Policy-driven versus Evidence-based Conservation: A Review of Political Targets and Biological Needs

Abstract “How much is enough?” is a question that conservationists, scientists, and policymakers have struggled with for years in conservation planning. To answer this question, and to ensure the long-term protection of biodiversity, many have sought to establish quantitative targets or goals based on the percentage of area in a country or region that is conserved. In recent years, policy-driven targets have frequently been faulted for their lack of biological foundation. In this manuscript, we reviewed 159 articles reporting or proposing 222 conservation targets and assessed differences between policy-driven and evidence-based approaches. Our findings suggest that the average percentages of area recommended for evidence-based targets were nearly three times as high as those recommended in policy-driven approaches. Implementing a minimalist, policy-driven approach to conservation could result in unanticipated decreases in species numbers and increases in the number of endangered species.

[1]  Reed F. Noss,et al.  Endangered Ecosystems of the United States: A Preliminary Assessment of Loss and Degradation , 1996, Restoration & Management Notes.

[2]  J. Estes,et al.  Strongly Interacting Species: Conservation Policy, Management, and Ethics , 2005 .

[3]  L. Fahrig.  How much habitat is enough , 2001 .

[4]  A. O. Nicholls,et al.  Apparent species turnover, probability of extinction and the selection of nature reserves A case study of the Ingleborough limestone pavements , 1994 .

[5]  Reed F. Noss,et al.  A Checklist for Wildlands Network Designs , 2003 .

[6]  J. M. Scott,et al.  Noah's Options: Initial Cost Estimates of a National System of Habitat Conservation Areas in the United States , 2002 .

[7]  W. Michener.  Win‐Win Ecology: How the Earth's Species Can Survive in the Midst of Human Enterprise , 2004 .

[8]  G. Brundtland,et al.  Our common future , 1987 .

[9]  N. Myers.  The Sinking Ark: A New Look at the Problem of Disappearing Species , 1979 .

[10]  M. Hummel.  Endangered spaces : the future for Canada's wilderness , 1989 .

[11]  Randy Kautz,et al.  Strategic Habitats for Biodiversity Conservation in Florida , 2001 .

[12]  A. O. Nicholls,et al.  Selecting networks of reserves to maximise biological diversity , 1988 .

[13]  R. G. Wright,et al.  Representation of natural vegetation in protected areas: capturing the geographic range , 2001, Biodiversity & Conservation.

[14]  N. Schumaker,et al.  USE OF POPULATION VIABILITY ANALYSIS AND RESERVE SELECTION ALGORITHMS IN REGIONAL CONSERVATION PLANS , 2003 .

[15]  H. Possingham,et al.  Applying a Decision‐Theory Framework to Landscape Planning for Biodiversity: Follow‐Up to Watson et al. , 2003 .

[16]  R. G. Wright,et al.  National Parks and Protected Areas: Their Role in Environmental Protection , 1996 .

[17]  Daniel P. Faith,et al.  Practical application of biodiversity surrogates and percentage targets for conservation in Papua New Guinea , 2000 .

[18]  Carlos Carroll,et al.  A Multicriteria Assessment of the Irreplaceability and Vulnerability of Sites in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem , 2002 .

[19]  World Conservation Union , 1999 .

[20]  Robert L. Pressey,et al.  Reserve Selection in a Species‐Rich and Fragmented Landscape on the Agulhas Plain, South Africa , 1997 .

[21]  Kevin J. Gaston,et al.  How large do reserve networks need to be , 2001 .

[22]  H. Biggs,et al.  Conservation targets for viable species assemblages? , 2003, Biodiversity & Conservation.

[23]  R. G. Wright,et al.  An Ecological Evaluation of Proposed New Conservation Areas in Idaho: Evaluating Proposed Idaho National Parks , 1994 .

[24]  D. Lindenmayer,et al.  Conserving Forest Biodiversity: A Comprehensive, Multiscaled Approach , 2002 .

[25]  Robert L. Pressey,et al.  Formulating conservation targets for biodiversity pattern and process in the Cape Floristic Region, South Africa , 2003 .

[26]  R. G. Wright,et al.  NATURE RESERVES: DO THEY CAPTURE THE FULL RANGE OF AMERICA'S BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY? , 2001 .

[27]  Timothy H. Tear,et al.  Socioeconomics and the Recovery of Endangered Species: Biological Assessment in a Political World , 1995 .

[28]  H. Odum,et al.  Natural areas as necessary components of man's total environment , 1972 .

[29]  Jordan Chamberlin,et al.  Assessing biodiversity conservation priorities: ecosystem risk and representativeness in continental Ecuador , 2002 .

[30]  M. Soulé,et al.  ECOLOGY: Conservation Targets: Do They Help? , 1998, Science.

[31]  Sandy J. Andelman,et al.  Present patterns and future prospects for biodiversity in the Western Hemisphere , 2003 .

[32]  R. Noss.  Precious Heritage: The Status of Biodiversity in the United States , 2001 .

[33]  D. Wilcove,et al.  QUANTIFYING THREATS TO IMPERILED SPECIES IN THE UNITED STATES , 1998 .

[34]  J. M. Scott,et al.  Pacific Salmon: Setting Ecologically Defensible Recovery Goals , 2003 .

[35]  Atte Moilanen,et al.  Site‐Selection Algorithms and Habitat Loss , 2003 .

[36]  Carlos Carroll,et al.  Extinction Debt of Protected Areas in Developing Landscapes , 2004 .

[37]  Joel E. Cohen,et al.  Human Population: The Next Half Century , 2003, Science.

[38]  P. Kareiva,et al.  How Much Is Enough? The Recurrent Problem of Setting Measurable Objectives in Conservation , 2005 .

[39]  R. G. Wright,et al.  Identifying unprotected and potentially at risk plant communities in the western USA , 2001 .

[40]  C. B. Williams.  Area and Number of Species , 1943, Nature.