Différents récits sur le départ des juifs du Maroc dans les années 1960-1970

Conservation outcomes are principally achieved through the protection of intact habitat or the restoration of degraded habitat. Restoration is generally considered a lower priority action than protection because protection is thought to provide superior outcomes, at lower costs, without the time delay required for restoration. Yet while it is broadly accepted that protected intact habitat safeguards more biodiversity and generates greater ecosystem services per unit area than restored habitat, conservation lacks a theory that can coherently compare the relative outcomes of the two actions. We use a dynamic landscape model to integrate these two actions into a unified conservation theory of protection and restoration. Using nonlinear benefit functions, we show that both actions are crucial components of a conservation strategy that seeks to optimise either biodiversity conservation or ecosystem services provision. In contrast to conservation orthodoxy, in some circumstances, restoration should be strongly preferred to protection. The relative priority of protection and restoration depends on their costs and also on the different time lags that are inherent to both protection and restoration. We derive a simple and easy-to-interpret heuristic that integrates these factors into a single equation that applies equally to biodiversity conservation and ecosystem service objectives. We use two examples to illustrate the theory: bird conservation in tropical rainforests and coastal defence provided by mangrove forests

The role of scale in designing protected area systems to conserve poorly known species

Systematic conservation planning has a substantial theoretical underpinning that allows optimization of tradeoffs between biodiversity conservation and other socioeconomic goals. However, this theory assumes perfect spatial information about the locations of biodiversity features (e.g., species distributions). In practice, planners represent well-known taxa and other biodiversity “surrogates” in protected area systems, hoping that unmapped species will also be conserved. However, empirical research finds that surrogates predict species presence imperfectly, and sometimes rather poorly, at scales relevant to planning, and existing theory provides no further guidance. We developed new theory, explicitly incorporating aspects of spatial scale, for the representation problem when the locations of species distributions are unknown. Using probability theory and simulated and real species distributions, we found that the probability of adequately representing an unmapped species in a protected area system will be low unless the total fraction of the region being protected is larger than the species representation target. Furthermore, successful conservation depended critically on the relative sizes of the species distribution and of the individual protected areas; fewer, larger protected areas allowed the entire species distribution to fall into an unprotected gap. This scale-dependence varied with the configuration of the protected area system, with the conservation objective most likely to be attained if the individual protected areas were hyperdispersed (evenly spaced across the planning region). Using these results, we developed three design principles for representing unmapped species in protected areas: (1) The fraction of the region placed in protected areas should be substantially larger than the species-level representation target; (2) Individual protected areas must be at least one to two orders of magnitude smaller than the unmapped species' distribution; and (3) Protected areas should be evenly dispersed over geographic space. We also performed preliminary investigations of the effects of surrogates and socio-economic cost data on the probability of adequately representing unmapped species, finding that the primary effect of surrogates may simply be to promote hyperdispersion of protected areas across the planning region, and that seeking to minimize opportunity costs gives poorer conservation results than random protected area placement

Spatial marine zoning for fisheries and conservation

Protected areas are an effective tool for reducing biodiversity loss. Current legislation distinguishes various types of marine protected areas, each allowing different levels of resource extraction. However, almost all of the theory for spatial conservation planning is focused on identifying no-take reserves. The current approaches to zoning for multiple types of protected areas could result in suboptimal plans in terms of protecting biodiversity and minimizing negative socioeconomic impacts. We overcame these limitations in the first application of the multizone planning tool, Marxan with Zones, to design a network of four types of protected areas in the context of California's Marine Life Protection Act. We have produced a zoning configuration that entails mean value losses of less than 9% for every fishery, without compromising conservation goals. We also found that a spatial numerical optimization tool that allows for multiple zones outperforms a tool that can identify one zone (ie marine reserves) in two ways: first, the overall impact on the fishing industry is reduced, and second, a more equitable impact on different fishing sectors is achieved. Finally, we examined the tradeoffs between representing biodiversity features and impacting fisheries. Our approach is applicable to both marine and terrestrial conservation planning, and delivers an ecosystem-based management outcome that balances conservation and industry objectives

Setting conservation priorities in Fiji: Decision science versus additive scoring systems

There is a well-established scientific field - decision science - that can be used to rigorously set conservation priorities. Despite well-documented shortcomings, additive scoring approaches to conservation prioritization are still prevalent. This paper discusses the shortcomings and advantages of both approaches applied in Fiji to identify priorities for terrestrial protected areas. The two main shortcomings of using a scoring approach (discussed in Keppel (2014) [1]) that are resolved with decision science approaches (presented in Klein et al. (2014) [2]) in Fiji were (1) priorities did not achieve one of the most important stated conservation goals of representing ~40% of Fiji's major vegetation types and (2) the weighting of different selection criteria used was arbitrary. Both approaches considered expert knowledge and land-sea connections important to decision makers in Fiji, but only decision science can logically integrate both, in addition to other important considerations. Thus, decision makers are urged to use decision science and avoid additive scoring systems when prioritizing places for conservation. Fiji has the opportunity to be a global leader in using decision science to support integrated land-sea planning decisions

Forest conservation delivers highly variable coral reef conservation outcomes

Coral reefs are threatened by human activities on both the land (e.g., deforestation) and the sea (e.g., overfishing). Most conservation planning for coral reefs focuses on removing threats in the sea, neglecting management actions on the land. A more integrated approach to coral reef conservation, inclusive of land–sea connections, requires an understanding of how and where terrestrial conservation actions influence reefs. We address this by developing a land–sea planning approach to inform fine-scale spatial management decisions and test it in Fiji. Our aim is to determine where the protection of forest can deliver the greatest return on investment for coral reef ecosystems. To assess the benefits of conservation to coral reefs, we estimate their relative condition as influenced by watershed-based pollution and fishing. We calculate the cost-effectiveness of protecting forest and find that investments deliver rapidly diminishing returns for improvements to relative reef condition. For example, protecting 2% of forest in one area is almost 500 times more beneficial than protecting 2% in another area, making prioritization essential. For the scenarios evaluated, relative coral reef condition could be improved by 8–58% if all remnant forest in Fiji were protected rather than deforested. Finally, we determine the priority of each coral reef for implementing a marine protected area when all remnant forest is protected for conservation. The general results will support decisions made by the Fiji Protected Area Committee as they establish a national protected area network that aims to protect 20% of the land and 30% of the inshore waters by 2020. Although challenges remain, we can inform conservation decisions around the globe by tackling the complex issues relevant to integrated land–sea planning

Spatio-temporal marine conservation planning to support high-latitude coral range expansion under climate change

Aim: Increasing sea-surface temperatures (SST) have resulted in poleward range expansions of scleractinian corals and declines in their core ranges. These changes may provide management opportunities for the long-term persistence of corals, but spatial prioritization rarely considers and anticipates these changes. We developed a spatio-temporal conservation plan that accommodates future coral range expansions based on projections of future SST. Our spatial planning approach is particularly useful in places with limited information about species distributions. Our aims were to (1) identify areas that consistently remain important for conservation through time and (2) determine the differences between priorities for conservation that account for potential coral range expansions and those that ignore them. Location: Japan. Methods: We developed spatial planning approaches using predicted coral habitat distributions for current conditions, the near future and the distant future. Using the Marxan conservation planning software, we designed conservation plans for scenarios that incorporated different types of spatial and temporal connections. Spatial connections are physical connections between adjacent and nearby areas, whereas temporal connections connect planning areas throughout time. Results: We found that protecting areas important for current and future coral habitat distributions is possible by prioritizing places that are consistently important through time. A spatially and temporally cohesive plan was accomplished with only a 14% increase in the overall reserve system costs, compared with reserve systems ignoring future coral habitat distributions. The attributes of priority areas (e.g. locations, outside boundary length and size) were substantially different when we varied the types of connections. Main conclusions: This study demonstrated that areas with highest conservation priority now will not necessarily be optimal when planning for future change, such as coral range expansions. Furthermore, we showed that incorporating spatio-temporal connections into spatial prioritization achieves objectives of simultaneously conserving corals in the current climate and facilitating their expansions as SST rises

Trade-offs between data resolution, accuracy, and cost when choosing information to plan reserves for coral reef ecosystems

Conservation planners must reconcile trade-offs associated with using biodiversity data of differing qualities to make decisions. Coarse habitat classifications are commonly used as surrogates to design marine reserve networks when fine-scale biodiversity data are incomplete or unavailable. Although finely-classified habitat maps provide more detail, they may have more misclassification errors, a common problem when remotely-sensed imagery is used. Despite these issues, planners rarely consider the effects of errors when choosing data for spatially explicit conservation prioritizations. Here we evaluate trade-offs between accuracy and resolution of hierarchical coral reef habitat data (geomorphology and benthic substrate) derived from remote sensing, in spatial planning for Kubulau District, Fiji. For both, we use accuracy information describing the probability that a mapped habitat classification is correct to design marine reserve networks that achieve habitat conservation targets, and demonstrate inadequacies of using habitat maps without accuracy data. We show that using more detailed habitat information ensures better representation of biogenic habitats (i.e. coral and seagrass), but leads to larger and more costly reserves, because these data have more misclassification errors, and are also more expensive to obtain. Reduced impacts on fishers are possible using coarsely-classified data, which are also more cost-effective for planning reserves if we account for data collection costs, but using these data may under-represent reef habitats that are important for fisheries and biodiversity, due to the maps low thematic resolution. Finally, we show that explicitly accounting for accuracy information in decisions maximizes the chance of successful conservation outcomes by reducing the risk of missing conservation representation targets, particularly when using finely classified data

From Marxan to management: ocean zoning with stakeholders for Tun Mustapha Park in Sabah, Malaysia

Tun Mustapha Park, in Sabah, Malaysia, was gazetted in May 2016 and is the first multiple-use park in Malaysia where conservation, sustainable resource use and development co-occur within one management framework. We applied a systematic conservation planning tool, Marxan with Zones, and stakeholder consultation to design and revise the draft zoning plan. This process was facilitated by Sabah Parks, a government agency, and WWF-Malaysia, under the guidance of the Tun Mustapha Park steering committee and with support from the University of Queensland. Four conservation and fishing zones, including no-take areas, were developed, each with representation and replication targets for key marine habitats, and a range of socio-economic and community objectives. Here we report on how decision-support tools informed the reserve design process in three planning stages: prioritization, government review, and community consultation. Using marine habitat and species representation as a reporting metric, we describe how the zoning plan changed at each stage of the design process. We found that the changes made to the zoning plan by the government and stakeholders resulted in plans that compromised the achievement of conservation targets because no-take areas were moved away from villages and the coastline, where unique habitats are located. The design process highlights a number of lessons learned for future conservation zoning, which we believe will be useful as many other places embark on similar zoning processes on land and in the sea

To Achieve Big Wins for Terrestrial Conservation, Prioritize Protection of Ecoregions Closest to Meeting Targets

Most of the terrestrial world is experiencing high rates of land conversion despite growth of the global protected area (PA) network. There is a need to assess whether the current global protection targets are achievable across all major ecosystem types and to identify those that need urgent protection. Using recent rates of habitat conversion and protection and the latest terrestrial ecoregion map, we show that if the same approach to PA establishment that has been undertaken over the past three decades continues, 558 of 748 ecoregions (ca. 75%) will not meet an aspirational 30% area protection target by 2030. A simple yet strategic acquisition plan that considers realistic futures around habitat loss and PA expansion could more than double the number of ecoregions adequately protected by 2030 given current funding constraints. These results highlight the importance of including explicit ecoregional representation targets within any new post-2020 global PA target

Climate Velocity Can Inform Conservation in a Warming World

Climate change is shifting the ranges of species. Simple predictive metrics of range shifts such as climate velocity, that do not require extensive knowledge or data on individual species, could help to guide conservation. We review research on climate velocity, describing the theory underpinning the concept and its assumptions. We highlight how climate velocity has already been applied in conservation-related research, including climate residence time, climate refugia, endemism, historic and projected range shifts, exposure to climate change, and climate connectivity. Finally, we discuss ways to enhance the use of climate velocity in conservation through tailoring it to be more biologically meaningful, informing design of protected areas, conserving ocean biodiversity in 3D, and informing conservation actions