Elemental Conservation Units: Communicating Extinction Risk without Dictating Targets for Protection

Conservation biologists mostly agree on the need to identify and protect biodiversity below the species level but have not yet resolved the best approach. We addressed 2 issues relevant to this debate. First, we distinguished between the abstract goal of preserving the maximum amount of unique biodi...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Conservation biology 2008-02, Vol.22 (1), p.36-47
Hauptverfasser: WOOD, CHRIS C, GROSS, MART R
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 47
container_issue 1
container_start_page 36
container_title Conservation biology
container_volume 22
creator WOOD, CHRIS C
GROSS, MART R
description Conservation biologists mostly agree on the need to identify and protect biodiversity below the species level but have not yet resolved the best approach. We addressed 2 issues relevant to this debate. First, we distinguished between the abstract goal of preserving the maximum amount of unique biodiversity and the pragmatic goal of minimizing the loss of ecological goods and services given that further loss of biodiversity seems inevitable. Second, we distinguished between the scientific task of assessing extinction risk and the normative task of choosing targets for protection. We propose that scientific advice on extinction risk be given at the smallest meaningful scale: the elemental conservation unit (ECU). An ECU is a demographically isolated population whose probability of extinction over the time scale of interest (say 100 years) is not substantially affected by natural immigration from other populations. Within this time frame, the loss of an ECU would be irreversible without human intervention. Society's decision to protect an ECU ought to reflect human values that have social, economic, and political dimensions. Scientists can best inform this decision by providing advice about the probability that an ECU will be lost and the ecological and evolutionary consequences of that loss in a form that can be integrated into landscape planning. The ECU approach provides maximum flexibility to decision makers and ensures that the scientific task of assessing extinction risk informs, but remains distinct from, the normative social challenge of setting conservation targets.
doi_str_mv 10.1111/j.1523-1739.2007.00856.x
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>jstor_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_70272166</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><jstor_id>20183343</jstor_id><sourcerecordid>20183343</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c6056-2c56e297d2a2526acf42d517c306f666231247a304184bae7ba2fb2b1238c2293</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkVFv0zAQxyMEYmXwEYAIabyl2GfHdpF4YKUbQxNDsGoSL5brOsVdEm-2w7pvj9NUBfECfjnr_r87n--fZTlGY5zOm_UYl0AKzMlkDAjxMUKiZOPNg2y0Fx5mIySEKISYwEH2JIQ1QmhSYvo4O8ACSipKPMqWs9o0po2qzqeuDcb_VNG6Np-3Noa3Kdc0XWt1SrarfLZJQW_1rzZc53c2_nBdzD9YHQfiUvmViSGvnM-_eBfNln6aPapUHcyzXTzM5iezy-nH4vzi9Gz6_rzQDJWsAF0yAxO-BAUlMKUrCssSc00QqxhjQDBQrgiiWNCFMnyhoFrAAgMRGmBCDrPXQ98b7247E6JsbNCmrlVrXBckR8ABM_ZPEFNB04Ygga_-Ateu8236hASECYE0XoLEAGnvQvCmkjfeNsrfS4xk75dcy94W2dsie7_k1i-5SaUvdv27RWOWvwt3BiXgaAeooFVdedVqG_Zc34wwihL3buDubG3u_3sAOb04Pku3VP98qF-H6Pwf_bEghJKkF4NuQzSbva78tWSc8FJefT6VdPoJTr5fEXmc-JcDXykn1cqnmeff-pX1DxPgnPwC5j3Rrg</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>201332517</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Elemental Conservation Units: Communicating Extinction Risk without Dictating Targets for Protection</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete</source><source>Jstor Complete Legacy</source><creator>WOOD, CHRIS C ; GROSS, MART R</creator><creatorcontrib>WOOD, CHRIS C ; GROSS, MART R</creatorcontrib><description>Conservation biologists mostly agree on the need to identify and protect biodiversity below the species level but have not yet resolved the best approach. We addressed 2 issues relevant to this debate. First, we distinguished between the abstract goal of preserving the maximum amount of unique biodiversity and the pragmatic goal of minimizing the loss of ecological goods and services given that further loss of biodiversity seems inevitable. Second, we distinguished between the scientific task of assessing extinction risk and the normative task of choosing targets for protection. We propose that scientific advice on extinction risk be given at the smallest meaningful scale: the elemental conservation unit (ECU). An ECU is a demographically isolated population whose probability of extinction over the time scale of interest (say 100 years) is not substantially affected by natural immigration from other populations. Within this time frame, the loss of an ECU would be irreversible without human intervention. Society's decision to protect an ECU ought to reflect human values that have social, economic, and political dimensions. Scientists can best inform this decision by providing advice about the probability that an ECU will be lost and the ecological and evolutionary consequences of that loss in a form that can be integrated into landscape planning. The ECU approach provides maximum flexibility to decision makers and ensures that the scientific task of assessing extinction risk informs, but remains distinct from, the normative social challenge of setting conservation targets.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0888-8892</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1523-1739</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1111/j.1523-1739.2007.00856.x</identifier><identifier>PMID: 18254851</identifier><identifier>CODEN: CBIOEF</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Malden, USA: Blackwell Publishing Inc</publisher><subject>Animal, plant and microbial ecology ; Animals ; Applied ecology ; Biodiversity ; Biodiversity conservation ; Bioethics ; Biological and medical sciences ; Biological Evolution ; Conservation ; Conservation biology ; Conservation of Natural Resources - methods ; conservation policy ; Conservation, protection and management of environment and wildlife ; designatable unit ; distinct population segment ; ecological exchangeability ; Ecological genetics ; Ecology ; elemental conservation unit ; Endangered &amp; extinct species ; endangered species ; Environmental conservation ; especies en peligro ; Essay ; Evolution ; evolutionarily significant unit ; Extinction, Biological ; Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology ; Habitat conservation ; intercambio ecológico ; Marine ecology ; Parks, reserves, wildlife conservation. Endangered species: population survey and restocking ; política de conservación ; Population ecology ; reemplazamiento ; replaceability ; Risk assessment ; Salmon ; segmento poblacional distinto ; Species extinction ; Theory ; unidad de conservación elemental ; unidad designable ; unidad evolutivamente significativa ; Wildlife conservation</subject><ispartof>Conservation biology, 2008-02, Vol.22 (1), p.36-47</ispartof><rights>Copyright 2008 Society for Conservation Biology</rights><rights>2008 Society for Conservation Biology</rights><rights>2008 INIST-CNRS</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c6056-2c56e297d2a2526acf42d517c306f666231247a304184bae7ba2fb2b1238c2293</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c6056-2c56e297d2a2526acf42d517c306f666231247a304184bae7ba2fb2b1238c2293</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/20183343$$EPDF$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/20183343$$EHTML$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,777,781,800,1412,27905,27906,57998,58231</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&amp;idt=20073640$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18254851$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>WOOD, CHRIS C</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>GROSS, MART R</creatorcontrib><title>Elemental Conservation Units: Communicating Extinction Risk without Dictating Targets for Protection</title><title>Conservation biology</title><addtitle>Conserv Biol</addtitle><description>Conservation biologists mostly agree on the need to identify and protect biodiversity below the species level but have not yet resolved the best approach. We addressed 2 issues relevant to this debate. First, we distinguished between the abstract goal of preserving the maximum amount of unique biodiversity and the pragmatic goal of minimizing the loss of ecological goods and services given that further loss of biodiversity seems inevitable. Second, we distinguished between the scientific task of assessing extinction risk and the normative task of choosing targets for protection. We propose that scientific advice on extinction risk be given at the smallest meaningful scale: the elemental conservation unit (ECU). An ECU is a demographically isolated population whose probability of extinction over the time scale of interest (say 100 years) is not substantially affected by natural immigration from other populations. Within this time frame, the loss of an ECU would be irreversible without human intervention. Society's decision to protect an ECU ought to reflect human values that have social, economic, and political dimensions. Scientists can best inform this decision by providing advice about the probability that an ECU will be lost and the ecological and evolutionary consequences of that loss in a form that can be integrated into landscape planning. The ECU approach provides maximum flexibility to decision makers and ensures that the scientific task of assessing extinction risk informs, but remains distinct from, the normative social challenge of setting conservation targets.</description><subject>Animal, plant and microbial ecology</subject><subject>Animals</subject><subject>Applied ecology</subject><subject>Biodiversity</subject><subject>Biodiversity conservation</subject><subject>Bioethics</subject><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Biological Evolution</subject><subject>Conservation</subject><subject>Conservation biology</subject><subject>Conservation of Natural Resources - methods</subject><subject>conservation policy</subject><subject>Conservation, protection and management of environment and wildlife</subject><subject>designatable unit</subject><subject>distinct population segment</subject><subject>ecological exchangeability</subject><subject>Ecological genetics</subject><subject>Ecology</subject><subject>elemental conservation unit</subject><subject>Endangered &amp; extinct species</subject><subject>endangered species</subject><subject>Environmental conservation</subject><subject>especies en peligro</subject><subject>Essay</subject><subject>Evolution</subject><subject>evolutionarily significant unit</subject><subject>Extinction, Biological</subject><subject>Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology</subject><subject>Habitat conservation</subject><subject>intercambio ecológico</subject><subject>Marine ecology</subject><subject>Parks, reserves, wildlife conservation. Endangered species: population survey and restocking</subject><subject>política de conservación</subject><subject>Population ecology</subject><subject>reemplazamiento</subject><subject>replaceability</subject><subject>Risk assessment</subject><subject>Salmon</subject><subject>segmento poblacional distinto</subject><subject>Species extinction</subject><subject>Theory</subject><subject>unidad de conservación elemental</subject><subject>unidad designable</subject><subject>unidad evolutivamente significativa</subject><subject>Wildlife conservation</subject><issn>0888-8892</issn><issn>1523-1739</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2008</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNqNkVFv0zAQxyMEYmXwEYAIabyl2GfHdpF4YKUbQxNDsGoSL5brOsVdEm-2w7pvj9NUBfECfjnr_r87n--fZTlGY5zOm_UYl0AKzMlkDAjxMUKiZOPNg2y0Fx5mIySEKISYwEH2JIQ1QmhSYvo4O8ACSipKPMqWs9o0po2qzqeuDcb_VNG6Np-3Noa3Kdc0XWt1SrarfLZJQW_1rzZc53c2_nBdzD9YHQfiUvmViSGvnM-_eBfNln6aPapUHcyzXTzM5iezy-nH4vzi9Gz6_rzQDJWsAF0yAxO-BAUlMKUrCssSc00QqxhjQDBQrgiiWNCFMnyhoFrAAgMRGmBCDrPXQ98b7247E6JsbNCmrlVrXBckR8ABM_ZPEFNB04Ygga_-Ateu8236hASECYE0XoLEAGnvQvCmkjfeNsrfS4xk75dcy94W2dsie7_k1i-5SaUvdv27RWOWvwt3BiXgaAeooFVdedVqG_Zc34wwihL3buDubG3u_3sAOb04Pku3VP98qF-H6Pwf_bEghJKkF4NuQzSbva78tWSc8FJefT6VdPoJTr5fEXmc-JcDXykn1cqnmeff-pX1DxPgnPwC5j3Rrg</recordid><startdate>200802</startdate><enddate>200802</enddate><creator>WOOD, CHRIS C</creator><creator>GROSS, MART R</creator><general>Blackwell Publishing Inc</general><general>Blackwell Publishing, Inc</general><general>Blackwell</general><general>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</general><scope>FBQ</scope><scope>BSCLL</scope><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7QG</scope><scope>7SN</scope><scope>7SS</scope><scope>7ST</scope><scope>7U6</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>F1W</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>H95</scope><scope>L.G</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>RC3</scope><scope>SOI</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>200802</creationdate><title>Elemental Conservation Units: Communicating Extinction Risk without Dictating Targets for Protection</title><author>WOOD, CHRIS C ; GROSS, MART R</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c6056-2c56e297d2a2526acf42d517c306f666231247a304184bae7ba2fb2b1238c2293</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2008</creationdate><topic>Animal, plant and microbial ecology</topic><topic>Animals</topic><topic>Applied ecology</topic><topic>Biodiversity</topic><topic>Biodiversity conservation</topic><topic>Bioethics</topic><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>Biological Evolution</topic><topic>Conservation</topic><topic>Conservation biology</topic><topic>Conservation of Natural Resources - methods</topic><topic>conservation policy</topic><topic>Conservation, protection and management of environment and wildlife</topic><topic>designatable unit</topic><topic>distinct population segment</topic><topic>ecological exchangeability</topic><topic>Ecological genetics</topic><topic>Ecology</topic><topic>elemental conservation unit</topic><topic>Endangered &amp; extinct species</topic><topic>endangered species</topic><topic>Environmental conservation</topic><topic>especies en peligro</topic><topic>Essay</topic><topic>Evolution</topic><topic>evolutionarily significant unit</topic><topic>Extinction, Biological</topic><topic>Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology</topic><topic>Habitat conservation</topic><topic>intercambio ecológico</topic><topic>Marine ecology</topic><topic>Parks, reserves, wildlife conservation. Endangered species: population survey and restocking</topic><topic>política de conservación</topic><topic>Population ecology</topic><topic>reemplazamiento</topic><topic>replaceability</topic><topic>Risk assessment</topic><topic>Salmon</topic><topic>segmento poblacional distinto</topic><topic>Species extinction</topic><topic>Theory</topic><topic>unidad de conservación elemental</topic><topic>unidad designable</topic><topic>unidad evolutivamente significativa</topic><topic>Wildlife conservation</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>WOOD, CHRIS C</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>GROSS, MART R</creatorcontrib><collection>AGRIS</collection><collection>Istex</collection><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Animal Behavior Abstracts</collection><collection>Ecology Abstracts</collection><collection>Entomology Abstracts (Full archive)</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>Sustainability Science Abstracts</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ASFA: Aquatic Sciences and Fisheries Abstracts</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Aquatic Science &amp; Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) 1: Biological Sciences &amp; Living Resources</collection><collection>Aquatic Science &amp; Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) Professional</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Genetics Abstracts</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Conservation biology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>WOOD, CHRIS C</au><au>GROSS, MART R</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Elemental Conservation Units: Communicating Extinction Risk without Dictating Targets for Protection</atitle><jtitle>Conservation biology</jtitle><addtitle>Conserv Biol</addtitle><date>2008-02</date><risdate>2008</risdate><volume>22</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>36</spage><epage>47</epage><pages>36-47</pages><issn>0888-8892</issn><eissn>1523-1739</eissn><coden>CBIOEF</coden><abstract>Conservation biologists mostly agree on the need to identify and protect biodiversity below the species level but have not yet resolved the best approach. We addressed 2 issues relevant to this debate. First, we distinguished between the abstract goal of preserving the maximum amount of unique biodiversity and the pragmatic goal of minimizing the loss of ecological goods and services given that further loss of biodiversity seems inevitable. Second, we distinguished between the scientific task of assessing extinction risk and the normative task of choosing targets for protection. We propose that scientific advice on extinction risk be given at the smallest meaningful scale: the elemental conservation unit (ECU). An ECU is a demographically isolated population whose probability of extinction over the time scale of interest (say 100 years) is not substantially affected by natural immigration from other populations. Within this time frame, the loss of an ECU would be irreversible without human intervention. Society's decision to protect an ECU ought to reflect human values that have social, economic, and political dimensions. Scientists can best inform this decision by providing advice about the probability that an ECU will be lost and the ecological and evolutionary consequences of that loss in a form that can be integrated into landscape planning. The ECU approach provides maximum flexibility to decision makers and ensures that the scientific task of assessing extinction risk informs, but remains distinct from, the normative social challenge of setting conservation targets.</abstract><cop>Malden, USA</cop><pub>Blackwell Publishing Inc</pub><pmid>18254851</pmid><doi>10.1111/j.1523-1739.2007.00856.x</doi><tpages>12</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0888-8892
ispartof Conservation biology, 2008-02, Vol.22 (1), p.36-47
issn 0888-8892
1523-1739
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_70272166
source MEDLINE; Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete; Jstor Complete Legacy
subjects Animal, plant and microbial ecology
Animals
Applied ecology
Biodiversity
Biodiversity conservation
Bioethics
Biological and medical sciences
Biological Evolution
Conservation
Conservation biology
Conservation of Natural Resources - methods
conservation policy
Conservation, protection and management of environment and wildlife
designatable unit
distinct population segment
ecological exchangeability
Ecological genetics
Ecology
elemental conservation unit
Endangered & extinct species
endangered species
Environmental conservation
especies en peligro
Essay
Evolution
evolutionarily significant unit
Extinction, Biological
Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology
Habitat conservation
intercambio ecológico
Marine ecology
Parks, reserves, wildlife conservation. Endangered species: population survey and restocking
política de conservación
Population ecology
reemplazamiento
replaceability
Risk assessment
Salmon
segmento poblacional distinto
Species extinction
Theory
unidad de conservación elemental
unidad designable
unidad evolutivamente significativa
Wildlife conservation
title Elemental Conservation Units: Communicating Extinction Risk without Dictating Targets for Protection
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-21T08%3A41%3A35IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-jstor_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Elemental%20Conservation%20Units:%20Communicating%20Extinction%20Risk%20without%20Dictating%20Targets%20for%20Protection&rft.jtitle=Conservation%20biology&rft.au=WOOD,%20CHRIS%20C&rft.date=2008-02&rft.volume=22&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=36&rft.epage=47&rft.pages=36-47&rft.issn=0888-8892&rft.eissn=1523-1739&rft.coden=CBIOEF&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111/j.1523-1739.2007.00856.x&rft_dat=%3Cjstor_proqu%3E20183343%3C/jstor_proqu%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=201332517&rft_id=info:pmid/18254851&rft_jstor_id=20183343&rfr_iscdi=true