CIFOR-ICRAF berfokus pada tantangan-tantangan dan peluang lokal dalam memberikan solusi global untuk hutan, bentang alam, masyarakat, dan Bumi kita

Kami menyediakan bukti-bukti serta solusi untuk mentransformasikan bagaimana lahan dimanfaatkan dan makanan diproduksi: melindungi dan memperbaiki ekosistem, merespons iklim global, malnutrisi, keanekaragaman hayati dan krisis disertifikasi. Ringkasnya, kami berupaya untuk mendukung kehidupan yang lebih baik.

Explore eventos futuros e passados ​​em todo o mundo e online, sejam hospedados pelo CIFOR-ICRAF ou com a participação de nossos pesquisadores.

Découvrez les évènements passés et à venir dans le monde entier et en ligne, qu’ils soient organisés par le CIFOR-ICRAF ou auxquels participent nos chercheurs.

Jelajahi acara-acara mendatang dan yang telah lalu di lintas global dan daring, baik itu diselenggarakan oleh CIFOR-ICRAF atau dihadiri para peneliti kami.

CIFOR-ICRAF menerbitkan lebih dari 750 publikasi setiap tahunnya mengenai agroforestri, hutan dan perubahan iklim, restorasi bentang alam, pemenuhan hak-hak, kebijakan hutan dan masih banyak lagi – juga tersedia dalam berbagai bahasa..

CIFOR-ICRAF berfokus pada tantangan-tantangan dan peluang lokal dalam memberikan solusi global untuk hutan, bentang alam, masyarakat, dan Bumi kita

Kami menyediakan bukti-bukti serta solusi untuk mentransformasikan bagaimana lahan dimanfaatkan dan makanan diproduksi: melindungi dan memperbaiki ekosistem, merespons iklim global, malnutrisi, keanekaragaman hayati dan krisis disertifikasi. Ringkasnya, kami berupaya untuk mendukung kehidupan yang lebih baik.

CIFOR–ICRAF publishes over 750 publications every year on agroforestry, forests and climate change, landscape restoration, rights, forest policy and much more – in multiple languages.

CIFOR–ICRAF addresses local challenges and opportunities while providing solutions to global problems for forests, landscapes, people and the planet.

We deliver actionable evidence and solutions to transform how land is used and how food is produced: conserving and restoring ecosystems, responding to the global climate, malnutrition, biodiversity and desertification crises. In short, improving people’s lives.

Testing absolute and percentage thresholds in the identification of key biodiversity areas

Ekspor kutipan

Just as quantitative criteria associated with the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species provide a benchmark of relative species extinction risk, criteria that identify ‘key biodiversity areas’ (KBAs, Eken et al., 2004) allow consistent recognition of sites with global significance for biodiversity conservation. Clearly, with habitat change ranking as the major threat worldwide (Baillie et al., 2004), site conservation approaches are urgently needed to stem the current extinction crisis (Boyd et al., 2008). This is articulated in the recently agreed 2020 strategic plan for the Conservation of Biological Diversity (http://www.cbd.int/decision/cop/id=12268), which sets explicit targets to stop extinction (Target #12) and to protect sites of particular significance for biodiversity (Target #11). Global recognition of sites of high biodiversity value assists managers when planning protected area networks, increases local ownership of and pride in natural heritage, and allows conservation and intergovernmental organizations to direct funding and focus activities at sites where needed most. The identification of KBAs and related critical areas for conservation has accelerated greatly in recent years through initiatives from civil society [e.g. the Alliance for Zero Extinction (http://www.zeroextinction.org)], international collaborations [e.g. the Global Ocean Biodiversity Initiative (http://openoceansdeepseas.org)] and the private sector [e.g. the Integrated Biodiversity Assessment Tool (https://www.ibatforbusiness.org)].The complex task of developing appropriate KBA criteria requires many tradeoffs (Bennun et al., 2007; Knight et al., 2007). First, a scale mismatch exists between the need to develop criteria through topdown decisions in order to allow repeatable assessment of patterns worldwide, and the bottomup need for criteria to be accepted and applied by local stakeholders who are responsible for onground actions. Second, criteria appropriate for one taxon may not be as appropriate for others, particularly if lifehistory traits are quite different. Third, quantitative thresholds associated with KBA criteria need to be established such that sites with real importance for global biodiversity conservation are not overlooked but at the same time the number of sites identified is not so excessive that the KBA currency devalues. The challenge of balancing these requirements has been mandated to a taskforce on ‘biodiversity and protected areas’, convened jointly by the IUCN Species Survival Commission and World Commission on Protected Areas (http://www.iucn.org/biodiversity_and_protected_areas_taskforce).

DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-1795.2011.00438.x
Skor altmetrik:
Jumlah Kutipan Dimensi:

    Tahun publikasi

    2011

    Penulis

    Edgar, G.J.; Brooks, T.M.

    Bahasa

    English

    Kata kunci

    biodiversity conservation, species, biological diversity

Publikasi terkait