Wetland Loss and Biodiversity Conservation

Abstract: Most species of wetland-dependent organisms live in multiple local populations sustained through occasional migration. Retention of minimum wetland densities in human-dominated landscapes is fundamental to conserving these organisms. An analysis of wetland mosaics was performed for two regions of the northeastern United States to assess the degree to which historical wetland loss alters the metrics of wetland mosaics and to assess potential future effects mediated by differently structured wetland regulations. These analyses indicated that profound reductions in wetland density and proximity are associated with increased human populations and that protections for all wetlands > 1 acre (0.4 ha) are likely required to retain wetland densities minimally sufficient to sustain the wetland biota.     

The Complex Links between Governance and Biodiversity

Abstract:  We argue that two problems weaken the claims of those who link corruption and the exploitation of natural resources. The first is conceptual and the second is methodological. Studies that use national-level indicators of corruption fail to note that corruption comes in many forms, at multiple levels, that may affect resource use quite differently: negatively, positively, or not at all. Without a clear causal model of the mechanism by which corruption affects resources, one should treat with caution any estimated relationship between corruption and the state of natural resources. Simple, atheoretical models linking corruption measures and natural resource use typically do not account for other important control variables pivotal to the relationship between humans and natural resources. By way of illustration of these two general concerns, we used statistical methods to demonstrate that the findings of a recent, well-known study that posits a link between corruption and decreases in forests and elephants are not robust to simple conceptual and methodological refinements. In particular, once we controlled for a few plausible anthropogenic and biophysical conditioning factors, estimated the effects in changes rather than levels so as not to confound cross-sectional and longitudinal variation, and incorporated additional observations from the same data sources, corruption levels no longer had any explanatory power.     

Biodiversity Offsets and the Challenge of Achieving No Net Loss

Businesses, governments, and financial institutions are increasingly adopting a policy of no net loss of biodiversity for development activities. The goal of no net loss is intended to help relieve tension between conservation and development by enabling economic gains to be achieved without concomitant biodiversity losses. biodiversity offsets represent a necessary component of a much broader mitigation strategy for achieving no net loss following prior application of avoidance, minimization, and remediation measures. However, doubts have been raised about the appropriate use of biodiversity offsets. We examined what no net loss means as a desirable conservation outcome and reviewed the conditions that determine whether, and under what circumstances, biodiversity offsets can help achieve such a goal. We propose a conceptual framework to substitute the often ad hoc approaches evident in many biodiversity offset initiatives. The relevance of biodiversity offsets to no net loss rests on 2 fundamental premises. First, offsets are rarely adequate for achieving no net loss of biodiversity alone. Second, some development effects may be too difficult or risky, or even impossible, to offset. To help to deliver no net loss through biodiversity offsets, biodiversity gains must be comparable to losses, be in addition to conservation gains that may have occurred in absence of the offset, and be lasting and protected from risk of failure. Adherence to these conditions requires consideration of the wider landscape context of development and offset activities, timing of offset delivery, measurement of biodiversity, accounting procedures and rule sets used to calculate biodiversity losses and gains and guide offset design, and approaches to managing risk. Adoption of this framework will strengthen the potential for offsets to provide an ecologically defensible mechanism that can help reconcile conservation and development. Balances de Biodiversidad y el Reto de No Obtener Pérdida Neta     

Modeling Human Factors That Affect the Loss of Biodiversity

Within conservation biology human factors are treated as driving forces of biodiversity loss, yet there are few empirical studies on how human actions affect biodiversity. We developed and tested an interdisciplinary model of biodiversity loss using socioeconomic and ecological data from 107 countries and structural equation modeling techniques. Some portions of the model fit the data well, other parts were less predictive. Counterintuitive results may be a result of the quality and availability of cross-national data and statistical limitations in testing a model of such complex processes. This model test provides insight into future research needs for examining human impacts on biodiversity. Issues including data quality, temporal and spatial scale, and model refinement are outlined. The results highlight the importance of relations between human social systems and biodiversity and the potential of interdisciplinary research.     

Economic Science, Endangered Species, and Biodiversity Loss

Abstract: Although economic analysis can be used to argue for preservation of species and habitats, many natural assets represent inferior investments in society's asset portfolio. We demonstrate this for the case of ancient temperate rainforests and minke whales (  Balaenoptera acutorostrata ). For both rainforests and whales, we determined their value for harvest and balanced this against society's valuation of the preserved stock. For the market and nonmarket data available, we then determined how much rainforest and how many minke whales global society should keep in its asset portfolio. Although ecologists increasingly attempt to justify preservation of biological assets on economic grounds, we argue that this might be a dangerous approach to take. Ultimately, it may be necessary to reexamine the ethical foundations for conservation of nature and biodiversity, including the economist's use of utilitarianism. We suggest that the safe minimum standard approach may prove useful in practice.     

The Limits to Caring: Sustainable Living and the Loss of Biodiversity

Caring for the Earth represents current middle-of-the-road thinking on the relationship between conservation and development. This IUCN/UNEP/WWF document has embraced a purely utilitarian perspective: it considers the conservation and development of natural resources to be the same process. In this analysis, I argue that the goal of creating the sustainable society, as defined in Caring for the Earth , is an unattainable utopia, and that the mechanisms proposed to attain this goal will lead irrevocably to the loss of biological diversity. I consider the history of the concept of sustainable development, and then document the constraints on sustainable use of natural resources. Sustainable use only occurs when both human needs are met and the losses of biodiversity and environmental degradation are acceptable. These conditions are not always met when natural resources are used, and I consider the fundamental contradictions between resource potential and human needs. I conclude by emphasizing that while sustainable use is a powerful approach to conservation, it is not the only one, and the conservation of many species and biological communities also requires a preservationist approach.     

Seventy‐One Important Questions for the Conservation of Marine Biodiversity

The ocean provides food, economic activity, and cultural value for a large proportion of humanity. Our knowledge of marine ecosystems lags behind that of terrestrial ecosystems, limiting effective protection of marine resources. We describe the outcome of 2 workshops in 2011 and 2012 to establish a list of important questions, which, if answered, would substantially improve our ability to conserve and manage the world's marine resources. Participants included individuals from academia, government, and nongovernment organizations with broad experience across disciplines, marine ecosystems, and countries that vary in levels of development. Contributors from the fields of science, conservation, industry, and government submitted questions to our workshops, which we distilled into a list of priority research questions. Through this process, we identified 71 key questions. We grouped these into 8 subject categories, each pertaining to a broad component of marine conservation: fisheries, climate change, other anthropogenic threats, ecosystems, marine citizenship, policy, societal and cultural considerations, and scientific enterprise. Our questions address many issues that are specific to marine conservation, and will serve as a road map to funders and researchers to develop programs that can greatly benefit marine conservation. Setenta y Un Preguntas Importantes para la Conservación de la Biodiversidad Marina     

Taxonomic Uncertainty and the Loss of Biodiversity on Christmas Island,Indian Ocean

The taxonomic uniqueness of island populations is often uncertain which hinders effective prioritization for conservation. The Christmas Island shrew (Crocidura attenuata trichura) is the only member of the highly speciose eutherian family Soricidae recorded from Australia. It is currently classified as a subspecies of the Asian gray or long‐tailed shrew (C. attenuata), although it was originally described as a subspecies of the southeast Asian white‐toothed shrew (C. fuliginosa). The Christmas Island shrew is currently listed as endangered and has not been recorded in the wild since 1984–1985, when 2 specimens were collected after an 80‐year absence. We aimed to obtain DNA sequence data for cytochrome b (cytb) from Christmas Island shrew museum specimens to determine their taxonomic affinities and to confirm the identity of the 1980s specimens. The Cytb sequences from 5, 1898 specimens and a 1985 specimen were identical. In addition, the Christmas Island shrew cytb sequence was divergent at the species level from all available Crocidura cytb sequences. Rather than a population of a widespread species, current evidence suggests the Christmas Island shrew is a critically endangered endemic species, C. trichura, and a high priority for conservation. As the decisions typically required to save declining species can be delayed or deferred if the taxonomic status of the population in question is uncertain, it is hoped that the history of the Christmas Island shrew will encourage the clarification of taxonomy to be seen as an important first step in initiating informed and effective conservation action.     

Economic Growth and Biodiversity Loss in an Age of Tradable Permits

Abstract:  Tradable permits are increasingly becoming part of environmental policy and conservation programs. The efficacy of tradable permit schemes in addressing the root cause of environmental decline—economic growth—will not be achieved unless the schemes cap economic activity based on ecological thresholds. Lessons can be learned from the largest tradable permit scheme to date, emissions trading now being implemented with the Kyoto Protocol. The Kyoto Protocol caps neither greenhouse gas emissions at a level that will achieve climate stability nor economic growth. If patterned after the Kyoto Protocol, cap-and-trade schemes for conservation will not ameliorate biodiversity loss either because they will not address economic growth. In response to these failures to cap economic growth, professional organizations concerned about biodiversity conservation should release position statements on economic growth and ecological thresholds. The statements can then be used by policy makers to infuse these positions into the local, national, and international environmental science-policy process when these schemes are being developed. Infusing language into the science-policy process that calls for capping economic activity based on ecological thresholds represents sound conservation science. Most importantly, position statements have a greater potential to ameliorate biodiversity loss if they are created and released than if this information remains within professional organizations because there is the potential for these ideas to be enacted into law and policy.     

Biodiversity Conservation and Indigenous Land Management in the Era of Self‐Determination

Abstract: Indigenous people inhabit approximately 85% of areas designated for biodiversity conservation worldwide. They also continue to struggle for recognition and preservation of cultural identities, lifestyles, and livelihoods—a struggle contingent on control and protection of traditional lands and associated natural resources (hereafter, self‐determination). Indigenous lands and the biodiversity they support are increasingly threatened because of human population growth and per capita consumption. Application of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) to tribal lands in the United States provides a rich example of the articulation between biodiversity conservation and indigenous peoples' struggle for self‐determination. We found a paradoxical relationship whereby tribal governments are simultaneously and contradictorily sovereign nations; yet their communities depend on the U.S. government for protection through the federal‐trust doctrine. The unique legal status of tribal lands, their importance for conserving federally protected species, and federal environmental regulations' failure to define applicability to tribal lands creates conflict between tribal sovereignty, self‐determination, and constitutional authority. We reviewed Secretarial Order 3206, the U.S. policy on “American Indian tribal rights, federal–tribal trust responsibilities, and the ESA,” and evaluated how it influences ESA implementation on tribal lands. We found improved biodiversity conservation and tribal self‐determination requires revision of the fiduciary relationship between the federal government and the tribes to establish clear, legal definitions regarding land rights, applicability of environmental laws, and financial responsibilities. Such actions will allow provision of adequate funding and training to tribal leaders and resource managers, government agency personnel responsible for biodiversity conservation and land management, and environmental policy makers. Increased capacity, cooperation, and knowledge transfer among tribes and conservationists will improve biodiversity conservation and indigenous self‐determination.     

The Capacity of Australia's Protected‐Area System to Represent Threatened Species

Abstract: The acquisition or designation of new protected areas is usually based on criteria for representation of different ecosystems or land‐cover classes, and it is unclear how well‐threatened species are conserved within protected‐area networks. Here, we assessed how Australia's terrestrial protected‐area system (89 million ha, 11.6% of the continent) overlaps with the geographic distributions of threatened species and compared this overlap against a model that randomly placed protected areas across the continent and a spatially efficient model that placed protected areas across the continent to maximize threatened species’ representation within the protected‐area estate. We defined the minimum area needed to conserve each species on the basis of the species’ range size. We found that although the current configuration of protected areas met targets for representation of a given percentage of species’ ranges better than a random selection of areas, 166 (12.6%) threatened species occurred entirely outside protected areas and target levels of protection were met for only 259 (19.6%) species. Critically endangered species were among those with the least protection; 12 (21.1%) species occurred entirely outside protected areas. Reptiles and plants were the most poorly represented taxonomic groups, and amphibians the best represented. Spatial prioritization analyses revealed that an efficient protected‐area system of the same size as the current protected‐area system (11.6% of the area of Australia) could meet representation targets for 1272 (93.3%) threatened species. Moreover, the results of these prioritization analyses showed that by protecting 17.8% of Australia, all threatened species could reach target levels of representation, assuming all current protected areas are retained. Although this amount of area theoretically could be protected, existing land uses and the finite resources available for conservation mean land acquisition may not be possible or even effective for the recovery of threatened species. The optimal use of resources must balance acquisition of new protected areas, where processes that threaten native species are mitigated by the change in ownership or on‐ground management jurisdiction, and management of threatened species inside and outside the existing protected‐area system.     

A Cross-National Analysis of How Economic Inequality Predicts Biodiversity Loss

Abstract:  We used socioeconomic models that included economic inequality to predict biodiversity loss, measured as the proportion of threatened plant and vertebrate species, across 50 countries. Our main goal was to evaluate whether economic inequality, measured as the Gini index of income distribution, improved the explanatory power of our statistical models. We compared four models that included the following: only population density, economic footprint (i.e., the size of the economy relative to the country area), economic footprint and income inequality (Gini index), and an index of environmental governance. We also tested the environmental Kuznets curve hypothesis, but it was not supported by the data. Statistical comparisons of the models revealed that the model including both economic footprint and inequality was the best predictor of threatened species. It significantly outperformed population density alone and the environmental governance model according to the Akaike information criterion. Inequality was a significant predictor of biodiversity loss and significantly improved the fit of our models. These results confirm that socioeconomic inequality is an important factor to consider when predicting rates of anthropogenic biodiversity loss.     

The Power of Bioenergy‐Related Standards to Protect Biodiversity

Abstract: The sustainable production of bioenergy is vital to avoiding negative impacts on environmental goods such as climate, soil, water, and especially biodiversity. We propose three key issues that should be addressed in any biodiversity risk‐mitigation strategy: conservation of areas of significant biodiversity value; mitigation of negative effects related to indirect land‐use change; and promotion of agricultural practices with few negative impacts on biodiversity. Focusing on biodiversity concerns, we compared principles and criteria set to address biodiversity and other environmental and social issues in seven standards (defined here as commodity‐based standards or roundtables, or relevant European legislation): five voluntary initiatives related to bioenergy feedstocks, the Renewable Transport Fuel Obligation (United Kingdom), and the European Renewable Energy Source Directive. Conservation of areas of significant biodiversity value was fairly well covered by these standards. Nevertheless, mitigation of negative impacts related to indirect land‐use change was underrepresented. Although the EU directive, with its bonus system for the use of degraded land and a subquota system for noncrop biofuels, offered the most robust standards to mitigate potential negative effects, all of the standards fell short in promoting agricultural practices with low negative impacts on biodiversity. We strongly recommend that each standard be benchmarked against related standards, as we have done here, and that efforts should be made to strengthen the elements that are weak or missing. This would be a significant step toward achieving a bioenergy industry that safeguards Earth's living heritage.     

A Matrix‐Calibrated Species‐Area Model for Predicting Biodiversity Losses Due to Land‐Use Change

Abstract: Application of island biogeography theory to prediction of species extinctions resulting from habitat loss is based on the assumption that the transformed landscape matrix is completely inhospitable to the taxa considered, despite evidence demonstrating the nontrivial influence of matrix on populations within habitat remnants. The island biogeography paradigm therefore needs refining to account for specific responses of taxa to the area of habitat “islands” and to the quality of the surrounding matrix. We incorporated matrix effects into island theory by partitioning the slope (z value) of species–area relationships into two components: γ, a constant, and σ, a measure of taxon‐specific responses to each component of a heterogeneous matrix. We used our matrix‐calibrated model to predict extinction and endangerment of bird species resulting from land‐use change in 20 biodiversity hotspots and compared these predictions with observed numbers of extinct and threatened bird species. We repeated this analysis with the conventional species–area model and the countryside species–area model, considering alternative z values of 0.35 (island) or 0.22 (continental). We evaluated the relative strength of support for each of the five candidate models with Akaike's information criterion (AIC). The matrix‐calibrated model had the highest AIC weight (w_i = 89.21%), which means the weight of evidence in support of this model was the optimal model given the set of candidate models and the data. In addition to being a valuable heuristic tool for assessing extinction risk, our matrix‐calibrated model also allows quantitative assessment of biodiversity benefits (and trade‐offs) of land‐management options in human‐dominated landscapes. Given that processes of secondary regeneration have become more widespread across tropical regions and are predicted to increase, our matrix‐calibrated model will be increasingly appropriate for practical conservation in tropical landscapes.     

2010年生物多样性目标:指标与进展

针对全球生物多样性急剧下降的态势,2002年<生物多样性公约>缔约方大会通过了2010年生物多样性目标,即"到2010年大幅度降低全球、区域和国家的生物多样性丧失速度".文章分析了2010年生物多样性目标的产生背景和主要内容,讨论了2010年目标评估指标,阐述了全球和国家层次的2010年目标实施进展.最后,展望了2020年生物多样性目标及其战略重点、实施支持机制.     

中国农业生物多样性及其保护

对我国农业生物多样性现状与变化态势进行了评述,分析了农业生物多样性丧失的原因,认为生境丧失、退化与破碎化、农业单一化耕作与驯养、农业物种的过度开发利用、外来物种的引进或入侵、环境污染以及全球气候变化等是造成农业生物多样性减少的主要威胁,同时提出一系列相应的保护对策。