Measuring biodiversity and sustainable management in forests and agricultural landscapes

Abstract

Most of the world's biodiversity will continue to exist outside protected areas and there are also managed lands within many protected areas. In the assessment of millennium targets, there is therefore a need for indicators to measure biodiversity and suitability of habitats for biodiversity both across the whole landscape/seascape and in specific managed habitats. The two predominant land uses in many inhabited areas are forestry and agriculture and these are examined. Many national-level criteria and indicator systems already exist that attempt to assess biodiversity in forests and the impacts of forest management, but there is generally less experience in measuring these values in agricultural landscapes. Existing systems are reviewed, both for their usefulness in providing indicators and to assess the extent to which they have been applied. This preliminary gap analysis is used in the development of a set of indicators suitable for measuring progress towards the conservation of biodiversity in managed forests and agriculture. The paper concludes with a draft set of indicators for discussion, with suggestions including proportion of land under sustainable management, amount of produce from such land, area of natural or high quality semi-natural land within landscapes under sustainable management and key indicator species.

Reactive forest management can also be proactive for wood-living beetles in hollow oak trees

“…Clearance of regrowth -scrub or trees that shade the trunk or crown of ancient oak trees -is therefore likely to be similarly beneficial in all oak-based habitats for a wider group of animals than wood-living beetles. Clearance of regrowth around oaks could also lead to important secondary benefits which would appeal to policy makers and the public, vital for conservation to succeed (Dudley et al, 2005). The increased light and warmth resulting from the removal of vegetation around the oaks will benefit more taxa than wood-living beetles.…”

The tree planting and protecting culture of cattle ranchers and small-scale agriculturalists in rural Panama: Opportunities for reforestation and land restoration

“…While there are a number of protected areas throughout Mesoamerica, most are located within agricultural matrices and are vulnerable to an array of adverse impacts, including contamination by agrochemicals, hunting, and unsustainable or illegal logging (Boffa et al, 2005;De Fries et al, 2005;Harvey et al, 2008;Barrance et al, 2009). Much of the region's forests and biodiversity also are scattered throughout agricultural landscapes outside of formal protected area networks and hence exposed to further degradation Rodrigues et al, 2004;Dudley et al, 2005;Hayes and Ostrom, 2005;Barrance et al, 2009;Jenkins and Joppa, 2009).…”

Case study of microarthropod communities to assess soil quality in different managed vineyards

“…Compared with forestry, there is generally less agreement about how the relationship between biodiversity and agriculture should be measured. Much of the emphasis -where it occurs at all -is focused on measuring detrimental impacts of agriculture on surrounding habitats (for instance through soil erosion or pollution run-off) rather than looking at biodiversity within agricultural systems (Dudley et al, 2005). The development of agroecological technologies and systems which emphasize the conservation/regeneration of bio-diversity, soil, water and other resources is urgently needed to meet the growing array of socioeconomic and environmental challenges (Altieri, 1999;Lavelle, 2000).…”