Complementarity, biodiversity viability analysis, and policy-based algorithms for conservation

Faith, Dan; Carter, G.; Cassis, Gerasimos; Ferrier, Simon; Wilkie, Lance

doi:10.1016/s1462-9011(03)00044-3

Cited by 72 publications

(56 citation statements)

References 69 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Spatial population models and habitat models have been used to evaluate reserve design options (e.g., Armbruster andLande 1993, Moilanen andCabeza 2002). Faith et al (2003) described ''biodiversity viability analysis'' in which they estimated gains and losses in persistence of all species. Desmet et al (2002) addressed the need to design reserves to account for spatial and evolutionary processes.…”

Section: Managing Landscapesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Managing Landscapes for Conservation Under Uncertainty

Burgman

Lindenmayer

Elith

2005

Ecology

164

131

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. In ecology, populations may be linked conceptually with landscapes through habitat and spatial population models. Usually, these models deal with single species and treat a range of uncertainties implicitly and explicitly. They assist managers in testing different management scenarios and making strategic decisions. Landscape pattern analysis was the first attempt to deal with multiple species, and it led to a range of landscape management strategies. Advances in landscape ecology, driven largely by the pragmatic needs of conservation, are building approaches to multispecies management that have stronger ecological foundations. However, their treatment of uncertainty is in its infancy. In this paper, we provide examples to illustrate some of these issues. We conclude that one of the most important sources of uncertainty is the choice of the modeling frame. We recommend that landscape planners use different kinds of models, identify important sources of uncertainty that may affect planning decisions, and seek options that are likely to result in tolerable outcomes, despite uncertainty.

show abstract

Section: Managing Landscapesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Managing Landscapes for Conservation Under Uncertainty

Burgman

Lindenmayer

Elith

2005

Ecology

164

131

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…"ED" refers to a specific family of "environmental diversity" calculations (Faith and Walker 1996a, b, c;Faith 2003;Faith et al 2003Faith et al , 2004. ED typically uses an environmental gradients space, derived using species compositional dissimilarities and ordination methods (Faith and Walker 1996a, b, c).…”

Section: How the Ed Methods Converts Pd-dissimilarities To Estimates Omentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Indeed, once we have an environmental space, under this model, we can simulate the sets of branches/features that would correspond, for example, to a nominated subset of sites. Faith et al (2003) used this approach to map the distributions in geographic space of the hypothetical elements (species or features). This "biodiversity viability analysis" (BVA) uses this spatial information for each element for various biodiversity assessments.…”

Section: Simulation Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…advantages over the similar ED calculations. Their MCR method shares with ED several useful properties, including a similar unimodal model, an ordination space, variants of p-median, plus ED's GDM and richness-weighting options (for discussion of ED options, see Faith and Walker 1994;Faith and Ferrier 2002;Faith et al 2003Faith et al , 2004.…”

Section: Maximization Of Complementary Richness (Mcr)mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Using Phylogenetic Dissimilarities Among Sites for Biodiversity Assessments and Conservation

Faith

2016

Biodiversity Conservation and Phylogenetic Systematics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The PD phylogenetic diversity measure provides a measure of biodiversity that reflects variety at the level of features, among species or other taxa. PD is based on a simple model which assumes that shared ancestry explains shared features. PD provides a family of calculations that operate as if we were directly counting up features of taxa. PD-dissimilarity or phylogenetic beta diversity compares the branches/features represented by two different areas. We also can consider a companion model, which shifts the focus to shared habitat/environment among taxa as the explanation of shared features, including those features not explained by shared ancestry and PD. That model means that PD-dissimilarities, among sampled and unsampled sites, can be predicted using a regression method applied to distances in an environmental-gradients space. However, PD-based conservation planning requires more than the dissimilarities among all sites, in order to make decisions informed by gains and losses of branches/features. The companion model also suggests how to transform dissimilarities to provide these needed estimates. This ED ("Environmental Diversity") method out-performs other suggested strategies for analysis of dissimilarities, including the Ferrier et al. method and the Arponen et al. method. The global biodiversity observation network (GEO BON) can use the ED method for inferences of biodiversity change that include loss of phylogenetic diversity.

show abstract

“…This demand for credits, together with the metric to measure them, creates an incentive for conservation. In a sense, we may view the process of trading credits as a policy-based site selection algorithm (Faith et al, 2003): competition among suppliers automatically extracts the sites that can provide conservation measures at the lowest costs.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Stay by thy neighbor? Social organization determines the efficiency of biodiversity markets with spatial incentives

Härtig

Drechsler

2010

Ecological Complexity

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Market-based conservation instruments, such as payments, auctions or tradable permits, are environmental policies that create financial incentives for landowners to engage in voluntary conservation on their land. But what if ecological processes operate across property boundaries and land use decisions on one property influence ecosystem functions on neighboring sites? This paper examines how to account for such spatial externalities when designing market-based conservation instruments. We use an agent-based model to analyze different spatial metrics and their implications on land use decisions in a dynamic cost environment. The model contains a number of alternative submodels which differ in incentive design and social interactions of agents, the latter including coordinating as well as cooperating behavior of agents. We find that incentive design and social interactions have a strong influence on the spatial allocation and the costs of the conservation market.

show abstract

Complementarity, biodiversity viability analysis, and policy-based algorithms for conservation

Cited by 72 publications

References 69 publications

Managing Landscapes for Conservation Under Uncertainty

Managing Landscapes for Conservation Under Uncertainty

Using Phylogenetic Dissimilarities Among Sites for Biodiversity Assessments and Conservation

Stay by thy neighbor? Social organization determines the efficiency of biodiversity markets with spatial incentives

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About