A Landscape Approach to Biodiversity and Biological Health Planning: The Map of Italian Nature

The assessment of conservation values and risks to habitat biological diversity and health is herein addressed based on the occurrence of threatened species within ecotype mosaics and incorporating metrics related to current human disturbances. This assessment is made within a view of biological integrity and ecosystem health. Within the Map of Italian Nature project, that started as a result of Italian national law n. 394/91, such assessments are currently applied to approximately 1.5 million hectares in order to establish new reserves and protected areas, based on their “natural values” and “fragility” at scales in which humans generally influence the condition of the landscape, to get a more representative network of regional biological diversity. Risk and value assessments, based on distribution of species and habitats most threatened with extinction and reduction, are made in reference to the coordination of information on the environment (CORINE) habitat mosaics. To this purpose, digital thematic maps are generated as geographic information systems (GIS) coverages in polygonal (vector) format from satellite, airborne, and observed distribution data of 1) existing land cover habitat types and biodiversity component distributions, and 2) different kinds of man-induced disturbance. Habitat fragility is estimated either as “potential,” through a simple conceptual model relating fragility to sensitivity and human disturbance, or as “displayed,” inferred from habitat loss. Habitat sensitivity is used to compare biological health within habitat types. The Map of Italian Nature project aims at identifying gaps in the existing reserve network, and is very akin to the gap analysis approach. Map of Italian Nature intends to protect landscape mosaics at the broader scale, based on gaps in protection and threats while including finer scale data on threatened species to make sure they do not fall through the cracks. Results for a pilot study area are presented and the relevance of the approach to biological health and integrity assessments is discussed.

[1]  P. White,et al.  The Ecology of Natural Disturbance and Patch Dynamics , 1986 .

[2]  James R. Karr,et al.  Biological Integrity versus Biological Diversity as Policy DirectivesProtecting biotic resources , 1994 .

[3]  R. O'Neill.  A Hierarchical Concept of Ecosystems. , 1986 .

[4]  G Sugihara,et al.  Applications of fractals in ecology. , 1990, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[5]  M. Usher.  Habitat structure and the design of nature reserves , 1991 .

[6]  Earl D. McCoy,et al.  The Statistics and Biology of the Species-Area Relationship , 1979, The American Naturalist.

[7]  Luigi Boitani,et al.  A Large‐Scale Model of Wolf Distribution in Italy for Conservation Planning , 1999 .

[8]  Hugh P. Possingham,et al.  Effectiveness of alternative heuristic algorithms for identifying indicative minimum requirements for conservation reserves , 1997 .

[9]  S. Zani,et al.  Robust bivariate boxplots and multiple outlier detection , 1998 .

[10]  C. S. Holling.  Cross-Scale Morphology, Geometry, and Dynamics of Ecosystems , 1992 .

[11]  R. Noss.  Indicators for Monitoring Biodiversity: A Hierarchical Approach , 1990 .

[12]  Robert E. Ulanowicz,et al.  Scale and Biodiversity Policy: A Hierarchical Approach , 1994 .

[13]  J. Contandriopoulos,et al.  Caractère original de la flore endémique des Baléares , 1984 .

[14]  C. S. Holling,et al.  Biodiversity loss: Biodiversity in the functioning of ecosystems: an ecological synthesis , 1995 .

[15]  Reed F. Noss,et al.  A Regional Landscape Approach to Maintain Diversity , 1983 .

[16]  J. L. Gittleman,et al.  The Future of Biodiversity , 1995, Science.

[17]  J. Baird Callicott,et al.  The Value of Ecosystem Health , 1995 .

[18]  J. Lawton,et al.  The Gaps between Theory and Practice in Selecting Nature Reserves , 1999 .

[19]  James R. Karr,et al.  Ecological perspective on water quality goals , 1981 .

[20]  Brian Groombridge,et al.  1996 IUCN Red List of Threatened Animals , 1996 .

[21]  G. Mace.  The development of new criteria for listing species on the IUCN Red List. , 1992 .

[22]  P. Petraitis,et al.  The Maintenance of Species Diversity by Disturbance , 1989, The Quarterly Review of Biology.

[23]  T. Allen,et al.  Toward a Unified Ecology. , 1994 .

[24]  D. A. Ratcliffe,et al.  A Nature Conservation Review , 1978 .

[25]  John B. Theberge,et al.  A review of criteria for evaluating natural areas , 1986 .

[26]  Zev Naveh,et al.  LANDSCAPE ECOLOGY: THEORY AND APPLICATION , 1983, Landscape Journal.

[27]  P. Bianco.  MEDITERRANEAN ENDEMIC FRESHWATER FISHES OF ITALY , 1995 .

[28]  M. J. Eden,et al.  Remote sensing and tropical land management. , 1986 .

[29]  J. Karr.  Using Biological Criteria to Protect Ecological Health , 1995 .

[30]  C. S. Holling,et al.  Biological Diversity, Ecosystems, and the Human Scale , 1996 .

[31]  Robert Costanza,et al.  The development and initial testing a quantitative assessment of ecosystem health , 1995 .

[32]  J. Gamisans,et al.  Quelques données numériques et chorologiques sur la flore vasculaire de la Corse , 1985 .

[33]  D. Rapport,et al.  Fish Community Structure as a Measure of Degradation and Rehabilitation of Riparian Systems in an Agricultural Drainage Basin , 1998, Environmental management.

[34]  A. Tansley.  The Use and Abuse of Vegetational Concepts and Terms , 1935 .

[35]  R. O'Neill,et al.  Landscape patterns in a disturbed environment , 1987 .

[36]  C. Margules,et al.  Criteria used in assessing wildlife conservation potential: A review , 1981 .

[37]  H. Akçakaya,et al.  Ecological risk analysis for single and multiple populations. , 1991 .

[38]  Christer Nilsson,et al.  The Fragility of Ecosystems: A Review , 1995 .

[39]  D. Rapport.  Ecosystem Health: An Emerging Integrative Science , 1995 .

[40]  A. Hadi.  Identifying Multiple Outliers in Multivariate Data , 1992 .

[41]  L. Jackson,et al.  A Bird Community Index of Biotic Integrity for the Mid-Atlantic Highlands , 1998 .