Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/ Biological Conservat...arrow_drop_down
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/
image/svg+xml Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao Closed Access logo, derived from PLoS Open Access logo. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Closed_Access_logo_transparent.svg Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao
Biological Conservation
Article . 2016 . Peer-reviewed
License: Elsevier TDM
Data sources: Crossref
versions View all 4 versions
addClaim

This Research product is the result of merged Research products in OpenAIRE.

You have already added 0 works in your ORCID record related to the merged Research product.

Prioritizing management actions for the conservation of freshwater biodiversity under changing climate and land-cover

Authors: Mantyka-Pringle, Chrystal S.; Martin, Tara G.; Moffatt, David B.; Udy, James; Olley, Jon; Saxton, Nina; Sheldon, Fran.; +2 Authors

Prioritizing management actions for the conservation of freshwater biodiversity under changing climate and land-cover

Abstract

Freshwater ecosystems are declining under climate change and land-use change. To maximize the return on investment in freshwater conservation with limited financial resources, managers must prioritize management actions that are most cost-effective. However, little is known about what these priorities may be under the combined effects of climate and land-cover change. We present a novel decision-making framework for prioritizing conservation resources to different management actions for the conservation of freshwater biodiversity. The approach is novel in that it has the ability to model interactions, rank management options for dealing with conservation threats from climate and land-cover change, and integrate empirical data with expert knowledge. We illustrate the approach using a case study in South East Queensland (SEQ), Australia under climate change, land-cover change and their combined effects. Our results show that the explicit inclusion of multiple threats and costs results in quite different priorities than when costs and interactions are ignored. When costs are not considered, stream and riparian restoration, as a single management strategy, provides the greatest overall protection of macroinvertebrate and fish richness in rural and urban areas of SEQ in response to climate change and/or urban growth. Whereas, when costs are considered, farm/land management with stream and riparian restoration are the most cost-effective strategies for macroinvertebrate and fish conservation. Our findings support riparian restoration as the most effective adaptation strategy to climate change and urban development, but because it is expensive it may often not be the most cost-efficient strategy. Our approach allows for these decisions to be evaluated explicitly.

Country
Australia
Keywords

Environmental management, Management actions, 330, 577, 1105 Dentistry, Freshwater conservation planning, 333, 2309 Nature and Landscape Conservation, veterinary and food sciences, Climate change, Agricultural, Ecology, Costs, Environmental sciences, Biological sciences, Bayesian decision network, Zoology, Land-cover change, Conservation and biodiversity

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    citations
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    46
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Top 10%
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Top 10%
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Top 10%
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
citations
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
46
Top 10%
Top 10%
Top 10%
bronze