Comparing Spatially Explicit Ecological and Social Values for Natural Areas to Identify Effective Conservation Strategies

Abstract

Consideration of the social values people assign to relatively undisturbed native ecosystems is critical for the success of science-based conservation plans. We used an interview process to identify and map social values assigned to 31 ecosystem services provided by natural areas in an agricultural landscape in southern Australia. We then modeled the spatial distribution of 12 components of ecological value commonly used in setting spatial conservation priorities. We used the analytical hierarchy process to weight these components and used multiattribute utility theory to combine them into a single spatial layer of ecological value. Social values assigned to natural areas were negatively correlated with ecological values overall, but were positively correlated with some components of ecological value. In terms of the spatial distribution of values, people valued protected areas, whereas those natural areas underrepresented in the reserve system were of higher ecological value. The habitats of threatened animal species were assigned both high ecological value and high social value. Only small areas were assigned both high ecological value and high social value in the study area, whereas large areas of high ecological value were of low social value, and vice versa. We used the assigned ecological and social values to identify different conservation strategies (e.g., information sharing, community engagement, incentive payments) that may be effective for specific areas. We suggest that consideration of both ecological and social values in selection of conservation strategies can enhance the success of science-based conservation planning.

An analysis of spatio-temporal landscape patterns for protected areas in northern New England: 1900–2010

“…With such knowledge, we will be able to assess the efficacy of specific PAs and improve future prioritizations, or even reconfigure the existing network (Fuller et al 2010). The scope of landscape process, however, should be expanded from solely ecological processes to include those that regulate ecosystem services and other socio-economic values (Bryan et al 2011). Many of these latter values drive public support for conservation more than biodiversity and thus must be considered (Kline et al 2004).…”

An interview methodology for exploring the values that community leaders assign to multiple-use landscapes.

“…Managing natural resources requires public policy makers, scientific advisors, and community stakeholder groups to reach agreement on the activities necessary to achieve effective landscape-scale environmental outcomes (Grimble and Wellard 1997, Lockwood 2005, Bryan et al 2011. Successful policy implementation is predicated on the willingness of the various actors to support environmental management programs.…”

Reading Ecosystem Services at the Local Scale through a Territorial Approach: the Case of Peri-Urban Agriculture in the Thau Lagoon, Southern France

“…There is extensive research on stakeholders' identification of the physical elements comprising ES, particularly through participatory mapping , Bryan et al 2011. The identification of physical elements that comprise the presence of an ES is important because these elements can be linked to the logical and existential dimensions of the model, which gives insights about the role of humans in the creation or maintenance of those elements and their symbolic meaning.…”