Conservation decision tools based on cost-effectiveness analysis are used to assess threat management strategies for improving species persistence. These approaches rank alternative strategies by their benefit to cost ratio but may fail to identify the optimal sets of strategies to implement under limited budgets because they do not account for redundancies. We devised a multiobjective optimization approach in which the complementarity principle is applied to identify the sets of threat management strategies that protect the most species for any budget. We used our approach to prioritize threat management strategies for 53 species of conservation concern in the Pilbara, Australia. We followed a structured elicitation approach to collect information on the benefits and costs of implementing 17 different conservation strategies during a 3-day workshop with 49 stakeholders and experts in the biodiversity, conservation, and management of the Pilbara. We compared the performance of our complementarity priority threat management approach with a current cost-effectiveness ranking approach. A complementary set of 3 strategies: domestic herbivore management, fire management and research, and sanctuaries provided all species with >50% chance of persistence for $4.7 million/year over 20 years. Achieving the same result cost almost twice as much ($9.71 million/year) when strategies were selected by their cost-effectiveness ranks alone. Our results show that complementarity of management benefits has the potential to double the impact of priority threat management approaches.
Climate change is a major threat to global biodiversity, and its impacts can act synergistically to heighten the severity of other threats. Most research on projecting species range shifts under climate change has not been translated to informing priority management strategies on the ground. We develop a prioritization framework to assess strategies for managing threats to biodiversity under climate change and apply it to the management of invasive animal species across one-sixth of the Australian continent, the Lake Eyre Basin. We collected information from key stakeholders and experts on the impacts of invasive animals on 148 of the region's most threatened species and 11 potential strategies. Assisted by models of current distributions of threatened species and their projected distributions, experts estimated the cost, feasibility, and potential benefits of each strategy for improving the persistence of threatened species with and without climate change. We discover that the relative cost-effectiveness of invasive animal control strategies is robust to climate change, with the management of feral pigs being the highest priority for conserving threatened species overall. Complementary sets of strategies to protect as many threatened species as possible under limited budgets change when climate change is considered, with additional strategies required to avoid impending extinctions from the region. Overall, we find that the ranking of strategies by cost-effectiveness was relatively unaffected by including climate change into decision-making, even though the benefits of the strategies were lower. Future climate conditions and impacts on range shifts become most important to consider when designing comprehensive management plans for the control of invasive animals under limited budgets to maximize the number of threatened species that can be protected.
1. Invasive non-native plants have negatively impacted on biodiversity and ecosystem functions world-wide. Because of the large number of species, their wide distributions and varying degrees of impact, we need a more effective method for prioritizing control strategies for cost-effective investment across heterogeneous landscapes. 2. Here, we develop a prioritization framework that synthesizes scientific data, elicits knowledge from experts and stakeholders to identify control strategies, and appraises the cost-effectiveness of strategies. Our objective was to identify the most cost-effective strategies for reducing the total area dominated by high-impact non-native plants in the Lake Eyre Basin (LEB). 3. We use a case study of the~120 million ha Lake Eyre Basin that comprises some of the most distinctive Australian landscapes, including Uluru-Kata Tjuta National Park. More than 240 non-native plant species are recorded in the Lake Eyre Basin, with many predicted to spread, but there are insufficient resources to control all species. 4. Lake Eyre Basin experts identified 12 strategies to control, contain or eradicate non-native species over the next 50 years. The total cost of the proposed Lake Eyre Basin strategies was estimated at AU$1Á7 billion, an average of AU$34 million annually. Implementation of these strategies is estimated to reduce non-native plant dominance by 17 million hathere would be a 32% reduction in the likely area dominated by non-native plants within 50 years if these strategies were implemented. 5. The three most cost-effective strategies were controlling Parkinsonia aculeata, Ziziphus mauritiana and Prosopis spp. These three strategies combined were estimated to cost only 0Á01% of total cost of all the strategies, but would provide 20% of the total benefits. Over 50 years, cost-effective spending of AU$2Á3 million could eradicate all non-native plant species from the only threatened ecological community within the Lake Eyre Basin, the Great Artesian Basin discharge springs. 6. Synthesis and applications. Our framework, based on a case study of the~120 million ha Lake Eyre Basin in Australia, provides a rationale for financially efficient investment in nonnative plant management and reveals combinations of strategies that are optimal for different budgets. It also highlights knowledge gaps and incidental findings that could improve effective management of non-native plants, for example addressing the reliability of species distribution data and prevalence of information sharing across states and regions.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.