Finding Common Ground for Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services

doi:10.1525/bio.2012.62.5.12

Cited by 164 publications

(36 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Recently, some members of the conservation community have preferred the maintenance of ecosystem services as a strategy to conserve biodiversity, while others have criticized this strategy as a distraction from the aim of biodiversity conservation (Reyers et al, 2012). Recent research did not show the accordant options regarding the existence of strong relationships between the positive effects of biodiversity and ecosystem services.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Optimizing hotspot areas for ecological planning and management based on biodiversity and ecosystem services

Xiao

Ouyang

et al. 2016

Chin. Geogr. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:The significance of biodiversity and ecosystem services are gradually recognized by human as an approach towards sustainability, so it is important to understand relationships and congruence between them to support conservation planning, especially in the hotspot areas with a prominent role in conservation. However, the management of most conservation hotspots mainly focused on biodiversity, and rarely concerned with ecosystem services. With the aim of proposing criteria for conservation strategies that contribute to the optimization of biodiversity and ecosystem services, in this study, a Geographic Information System (GIS)-based approach was designed to estimate and map the biodiversity and ecosystem services in Chongqing Municipality of China. Furthermore, the distributions of hotspot areas for biodiversity and ecosystem services were mapped based on the relationship between cumulative ecosystem services and areas. Finally the statistical analysis was processed focused on specific conservation objectives. The results showed that hotspot areas can conserve the most biodiversity but with the least ecosystem services under the conservation plans target to biodiversity conservation. In contrast, depending on the ecosystem services of interest, hotspot areas can conserve the largest ecosystem services but with the least biodiversity. By integrating biodiversity and ecosystem services into conservation plan, we found that the conservation and regeneration of these small areas, would contribute to a conservation of 44% of the biodiversity hotspot and 14%-42% of the ecosystem services hotspot. Moreover, the current nature reserve selection was not maximize the biodiversity and ecosystem services compared to integration strategy, indicating that hotspot areas conservation and selection is vital for optimization protection of biodiversity and ecosystem services, and has practical significance for natural resources and ecosystem management. Keywords: biodiversity; ecosystem services; hotspot; nature reserve; Chongqing Municipality, China Citation: Xiao Yang, Ouyang Zhiyun, Xu Weihua, Xiao Yi, Zheng Hua, Xian Chaofan, 2016. Optimizing hotspot areas for ecological planning and management based on biodiversity and ecosystem services.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Optimizing hotspot areas for ecological planning and management based on biodiversity and ecosystem services

Xiao

Ouyang

et al. 2016

Chin. Geogr. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Most examples of where biodiversity and ecosystem service trade-offs arise concern provisioning services [8,9]. The Millennium Ecosystem Assessment [8] defined provisioning services as 'products obtained from ecosystems' and found that trade-offs between these services and biodiversity have been the largest driver of biodiversity loss over the last 50 years [8].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Exclusion of agricultural lands in spatial conservation prioritization strategies: consequences for biodiversity and ecosystem service representation

2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Agroecosystems have traditionally been considered incompatible with biological conservation goals, and often been excluded from spatial conservation prioritization strategies. The consequences for the representativeness of identified priority areas have been little explored. Here, we evaluate these for biodiversity and carbon storage representation when agricultural land areas are excluded from a spatial prioritization strategy for South America. Comparing different prioritization approaches, we also assess how the spatial overlap of priority areas changes. The exclusion of agricultural lands was detrimental to biodiversity representation, indicating that priority areas for agricultural production overlap with areas of relatively high occurrence of species. By contrast, exclusion of agricultural lands benefits representation of carbon storage within priority areas, as lands of high value for agriculture and carbon storage overlap little. When agricultural lands were included and equally weighted with biodiversity and carbon storage, a balanced representation resulted. Our findings suggest that with appropriate management, South American agroecosystems can significantly contribute to biodiversity conservation.

show abstract

“…A recent statement by Reyers et al 3 that "the concept of biodiversity emerges from an intrinsic context" echoes earlier studies, including the previous assertion by Reyers and colleagues 4 that "biodiversity and ecosystem services are associated with different values (intrinsic vs. utilitarian)" (see also 5 ). However, Reyers et al 3 do suggest "common ground" based on biodiversity’s additional links to ethical, spiritual, and religious values.…”

Section: Common Groundmentioning

confidence: 71%

“…However, Reyers et al 3 do suggest "common ground" based on biodiversity’s additional links to ethical, spiritual, and religious values. They argue that, because these are ecosystem services, conservation of ecosystems services sometimes captures biodiversity and its values (see also 6, 7 ).…”

Section: Common Groundmentioning

confidence: 99%

Common ground for biodiversity and ecosystem services: the “partial protection” challenge

Faith

2012

F1000Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

New global initiatives require clarity about similarities and differences between biodiversity and ecosystem services. One argument is that ecosystem services capture utilitarian values, while biodiversity captures intrinsic values. However, the concept of biodiversity equally emerges from anthropogenic use values. Measures of biodiversity indicate broad option values, and so provide different information about future uses and benefits. Such differences nevertheless can be the basis for “common ground” for biodiversity and ecosystem services. Systematic conservation planning and related frameworks acknowledge such differences through effective trade-offs and synergies among different values of society. The early work on regional biodiversity trade-offs includes a little-explored aspect that could enhance this common ground. Regional planning here takes into account the “partial protection” of biodiversity provided by some land uses. Common-ground will be promoted by better integrating the ecosystem services and biodiversity conservation offered by ecosystems at the “natural end of the spectrum” with the partial protection and other benefits/services provided by more intensively-transformed places.

show abstract

Finding Common Ground for Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services

Cited by 164 publications

References 18 publications

Optimizing hotspot areas for ecological planning and management based on biodiversity and ecosystem services

Optimizing hotspot areas for ecological planning and management based on biodiversity and ecosystem services

Exclusion of agricultural lands in spatial conservation prioritization strategies: consequences for biodiversity and ecosystem service representation

Common ground for biodiversity and ecosystem services: the “partial protection” challenge

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About