Environment:”True” conservation progress

McDonald-Madden, Eve, Gordon, Ascelin, Wintle, Brendan A., Walker, Susan, Grantham, Hedley, Carvalho, Silvia, Bottrill, Madeleine, Joseph, Liana, Ponce, Rocio, Stewart, Romola and Possingham, Hugh P. (2009) Environment:”True” conservation progress. Science, 323 5910: 43-44. doi:10.1126/science.1164342


Author McDonald-Madden, Eve
Gordon, Ascelin
Wintle, Brendan A.
Walker, Susan
Grantham, Hedley
Carvalho, Silvia
Bottrill, Madeleine
Joseph, Liana
Ponce, Rocio
Stewart, Romola
Possingham, Hugh P.
Title Environment:”True” conservation progress
Journal name Science   Check publisher's open access policy
ISSN 0036-8075
Publication date 2009-01-01
Year available 2009
Sub-type Critical review of research, literature review, critical commentary
DOI 10.1126/science.1164342
Volume 323
Issue 5910
Start page 43
End page 44
Total pages 2
Editor B. Alberts
Place of publication United States
Publisher American Association for the Advancement of Science
Collection year 2010
Language eng
Subject 9608 Flora, Fauna and Biodiversity
050202 Conservation and Biodiversity
Abstract The field of biodiversity conservation is hampered by weak performance measurement and reporting standards (1). In other areas, such as the corporate world, weak reporting of performance is considered bad practice, if not illegal (2, 3). Although various evaluation frameworks for conservation programs have been suggested (4–7), few simple measures for unbiased reporting have been developed (8). Credible performance measures should connect conservation outcomes to goals for public investment in conservation. Gains and losses must both be presented as an auditable conservation balance sheet (8), revealing the net benefit of conservation actions and policies reported against losses. A major conservation performance metric in government state of the environment reports (9–14) is the size of the physical area protected, or the change in area protected. For example, South Africa reported that 6% of terrestrial habitat was contained within protected areas in 1999 (9); in 2001, North America reported an increase in land within reserves over time (13). However, these numbers provide no information on loss of habitat outside (or inside) reserved areas, or conservation opportunity costs of securing areas for conservation (15). Even when habitat loss is reported (11, 12), it is rarely possible to evaluate net conservation outcomes.
Q-Index Code C1
Q-Index Status Confirmed Code
Institutional Status UQ

 
Versions
Version Filter Type
Citation counts: TR Web of Science Citation Count  Cited 22 times in Thomson Reuters Web of Science Article | Citations
Scopus Citation Count Cited 25 times in Scopus Article | Citations
Google Scholar Search Google Scholar
Created: Tue, 23 Feb 2010, 01:15:36 EST by Hayley Ware on behalf of School of Biological Sciences