Conservation Planning for Ecosystem Services
Top Cited Papers
Open Access
- 31 October 2006
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Public Library of Science (PLoS) in PLoS Biology
- Vol. 4 (11), e379
- https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.0040379
Abstract
Despite increasing attention to the human dimension of conservation projects, a rigorous, systematic methodology for planning for ecosystem services has not been developed. This is in part because flows of ecosystem services remain poorly characterized at local-to-regional scales, and their protection has not generally been made a priority. We used a spatially explicit conservation planning framework to explore the trade-offs and opportunities for aligning conservation goals for biodiversity with six ecosystem services (carbon storage, flood control, forage production, outdoor recreation, crop pollination, and water provision) in the Central Coast ecoregion of California, United States. We found weak positive and some weak negative associations between the priority areas for biodiversity conservation and the flows of the six ecosystem services across the ecoregion. Excluding the two agriculture-focused services—crop pollination and forage production—eliminates all negative correlations. We compared the degree to which four contrasting conservation network designs protect biodiversity and the flow of the six services. We found that biodiversity conservation protects substantial collateral flows of services. Targeting ecosystem services directly can meet the multiple ecosystem services and biodiversity goals more efficiently but cannot substitute for targeted biodiversity protection (biodiversity losses of 44% relative to targeting biodiversity alone). Strategically targeting only biodiversity plus the four positively associated services offers much promise (relative biodiversity losses of 7%). Here we present an initial analytical framework for integrating biodiversity and ecosystem services in conservation planning and illustrate its application. We found that although there are important potential trade-offs between conservation for biodiversity and for ecosystem services, a systematic planning framework offers scope for identifying valuable synergies.Keywords
This publication has 54 references indexed in Scilit:
- Mapping the Economic Costs and Benefits of ConservationPLoS Biology, 2006
- Wild bees enhance honey bees’ pollination of hybrid sunflowerProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 2006
- Biodiversity-Ecosystem Function Research: Is It Relevant to Conservation?Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics, 2005
- Effects of Cattle Grazing on Diversity in Ephemeral WetlandsConservation Biology, 2005
- Verification of Carbon Sink Assessment: Can We Exclude Natural Sinks?Climatic Change, 2004
- Bridging Political Expectations and Scientific Limitations in Climate Risk Management ? On the Uncertain Effects of International Carbon Sink Policies*Climatic Change, 2004
- Estimation of groundwater pumping as closure to the water balance of a semi-arid, irrigated agricultural basinJournal of Hydrology, 2004
- Cattle Grazing Impacts on Annual Forbs and Vegetation Composition of Mesic Grasslands in CaliforniaConservation Biology, 2003
- Accounting for the value of ecosystem servicesEcological Economics, 2002
- A numerical study of bank storage and its contribution to streamflowJournal of Hydrology, 1997