Are We Conserving What We Say We Are? Measuring Ecological Integrity within Protected Areas
Managers of protected areas are under increasing pressure to measure their effectiveness in conserving native biological diversity in ways that are scientifically sound, practical, and comparable among protected areas over time. The Nature Conservancy and its partners have developed a “Measures of S...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Bioscience 2003-09, Vol.53 (9), p.851-860 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 860 |
---|---|
container_issue | 9 |
container_start_page | 851 |
container_title | Bioscience |
container_volume | 53 |
creator | PARRISH, JEFFREY D BRAUN, DAVID P UNNASCH, ROBERT S |
description | Managers of protected areas are under increasing pressure to measure their effectiveness in conserving native biological diversity in ways that are scientifically sound, practical, and comparable among protected areas over time. The Nature Conservancy and its partners have developed a “Measures of Success” framework with four core components: (1) identifying a limited number of focal conservation targets, (2) identifying key ecological attributes for these targets, (3) identifying an acceptable range of variation for each attribute as measured by properly selected indicators, and (4) rating target status based on whether or not the target's key attributes are within their acceptable ranges of variation. A target cannot be considered “conserved” if any of its key ecological attributes exceeds its acceptable range of variation. The framework provides a rigorous basis not only for measuring success but for setting conservation objectives, assessing threats to biodiversity, identifying monitoring and research needs, and communicating management information to nonspecialists. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1641/0006-3568(2003)053[0851:AWCWWS]2.0.CO;2 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>gale_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_16171915</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><galeid>A117523230</galeid><jstor_id>10.1641/0006-3568(2003)053[0851:awcwws]2.0.co;2</jstor_id><oup_id>10.1641/0006-3568(2003)053[0851:AWCWWS]2.0.CO;2</oup_id><sourcerecordid>A117523230</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-b875t-cddf7f5c3963502399dea0b324899087534827f39f0f2c4d922536df6ad919803</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqlks2O0zAURiMEEmXgHSIWiFmk4584iWGBOqGUSoUiFdRFNbLc5CbjKo07tgP07XEUhKaoixHIC8vOuSdXvl8QXGE0xkmMrxBCSURZkr0mCNFLxOgGZQy_mazz9Xp1Q8ZonC_fkkfBCDPCIkri-HEw-lP1NHhm7c4fcUz5KNhMDIRrCHPdWjDfVVuH61vp-quVPPabB96Fn0DazvRfp4VudK0K2YTz1kFtlDuGP5S7VW34xWgHhYOyL5L2efCkko2FF7_3i-Dbh-nX_GO0WM7m-WQRbbOUuagoyyqtWEF5QhkilPMSJNr6xjPOkUdonJG0orxCFSnikhPCaFJWiSw55hmiF8GrwXsw-q4D68Re2QKaRragOytwglPMMfPgy7_Ane5M63sTxL9t6h8l9VA0QLVsQKi20s7IooYWjGx0C5Xy1xOMU0Yoof3fx2d4v0rYq-JsweVJgWcc_HS17KwV89Xnh7PXswez2WxxykbnWD_bBmoQfjz58pSfDXxhtLUGKnEwai_NUWAk-liKPmCiD5joYyl8LEUfSzHEUhCBhFcSb7oeTLo7nJVEJ5LNPcnNPcn7QbKzTpv_6GU6aLZK-0H9s-cXLXcNVw</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>216470017</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Are We Conserving What We Say We Are? Measuring Ecological Integrity within Protected Areas</title><source>Oxford University Press Journals All Titles (1996-Current)</source><source>JSTOR</source><source>BioOne Complete</source><creator>PARRISH, JEFFREY D ; BRAUN, DAVID P ; UNNASCH, ROBERT S</creator><creatorcontrib>PARRISH, JEFFREY D ; BRAUN, DAVID P ; UNNASCH, ROBERT S</creatorcontrib><description>Managers of protected areas are under increasing pressure to measure their effectiveness in conserving native biological diversity in ways that are scientifically sound, practical, and comparable among protected areas over time. The Nature Conservancy and its partners have developed a “Measures of Success” framework with four core components: (1) identifying a limited number of focal conservation targets, (2) identifying key ecological attributes for these targets, (3) identifying an acceptable range of variation for each attribute as measured by properly selected indicators, and (4) rating target status based on whether or not the target's key attributes are within their acceptable ranges of variation. A target cannot be considered “conserved” if any of its key ecological attributes exceeds its acceptable range of variation. The framework provides a rigorous basis not only for measuring success but for setting conservation objectives, assessing threats to biodiversity, identifying monitoring and research needs, and communicating management information to nonspecialists.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0006-3568</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1525-3244</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1641/0006-3568(2003)053[0851:AWCWWS]2.0.CO;2</identifier><identifier>CODEN: BISNAS</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Circulation, AIBS, 1313 Dolley Madison Blvd., Suite 402, McLean, VA 22101. USA: American Institute of Biological Sciences</publisher><subject>Animal Husbandry ; Biodiversity ; Biodiversity conservation ; Community Relations ; Conservation ; Conservation (Concept) ; Conservation biology ; Conservation organizations ; ecological integrity ; Ecosystem integrity ; Ecosystems ; Habitat conservation ; Integrity ; measures of success ; monitoring ; National parks ; Nature conservation ; Outcome Measures ; OVERVIEW ARTICLES ; Population ecology ; protected area effectiveness ; Protected areas ; Research Needs ; Riparian ecology ; Species ; Success ; Wildlife conservation ; Zero Tolerance Policy</subject><ispartof>Bioscience, 2003-09, Vol.53 (9), p.851-860</ispartof><rights>American Institute of Biological Sciences</rights><rights>2003 American Institute of Biological Sciences 2003</rights><rights>COPYRIGHT 2003 University of California Press</rights><rights>COPYRIGHT 2003 Oxford University Press</rights><rights>Copyright American Institute of Biological Sciences Sep 2003</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-b875t-cddf7f5c3963502399dea0b324899087534827f39f0f2c4d922536df6ad919803</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-b875t-cddf7f5c3963502399dea0b324899087534827f39f0f2c4d922536df6ad919803</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://bioone.org/doi/pdf/10.1641/0006-3568(2003)053[0851:AWCWWS]2.0.CO;2$$EPDF$$P50$$Gbioone$$H</linktopdf><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,803,26978,27924,27925,52363</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>PARRISH, JEFFREY D</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>BRAUN, DAVID P</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>UNNASCH, ROBERT S</creatorcontrib><title>Are We Conserving What We Say We Are? Measuring Ecological Integrity within Protected Areas</title><title>Bioscience</title><addtitle>BioScience</addtitle><description>Managers of protected areas are under increasing pressure to measure their effectiveness in conserving native biological diversity in ways that are scientifically sound, practical, and comparable among protected areas over time. The Nature Conservancy and its partners have developed a “Measures of Success” framework with four core components: (1) identifying a limited number of focal conservation targets, (2) identifying key ecological attributes for these targets, (3) identifying an acceptable range of variation for each attribute as measured by properly selected indicators, and (4) rating target status based on whether or not the target's key attributes are within their acceptable ranges of variation. A target cannot be considered “conserved” if any of its key ecological attributes exceeds its acceptable range of variation. The framework provides a rigorous basis not only for measuring success but for setting conservation objectives, assessing threats to biodiversity, identifying monitoring and research needs, and communicating management information to nonspecialists.</description><subject>Animal Husbandry</subject><subject>Biodiversity</subject><subject>Biodiversity conservation</subject><subject>Community Relations</subject><subject>Conservation</subject><subject>Conservation (Concept)</subject><subject>Conservation biology</subject><subject>Conservation organizations</subject><subject>ecological integrity</subject><subject>Ecosystem integrity</subject><subject>Ecosystems</subject><subject>Habitat conservation</subject><subject>Integrity</subject><subject>measures of success</subject><subject>monitoring</subject><subject>National parks</subject><subject>Nature conservation</subject><subject>Outcome Measures</subject><subject>OVERVIEW ARTICLES</subject><subject>Population ecology</subject><subject>protected area effectiveness</subject><subject>Protected areas</subject><subject>Research Needs</subject><subject>Riparian ecology</subject><subject>Species</subject><subject>Success</subject><subject>Wildlife conservation</subject><subject>Zero Tolerance Policy</subject><issn>0006-3568</issn><issn>1525-3244</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2003</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>8G5</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><sourceid>GUQSH</sourceid><sourceid>M2O</sourceid><recordid>eNqlks2O0zAURiMEEmXgHSIWiFmk4584iWGBOqGUSoUiFdRFNbLc5CbjKo07tgP07XEUhKaoixHIC8vOuSdXvl8QXGE0xkmMrxBCSURZkr0mCNFLxOgGZQy_mazz9Xp1Q8ZonC_fkkfBCDPCIkri-HEw-lP1NHhm7c4fcUz5KNhMDIRrCHPdWjDfVVuH61vp-quVPPabB96Fn0DazvRfp4VudK0K2YTz1kFtlDuGP5S7VW34xWgHhYOyL5L2efCkko2FF7_3i-Dbh-nX_GO0WM7m-WQRbbOUuagoyyqtWEF5QhkilPMSJNr6xjPOkUdonJG0orxCFSnikhPCaFJWiSw55hmiF8GrwXsw-q4D68Re2QKaRragOytwglPMMfPgy7_Ane5M63sTxL9t6h8l9VA0QLVsQKi20s7IooYWjGx0C5Xy1xOMU0Yoof3fx2d4v0rYq-JsweVJgWcc_HS17KwV89Xnh7PXswez2WxxykbnWD_bBmoQfjz58pSfDXxhtLUGKnEwai_NUWAk-liKPmCiD5joYyl8LEUfSzHEUhCBhFcSb7oeTLo7nJVEJ5LNPcnNPcn7QbKzTpv_6GU6aLZK-0H9s-cXLXcNVw</recordid><startdate>20030901</startdate><enddate>20030901</enddate><creator>PARRISH, JEFFREY D</creator><creator>BRAUN, DAVID P</creator><creator>UNNASCH, ROBERT S</creator><general>American Institute of Biological Sciences</general><general>University of California Press</general><general>Oxford University Press</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>8GL</scope><scope>IBG</scope><scope>ISN</scope><scope>0-V</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7X2</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88A</scope><scope>88B</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>88I</scope><scope>8AF</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ALSLI</scope><scope>ATCPS</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BBNVY</scope><scope>BEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>CJNVE</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>LK8</scope><scope>M0K</scope><scope>M0P</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>M2P</scope><scope>M7P</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>PQEDU</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>R05</scope><scope>S0X</scope><scope>7SN</scope><scope>7ST</scope><scope>7T4</scope><scope>7U6</scope><scope>C1K</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20030901</creationdate><title>Are We Conserving What We Say We Are? Measuring Ecological Integrity within Protected Areas</title><author>PARRISH, JEFFREY D ; BRAUN, DAVID P ; UNNASCH, ROBERT S</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-b875t-cddf7f5c3963502399dea0b324899087534827f39f0f2c4d922536df6ad919803</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2003</creationdate><topic>Animal Husbandry</topic><topic>Biodiversity</topic><topic>Biodiversity conservation</topic><topic>Community Relations</topic><topic>Conservation</topic><topic>Conservation (Concept)</topic><topic>Conservation biology</topic><topic>Conservation organizations</topic><topic>ecological integrity</topic><topic>Ecosystem integrity</topic><topic>Ecosystems</topic><topic>Habitat conservation</topic><topic>Integrity</topic><topic>measures of success</topic><topic>monitoring</topic><topic>National parks</topic><topic>Nature conservation</topic><topic>Outcome Measures</topic><topic>OVERVIEW ARTICLES</topic><topic>Population ecology</topic><topic>protected area effectiveness</topic><topic>Protected areas</topic><topic>Research Needs</topic><topic>Riparian ecology</topic><topic>Species</topic><topic>Success</topic><topic>Wildlife conservation</topic><topic>Zero Tolerance Policy</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>PARRISH, JEFFREY D</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>BRAUN, DAVID P</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>UNNASCH, ROBERT S</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Gale In Context: High School</collection><collection>Biography In Context</collection><collection>Gale In Context: Canada</collection><collection>ProQuest Social Sciences Premium Collection【Remote access available】</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Agricultural Science Collection</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Biology Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Education Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>STEM Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Social Science Premium Collection</collection><collection>Agricultural & Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>eLibrary</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>Education Collection (Proquest) (PQ_SDU_P3)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>Agricultural Science Database</collection><collection>Education Database</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>PML(ProQuest Medical Library)</collection><collection>Research Library</collection><collection>Science Database</collection><collection>Biological Science Database</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Education</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>University of Michigan</collection><collection>SIRS Editorial</collection><collection>Ecology Abstracts</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>Human Population & Natural Resource Management</collection><collection>Sustainability Science Abstracts</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><jtitle>Bioscience</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>PARRISH, JEFFREY D</au><au>BRAUN, DAVID P</au><au>UNNASCH, ROBERT S</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Are We Conserving What We Say We Are? Measuring Ecological Integrity within Protected Areas</atitle><jtitle>Bioscience</jtitle><addtitle>BioScience</addtitle><date>2003-09-01</date><risdate>2003</risdate><volume>53</volume><issue>9</issue><spage>851</spage><epage>860</epage><pages>851-860</pages><issn>0006-3568</issn><eissn>1525-3244</eissn><coden>BISNAS</coden><abstract>Managers of protected areas are under increasing pressure to measure their effectiveness in conserving native biological diversity in ways that are scientifically sound, practical, and comparable among protected areas over time. The Nature Conservancy and its partners have developed a “Measures of Success” framework with four core components: (1) identifying a limited number of focal conservation targets, (2) identifying key ecological attributes for these targets, (3) identifying an acceptable range of variation for each attribute as measured by properly selected indicators, and (4) rating target status based on whether or not the target's key attributes are within their acceptable ranges of variation. A target cannot be considered “conserved” if any of its key ecological attributes exceeds its acceptable range of variation. The framework provides a rigorous basis not only for measuring success but for setting conservation objectives, assessing threats to biodiversity, identifying monitoring and research needs, and communicating management information to nonspecialists.</abstract><cop>Circulation, AIBS, 1313 Dolley Madison Blvd., Suite 402, McLean, VA 22101. USA</cop><pub>American Institute of Biological Sciences</pub><doi>10.1641/0006-3568(2003)053[0851:AWCWWS]2.0.CO;2</doi><tpages>10</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0006-3568 |
ispartof | Bioscience, 2003-09, Vol.53 (9), p.851-860 |
issn | 0006-3568 1525-3244 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_16171915 |
source | Oxford University Press Journals All Titles (1996-Current); JSTOR; BioOne Complete |
subjects | Animal Husbandry Biodiversity Biodiversity conservation Community Relations Conservation Conservation (Concept) Conservation biology Conservation organizations ecological integrity Ecosystem integrity Ecosystems Habitat conservation Integrity measures of success monitoring National parks Nature conservation Outcome Measures OVERVIEW ARTICLES Population ecology protected area effectiveness Protected areas Research Needs Riparian ecology Species Success Wildlife conservation Zero Tolerance Policy |
title | Are We Conserving What We Say We Are? Measuring Ecological Integrity within Protected Areas |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-20T18%3A42%3A05IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-gale_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Are%20We%20Conserving%20What%20We%20Say%20We%20Are?%20Measuring%20Ecological%20Integrity%20within%20Protected%20Areas&rft.jtitle=Bioscience&rft.au=PARRISH,%20JEFFREY%20D&rft.date=2003-09-01&rft.volume=53&rft.issue=9&rft.spage=851&rft.epage=860&rft.pages=851-860&rft.issn=0006-3568&rft.eissn=1525-3244&rft.coden=BISNAS&rft_id=info:doi/10.1641/0006-3568(2003)053%5B0851:AWCWWS%5D2.0.CO;2&rft_dat=%3Cgale_proqu%3EA117523230%3C/gale_proqu%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=216470017&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_galeid=A117523230&rft_jstor_id=10.1641/0006-3568(2003)053%5B0851:awcwws%5D2.0.co;2&rft_oup_id=10.1641/0006-3568(2003)053%5B0851:AWCWWS%5D2.0.CO;2&rfr_iscdi=true |