10.1016/S0006-3207(99)00149-4

10.1016/S0006-3207(99)00149-4 1 <h5>Introduction</h5> One of the outcomes of research into systematic conservation planning in recent years is the concept of irreplaceability ( Pressey et al., 1993, 1994 ), developed in response to a limitation of reserve selection algorithms. Selection algorithms can efficiently select a set of areas to achieve a nominated conservation goal but provide little or no information on the potential contribution to that goal of the unselected areas in a region ( Pressey et al., 1997 ). Consequently, they generally do not indicate optional replacements for selected areas which could become unsuitable or unavailable for conservation management (but see Bedward et al., 1992; Rebelo and Siegfried, 1992; Rebelo, 1994a; Williams et al., 1996a,b ). The alternative sets of areas that can achieve a conservation goal in a region can be very numerous ( Rebelo and Siegfried, 1992; Pressey et al., 1994; Rebelo, 1994a ). Other things being equal, they will increase with the number of areas in a region that are available for conservation ( Pressey et al., 1994 ), but will decrease as conservation targets for species or habitats become larger ( Pressey, 1998 ), or when more species or habitats are narrowly distributed ( Rebelo, http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png

10.1016/S0006-3207(99)00149-4

Elsevier — Jun 11, 2020

Loading next page...
 
/lp/elsevier/10-1016-s0006-3207-99-00149-4-AtAcXkfVea
Datasource
Elsevier

Abstract

1 <h5>Introduction</h5> One of the outcomes of research into systematic conservation planning in recent years is the concept of irreplaceability ( Pressey et al., 1993, 1994 ), developed in response to a limitation of reserve selection algorithms. Selection algorithms can efficiently select a set of areas to achieve a nominated conservation goal but provide little or no information on the potential contribution to that goal of the unselected areas in a region ( Pressey et al., 1997 ). Consequently, they generally do not indicate optional replacements for selected areas which could become unsuitable or unavailable for conservation management (but see Bedward et al., 1992; Rebelo and Siegfried, 1992; Rebelo, 1994a; Williams et al., 1996a,b ). The alternative sets of areas that can achieve a conservation goal in a region can be very numerous ( Rebelo and Siegfried, 1992; Pressey et al., 1994; Rebelo, 1994a ). Other things being equal, they will increase with the number of areas in a region that are available for conservation ( Pressey et al., 1994 ), but will decrease as conservation targets for species or habitats become larger ( Pressey, 1998 ), or when more species or habitats are narrowly distributed ( Rebelo,

There are no references for this article.

You’re reading a free preview. Subscribe to read the entire article.


DeepDyve is your
personal research library

It’s your single place to instantly
discover and read the research
that matters to you.

Enjoy affordable access to
over 18 million articles from more than
15,000 peer-reviewed journals.

All for just $49/month

Explore the DeepDyve Library

Search

Query the DeepDyve database, plus search all of PubMed and Google Scholar seamlessly

Organize

Save any article or search result from DeepDyve, PubMed, and Google Scholar... all in one place.

Access

Get unlimited, online access to over 18 million full-text articles from more than 15,000 scientific journals.

Your journals are on DeepDyve

Read from thousands of the leading scholarly journals from SpringerNature, Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford University Press and more.

All the latest content is available, no embargo periods.

See the journals in your area

DeepDyve

Freelancer

DeepDyve

Pro

Price

FREE

$49/month
$360/year

Save searches from
Google Scholar,
PubMed

Create folders to
organize your research

Export folders, citations

Read DeepDyve articles

Abstract access only

Unlimited access to over
18 million full-text articles

Print

20 pages / month

PDF Discount

20% off