The Gaps between Theory and Practice in Selecting Nature Reserves

The Gaps between Theory and Practice in Selecting Nature Reserves Abstract: Over the last three decades a great deal of research, money, and effort have been put into the development of theory and techniques designed to make conservation more efficient. Much of the recent emphasis has been on methods to identify areas of high conservation interest and to design efficient networks of nature reserves. Reserve selection algorithms, gap analysis, and other computerized approaches have much potential to transform conservation planning, yet these methods are used only infrequently by those charged with managing landscapes. We briefly describe different approaches to identifying potentially valuable areas and methods for reserve selection and then discuss the reasons they remain largely unused by conservationists and land‐use planners. Our informal discussions with ecologists, conservationists, and land managers from Europe and the United States suggested that the main reason for the low level of adoption of these sophisticated tools is simply that land managers have been unaware of them. Where this has not been the case, low levels of funding, lack of understanding about the purpose of these tools, and general antipathy toward what is seen as a prescriptive approach to conservation all play a part. We recognize there is no simple solution but call for a closer dialogue between theoreticians and practitioners in conservation biology. The two communities might be brought into closer contact in numerous ways, including carefully targeted publication of research and Internet communication. However it is done, we feel that the needs of land managers need to be catered to by those engaged in conservation research and that managers need to be more aware of what science can contribute to practical conservation. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Conservation Biology Wiley

The Gaps between Theory and Practice in Selecting Nature Reserves

Loading next page...
 
/lp/wiley/the-gaps-between-theory-and-practice-in-selecting-nature-reserves-5YJzLxXtnb
Publisher
Wiley
Copyright
Copyright © 1999 Wiley Subscription Services, Inc., A Wiley Company
ISSN
0888-8892
eISSN
1523-1739
D.O.I.
10.1046/j.1523-1739.1999.97428.x
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Abstract: Over the last three decades a great deal of research, money, and effort have been put into the development of theory and techniques designed to make conservation more efficient. Much of the recent emphasis has been on methods to identify areas of high conservation interest and to design efficient networks of nature reserves. Reserve selection algorithms, gap analysis, and other computerized approaches have much potential to transform conservation planning, yet these methods are used only infrequently by those charged with managing landscapes. We briefly describe different approaches to identifying potentially valuable areas and methods for reserve selection and then discuss the reasons they remain largely unused by conservationists and land‐use planners. Our informal discussions with ecologists, conservationists, and land managers from Europe and the United States suggested that the main reason for the low level of adoption of these sophisticated tools is simply that land managers have been unaware of them. Where this has not been the case, low levels of funding, lack of understanding about the purpose of these tools, and general antipathy toward what is seen as a prescriptive approach to conservation all play a part. We recognize there is no simple solution but call for a closer dialogue between theoreticians and practitioners in conservation biology. The two communities might be brought into closer contact in numerous ways, including carefully targeted publication of research and Internet communication. However it is done, we feel that the needs of land managers need to be catered to by those engaged in conservation research and that managers need to be more aware of what science can contribute to practical conservation.

Journal

Conservation BiologyWiley

Published: Jun 1, 1999

References

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, Elsevier, 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