IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v10y2018i10p3694-d175708.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Method to Compare the Biodiversity Conservation Effectiveness between Regions based on a Reference Condition

Author

Listed:
  • Kaikai Dong

    (Northeast Institute of Geography and Agroecology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Changchun 130102, China
    University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China)

  • Guanglei Hou

    (Northeast Institute of Geography and Agroecology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Changchun 130102, China)

  • Dandan Xu

    (Northeast Institute of Geography and Agroecology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Changchun 130102, China
    University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China)

  • Honglin He

    (Key Laboratory of Ecosystem Network Observation and Modeling, Institute of Geographic Sciences and Natural Resources Research, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100101, China)

  • Zhaoli Liu

    (Northeast Institute of Geography and Agroecology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Changchun 130102, China)

Abstract

Assessment of conservation effectiveness in biodiversity ecological function zones (BEFZs) is important for biodiversity in China. However, a scientific and practical method for effectively comparing biodiversity conservation between different BEFZs is lacking. In this study, a reference condition index that can represent the optimum value of biodiversity in one BEFZ and a conservation effectiveness index that can reflect the effect of conservation measures were developed. Then a method to compare the biodiversity conservation effectiveness between different BEFZs on both temporal and spatial scales was developed. The method was applied to three BEFZs in China—Yili-Tianshan Mountain, San Jiang Plain Wetland and Minshan-Qionglai Mountain—which are located in different geographic environments. The main conclusions are as follows: (1) the reference condition index can reflect differences in the background of conservation capacity among BEFZs examined, allowing comparison of the biodiversity conservation effectiveness between different BEFZs; (2) the conservation effectiveness index is a useful quantitative measure of the biodiversity conservation effectiveness in BEFZs; and (3) application of this method to the three BEFZs indicated that the method can provide a powerful tool for the management of biodiversity conservation in BEFZs at a macroscale in China. Meanwhile, this method can also provide a reference for building strategies for protecting the ecological environments in other countries on a case-by-case basis.

Suggested Citation

  • Kaikai Dong & Guanglei Hou & Dandan Xu & Honglin He & Zhaoli Liu, 2018. "A Method to Compare the Biodiversity Conservation Effectiveness between Regions based on a Reference Condition," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(10), pages 1-14, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:10:y:2018:i:10:p:3694-:d:175708
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/10/10/3694/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/10/10/3694/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bernard W T Coetzee & Kevin J Gaston & Steven L Chown, 2014. "Local Scale Comparisons of Biodiversity as a Test for Global Protected Area Ecological Performance: A Meta-Analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(8), pages 1-11, August.
    2. Claudia L. Gray & Samantha L. L. Hill & Tim Newbold & Lawrence N. Hudson & Luca Börger & Sara Contu & Andrew J. Hoskins & Simon Ferrier & Andy Purvis & Jörn P. W. Scharlemann, 2016. "Local biodiversity is higher inside than outside terrestrial protected areas worldwide," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 7(1), pages 1-7, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Richard A. Niesenbaum, 2019. "The Integration of Conservation, Biodiversity, and Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(17), pages 1-11, August.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Nigel Dudley & Adrian Phillips & Thora Amend & Jessica Brown & Sue Stolton, 2016. "Evidence for Biodiversity Conservation in Protected Landscapes," Land, MDPI, vol. 5(4), pages 1-12, November.
    2. Luis Santiago Castillo & Camilo Andrés Correa Ayram & Clara L. Matallana Tobón & Germán Corzo & Alexandra Areiza & Roy González-M. & Felipe Serrano & Luis Chalán Briceño & Felipe Sánchez Puertas & Ale, 2020. "Connectivity of Protected Areas: Effect of Human Pressure and Subnational Contributions in the Ecoregions of Tropical Andean Countries," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(8), pages 1-19, July.
    3. Guadilla-Sáez, Sara & Pardo-de-Santayana, Manuel & Reyes-García, Victoria, 2020. "Forest commons, traditional community ownership and ecological consequences: Insights from Spain," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 112(C).
    4. Jaraíz-Cabanillas, Francisco Javier & Mora-Aliseda, Julián & Jeong, Jin Su & Garrido-Velarde, Jacinto, 2018. "Methodological proposal to classify and delineate natural protected areas. Study case: Region of Extremadura, Spain," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 310-319.
    5. Kubacka, Marta & Żywica, Patryk & Vila Subirós, Josep & Bródka, Sylwia & Macias, Andrzej, 2022. "How do the surrounding areas of national parks work in the context of landscape fragmentation? A case study of 159 protected areas selected in 11 EU countries," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 113(C).
    6. Kelly Maria Zanuzzi Palharini & Luciana Cristina Vitorino & Gisele Cristina de Oliveira Menino & Layara Alexandre Bessa, 2020. "Edge Effects Reflect the Impact of the Agricultural Matrix on the Corticolous Lichens Found in Fragments of Cerrado Savanna in Central Brazil," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(17), pages 1-19, September.
    7. Xu, Xibao & Jiang, Bo & Chen, Minkun & Bai, Yang & Yang, Guishan, 2020. "Strengthening the effectiveness of nature reserves in representing ecosystem services: The Yangtze River Economic Belt in China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 96(C).
    8. Ziqi Meng & Jinwei Dong & Erle C. Ellis & Graciela Metternicht & Yuanwei Qin & Xiao-Peng Song & Sara Löfqvist & Rachael D. Garrett & Xiaopeng Jia & Xiangming Xiao, 2023. "Post-2020 biodiversity framework challenged by cropland expansion in protected areas," Nature Sustainability, Nature, vol. 6(7), pages 758-768, July.
    9. Beacham, Austin, 2023. "Extraction, Contestation, and Conservation: Natural Resource Dependence and Protected Area Designation," Institute on Global Conflict and Cooperation, Working Paper Series qt0d40d2z8, Institute on Global Conflict and Cooperation, University of California.
    10. Guangdong Li & Chuanglin Fang & James E. M. Watson & Siao Sun & Wei Qi & Zhenbo Wang & Jianguo Liu, 2024. "Mixed effectiveness of global protected areas in resisting habitat loss," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 15(1), pages 1-17, December.
    11. Patricia A. Henríquez-Piskulich & Constanza Schapheer & Nicolas J. Vereecken & Cristian Villagra, 2021. "Agroecological Strategies to Safeguard Insect Pollinators in Biodiversity Hotspots: Chile as a Case Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(12), pages 1-31, June.
    12. Sylvie Côté & Robert Beauregard & Manuele Margni & Louis Bélanger, 2021. "Using Naturalness for Assessing the Impact of Forestry and Protection on the Quality of Ecosystems in Life Cycle Assessment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(16), pages 1-29, August.
    13. Salman, M.M. & Kharroubi, S. & Itani, M. & Talhouk, S.N., 2020. "Using IUCN protected areas management categories as a tool to assess youth preferences for local management of an Important Plant Area (IPA) in Lebanon," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
    14. Jun Liu & Mengting Yue & Yiming Liu & Ding Wen & Yun Tong, 2022. "The Impact of Tourism on Ecosystem Services Value: A Spatio-Temporal Analysis Based on BRT and GWR Modeling," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(5), pages 1-17, February.
    15. Zhifeng Zhang & Yuping Tang & Hongyi Pan & Caiyi Yao & Tianyi Zhang, 2022. "Assessment of the Ecological Protection Effectiveness of Protected Areas Using Propensity Score Matching: A Case Study in Sichuan, China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(8), pages 1-15, April.
    16. Cyprian Chwiałkowski & Adam Zydroń, 2021. "Socio-Economic and Spatial Characteristics of Wielkopolski National Park: Application of the Hedonic Pricing Method," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-17, April.
    17. Iván Barbero-Bermejo & Gabriela Crespo-Luengo & Ricardo Enrique Hernández-Lambraño & David Rodríguez de la Cruz & José Ángel Sánchez-Agudo, 2020. "Natural Protected Areas as Providers of Ecological Connectivity in the Landscape: The Case of the Iberian Lynx," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(1), pages 1-17, December.
    18. Nicolas Marine & Cecilia Arnaiz-Schmitz & Cristina Herrero-Jáuregui & Manuel Rodrigo de la O Cabrera & David Escudero & María F. Schmitz, 2020. "Protected Landscapes in Spain: Reasons for Protection and Sustainability of Conservation Management," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(17), pages 1-21, August.
    19. Alberto Jonay Rodríguez-Darias & Pablo Díaz-Rodríguez, 2023. "Some Considerations on the Implications of Protected Areas for Sustainable Development," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(3), pages 1-15, February.
    20. Mulugheta Ghebreslassie Araia & Paxie Wanangwa Chirwa & Eméline Sêssi Pélagie Assédé, 2019. "Contrasting the Effect of Forest Landscape Condition to the Resilience of Species Diversity in a Human Modified Landscape: Implications for the Conservation of Tree Species," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(1), pages 1-19, December.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:10:y:2018:i:10:p:3694-:d:175708. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.