Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gbm5v Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T10:11:33.313Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Site complementarity between biodiversity and ecosystem services in conservation planning of sparsely-populated regions

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 June 2015

JÉRÔME CIMON-MORIN ,
MARCEL DARVEAU  and
MONIQUE POULIN
JÉRÔME CIMON-MORIN
Affiliation:
Laval University, Pavillon Paul-Comtois, Faculté des sciences de l’agriculture et de l’alimentation, Département de phytologie, 2425 rue de l’Agriculture, Québec, QC, CanadaG1V 0A6 Ducks Unlimited Canada, 710 Bouvier, Bureau 260, Québec, QC, CanadaG2J 1C2 Quebec Centre for Biodiversity Science, McGill University, Stewart Biology Building, Department of Biology, 1205 Dr Penfield Avenue, Montréal, QC, CanadaH3A 1B1
MARCEL DARVEAU
Affiliation:
Laval University, Pavillon Paul-Comtois, Faculté des sciences de l’agriculture et de l’alimentation, Département de phytologie, 2425 rue de l’Agriculture, Québec, QC, CanadaG1V 0A6 Ducks Unlimited Canada, 710 Bouvier, Bureau 260, Québec, QC, CanadaG2J 1C2 Quebec Centre for Biodiversity Science, McGill University, Stewart Biology Building, Department of Biology, 1205 Dr Penfield Avenue, Montréal, QC, CanadaH3A 1B1
MONIQUE POULIN*
Affiliation:
Laval University, Pavillon Paul-Comtois, Faculté des sciences de l’agriculture et de l’alimentation, Département de phytologie, 2425 rue de l’Agriculture, Québec, QC, CanadaG1V 0A6 Quebec Centre for Biodiversity Science, McGill University, Stewart Biology Building, Department of Biology, 1205 Dr Penfield Avenue, Montréal, QC, CanadaH3A 1B1
*
*Correspondence: Dr Monique Poulin Tel: +1 418 656 2131 ext. 13035 e-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

The consequences of considering ecosystem services (ES) in conservation assessment are still widely debated. The degree of success depends on the extent to which biodiversity and ES can be secured under joint conservation actions. Unlike biodiversity, ES conservation is inseparably linked to human beneficiaries. Reconciling biodiversity with ES and conservation can be particularly challenging in sparsely populated areas. This study, in a sparsely-populated region of eastern Canada, focused on freshwater wetland biodiversity and ten ES provided by wetlands. Within a given maximal total area, the results showed that planning for biodiversity underrepresented local flow ES supply by 57% and demand by 61% in conservation networks. Planning for ES alone underrepresented wetland biodiversity surrogates by an average of 34%. Considering both biodiversity and ES simultaneously, all of the biodiversity and ES targets were achieved with only a 6% mean increase in area. Achieving all conservation targets starting from a network that was primarily built for either ES or biodiversity features alone was two to five times less efficient than considering both ES and biodiversity simultaneously in conservation assessment. A better framework is required to translate these spatial synergies into effective joint conservation actions.

Keywords

borealconservation assessmentecological servicesystematic conservation planningwetland
Type
Papers
Information
Environmental Conservation , Volume 43 , Issue 1 , March 2016 , pp. 56 - 68
Copyright
Copyright © Foundation for Environmental Conservation 2015 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bergeron, S. H. (2014) Analyse des estimations économiques des services écologiques pour faciliter leur intégration dans les processus décisionnels. Mémoire de maîtrise présenté à la Faculté des études supérieures de l’Université Laval, Faculté des sciences sociales, Département d’économique, Université Laval. Québec, Canada: 67 pp. [www document]. URL http://www.theses.ulaval.ca/2014/30990/30990.pdf Google Scholar
Berteaux, D. (2013) Québec's large-scale plan nord. Conservation Biology 27 (2): 242–247.Google Scholar
Borcard, D., Gillet, F. & Legendre, P. (2011) Numerical Ecology with R. New York, NY, USA: Springer New York.Google Scholar
Brandt, J. P. (2009) The extent of the North American boreal zone. Environmental Reviews 17: 101–161.Google Scholar
Butchart, S. H. M., Walpole, M., Collen, B., van Strien, A., Scharlemann, J. P. W., Almond, R. E. A., Baillie, J. E. M., Bomhard, B., Brown, C., Bruno, J., et al. (2010) Global biodiversity: indicators of recent declines. Science 328 (5982): 1164–1168.Google Scholar
Chan, K. M. A., Shaw, M. R., Cameron, D. R., Underwood, E. C. & Daily, G. C. (2006) Conservation planning for ecosystem services. PLoS Biology 4 (11): 2138–2152.Google Scholar
Cimon-Morin, J., Darveau, M. & Poulin, M. (2013) Fostering synergies between ecosystem services and biodiversity in conservation planning: A review. Biological Conservation 166: 144–154.Google Scholar
Cimon-Morin, J., Darveau, M. & Poulin, M. (2014 a) Ecosystem services expand the biodiversity conservation toolbox. A response to Deliège and Neuteleers. Biological Conservation 172: 219–220.Google Scholar
Cimon-Morin, J., Darveau, M. & Poulin, M. (2014 b) Towards systematic conservation planning adapted to the local flow of ecosystem services. Global Ecology and Conservation 2: 11–23.Google Scholar
Cimon-Morin, J., Darveau, M. & Poulin, M. (2015) Conservation biogeography of ecosystem services. Reference Module in Earth Systems and Environmental Sciences. Elsevier. doi: 10.1016/B978-0-12-409548-9.09205-8.Google Scholar
Cowardin, L. M. & Golet, F. C. (1995) US Fish and Wildlife Service 1979 wetland classification: a review. Vegetatio 118: 139–152.Google Scholar
Craigie, I. D., Pressey, R. L. & Barnes, M. (2014) Remote regions. The last places where conservation efforts should be intensified. A reply to McCauley et al. (2013). Biological Conservation 172: 221–222.Google Scholar
CRÉ (2010) Portait, constats et enjeux des ressources naturelles du territoire de la Côte-Nord. Conférence régionale des élus de la Côte-Nord, Plan régional de développement intégré des ressources et du territoire, CRE, Quebec, Canada: 232 pp. [www document]. URL http://www.crecotenord.qc.ca/sites/default/files/prdirt_portrait_vf_11fev2011.pdf Google Scholar
Daw, T., Brown, K., Rosendo, S. & Pomeroy, R. (2011) Applying the ecosystem services concept to poverty alleviation: the need to disaggregate human well-being. Environmental Conservation 38 (4): 370–379.Google Scholar
del Carmen Sabatini, M., Verdiell, A., Rodríguez Iglesias, R. M. & Vidal, M. (2007) A quantitative method for zoning of protected areas and its spatial ecological implications. Journal of Environmental Management 83 (2): 198–206.Google Scholar
Deliège, G. & Neuteleers, S. (2014) Ecosystem services as an argument for biodiversity preservation: why its strength is its problem. Reply to Cimon-Morin et al. Biological Conservation 172: 218.Google Scholar
Ducruc, J.-P. (1985) L’analyse écologique du territoire au Québec: l’inventaire du capital-nature de la moyenne-et-basse-côte-nord. Environnement Québec-Environnement Canada-Hydro-Québec, Division des inventaires écologiques, ministère de l’Environnement du Québec, Série de l’inventaire du capital-nature, Numéro 6: 192 pp.Google Scholar
Dudley, N., ed. (2008) Guidelines for Applying Protected Area Management Categories. Gland, Switzerland: IUCN: x + 86 pp. [www document] URL http://cmsdata.iucn.org/downloads/guidelines_for_applying_protected_area_management_categories.pdf Google Scholar
Egoh, B. N., Reyers, B., Rouget, M. & Richardson, D. M. (2011) Identifying priority areas for ecosystem service management in South African grasslands. Journal of Environmental Management 92 (6): 1642–1650.Google Scholar
ESRI (2012) ArcGIS 10.0. Redlands, CA, USA: Environmental Systems Research Institute Inc. Google Scholar
Failing, L., Gregory, R. & Higgins, P. (2013) Science, uncertainty, and values in ecological restoration: a case study in structured decision-making and adaptive management. Restoration Ecology 21: 422–430.Google Scholar
Foote, L. & Krogman, N. (2006) Wetlands in Canada's western boreal forest: agents of change. Forestry Chronicle 82 (6): 825–833.Google Scholar
Geneletti, D. & van Duren, I. (2008) Protected area zoning for conservation and use: a combination of spatial multicriteria and multiobjective evaluation. Landscape and Urban Planning 85 (2): 97–110.Google Scholar
Goldman, R. L., Tallis, H., Kareiva, P. & Daily, G. C. (2008) Field evidence that ecosystem service projects support biodiversity and diversify options. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA 105 (27): 9445–9448.Google Scholar
Gouvernement du Québec (2013) Région 09: Côte-Nord. MRC et agglomérations ou municipalités locales exerçant certaines compétences de MRC. Ministère des affaire municipales, régions et occupation du territoire, Direction de la géomatique et de la statistique, Gouvernement du Québec [www document]. URL http://www.mamrot.gouv.qc.ca/pub/organisation_municipale/cartotheque/Region_09.pdf Google Scholar
Harrison, P. A., Berry, P. M., Simpson, G., Haslett, J. R., Blicharska, M., Bucur, M., Dunford, R., Egoh, B., Garcia-Llorente, M., Geamănă, N., Geertsema, W., Lommelen, E., Meiresonne, L. & Turkelboom, F. (2014) Linkages between biodiversity attributes and ecosystem services: a systematic review. Ecosystem Services 9: 191–203.Google Scholar
Hunter, M. L. J. & Schmiegelow, F. K. A. (2011) Wildlife, Forests, and Forestry: Principles of Managing Forests for Biological Diversity. Upper Sadle River, NJ, USA: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
Hydro-Québec (2007) Complexe de la Romaine: etude d’impact sur l’environnement. Hydro-Québec Équipement et Hydro-Québec Production, Quebec, Canada [www document]. URL http://www.hydroquebec.com/romaine/documents/etude.html Google Scholar
Joubert, B. & Davidson, D. J. (2010) Mediating constructivism, nature and dissonant land use values: the case of northwest Saskatchewan Métis. Human Ecology Review 17 (1): 1–10.Google Scholar
Kalamandeen, M. & Gillson, L. (2007) Demything ‘wilderness’: implications for protected area designation and management. Biodiversity and Conservation 16 (1): 165–182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kareiva, P. & Marvier, M. (2003) Conserving biodiversity coldspots. American Scientist 91: 344–351.Google Scholar
Kramer, D. B., Urquhart, G. & Schmitt, K. (2009) Globalization and the connection of remote communities: a review of household effects and their biodiversity implications. Ecological Economics 68 (12): 2897–2909.Google Scholar
Kukkala, A. S. & Moilanen, A. (2013) Core concepts of spatial prioritisation in systematic conservation planning. Biological Reviews 88 (2): 443–464.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Larsen, F. W., Londoño-Murcia, M. C. & Turner, W. R. (2011) Global priorities for conservation of threatened species, carbon storage, and freshwater services: scope for synergy? Conservation Letters 4: 355–363.Google Scholar
Legendre, P. & Legendre, L. (2012) Numerical Ecology. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Elsevier.Google Scholar
Lemelin, L. V. & Darveau, M. (2006) Coarse and fine filters, gap analysis, and systematic conservation planning. Forestry Chronicle 82: 802–805.Google Scholar
Lemelin, L. V. & Darveau, M. (2008) Les milieux humides du parc national du Canada de la Mauricie: cartographie en vue d’une surveillance de l’intégrité écologique. Ducks Unlimited Canada, Québec, Canada.Google Scholar
Lemelin, L. V., Darveau, M., Imbeau, L. & Bordage, D. (2010) Wetland use and selection by breeding waterbirds in the boreal forest of Quebec, Canada. Wetlands 30: 321–332.Google Scholar
Li, T. & Ducruc, J.-P. (1999) Les provinces naturelles. Niveau I du cadre écologique de référence du Québec. Ministère de l’Environnement, Quebec, Canada: 90 pp. [www document]. URL http://www.mddefp.gouv.qc.ca/biodiversite/aires_protegees/provinces/index.htm Google Scholar
Lin, F. T. (2000) GIS-based information flow in a land-use zoning review process. Landscape and Urban Planning 52: 21–32.Google Scholar
Locke, H. & Dearden, P. (2005) Rethinking protected area categories and the new paradigm. Environmental Conservation 32 (1): 1–10.Google Scholar
MA (2005) Ecosystems and Human well-being: Synthesis. Washington, DC, USA: Island Press.Google Scholar
Mace, G. M., Norris, K. & Fitter, A. (2012) Biodiversity and ecosystem services: a multilayered relationship. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 27 (1): 19–26.Google Scholar
Margules, C. R. & Pressey, R. L. (2000) Systematic conservation planning. Nature 405: 243–253.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Margules, C. R. & Sarkar, S. (2007) Systematic Conservation Planning. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
McCauley, D. J. (2006) Selling out on nature. Nature 443 (7107): 27–28.Google Scholar
McCauley, D. J., Power, E. A., Bird, D. W., McInturff, A., Dunbar, R. B., Durham, W. H., Micheli, F. & Young, H. S. (2013) Conservation at the edges of the world. Biological Conservation 165 (0): 139–145.Google Scholar
McCauley, D. J., Young, H. S., Power, E. A., Bird, D. W., Durham, W. H., McInturff, A., Dunbar, R. B. & Micheli, F. (2014) Pushing back against paper-park pushers. Reply to Craigie et al. Biological Conservation 172: 223–224.Google Scholar
Ménard, S., Darveau, M. & Imbeau, L. (2013) The importance of geology, climate and anthropogenic disturbances in shaping boreal wetland and aquatic landscape types. Ecoscience 20: 399–410.Google Scholar
Miller, T. R., Minteer, B. & Malan, L.-C. (2011) The new conservation debate: the view from practical ethics. Biological Conservation 144 (3): 948–957.Google Scholar
Minteer, B. & Miller, T. R. (2011) The new conservation debate: ethical foundations, strategic trade-offs, and policy opportunities. Biological Conservation 144 (3): 945–947.Google Scholar
MRNF (2012) Données numériques écoforestière du Québec (4e programme d’inventaire forestier). Ministère des Ressources naturelles et Faune du Québec, Direction des inventaires forestiers, Québec, Canada.Google Scholar
Naidoo, R., Balmford, A., Costanza, R., Fisher, B., Green, R. E., Lehner, B., Malcolm, T. R. & Ricketts, T. H. (2008) Global mapping of ecosystem services and conservation priorities. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA 105 (28): 9495–9500.Google Scholar
Noss, R. F. (1987) From plant communities to landscapes in conservation inventories: a look at the Nature Conservancy (USA). Biological Conservation 41: 11–37.Google Scholar
NRCan (2011) CanVec v8.0. Natural Resources Canada, Earth Science Sector, Centre for Topographic Information [www document]. URL http://geogratis.cgdi.gc.ca/geogratis/fr/collection/5460AA9D-54CD-8349-C95E-1A4D03172FDF.html Google Scholar
NWWG (1997) The Canadian wetland classification system. Second edition. Eds B. G. Warner & C. D. A. Rubec. Waterloo, Wetlands Research Centre, Waterloo University, Ontario, Canada: 68 pp.Google Scholar
Pressey, R. L., Watts, M. E., Barrett, T. W. & Ridges, M. J. (2009) The C-Plan conservation planning system: origins, applications, and possible futures. In: Spatial Conservation Prioritization, ed. Moilanen, A., Wilson, K. A. & Possingham, H. P., pp. 211–234. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
R Development Core Team (2013) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria [www document]. URL http://www.R-project.org Google Scholar
Redford, K. H. & Adams, W. M. (2009) Payment for ecosystem services and the challenge of saving Nature. Conservation Biology 23 (4): 785–787.Google Scholar
Reyers, B., Polasky, S., Tallis, H., Mooney, H. A. & Larigauderie, A. (2012) Finding common ground for biodiversity and ecosystem services. Bioscience 62 (5): 503–507.Google Scholar
Schindler, D. W. & Lee, P. G. (2010) Comprehensive conservation planning to protect biodiversity and ecosystem services in Canadian boreal regions under a warming climate and increasing exploitation. Biological Conservation 143 (7): 1571–1586.Google Scholar
Tallis, H., Polasky, S., Lozano, J. S. & Wolny, S. (2012) Inclusive wealth accounting for regulating ecosystem services. In: UNU-IHDP and UNEP. Inclusive Wealth Report 2012. Measuring Progress Toward Sustainability, Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Thomas, C. D., Anderson, B. J., Moilanen, A., Eigenbrod, F., Heinemeyer, A., Quaife, T., Roy, D. B., Gillings, S., Armsworth, P. R. & Gaston, K. (2012) Reconciling biodiversity and carbon conservation. Ecology Letters 16 (1): 1–9.Google Scholar
Wiken, E., Jiménez Nava, F. & Griffith, G. (2011) North American Terrestrial Ecoregions. Level III. Commission for Environmental Cooperation, Montreal, Canada.Google Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Cimon-Morin supplementary material S1

Cimon-Morin supplementary material

Download Cimon-Morin supplementary material S1(File)
File 1.4 MB
Supplementary material: Image

Cimon-Morin supplementary material S2

Cimon-Morin supplementary material

Download Cimon-Morin supplementary material S2(Image)
Image 251.6 KB