Comprehensive criteria for biodiversity evaluation in conservation planning

Abstract

In this paper we present the results of a multi-criteria decision analysis used to identify a comprehensive set of criteria for assigning biodiversity value to sites for conservation planning. For effective conservation management, biodiversity value needs to be a composite of biotic and abiotic factors. However, in the reserve design literature, conservation value is assigned with a limited set of metrics usually based on comprehensiveness, representativeness and persistence which may be insufficient at fully capturing biodiversity value. A group of conservation specialists in California, USA, used a multi-criteria decision making framework to elucidate and weight criteria for scoring biodiversity value at sites. A formal model for consensus and negotiation was applied to aggregate individuals' criteria weights across all group members. The group identified ecological condition, followed by biotic composition as the most important contributors to site conservation value. Longand short-term threats causing fragmentation and degradation are also important criteria to consider. Key criteria are identified for which further data collection would serve the greatest purpose in prioritizing sites and the role of prioritization criteria in the larger context of systematic conservation planning is discussed. With the recognition that biodiversity value plays an important role in conservation 2006 decisions, the criteria presented here represents a comprehensive suite of factors to consider when assigning biodiversity value to sites for conservation planning. These can serve as an encompassing list which other groups can customize for the purpose of biodiversity evaluation for alternative conservation planning contexts.

Groundwater potentiality mapping using geoelectrical-based aquifer hydraulic parameters: A GIS-based multi-criteria decision analysis modeling approach

“…It is also a process for analyzing decisions when two or more attributes are involved (Tecle and Duckstein 1994). Its role in formalizing and addressing the problems of competing decision objectives make it an important tool in environmental decision making (Janssen 1992;Lahdelma et al 2000;Linkov et al 2006;Regan et al 2007). Among the various MCDA systems, the AHP technique is the most commonly used (Awasthi and Chauhan 2011).…”

Biodiversity and Systematic Conservation Planning for the Twenty-first Century: A Philosophical Perspective

“…For instance, food production may be in conflict with both biodiversity conservation and wilderness preservation and the latter two may be in conflict with each other (Callicott and Nelson 1998, 2008, Sarkar 1999. Systematic conservation planning (SCP) can incorporate these conflicts by co-opting techniques from multi-criteria analysis (MCA) developed within decision theory , Regan et al 2007, Sarkar 2012b. Such attempts go back to the late 1980s (Anselin et al 1989, Mendoza and Sprouse 1989, see Moffett and Sarkar [2006 for a review).…”

“…In multi-attribute utility (or value) theory, a linear utility (or value) function is then computed to rank the alternatives quantitatively . (A variety of more ad hoc methods, including the Analytic Hierarchy Process (Saaty 1980) have also often been used (e.g., Regan et al 2007) but are not recommended The relevant point here is that MCA provides a systematic methodology for incorporating myriad natural (and other-see Section 6) values into conservation decisions.…”

Blending the Analytic Hierarchy Process and Fuzzy Logical Systems in Scenic Beauty Assessment of Check Dams in Streams

“…To implement the environmental management and understand the characteristics of natural landscapes, various theories for landscape assessment have been developed [9,10]. Landscape assessment generally refers to the assessment of the visual quality of an environment through visual perception.…”