首页 | 本学科首页   官方微博 | 高级检索  
     


Best of both worlds: Combining ecological and social research to inform conservation decisions in a Neotropical biodiversity hotspot
Affiliation:1. Laboratório de Ecologia, Manejo e Conservação de Fauna (LEMaC), Departamento de Ciências Florestais, Escola Superior de Agricultura “Luiz de Queiroz”, Universidade de São Paulo, 13418-900 Piracicaba, São Paulo, Brazil;2. Instituto Pró-Carnívoros, 12945-010, Atibaia, São Paulo, Brazil;3. Wildlife Conservation Research Unit, Department of Zoology, University of Oxford, Recanati-Kaplan Centre, Tubney House, Abingdon Road, Tubney, Oxfordshire OX13 5QL, United Kingdom;4. North of England Zoological Society (Chester Zoo), Caughall Road, Chester CH2 1LH, United Kingdom;5. School of Environmental Sciences, University of East Anglia, Norwich NR4 7TJ, Norwich, United Kingdom;6. Laboratório de Ecologia e Conservação, Departamento de Biologia, Faculdade de Filosofia, Ciências e Letras de Ribeirão Preto, Universidade de São Paulo, Av. Bandeirantes, 3900 14040-900 Ribeirão Preto, São Paulo, Brazil;7. Instituto Manacá, Rodovia SP139, km 80, Caixa Postal 138, 18230-000 São Miguel, Arcanjo, São Paulo, Brazil;8. Programa de Pós-Graduação Ecologia e Conservação, Universidade Federal do Paraná, Setor de Ciências Biológicas, Caixa Postal 19031, 81531-990 Curitiba, PR, Brazil;9. Instituto de Pesquisas Cananéia, Rua Nina 523, Retiro das Caravelas, 11990-000 Cananéia, SP, Brazil;10. Centro Nacional de Pesquisa e Conservação de Mamíferos Carnívoros (CENAP), Instituto Chico Mendes de Conservação da Biodiversidade (ICMBio), Atibaia, São Paulo, Brazil;11. Departamento de Genética e Evolução, Universidade Federal de São Carlos, 13565-905 São Carlos, São Paulo, Brazil;12. Department of Life Sciences, Imperial College London, Ascot, United Kingdom;13. Departamento de Biodiversidade, Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP), 13506‑900, yetRio Claro, São Paulo, Brazil;14. Department of Biology, University of Miami, Coral Gables, FL, USA
Abstract:Conservation decision is a challenging and risky task when it aims at prioritizing species or protected areas (PAs) to prevent extinction while ensuring fair treatment of all stakeholders. Better conservation decisions are those made upon a broader evidence base that includes both ecological and social considerations. However, in some of the most biodiverse ecosystems on Earth — tropical forests, for instance — multicriteria decision-making has been constrained by the following (i) ecological and social datasets available have been obtained in an independent, non-integrated manner, with social data typically more scarce than ecological ones, and (ii) capacity in social and/or interdisciplinary data analysis among decision-maker is limited. We describe a conservation prioritization exercise that combined findings from independent ecological and social research conducted in the Brazilian Atlantic Forest, and propose methods to integrate, analyze and visualize data. We found that the outcomes based on combined ecological and social research findings were, in some cases, different from those based on any of these lines of evidence alone. Indeed, the input from relatively basic social research significantly changed the outcomes of decision-making based on the results of ecological research. Results corroborate the importance and cost-effectiveness of broadening the interdisciplinary evidence base for conservation decision-making, even when social data is scarce and analytical capacity is limited.
Keywords:Atlantic Forest  Conservation planning  Interdisciplinary research  Mammal diversity  Multi-criteria decision-making  Social research
本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录!
设为首页 | 免责声明 | 关于勤云 | 加入收藏

Copyright©北京勤云科技发展有限公司  京ICP备09084417号