设计有效落实 30×30 陆地保护承诺的方法

IF 2.8 2区 环境科学与生态学 Q1 BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION
Carrie A. Schloss, D. Richard Cameron, Bradley Franklin, Christoph Nolte, Scott A. Morrison
{"title":"设计有效落实 30×30 陆地保护承诺的方法","authors":"Carrie A. Schloss,&nbsp;D. Richard Cameron,&nbsp;Bradley Franklin,&nbsp;Christoph Nolte,&nbsp;Scott A. Morrison","doi":"10.1111/csp2.13232","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>In response to biodiversity declines worldwide, over 190 nations committed to protect 30% of their lands and waters by 2030 (hereafter, 30×30). Systematic conservation planning and return on investment analysis can be helpful tools for determining where protection efforts could deliver the most efficient and effective reserve design, and supporting decision-making when trade-offs among objectives are required. Here, we propose a framework for efficient “30×30” implementation and apply it to the state of California (USA). Because conservation of a region's full suite of biodiversity is the primary objective of the global initiative, we prioritized representation in our analysis. We used Zonation to identify networks that close the gap in representation of major habitat types in California's protected area network and that also conserve the places important for biodiversity or climate change mitigation. We identified networks that are efficient relative to metrics likely to be important in implementation including land acquisition cost, number of transactions, and conservation benefit per hectare, and we illustrate not only trade-offs associated with these metrics but also differences in the co-benefits achieved. Five of the eight major habitat types in California are not currently protected at a 30% level statewide, and if representation was achieved solely through private land acquisition, targets could be met for as little as $5.84 billion, with as few as 364 transactions, or with 2.18 million additional conserved hectares. Implementation of 30×30 will likely require more flexibility than a single network design. A “no regrets” action would be to protect properties that were prioritized across all networks and additional implementation should include properties with characteristics of any of the individual networks. Our analytical framework and implementation guidance can be applied to other geographies and jurisdictions to increase the likelihood of both meeting 30×30 targets and delivering the conservation benefits they aim to secure.</p>","PeriodicalId":51337,"journal":{"name":"Conservation Science and Practice","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/csp2.13232","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"An approach to designing efficient implementation of 30×30 terrestrial conservation commitments\",\"authors\":\"Carrie A. Schloss,&nbsp;D. Richard Cameron,&nbsp;Bradley Franklin,&nbsp;Christoph Nolte,&nbsp;Scott A. Morrison\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/csp2.13232\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>In response to biodiversity declines worldwide, over 190 nations committed to protect 30% of their lands and waters by 2030 (hereafter, 30×30). Systematic conservation planning and return on investment analysis can be helpful tools for determining where protection efforts could deliver the most efficient and effective reserve design, and supporting decision-making when trade-offs among objectives are required. Here, we propose a framework for efficient “30×30” implementation and apply it to the state of California (USA). Because conservation of a region's full suite of biodiversity is the primary objective of the global initiative, we prioritized representation in our analysis. We used Zonation to identify networks that close the gap in representation of major habitat types in California's protected area network and that also conserve the places important for biodiversity or climate change mitigation. We identified networks that are efficient relative to metrics likely to be important in implementation including land acquisition cost, number of transactions, and conservation benefit per hectare, and we illustrate not only trade-offs associated with these metrics but also differences in the co-benefits achieved. Five of the eight major habitat types in California are not currently protected at a 30% level statewide, and if representation was achieved solely through private land acquisition, targets could be met for as little as $5.84 billion, with as few as 364 transactions, or with 2.18 million additional conserved hectares. Implementation of 30×30 will likely require more flexibility than a single network design. A “no regrets” action would be to protect properties that were prioritized across all networks and additional implementation should include properties with characteristics of any of the individual networks. Our analytical framework and implementation guidance can be applied to other geographies and jurisdictions to increase the likelihood of both meeting 30×30 targets and delivering the conservation benefits they aim to secure.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51337,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Conservation Science and Practice\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/csp2.13232\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Conservation Science and Practice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"93\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/csp2.13232\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"环境科学与生态学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Conservation Science and Practice","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/csp2.13232","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

为应对全球生物多样性的减少,190 多个国家承诺在 2030 年前保护其 30% 的土地和水域(以下简称 "30×30")。系统的保护规划和投资回报分析可以作为一种有用的工具,用于确定保护工作在哪些方面可以实现最高效、最有效的保护区设计,并在需要权衡不同目标时为决策提供支持。在此,我们提出了一个高效实施 "30×30 "的框架,并将其应用于美国加利福尼亚州。由于保护一个地区的全套生物多样性是全球倡议的首要目标,因此我们在分析中优先考虑代表性。我们使用分区法来识别能够缩小加利福尼亚州保护区网络中主要栖息地类型代表性差距的网络,这些网络还能保护对生物多样性或减缓气候变化具有重要意义的地方。我们确定了在实施过程中可能很重要的指标(包括土地获取成本、交易数量和每公顷保护效益)方面效率较高的网络,我们不仅说明了与这些指标相关的权衡,还说明了所实现的共同效益的差异。在加州的八种主要栖息地类型中,有五种目前在全州范围内未达到 30% 的保护水平,如果仅通过征用私人土地来实现代表性,则只需花费 58.4 亿美元、364 次交易或增加 218 万公顷的保护面积即可实现目标。与单一的网络设计相比,30×30 的实施可能需要更大的灵活性。一个 "无悔 "的行动是保护在所有网络中被优先考虑的财产,额外的实施应包括具有任何单个网络特征的财产。我们的分析框架和实施指南可应用于其他地区和司法管辖区,以提高实现 30×30 目标的可能性,并实现其旨在确保的保护效益。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

An approach to designing efficient implementation of 30×30 terrestrial conservation commitments

An approach to designing efficient implementation of 30×30 terrestrial conservation commitments

In response to biodiversity declines worldwide, over 190 nations committed to protect 30% of their lands and waters by 2030 (hereafter, 30×30). Systematic conservation planning and return on investment analysis can be helpful tools for determining where protection efforts could deliver the most efficient and effective reserve design, and supporting decision-making when trade-offs among objectives are required. Here, we propose a framework for efficient “30×30” implementation and apply it to the state of California (USA). Because conservation of a region's full suite of biodiversity is the primary objective of the global initiative, we prioritized representation in our analysis. We used Zonation to identify networks that close the gap in representation of major habitat types in California's protected area network and that also conserve the places important for biodiversity or climate change mitigation. We identified networks that are efficient relative to metrics likely to be important in implementation including land acquisition cost, number of transactions, and conservation benefit per hectare, and we illustrate not only trade-offs associated with these metrics but also differences in the co-benefits achieved. Five of the eight major habitat types in California are not currently protected at a 30% level statewide, and if representation was achieved solely through private land acquisition, targets could be met for as little as $5.84 billion, with as few as 364 transactions, or with 2.18 million additional conserved hectares. Implementation of 30×30 will likely require more flexibility than a single network design. A “no regrets” action would be to protect properties that were prioritized across all networks and additional implementation should include properties with characteristics of any of the individual networks. Our analytical framework and implementation guidance can be applied to other geographies and jurisdictions to increase the likelihood of both meeting 30×30 targets and delivering the conservation benefits they aim to secure.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Conservation Science and Practice
Conservation Science and Practice BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION-
CiteScore
5.50
自引率
6.50%
发文量
240
审稿时长
10 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信