Macroeconomic Policy,Growth, and Biodiversity Conservation

Abstract: To successfully achieve biodiversity conservation, the amount of ecosystem structure available for economic production must be determined by, and subject to, conservation needs. As such, the scale of economic systems must remain within the limits imposed by the need to preserve critical ecosystems and the regenerative and waste assimilative capacities of the ecosphere. These limits are determined by biophysical criteria, yet macroeconomics involves the use of economic instruments designed to meet economic criteria that have no capacity to achieve biophysically based targets. Macroeconomic policy cannot, therefore, directly solve the biodiversity erosion crisis. Nevertheless, good macroeconomic policy is still important given that bad macroeconomy policy is likely to reduce human well‐being and increase the likelihood of social upheaval that could undermine conservation efforts.     

Economic Growth,Climate Change,Biodiversity Loss: Distributive Justice for the Global North and South

Abstract: Economic growth‐the increase in production and consumption of goods and services‐must be considered within its biophysical context. Economic growth is fueled by biophysical inputs and its outputs degrade ecological processes, such as the global climate system. Economic growth is currently the principal cause of increased climate change, and climate change is a primary mechanism of biodiversity loss. Therefore, economic growth is a prime catalyst of biodiversity loss. Because people desire economic growth for dissimilar reasons‐some for the increased accumulation of wealth, others for basic needs‐how we limit economic growth becomes an ethical problem. Principles of distributive justice can help construct an international climate‐change regime based on principles of equity. An equity‐based framework that caps economic growth in the most polluting economies will lessen human impact on biodiversity. When coupled with a cap‐and‐trade mechanism, the framework can also provide a powerful tool for redistribution of wealth. Such an equity‐based framework promises to be more inclusive and therefore more effective because it accounts for the disparate developmental conditions of the global north and south.     

Key Role of European Rabbits in the Conservation of the Western Mediterranean Basin Hotspot

Abstract: The Mediterranean Basin is a global hotspot of biodiversity. Hotspots are said to be experiencing a major loss of habitat, but an added risk could be the decline of some species having a special role in ecological relationships of the system. We reviewed the role of European rabbits (Oryctolagus cuniculus) as a keystone species in the Iberian Peninsula portion of the Mediterranean hotspot. Rabbits conspicuously alter plant species composition and vegetation structure through grazing and seed dispersal, which creates open areas and preserves plant species diversity. Moreover, rabbit latrines have a demonstrable effect on soil fertility and plant growth and provide new feeding resources for many invertebrate species. Rabbit burrows provide nest sites and shelter for vertebrates and invertebrates. In addition, rabbits serve as prey for a number of predators, including the critically endangered Iberian lynx (Lynx pardinus) and Spanish Imperial Eagle (Aquila adalberti). Thus, the Mediterranean ecosystem of the Iberian Peninsula should be termed “the rabbit's ecosystem.” To our knowledge, this is the first empirical support for existence of a multifunctional keystone species in a global hotspot of biodiversity. Rabbit populations have declined drastically on the Iberian Peninsula, with potential cascading effects and serious ecological and economic consequences. From this perspective, rabbit recovery is one of the biggest challenges for conservation of the Mediterranean Basin hotspot.     

Quantifying species recovery and conservation success to develop an IUCN Green List of Species

Stopping declines in biodiversity is critically important, but it is only a first step toward achieving more ambitious conservation goals. The absence of an objective and practical definition of species recovery that is applicable across taxonomic groups leads to inconsistent targets in recovery plans and frustrates reporting and maximization of conservation impact. We devised a framework for comprehensively assessing species recovery and conservation success. We propose a definition of a fully recovered species that emphasizes viability, ecological functionality, and representation; and use counterfactual approaches to quantify degree of recovery. This allowed us to calculate a set of 4 conservation metrics that demonstrate impacts of conservation efforts to date (conservation legacy); identify dependence of a species on conservation actions (conservation dependence); quantify expected gains resulting from conservation action in the medium term (conservation gain); and specify requirements to achieve maximum plausible recovery over the long term (recovery potential). These metrics can incentivize the establishment and achievement of ambitious conservation targets. We illustrate their use by applying the framework to a vertebrate, an invertebrate, and a woody and an herbaceous plant. Our approach is a preliminary framework for an International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Green List of Species, which was mandated by a resolution of IUCN members in 2012. Although there are several challenges in applying our proposed framework to a wide range of species, we believe its further development, implementation, and integration with the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species will help catalyze a positive and ambitious vision for conservation that will drive sustained conservation action.     

Bird‐community responses to habitat creation in a long‐term,large‐scale natural experiment

Ecosystem function and resilience are compromised when habitats become fragmented due to land‐use change. This has led to national and international conservation strategies aimed at restoring habitat extent and improving functional connectivity (i.e., maintaining dispersal processes). However, biodiversity responses to landscape‐scale habitat creation and the relative importance of spatial and temporal scales are poorly understood, and there is disagreement over which conservation strategies should be prioritized. We used 160 years of historic post‐agricultural woodland creation as a natural experiment to evaluate biodiversity responses to habitat creation in a landscape context. Birds were surveyed in 101 secondary, broadleaf woodlands aged 10–160 years with ≥80% canopy cover and in landscapes with 0‐17% broadleaf woodland cover within 3000 m. We used piecewise structural equation modeling to examine the direct and indirect relationships between bird abundance and diversity, ecological continuity, patch characteristics, and landscape structure and quantified the relative conservation value of local and landscape scales for bird communities. Ecological continuity indirectly affected overall bird abundance and species richness through its effects on stand structure, but had a weaker influence (effect size near 0) on the abundance and diversity of species most closely associated with woodland habitats. This was probably because woodlands were rapidly colonized by woodland generalists in ≤10 years (minimum patch age) but were on average too young (median 50 years) to be colonized by woodland specialists. Local patch characteristics were relatively more important than landscape characteristics for bird communities. Based on our results, biodiversity responses to habitat creation depended on local‐ and landscape‐scale factors that interacted across time and space. We suggest that there is a need for further studies that focus on habitat creation in a landscape context and that knowledge gained from studies of habitat fragmentation and loss should be used to inform habitat creation with caution because the outcomes are not necessarily reciprocal.     

Predicting the Spatial Distribution of a Seabird Community to Identify Priority Conservation Areas in the Timor Sea

Understanding spatial and temporal variability in the distribution of species is fundamental to the conservation of marine and terrestrial ecosystems. To support strategic decision making aimed at sustainable management of the oceans, such as the establishment of protected areas for marine wildlife, we identified areas predicted to support multispecies seabird aggregations in the Timor Sea. We developed species distribution models for 21 seabird species based on at‐sea survey observations from 2000–2013 and oceanographic variables (e.g., bathymetry). We applied 4 statistical modeling techniques and combined the results into an ensemble model with robust performance. The ensemble model predicted the probability of seabird occurrence in areas where few or no surveys had been conducted and demonstrated 3 areas of high seabird richness that varied little between seasons. These were located within 150 km of Adele Island, Ashmore Reef, and the Lacepede Islands, 3 of the largest aggregations of breeding seabirds in Australia. Although these breeding islands were foci for high species richness, model performance was greatest for 3 nonbreeding migratory species that would have been overlooked had regional monitoring been restricted to islands. Our results indicate many seabird hotspots in the Timor Sea occur outside existing reserves (e.g., Ashmore Reef Marine Reserve), where shipping, fisheries, and offshore development likely pose a threat to resident and migratory populations. Our results highlight the need to expand marine spatial planning efforts to ensure biodiversity assets are appropriately represented in marine reserves. Correspondingly, our results support the designation of at least 4 new important bird areas, for example, surrounding Adele Island and Ashmore Reef. Pronostico de la Distribución Espacial de una Comunidad de Aves Marinas para Identificar Áreas Prioritarias de Conservación en el Mar de Timor     

Setting Practical Conservation Priorities for Birds in the Western Andes of Colombia

We aspired to set conservation priorities in ways that lead to direct conservation actions. Very large‐scale strategic mapping leads to familiar conservation priorities exemplified by biodiversity hotspots. In contrast, tactical conservation actions unfold on much smaller geographical extents and they need to reflect the habitat loss and fragmentation that have sharply restricted where species now live. Our aspirations for direct, practical actions were demanding. First, we identified the global, strategic conservation priorities and then downscaled to practical local actions within the selected priorities. In doing this, we recognized the limitations of incomplete information. We started such a process in Colombia and used the results presented here to implement reforestation of degraded land to prevent the isolation of a large area of cloud forest. We used existing range maps of 171 bird species to identify priority conservation areas that would conserve the greatest number of species at risk in Colombia. By at risk species, we mean those that are endemic and have small ranges. The Western Andes had the highest concentrations of such species—100 in total—but the lowest densities of national parks. We then adjusted the priorities for this region by refining these species ranges by selecting only areas of suitable elevation and remaining habitat. The estimated ranges of these species shrank by 18–100% after accounting for habitat and suitable elevation. Setting conservation priorities on the basis of currently available range maps excluded priority areas in the Western Andes and, by extension, likely elsewhere and for other taxa. By incorporating detailed maps of remaining natural habitats, we made practical recommendations for conservation actions. One recommendation was to restore forest connections to a patch of cloud forest about to become isolated from the main Andes. Establecimiento de Prioridades Prácticas para la Conservación de Aves en los Andes Occidentales de Colombia     

Voting Systems for Environmental Decisions

Voting systems aggregate preferences efficiently and are often used for deciding conservation priorities. Desirable characteristics of voting systems include transitivity, completeness, and Pareto optimality, among others. Voting systems that are common and potentially useful for environmental decision making include simple majority, approval, and preferential voting. Unfortunately, no voting system can guarantee an outcome, while also satisfying a range of very reasonable performance criteria. Furthermore, voting methods may be manipulated by decision makers and strategic voters if they have knowledge of the voting patterns and alliances of others in the voting populations. The difficult properties of voting systems arise in routine decision making when there are multiple criteria and management alternatives. Because each method has flaws, we do not endorse one method. Instead, we urge organizers to be transparent about the properties of proposed voting systems and to offer participants the opportunity to approve the voting system as part of the ground rules for operation of a group. Sistemas de Votación para Decisiones Ambientales     

Understanding the effects of different social data on selecting priority conservation areas

Conservation success is contingent on assessing social and environmental factors so that cost‐effective implementation of strategies and actions can be placed in a broad social–ecological context. Until now, the focus has been on how to include spatially explicit social data in conservation planning, whereas the value of different kinds of social data has received limited attention. In a regional systematic conservation planning case study in Australia, we examined the spatial concurrence of a range of spatially explicit social values and land‐use preferences collected using a public participation geographic information system and biological data. We used Zonation to integrate the social data with the biological data in a series of spatial‐prioritization scenarios to determine the effect of the different types of social data on spatial prioritization compared with biological data alone. The type of social data (i.e., conservation opportunities or constraints) significantly affected spatial prioritization outcomes. The integration of social values and land‐use preferences under different scenarios was highly variable and generated spatial prioritizations 1.2–51% different from those based on biological data alone. The inclusion of conservation‐compatible values and preferences added relatively few new areas to conservation priorities, whereas including noncompatible economic values and development preferences as costs significantly changed conservation priority areas (48.2% and 47.4%, respectively). Based on our results, a multifaceted conservation prioritization approach that combines spatially explicit social data with biological data can help conservation planners identify the type of social data to collect for more effective and feasible conservation actions.     

Adaptive introgression as a resource for management and genetic conservation in a changing climate

Current rates of climate change require organisms to respond through migration, phenotypic plasticity, or genetic changes via adaptation. We focused on questions regarding species’ and populations’ ability to respond to climate change through adaptation. Specifically, the role adaptive introgression, movement of genetic material from the genome of 1 species into the genome of another through repeated interbreeding, may play in increasing species’ ability to respond to a changing climate. Such interspecific gene flow may mediate extinction risk or consequences of limited adaptive potential that result from standing genetic variation and mutation alone, enabling a quicker demographic recovery in response to changing environments. Despite the near dismissal of the potential benefits of hybridization by conservation practitioners, we examined a number of case studies across different taxa that suggest gene flow between sympatric or parapatric sister species or within species that exhibit strong ecotypic differentiation may represent an underutilized management option to conserve evolutionary potential in a changing environment. This will be particularly true where advanced‐generation hybrids exhibit adaptive traits outside the parental phenotypic range, a phenomenon known as transgressive segregation. The ideas presented in this essay are meant to provoke discussion regarding how we maintain evolutionary potential, the conservation value of natural hybrid zones, and consideration of their important role in adaptation to climate.