Conservation planning and priorities

摘要: Maybe the first law of conservation science should be that human population—which course drives both threats to biodiversity and its conservation—is distributed unevenly around world (Cincotta et al. 2000). This parallels a better-known science, itself is also (Gaston 2000; Chapter 2). Were it not for these two patterns, would need planned or prioritized. A investment in one place have same effects as another. As is, though, contribution given towards reducing loss varies enormously over space. recognition has led emergence sub-discipline systematic planning within biology. Systematic now dates back quarter-century earliest contributions (Kirkpatrick 1983). seminal review by Margules Pressey (2000) established firm conceptual framework sub-discipline, parameterized along axes derived from aforementioned laws. Variation (and responses these) can measured vulnerability (Pressey Taffs 2001), or, put another way, breadth options available time conserve feature before lost. Meanwhile, uneven distribution irreplaceability 1994), extent spatial givenbiodiversity feature.Analternative measure complementarity—the degree which value area adds thevalueof anoverall networkof areas. chapter charts history, state, prospects prioritization, framed through lens irreplaceability. It does attempt comprehensive, but rather focuses on boundary between theory practice,where successful implementation been explicitly discipline’s In other words, work covered here successfully bridged “research–implementation gap” (Knight 2008). The structured scale. Its half addresses global scale planning, attracted disproportionate share literature since Myers’ (1988) pioneering “hotspots” treatise. remainder tackles prioritization ground water). turn organized according three levels increasing ecological geographic organization: species, sites, seascapes landscapes.