Methods for allocation of habitat management, maintenance, restoration and offsetting, when conservation actions have uncertain consequences

We develop methods for conservation resource allocation, to help with decisions about targeting of protection, habitat management, maintenance and restoration or biodiversity offsetting. We construct a framework, where conservation actions have different responses for different biodiversity features in different environments, and in which uncertainty in responses and the time perspective are explicitly considered. Costs of actions in different environments are also accounted for. Costs can be defined as constants, functions of time or as functions of the total area in which an action is performed. We optimize the combination of actions to maximize conservation value given uncertain responses, limited resources, different robustness requirements and limits to the area in which different actions can be undertaken. Accounting for the uncertainty in responses to actions or accounting for time can change the optimal combination of actions. We can account for both negative consequences of uncertainty (robustness analysis) and positive aspects of uncertainty (opportunity analysis). To allow for the complexity of the analysis above and to significantly reduce data demands, we have omitted an explicit spatial structure from these analyses. Nevertheless, we describe approaches that account for spatial considerations, for example, by using the present methods in combination with software that is intended for the spatial analysis of static biodiversity pattern. The proposed analyses have been implemented in a software package called RobOff, which will be made freely, publicly available. Thereby it is possible for the first time to effectively find solutions to a significant set of conservation resource allocation problems. These analyses can assist conservation scientists and managers in decision making based on quantitative analysis.

[1]  Neville D. Crossman,et al.  Systematic landscape restoration using integer programming , 2006 .

[2]  J. Wesley Barnes,et al.  ConsNet: new software for the selection of conservation area networks with spatial and multi‐criteria analyses , 2009 .

[3]  Simon Dietz,et al.  Weak and Strong Sustainability in the SEEA: Concepts and Measurement , 2007 .

[4]  I. Denholm,et al.  Monopolization of honeydew sources by Crematogaster macaoensis and its effects on lac production , 1985 .

[5]  R. Hobbs,et al.  Ecological Restoration and Global Climate Change , 2006 .

[6]  Atte Moilanen,et al.  Generalized Complementarity and Mapping of the Concepts of Systematic Conservation Planning , 2008, Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology.

[7]  Atte Moilanen,et al.  The Value of Biodiversity in Reserve Selection: Representation, Species Weighting, and Benefit Functions , 2005 .

[8]  Hugh P. Possingham,et al.  Marxan with Zones: Software for optimal conservation based land- and sea-use zoning , 2009, Environ. Model. Softw..

[9]  Yakov Ben-Haim,et al.  How Much Compensation is Enough? A Framework for Incorporating Uncertainty and Time Discounting When Calculating Offset Ratios for Impacted Habitat , 2009 .

[10]  K. Gaston,et al.  Balancing alternative land uses in conservation prioritization. , 2011, Ecological applications : a publication of the Ecological Society of America.

[11]  Aldina M. A. Franco,et al.  Prioritizing multiple-use landscapes for conservation: methods for large multi-species planning problems , 2005, Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

[12]  E. Neumayer Weak Versus Strong Sustainability: Exploring The Limits Of Two Opposing Paradigms , 2010 .

[13]  T. Hahn,et al.  Sustainable Value Added - Measuring Corporate Contributions to Sustainability Beyond Eco-Efficiency , 2004 .

[14]  T. Ricketts,et al.  Factoring species, non-species values and threats into biodiversity prioritisation across the ecoregions of Africa and its islands , 2006 .

[15]  S. Sarkar,et al.  Systematic conservation planning , 2000, Nature.

[16]  S. Andelman,et al.  Mathematical Methods for Identifying Representative Reserve Networks , 2000 .

[17]  A. Bennett,et al.  Where and when to revegetate: a quantitative method for scheduling landscape reconstruction. , 2009, Ecological applications : a publication of the Ecological Society of America.

[18]  H. Possingham,et al.  Hitting the target and missing the point: target‐based conservation planning in context , 2009 .

[19]  P. Vesk,et al.  Time lags in provision of habitat resources through revegetation , 2008 .

[20]  Robert L. Pressey,et al.  Efficiency in conservation evaluation: Scoring versus iterative approaches , 1989 .

[21]  Sikha Bagui,et al.  Database design using entity-relationship diagrams , 2003 .

[22]  Matthew E. Watts,et al.  The C-plan conservation planning system: Origins, applications, and possible futures , 2009 .

[23]  Jorge M. Lobo,et al.  Prioritizing areas for conservation and vegetation restoration in post-agricultural landscapes: a Biosphere Reserve plan for Bioko, Equatorial Guinea. , 2010 .

[24]  Richard M Cowling,et al.  Conservation planning in a changing world. , 2007, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[25]  S. Andelman,et al.  Conserving Biodiversity Efficiently: What to Do, Where, and When , 2007, PLoS biology.

[26]  Hugh P. Possingham,et al.  Avoiding Costly Conservation Mistakes: The Importance of Defining Actions and Costs in Spatial Priority Setting , 2008, PloS one.

[27]  Sikha Bagui,et al.  Database Design Using Entity-Relationship Diagrams, Second Edition , 2011 .

[28]  L. Green,et al.  A discounting framework for choice with delayed and probabilistic rewards. , 2004, Psychological bulletin.

[29]  Astrid J.A. van Teeffelen,et al.  Maximizing conservation benefit for grassland species with contrasting management requirements , 2008 .

[30]  Michael Drielsma,et al.  Synthesis of pattern and process in biodiversity conservation assessment: a flexible whole‐landscape modelling framework , 2010 .