Skip to main content

Synergies between the key biodiversity area and systematic conservation planning approaches

Smith, Robert J., Bennun, Leon, Brooks, Thomas M., Butchart, Stuart HM, Cuttelod, Annabelle, Di Marco, Moreno, Ferrier, Simon, Fishpool, Lincoln DC, Joppa, Lucas, Juffe?Bignoli, Diego, and others. (2018) Synergies between the key biodiversity area and systematic conservation planning approaches. Conservation Letters, . ISSN 1755-263X. (doi:10.1111/conl.12625)

PDF (Early View) - Publisher pdf

Creative Commons Licence
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Download (308kB) Preview
[img]
Preview
Official URL
https://doi.org/10.1111/conl.12625

Abstract

Systematic conservation planning and Key Biodiversity Areas (KBAs) are the two most widely used approaches for identifying important sites for biodiversity. However,thereislimitedadviceforconservationpolicymakersandpractitionersonwhen and how they should be combined. Here we provide such guidance, using insights from the recently developed Global Standard for the Identi?cation of KBAs and the language of decision science to review and clarify their similarities and di?erences. We argue the two approaches are broadly similar, with both setting transparent environmental objectives and specifying actions. There is however greater contrast in the datausedandactionsinvolved,astheKBAapproachusesbiodiversitydataaloneand identi?es sites for monitoring and vigilance actions at a minimum, whereas systematic conservation planning combines biodiversity and implementation-relevant data to guide management actions. This di?erence means there is much scope for combining approaches, so conservation planners should use KBA data in their analyses, setting context-speci?c targets for each KBA type, and planners and donors should use systematic conservation planning techniques when prioritizing between KBAs for management action. In doing so, they will bene?t conservation policy, practice and research by building on the collaborations formed through the KBA Standard's development.

Item Type: Article
DOI/Identification number: 10.1111/conl.12625
Uncontrolled keywords: decision science, irreplaceability, Key Biodiversity Areas, spatial prioritization, systematic conservation planning, targets
Subjects: Q Science > QH Natural history > QH75 Conservation (Biology)
Divisions: Faculties > Social Sciences > School of Anthropology and Conservation > DICE (Durrell Institute of Conservation and Ecology)
Depositing User: Bob Smith
Date Deposited: 18 Dec 2018 15:32 UTC
Last Modified: 30 May 2019 08:38 UTC
Resource URI: https://kar.kent.ac.uk/id/eprint/71267 (The current URI for this page, for reference purposes)
Smith, Robert J.: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1599-9171
  • Depositors only (login required):

Downloads

Downloads per month over past year