Evaluating trade-offs between target persistence levels and numbers of species conserved

Di Fonzo, Martina M. I., Possingham, Hugh P., Probert, William J. M., Bennett, Joseph R., Joseph, Liana N., Tulloch, Ayesha I., O'Connor, Shaun, Densem, Jodie and Maloney, Richard F. (2015) Evaluating trade-offs between target persistence levels and numbers of species conserved. Conservation Letters, 9 1: 51-57. doi:10.1111/conl.12179


Author Di Fonzo, Martina M. I.
Possingham, Hugh P.
Probert, William J. M.
Bennett, Joseph R.
Joseph, Liana N.
Tulloch, Ayesha I.
O'Connor, Shaun
Densem, Jodie
Maloney, Richard F.
Title Evaluating trade-offs between target persistence levels and numbers of species conserved
Journal name Conservation Letters   Check publisher's open access policy
ISSN 1755-263X
Publication date 2015-07-14
Year available 2015
Sub-type Article (original research)
DOI 10.1111/conl.12179
Open Access Status DOI
Volume 9
Issue 1
Start page 51
End page 57
Total pages 7
Place of publication Chichester, West Sussex, United Kingdom
Publisher Wiley-Blackwell Publishing
Language eng
Abstract A focus of conservation planning is to maximize the probability of species persistence, but this may reduce the number of species that can be secured with a limited budget. Using a data set of 700 New Zealand species, we examine the trade-off between providing a high level of persistence for some species and a lower level of persistence for more species. We find that the target persistence level that delivers the highest conservation outcome is a function of the annual budget, such that lower budgets have lower optimal targets. However, it is never optimal to manage species below a 75% probability of persistence. We introduce a prioritization approach that maximizes biodiversity gains based on a flexible persistence target, and demonstrate how strategies with fixed high-persistence targets can be inefficient. We also illustrate the risks in spreading conservation resources too thinly by undertaking low levels of management on more species.
Keyword Conservation planning
Persistence
Prioritization
Resource allocation
Q-Index Code C1
Q-Index Status Confirmed Code
Institutional Status UQ
Additional Notes Early view of article. Published online 14 July 2015.

Document type: Journal Article
Sub-type: Article (original research)
Collections: CEED Publications
Official 2016 Collection
 
Versions
Version Filter Type
Citation counts: TR Web of Science Citation Count  Cited 6 times in Thomson Reuters Web of Science Article | Citations
Scopus Citation Count Cited 7 times in Scopus Article | Citations
Google Scholar Search Google Scholar
Created: Tue, 28 Jul 2015, 12:35:03 EST by System User on behalf of Scholarly Communication and Digitisation Service