Search

Globally, extensive marine areas important for biodiversity conservation and ecosystem functioning are undergoing exploration and extraction of oil and natural gas resources. Such operations are expanding to previously inaccessible deep waters and other frontier regions, while conservation-related legislation and planning is often lacking. Conservation challenges arising from offshore hydrocarbon development are wide-ranging. These challenges include threats to ecosystems and marine species from oil spills, negative impacts on native biodiversity from invasive species colonizing drilling infrastructure, and increased political conflicts that can delay conservation actions. With mounting offshore operations, conservationists need to urgently consider some possible opportunities that could be leveraged for conservation. Leveraging options, as part of multi-billion dollar marine hydrocarbon operations, include the use of facilities and costly equipment of the deep and ultra-deep hydrocarbon industry for deep-sea conservation research and monitoring and establishing new conservation research, practice, and monitoring funds and environmental offsetting schemes. The conservation community, including conservation scientists, should become more involved in the earliest planning and exploration phases and remain involved throughout the operations so as to influence decision making and promote continuous monitoring of biodiversity and ecosystems. A prompt response by conservation professionals to offshore oil and gas developments can mitigate impacts of future decisions and actions of the industry and governments. New environmental decision support tools can be used to explicitly incorporate the impacts of hydrocarbon operations on biodiversity into marine spatial and conservation plans and thus allow for optimum trade-offs among multiple objectives, costs, and risks., (© 2015 Society for Conservation Biology.)

Conservation prioritization at large scales is complex, combining biological, environmental, and social factors. While conservation scientists now more often aim to incorporate human-related factors, a critical yet unquantified challenge remains: to identify which areas people use for recreation outside urban centers. To address this gap in applied ecology and conservation, we developed a novel approach for quantifying human presence beyond populated areas by combining social media "big data" and remote sensing tools. We used data from the Flickr photo-sharing website as a surrogate for identifying spatial variation in visitation globally, and complemented this estimate with spatially explicit information on stable night lights between 2004 and 2012, used as a proxy for identifying urban and industrial centers. Natural and seminatural areas attracting visitors were defined as areas both highly photographed and non-lit. The number of Flickr photographers within protected areas was found to be a reliable surrogate for estimating visitor numbers as confirmed by local authority censuses (r = 0.8). Half of all visitors' photos taken in protected areas originated from under 1% of all protected areas on Earth (250 of -27 000). The most photographed protected areas globally included Yosemite and Yellowstone National Parks (USA), and the Lake and Peak Districts (UK). Factors explaining the spatial variation in protected areas Flickr photo coverage included their type (e.g., UNESCO World Heritage sites have higher visitation) and accessibility to roads and trails. Using this approach, we identified photography hotspots, which draw many visitors and are also unlit (i.e., are located outside urban centers), but currently remain largely unprotected, such as Brazil's Pantanal and Bolivia's Salar de Uyuni. The integrated big data approach developed here demonstrates the benefits of combining remote sensing sources and novel geo-tagged and crowd-sourced information from social media in future efforts to identify spatial conservation gaps and pressures in real time, and their spatial and temporal variation globally.

Systematic conservation planning has rapidly advanced in the past decade and has been increasingly incorporated in multiple studies and conservation projects. One of its requirements is a quantitative definition of conservation targets. While the Convention on Biological Diversity aims to expand the world's protected area network to 17% of the land surface, in many cases such uniform policy-driven targets may not be appropriate for achieving persistence of various species. Targets are often set arbitrarily, often because information required for the persistence of each species is unavailable or unknown in the focal region. Conservation planners therefore need to establish complementary novel approaches to address the gaps in setting targets. Here, we develop and present a novel method that aims to help guide the selection of conservation targets, providing support for decision makers, planners, and managers. This is achieved by examining the overall flexibility of the conservation network resulting from conservation prioritization, and aiming for greater flexibility. To test this approach we applied the decision support tool Marxan to determine marine conservation priority areas in the eastern Mediterranean Sea as a case study. We assessed the flexibility of the conservation network by comparing 80 different scenarios in which conservation targets were gradually increased and assessed by a range of calculated metrics (e.g., the percentage of the total area selected, the overall connectivity). We discovered that when conservation targets were set too low (i.e., below 10% of the distribution range of each species), very few areas were identified as irreplaceable and the conservation network was not well defined. Interestingly, when conservation targets were set too high (over 50% of the species' range), too many conservation priority areas were selected as irreplaceable, an outcome which is realistically infeasible to implement. As a general guideline, we found that flexibility in a conservation network is adequate when ~10-20% of the study area is considered irreplaceable (selection frequency values over 90%). This approach offers a useful sensitivity analysis when applying target-based systematic conservation planning tools, ensuring that the resulting protected area conservation network offers more choices for managers and decision makers.

Explicitly including cost in marine conservation planning is essential for achieving feasible and efficient conservation outcomes. Yet, spatial priorities for marine conservation are still often based solely on biodiversity hotspots, species richness, and/or cumulative threat maps. This study aims to provide an approach for including cost when planning large-scale Marine Protected Area (MPA) networks that span multiple countries. Here, we explore the incorporation of cost in the complex setting of the Mediterranean Sea. In order to include cost in conservation prioritization, we developed surrogates that account for revenue from multiple marine sectors: commercial fishing, noncommercial fishing, and aquaculture. Such revenue can translate into an opportunity cost for the implementation of an MPA network. Using the software Marxan, we set conservation targets to protect 10% of the distribution of 77 threatened marine species in the Mediterranean Sea. We compared nine scenarios of opportunity cost by calculating the area and cost required to meet our targets. We further compared our spatial priorities with those that are considered consensus areas by several proposed prioritization schemes in the Mediterranean Sea, none of which explicitly considers cost. We found that for less than 10% of the Sea's area, our conservation targets can be achieved while incurring opportunity costs of less than 1%. In marine systems, we reveal that area is a poor cost surrogate and that the most effective surrogates are those that account for multiple sectors or stakeholders. Furthermore, our results indicate that including cost can greatly influence the selection of spatial priorities for marine conservation of threatened species. Although there are known limitations in multinational large-scale planning, attempting to devise more systematic and rigorous planning methods is especially critical given that collaborative conservation action is on the rise and global financial crisis restricts conservation investments.

The accelerating rates of international trade, travel, and transport in the latter half of the twentieth century have led to the progressive mixing of biota from across the world and the number of species introduced to new regions continues to increase. The importance of biogeographic, climatic, economic, and demographic factors as drivers of this trend is increasingly being realized but as yet there is no consensus regarding their relative importance. Whereas little may be done to mitigate the effects of geography and climate on invasions, a wider range of options may exist to moderate the impacts of economic and demographic drivers. Here we use the most recent data available from Europe to partition between macroecological, economic, and demographic variables the variation in alien species richness of bryophytes, fungi, vascular plants, terrestrial insects, aquatic invertebrates, fish, amphibians, reptiles, birds, and mammals. Only national wealth and human population density were statistically significant predictors in the majority of models when analyzed jointly with climate, geography, and land cover. The economic and demographic variables reflect the intensity of human activities and integrate the effect of factors that directly determine the outcome of invasion such as propagule pressure, pathways of introduction, eutrophication, and the intensity of anthropogenic disturbance. The strong influence of economic and demographic variables on the levels of invasion by alien species demonstrates that future solutions to the problem of biological invasions at a national scale lie in mitigating the negative environmental consequences of human activities that generate wealth and by promoting more sustainable population growth.

In a time of increasing urbanization, the fundamental value of conserving urban biodiversity remains controversial. How much of a fixed budget should be spent on conservation in urban versus nonurban landscapes? The answer should depend on the goals that drive our conservation actions, yet proponents of urban conservation often fail to specify the motivation for protecting urban biodiversity. This is an important shortcoming on several fronts, including a missed opportunity to make a stronger appeal to those who believe conservation biology should focus exclusively on more natural, wilder landscapes. We argue that urban areas do offer an important venue for conservation biology, but that we must become better at choosing and articulating our goals. We explored seven possible motivations for urban biodiversity conservation: preserving local biodiversity, creating stepping stones to nonurban habitat, understanding and facilitating responses to environmental change, conducting environmental education, providing ecosystem services, fulfilling ethical responsibilities, and improving human well-being. To attain all these goals, challenges must be faced that are common to the urban environment, such as localized pollution, disruption of ecosystem structure, and limited availability of land. There are, however, also challenges specific only to particular goals, meaning that different goals will require different approaches and actions. This highlights the importance of specifying the motivations behind urban biodiversity conservation. If the goals are unknown, progress cannot be assessed.

The importance of global and regional coordination in conservation is growing, although currently, the majority of conservation programs are applied at national and subnational scales. Nevertheless, multinational programs incur transaction costs and resources beyond what is required in national programs. Given the need to maximize returns on investment within limited conservation budgets, it is crucial to quantify how much more biodiversity can be protected by coordinating multinational conservation efforts when resources are fungible. Previous studies that compared different scales of conservation decision-making mostly ignored spatial variability in biodiversity threats and the cost of actions. Here, we developed a simple integrating metric, taking into account both the cost of conservation and threats to biodiversity. We examined the Mediterranean Basin biodiversity hotspot, which encompasses over 20 countries. We discovered that for vertebrates to achieve similar conservation benefits, one would need substantially more money and area if each country were to act independently as compared to fully coordinated action across the Basin. A fully coordinated conservation plan is expected to save approximately US$67 billion, 45% of total cost, compared with the uncoordinated plan; and if implemented over a 10-year period, the plan would cost approximately 0.1% of the gross national income of all European Union (EU) countries annually. The initiative declared in the recent Paris Summit for the Mediterranean provides a political basis for such complex coordination. Surprisingly, because many conservation priority areas selected are located in EU countries, a partly coordinated solution incorporating only EU-Mediterranean countries is almost as efficient as the fully coordinated scenario.

Both human-related and natural factors can affect the establishment and distribution of exotic species. Understanding the relative role of the different factors has important scientific and applied implications. Here, we examined the relative effect of human-related and natural factors in determining the richness of exotic bird species established across Europe. Using hierarchical partitioning, which controls for covariation among factors, we show that the most important factor is the human-related community-level propagule pressure (the number of exotic species introduced), which is often not included in invasion studies due to the lack of information for this early stage in the invasion process. Another, though less important, factor was the human footprint (an index that includes human population size, land use and infrastructure). Biotic and abiotic factors of the environment were of minor importance in shaping the number of established birds when tested at a European extent using 50 x 50 km2 grid squares. We provide, to our knowledge, the first map of the distribution of exotic bird richness in Europe. The richest hotspot of established exotic birds is located in southeastern England, followed by areas in Belgium and The Netherlands. Community-level propagule pressure remains the major factor shaping the distribution of exotic birds also when tested for the UK separately. Thus, studies examining the patterns of establishment should aim at collecting the crucial and hard-to-find information on community-level propagule pressure or develop reliable surrogates for estimating this factor. Allowing future introductions of exotic birds into Europe should be reconsidered carefully, as the number of introduced species is basically the main factor that determines the number established.