Synthesis of pattern and process in biodiversity conservation assessment: a flexible whole‐landscape modelling framework

Abstract

Aim To describe a general modelling framework for integrating multiple pattern‐ and process‐related factors into biodiversity conservation assessments across whole landscapes. Location New South Wales (Australia), and world‐wide. Methods The framework allows for a rich array of alternatives to the target‐based model traditionally underpinning systematic conservation planning and consists of three broad modelling components. The first component models the future state (condition) of habitat across a landscape as a function of present state, current and projected pressures acting on this state, and any proposed, or implemented, management interventions. The second component uses this spatially explicit prediction of future habitat state to model the level of persistence expected for each of a set of surrogate biodiversity entities. The third component then integrates these individual expectations to estimate the overall level of persistence expected for biodiversity as a whole. Results Options are explored for tailoring implementation of the framework to suit planning processes varying markedly in purpose, and in availability of data, time, funding and expertise. The framework allows considerable flexibility in the nature of employed biodiversity surrogates (species‐level, discrete or continuous community‐level) and spatial data structures (polygonal planning units, or fine‐scaled raster), the level of sophistication with which each of the three modelling components is implemented (from simple target‐based assessment to complex process‐based modelling approaches), and the forms of higher‐level analysis supported (e.g. optimal plan development, priority mapping, interactive scenario evaluation). Main conclusions The described framework provides a logical, and highly flexible, foundation for integrating disparate pattern‐ and process‐related factors into conservation assessments in dynamic, multiple‐use landscapes.

MetaNatuurplanner v2.0 : status A

“…De meeste drukfactoren zijn van invloed op de mate van geschiktheid van het leefgebied voor de soort en ze zijn geïmplementeerd in de eerste stap van de MetaNatuurplanner (Ferrier & Drielsma, 2010):…”

Local patterns of diversity in California northern coastal scrub

“…The spatial distribution of biological diversity and its determinants have long been a primary concern for ecologists and biogeographers, with significant modern applications in ecological theory and conservation biology (Ferrier & Drielsma, 2010; Gaston, 2000). Delineation and conservation of global biodiversity hotspots have gained particular significance as anthropogenic impacts have increased (Brooks et al., 2006; Mittermeier, Turner, Larsen, Brooks, & Gascon, 2011; Myers, Mittermeier, Mittermeier, da Fonseca, & Kent, 2000).…”

MetaNatuurplanner v4.0 - Status A : Toepassing voor Evaluatie Natuurpact

“…MNP evaluates the landscape from a species perspective in three steps, according to the structure of ecological models as described by Ferrier and Drielsma (2010):…”