More cool than tool: Equivoques, conceptual traps and weaknesses of ecological networks in environmental planning and conservation

•In ecological network planning there is an interdisciplinary semantic ambiguity.•Ecological networks lack in the use problem solving logic, decision-making approach, costs/benefits evaluation, monitoring to test effectiveness.•There is an over-emphasis of connectivity as a concept and an under-evaluation of more pragmatic local-based measures.•Fragmentation-sensitive species should be selected to monitor effectiveness of ecological network plans. The paper critically examines the equivoques, conceptual traps and weaknesses of the recent ‘ecological network’ paradigm, invocated as a cool environmental planning tool to the aim to mitigate the effect of habitat fragmentation on biodiversity. We highlight as: (i) there is a semantic ambiguity deriving from the languages used in this interdisciplinary arena; (ii) these plans will be considered a true tool for biodiversity conservation when they will adopt a logic of problem solving and the standards requested in project cycle management (clear objectives, decision-making approach, appropriate monitoring and indicators, adaptive management); (iii) planners should follow a costs/benefits analysis comparing different scenarios and verifying that the ‘connectivity’ option effectively work better; (iv) each ecological network should be considered as a context-specific strategy where connectivity is only a simplified and schematic key of interpretation; (v) planners should carried out a local selection of fragmentation-sensitive targets that may not correspond with the species of conservation concern included in global or national red lists.