The Value of Validated Vulnerability Data for Conservation Planning in Rapidly Changing Landscapes

Abstract

Data needed for informed conservation prioritization are generally greater than the data available, and surrogates are often used. Although the need to anticipate threats is recognized, the effectiveness of surrogates for predicting habitat loss (or vulnerability) to land-use change is seldom tested. Here, we compared properties of two different vulnerability surrogates to validated vulnerability-validated prediction of habitat conversion based on a recent assessment of land-use change. We found that neither surrogate was a particularly effective predictor of vulnerability. Importantly, both surrogates performed poorly in places most imminently threatened with habitat conversion. We also show that the majority of areas protected over the last two decades have low vulnerability to the most active threatening process in this biome (habitat conversion). The contrary patterns of vulnerability and protection suggest that use of validated vulnerability would help to clarify protection needs, which might lead to the improvement of conservation decisions. Our study suggests the integration of validated vulnerability into conservation planning tools may be an important requirement for effective conservation planning in rapidly changing landscapes. We apply our results to discuss the practical considerations and potential value of incorporating validated vulnerability into conservation planning tools both generally and in the context of New Zealand's indigenous grasslands.

A Vulnerability Analysis of Coral Reefs in Coastal Ecotourism Areas for Conservation Management

“…In relation to coral reef existence in the future, in [29,30] it was explained that the degradation trend of local coral reefs caused by adverse human activities can be reduced or recovered. Using the results of the vulnerability analysis as a consideration in decision making is beneficial, since it is inexpensive and easy [9]. Determining the distance from the coral reef to the fishing ports is considered to be easier than determining the distance from fishing vessel channels, according to respondents' answers.…”

“…Besides, the results can be regularly updated. Updating the results will reduce the risks of the previous vulnerability pattern and reveal the variable which needs more protection [9]. Moreover, it can be used to analyze whether a system is vulnerable or unable to cope with adverse effects.…”

“…[8] • Pests, weeds, pollution, and habitat conversion. [9] • Society, economy, demography, technology, politics and culture, logging, land clearing, agricultural expansion, urbanization, infrastructure, mining, hydrological changes, salinization, soil type, climate and topography, geographical variables such as proximity to population centers and infrastructure, including roads, irrigation systems, extractive activities, transformation with urbanization, expansion of infrastructure, spread of invasive plants and animals, and extractive land such as agriculture, grazing, logging, mining, and land use.…”

Prioritising Land-Use Decisions for the Optimal Delivery of Ecosystem Services and Biodiversity Protection in Productive Landscapes

“…Assessment of the vulnerability of species and habitats to imminent proximate threats such as land-use change is a fundamental component of conservation management and planning [76,77,80]. Spatially explicit models can provide a tool for capturing the essence of where landuse change is likely to take place and what is driving these patterns [79].…”

“…Because land-use change is a dynamic threat, it is important that practitioners keep abreast of change and regularly validate the utility of their vulnerability assumptions and models [80,102]. A common weakness of land-use modelling is the use of the same data for both calibration (making the model as consistent as possible with the data from which the parameters were estimated) and validation (assessment of the predictive power of the model) [87].…”