خدمات اکوسیستم و تنوع زیستی
Abstract
۱٫ Introduction
۲٫ Methods
۳٫ Results
۴٫ Discussion and conclusions
Declaration of Competing Interest
Acknowledgements
Appendices
References
Abstract
Conservation organizations increasingly target ecosystem services alongside biodiversity, yet it remains unclear whether ecosystem service goals reinforce or detract from those for biodiversity. We assess tradeoffs between biodiversity and ecosystem services and test the hypothesis that the severity of this tradeoff is a function the breadth of taxa and ecosystem services targeted. We identify optimal conserved lands networks for four taxa, four ecosystem services, and all possible combinations of each. We then assess the amount of biodiversity and ecosystem service contained within each network, its conservation cost, and its overlap with every other network. We find that overlap varies widely across individual ecosystem services and taxa, and that networks targeting multiple services contain more biodiversity than networks targeting a single service. Safeguarding a given amount of ecosystem service and biodiversity through joint optimization requires a 13% increase in conservation budgets relative to achieving targets for biodiversity alone, and results in a 22% budget savings relative to achieving targets for each though separate efforts. We conclude that including ecosystem services goals alongside those for biodiversity is likely have a net positive impact on biodiversity, especially when a broad suite of services are targeted.
Introduction
Supporting the wellbeing of a growing human population while avoiding biodiversity loss is a central challenge of sustainable development (ICSU, 2015; Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, 2005; Steffen et al., 2015). Ecosystem services (ES) are the benefits that people derive from nature (Daily, 1997; Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, 2005). Development-driven environmental degradation is rapidly eroding both biodiversity (Butchart et al., 2010; Ceballos et al., 2015; Newbold et al., 2015; Pimm et al., 2014) and those ecosystem services whose value is not captured in markets (Foley et al., 2005; Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, 2005; Sutton et al., 2016). By making explicit the link between the well-being of people and nature, ES have the potential to serve as common ground for human development and conservation (Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, 2005). As a result, conservation organizations and governments are increasingly prioritizing ecosystem services (Bateman et al., 2013; Donovan et al., 2015; Guerry et al., 2015; Ruckelshaus et al., 2013). How will an ES focus impact biodiversity? Considerable debate has arisen among the conservation community over whether an ES approach is undercutting or bolstering traditional biodiversity goals (McCauley, 2006; Reyers et al., 2012). On the one hand, the resources once allocated specifically to protecting nature for its own sake are now being used to protect the parts of nature that have the highest utility to people.