302
20.8 Conclusions
The goal of representing and sustaining regional
biodiversity in an efficient network of conservation
areas requires a set of procedures for determining
the conservation value of the areas using explicit
methods. Ad hoc designation of conservation areas
has been demonstrated to increase the final costs
of achieving representation of biodiversity in conservation areas (Margules, 1989; Pressey and
Nicholls, 1989a; Pressey 1990, 1994; Pressey et aI.,
1990; Rebelo and Siegfried, 1992), without the
guarantee of long-term persistence over large
areas.
This chapter has presented a set of procedures
for conducting RAs for conservation planning at
regional and continental scales. RA is the process
by which networks of conservation areas are designed to capture the ecological patterns that constitute biodiversity and their associated processes
so that biodiversity is sustainable at all relevant
scales. RA should be incorporated into the planning process, and methods should be chosen that
strengthen the on the ground implementation of
conservation goals. Many of the steps described are
the focus of active research and development. RAs
have been conducted increasingly often and have
been incorporated into the planning system, especially in Australia. Few conservation assessments
have had the data, time, budget and human resources available to follow the entire process. However, as IREAs at the scale of the ICBEMP and
SNEP (see also Chapters 30 through 33) get underway or are completed, there is an opportunity to
implement the full RA framework.
Data, analyses, and interpretations are required
to incorporate information about the dynamic nature of ecosystems into conservation planning at a
regional scale. Human activities should be considered as integral components of ecosystems. The
best applicable science and technology should be
identified so that the required knowledge about
ecosystems can be arranged hierarchically from
very broad continental or global scales down to the
smallest local levels. Several assessment scales are
important in deciding what actions should be taken
and in evaluating the implications and effectiveness
of such actions. The most important consideration
is incorporation of the RA process into a flexible
planning process that includes all interested parties
from the outset and that follows the principles of
adaptive management. Such a planning process
provides the best way to implement the recommended actions. For example, coordination across
Representativeness Assessments
all boundaries is necessary if regional networks of
conservation areas are to be efficient, effective, and
sustainable.
RAs have been widely conducted in Australia,
but their implementation in North America has
been less frequent. RAs and other large-scale conservation assessments conducted in the past have
omitted important steps of the process as a result
of data, budgetary, and time constraints. Wellfunded current and future IREAs provide the opportunity to conduct effective RAs. Establishing a
system of conservation areas to represent selected
conservation targets and the processes that maintain them is only the first step in the long-term protection of biodiversity. The application of RA may
ensure the sustainability of conservation targets in
a network, but it is not a substitute for the exploration of management practices conducive to the
conservation of biodiversity in other lands.
20.9 References
Alverson, W.S.; Kuhlmann, W.; Waller, D.A 1994. Wild
forests: Conservation Biology and Public Policy.
Washington, DC: Island Press.
Austin, M.P.; Margules, C.R 1986. Assessing representativeness. In: Usher, M.B., ed. Wildlife conservation
evaluation. London: Chapman and Hall: 45-67.
Austin, M.P.; Nicholls, AO.; Margules, C.R. 1990. Measurement of the realized qualitative niche: environmental niches of five eucalyptus species. Eco!.
Monogr.60:161-177.
Austin, M.P.; Pausas, J.O.; Nicholls, A.O. 1996. Patterns
of tree species richness in relation to environment in
southeastern New South Wales, Australia. Australian
J. Ecol. 21:154-164.
Bailey, R.O. 1995. Description of the ecoregions of the
United States. Washington, DC: U.S. Dept. Agric.,
For. Servo Misc. Pub!. 1391.
Bailey, RO.; Jensen, M.E.; Cleland, D.T.; Bourgeron,
P.S. 1994. Design and use of ecological mapping units.
In: Jensen, M.E.; Bourgeron, P.S., eds. Volume II:
Ecosystem management: principles and applications.
PNW-OTR-318. Portland, OR: U.S. Dept. Agric., For.
Serv., Pacific Northw. Res. Sta.: 95-106.
Bedward, M.; Pressey, RL.; Keith, D.A 1992. A new
approach for selecting fully representative reserve networks: addressing efficiency, reserve design and land
suitability with an iterative analysis. Bioi. Conserv.
62: 115-125.
Belbin, L. 1993. Environmental representativeness: regional partitioning and reserve selection. Bio!. Conservo 66:223-230.
Bourgeron, P. S.; Jensen, M. E. 1994. An overview of
ecological principles for ecosystem management. In:
Jensen, M. E.; Bourgeron, P. S., eds. Volume II:
Ecosystem management: principles and applications.
20.8 Conclusions
The goal of representing and sustaining regional
biodiversity in an efficient network of conservation
areas requires a set of procedures for determining
the conservation value of the areas using explicit
methods. Ad hoc designation of conservation areas
has been demonstrated to increase the final costs
of achieving representation of biodiversity in conservation areas (Margules, 1989; Pressey and
Nicholls, 1989a; Pressey 1990, 1994; Pressey et aI.,
1990; Rebelo and Siegfried, 1992), without the
guarantee of long-term persistence over large
areas.
This chapter has presented a set of procedures
for conducting RAs for conservation planning at
regional and continental scales. RA is the process
by which networks of conservation areas are designed to capture the ecological patterns that constitute biodiversity and their associated processes
so that biodiversity is sustainable at all relevant
scales. RA should be incorporated into the planning process, and methods should be chosen that
strengthen the on the ground implementation of
conservation goals. Many of the steps described are
the focus of active research and development. RAs
have been conducted increasingly often and have
been incorporated into the planning system, especially in Australia. Few conservation assessments
have had the data, time, budget and human resources available to follow the entire process. However, as IREAs at the scale of the ICBEMP and
SNEP (see also Chapters 30 through 33) get underway or are completed, there is an opportunity to
implement the full RA framework.
Data, analyses, and interpretations are required
to incorporate information about the dynamic nature of ecosystems into conservation planning at a
regional scale. Human activities should be considered as integral components of ecosystems. The
best applicable science and technology should be
identified so that the required knowledge about
ecosystems can be arranged hierarchically from
very broad continental or global scales down to the
smallest local levels. Several assessment scales are
important in deciding what actions should be taken
and in evaluating the implications and effectiveness
of such actions. The most important consideration
is incorporation of the RA process into a flexible
planning process that includes all interested parties
from the outset and that follows the principles of
adaptive management. Such a planning process
provides the best way to implement the recommended actions. For example, coordination across
Representativeness Assessments
all boundaries is necessary if regional networks of
conservation areas are to be efficient, effective, and
sustainable.
RAs have been widely conducted in Australia,
but their implementation in North America has
been less frequent. RAs and other large-scale conservation assessments conducted in the past have
omitted important steps of the process as a result
of data, budgetary, and time constraints. Wellfunded current and future IREAs provide the opportunity to conduct effective RAs. Establishing a
system of conservation areas to represent selected
conservation targets and the processes that maintain them is only the first step in the long-term protection of biodiversity. The application of RA may
ensure the sustainability of conservation targets in
a network, but it is not a substitute for the exploration of management practices conducive to the
conservation of biodiversity in other lands.
20.9 References
Alverson, W.S.; Kuhlmann, W.; Waller, D.A 1994. Wild
forests: Conservation Biology and Public Policy.
Washington, DC: Island Press.
Austin, M.P.; Margules, C.R 1986. Assessing representativeness. In: Usher, M.B., ed. Wildlife conservation
evaluation. London: Chapman and Hall: 45-67.
Austin, M.P.; Nicholls, AO.; Margules, C.R. 1990. Measurement of the realized qualitative niche: environmental niches of five eucalyptus species. Eco!.
Monogr.60:161-177.
Austin, M.P.; Pausas, J.O.; Nicholls, A.O. 1996. Patterns
of tree species richness in relation to environment in
southeastern New South Wales, Australia. Australian
J. Ecol. 21:154-164.
Bailey, R.O. 1995. Description of the ecoregions of the
United States. Washington, DC: U.S. Dept. Agric.,
For. Servo Misc. Pub!. 1391.
Bailey, RO.; Jensen, M.E.; Cleland, D.T.; Bourgeron,
P.S. 1994. Design and use of ecological mapping units.
In: Jensen, M.E.; Bourgeron, P.S., eds. Volume II:
Ecosystem management: principles and applications.
PNW-OTR-318. Portland, OR: U.S. Dept. Agric., For.
Serv., Pacific Northw. Res. Sta.: 95-106.
Bedward, M.; Pressey, RL.; Keith, D.A 1992. A new
approach for selecting fully representative reserve networks: addressing efficiency, reserve design and land
suitability with an iterative analysis. Bioi. Conserv.
62: 115-125.
Belbin, L. 1993. Environmental representativeness: regional partitioning and reserve selection. Bio!. Conservo 66:223-230.
Bourgeron, P. S.; Jensen, M. E. 1994. An overview of
ecological principles for ecosystem management. In:
Jensen, M. E.; Bourgeron, P. S., eds. Volume II:
Ecosystem management: principles and applications.