ORCID Profile
0000-0003-2199-3446
Current Organisation
University of Melbourne
Does something not look right? The information on this page has been harvested from data sources that may not be up to date. We continue to work with information providers to improve coverage and quality. To report an issue, use the Feedback Form.
Research Topics
In Research Link Australia (RLA), "Research Topics" refer to ANZSRC FOR and SEO codes. These topics are either sourced from ANZSRC FOR and SEO codes listed in researchers' related grants or generated by a large language model (LLM) based on their publications.
Top 5 Research Topics
ANZSRC Field of Research (FoR)
Environmental Science and Management | Conservation and Biodiversity | Ecosystem Function | Natural Resource Management | Environmental Monitoring | Marine and Estuarine Ecology (incl. Marine Ichthyology) | Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Environmental Knowledge | Environmental Management | Carbon Sequestration Science | Community Ecology |
ANZSRC Socio-Economic Objective (SEO)
Ecosystem Assessment and Management at Regional or Larger Scales | Ecosystem Assessment and Management of Coastal and Estuarine Environments | Flora, Fauna and Biodiversity at Regional or Larger Scales | Sustainability Indicators | Climate Change Mitigation Strategies | Coastal and Estuarine Soils | Ecosystem Assessment and Management of Mountain and High Country Environments
Related Links
Publications
Using decision science to evaluate global biodiversity indices
Publisher: Wiley
Date: 02-09-2020
DOI: 10.1111/COBI.13574
Prioritising the restoration of marine and coastal ecosystems using ecosystem accounting
Publisher: Research Square Platform LLC
Date: 10-05-2022
DOI: 10.21203/RS.3.RS-1617940/V1
Abstract: Ecosystem accounting is a structured approach to compiling environmental and economic information. While accounts are typically used to compile data on past trends, they have an unrealised capacity to also be used to inform decisions by providing a structured approach to scenario evaluation of potential futures. We used the global standard for ecosystem accounting (System for Environmental Economic Accounting), to examine past trends and potential future restoration options in two large metropolitan bays, where data existed for tidal marshes, mangroves and seagrass. We assessed options for reversing the loss of these ecosystems and although the net benefit varied between sites, we found that if all sites were restored, the overall investment-benefit ratio would be 10.5, resulting from AUD$100 million of ecosystem services from an investment of AUD$8.5 million. This study highlights the advantage of structured approaches to data compilation through ecosystem accounts, and consideration of ecosystem dynamics and response to restoration actions, to inform management decisions.
Matching biodiversity indicators to policy needs
Publisher: Wiley
Date: 21-12-2020
DOI: 10.1111/COBI.13575
Satellite remote sensing of ecosystem functions: opportunities, challenges and way forward
Publisher: Wiley
Date: 10-08-2017
DOI: 10.1002/RSE2.59
Developing a standardized definition of ecosystem collapse for risk assessment
Publisher: Wiley
Date: 10-01-2018
DOI: 10.1002/FEE.1747
Optimal soil carbon sampling designs to achieve cost-effectiveness: a case study in blue carbon ecosystems
Publisher: The Royal Society
Date: 09-2018
Abstract: Researchers are increasingly studying carbon (C) storage by natural ecosystems for climate mitigation, including coastal ‘blue carbon’ ecosystems. Unfortunately, little guidance on how to achieve robust, cost-effective estimates of blue C stocks to inform inventories exists. We use existing data (492 cores) to develop recommendations on the s ling effort required to achieve robust estimates of blue C. Using a broad-scale, spatially explicit dataset from Victoria, Australia, we applied multiple spatial methods to provide guidelines for reducing variability in estimates of soil C stocks over large areas. With a separate dataset collected across Australia, we evaluated how many s les are needed to capture variability within soil cores and the best methods for extrapolating C to 1 m soil depth. We found that 40 core s les are optimal for capturing C variance across 1000's of kilometres but higher density s ling is required across finer scales (100–200 km). Accounting for environmental variation can further decrease required s ling. The within core analyses showed that nine s les within a core capture the majority of the variability and log-linear equations can accurately extrapolate C. These recommendations can help develop standardized methods for s ling programmes to quantify soil C stocks at national scales.
Monitoring biodiversity change through effective global coordination
Publisher: Elsevier BV
Date: 12-2017
Scientific foundations for an ecosystem goal, milestones and indicators for the post-2020 global biodiversity framework
Publisher: Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Date: 16-08-2021
A guide to representing variability and uncertainty in biodiversity indicators
Publisher: Wiley
Date: 26-05-2021
DOI: 10.1111/COBI.13699
Abstract: Bio ersity indicators are used to inform decisions and measure progress toward global targets, such as the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals. Indicators aggregate and simplify complex information, so underlying information influencing its reliability and interpretation (e.g., variability in data and uncertainty in indicator values) can be lost. Communicating uncertainty is necessary to ensure robust decisions and limit misinterpretations of trends, yet variability and uncertainty are rarely quantified in bio ersity indicators. We developed a guide to representing uncertainty and variability in bio ersity indicators. We considered the key purposes of bio ersity indicators and commonly used methods for representing uncertainty (standard error, bootstrap res ling, and jackknife res ling) and variability (quantiles, standard deviation, median absolute deviation, and mean absolute deviation) with intervals. Using 3 high‐profile bio ersity indicators (Red List Index, Living Planet Index, and Ocean Health Index), we tested the use, suitability, and interpretation of each interval method based on the formulation and data types underpinning the indicators. The methods revealed vastly different information indicator formula and data distribution affected the suitability of each interval method. Because the data underpinning each indicator were not normally distributed, methods relying on normality or symmetrical spread were unsuitable. Quantiles, bootstrapping, and jackknifing provided useful information about the underlying variability and uncertainty. We built a decision tree to inform selection of the appropriate interval method to represent uncertainty or variation in bio ersity indicators, depending on data type and objectives. Our guide supports transparent and effective communication of bio ersity indicator trends to facilitate accurate interpretation by decision makers.
Scenarios and Models to Support Global Conservation Targets
Publisher: Elsevier BV
Date: 2019
DOI: 10.1016/J.TREE.2018.10.006
Abstract: Global bio ersity targets have far-reaching implications for nature conservation worldwide. Scenarios and models hold unfulfilled promise for ensuring such targets are well founded and implemented here, we review how they can and should inform the Aichi Targets of the Strategic Plan for Bio ersity and their reformulation. They offer two clear benefits: providing a scientific basis for the wording and quantitative elements of targets and identifying synergies and trade-offs by accounting for interactions between targets and the actions needed to achieve them. The capacity of scenarios and models to address complexity makes them invaluable for developing meaningful targets and policy, and improving conservation outcomes.
Species Population Trends in Protected Areas
Publisher: Wiley
Date: 02-2016
Objectives for multiple-species conservation planning
Publisher: Wiley
Date: 09-02-2006
DOI: 10.1111/J.1523-1739.2006.00369.X
Abstract: The first step in conservation planning is to identify objectives. Most stated objectives for conservation, such as to maximize bio ersity outcomes, are too vague to be useful within a decision-making framework. One way to clarify the issue is to define objectives in terms of the risk of extinction for multiple species. Although the assessment of extinction risk for single species is common, few researchers have formulated an objective function that combines the extinction risks of multiple species. We sought to translate the broad goal of maximizing the viability of species into explicit objectives for use in a decision-theoretic approach to conservation planning. We formulated several objective functions based on extinction risk across many species and illustrated the differences between these objectives with simple ex les. Each objective function was the mathematical representation of an approach to conservation and emphasized different levels of threat. Our objectives included minimizing the joint probability of one or more extinctions, minimizing the expected number of extinctions, and minimizing the increase in risk of extinction from the best-case scenario. With objective functions based on joint probabilities of extinction across species, any correlations in extinction probabilities had to be known or the resultant decisions were potentially misleading. Additive objectives, such as the expected number of extinctions, did not produce the same anomalies. We demonstrated that the choice of objective function is central to the decision-making process because alternative objective functions can lead to a different ranking of management options. Therefore, decision makers need to think carefully in selecting and defining their conservation goals.
Application of Population Viability Analysis to Landscape Conservation Planning
Publisher: Elsevier
Date: 2009
A conceptual framework and practical structure for implementing ecosystem condition accounts
Publisher: Pensoft Publishers
Date: 09-11-2020
Abstract: Ecosystem condition is a fundamental component in the ecosystem accounting framework as part of the System of Environmental-Economic Accounting Experimental Ecosystem Accounting (SEEA EEA). Here, we develop a conceptual framework and present a practical structure for implementing ecosystem condition accounts to contribute to the revision process of the SEEA EEA, focussing on six core elements: (1) developing a common definition of ecosystem condition, (2) establishing a conceptual framing for ecosystem condition, (3) portraying the role of condition within the SEEA EEA accounting system, (4) deriving an inclusive multi-purpose approach, (5) describing the components of condition accounts and (6) developing a three-stage structure for reporting accounts. We develop a conceptual framework for an inclusive condition account, building on an ecological understanding of ecosystems upon which definitions, concepts, classifications and reporting structures were based. The framework encompasses the dual perspectives of first, the interdependencies of ecosystem composition, structure and function in maintaining ecosystem integrity and second, the capacity of ecosystems to supply services as benefits for humans. The following components of ecosystem condition accounts are recommended to provide comprehensive, consistent, repeatable and transparent accounts: (1) intrinsic and instrumental values, together with ecocentric and anthropocentric worldviews (2) a formal typology or classification of characteristics, variables and indicators, based on selection criteria (3) a reference condition used both to compare past, current and future levels of indicators of condition and as a basis for aggregation of indicators and (4) a three-stage approach to compiling accounts with increasing levels of information and complexity that are appropriate for different purposes and applications. The recommended broad and inclusive scope of ecosystem condition and the demonstrated practical methods for implementation of accounts will enhance the ecosystem accounting framework and thus support a wider range of current and potential applications and users.
Scientific foundations for an ecosystem goal, milestones and indicators for the post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework (now published: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41559-021-01538-5)
Publisher: Center for Open Science
Date: 31-12-2020
Abstract: Despite significant conservation efforts, the loss of ecosystems continues globally, along with related loss of species and Nature’s contributions to people. A new ecosystem goal and milestone, supported by clear targets and indicators, is urgently needed for the Convention on Biological Diversity’s post-2020 Global Bio ersity Framework and beyond, to support efforts to abate climate change, and to achieve the UN Sustainable Development Goals. Here, we detail the scientific foundations for an ecosystem goal and milestones, founded on a theory of change, and review available indicators to measure progress. An ecosystem goal should include three core components: area, integrity, and risk of collapse. Targets, the actions necessary for the goals to be met, should address pathways to ecosystem loss and recovery, including retaining threatened ecosystems and intact areas, and restoring degraded ecosystems. Multiple indicators are needed to capture the different dimensions of ecosystem area, integrity and collapse risk across ecosystem types. Indicators should be selected for fitness-for-purpose and relevance to goal components, rather than constrained by currently available data. Science-based goals, supported by well-formulated action targets and fit-for purpose indicators, will provide the best foundation for future success in reversing bio ersity loss and sustaining human well-being.
Scientific foundations for an IUCN Red List of Ecosystems
Publisher: Public Library of Science (PLoS)
Date: 08-05-2013
A review of ecosystem condition accounts: lessons learned and options for further development
Publisher: Pensoft Publishers
Date: 15-06-2020
Abstract: Ecosystem condition accounts are part of the System of Environmental-Economic Accounting – Experimental Ecosystem Accounting (SEEA EEA). An ecosystem condition account contains aggregated statistical information about the overall abiotic and biotic quality of an ecosystem at a policy relevant spatial scale. This article reviews 23 publicly-accessible reports undertaken or commissioned by government agencies, academic and non-government organisations that discuss or present an ecosystem condition account. This analysis revealed that ecosystem condition is usually reported for one or more ecosystem types, but there is little consistency in the terminology used to define ecosystem types. All case studies report variables or indicators that measure specific ecosystem characteristics in order to make inferences about the overall condition of ecosystems. All studies included biotic indicators and almost all studies included species-based indicators in the condition account. The thematic aggregation of indicators into a single composite index (or in a few composite sub-indices) is not a standard practice, but applied in about half of the studies. The definition and use of a reference condition or reference levels for specific indicators against which the reported condition can be evaluated is not a standard practice, but was applied in about half of the studies. Based on this analysis, we suggest the revision of the SEEA EEA to propose a globally-consistent typology of ecosystem types to recommend a list of ecosystem condition indicators according to an agreed classification to provide further guidance on aggregation methods and on the development of an ecosystem condition index that can be used to compare ecosystem condition across ecosystem types and across different accounting areas to provide further guidance on how best to set reference levels and reference conditions against which the past, current and future ecosystem condition can be assessed and to propose a standard set of statistical tables for reporting the condition account.
Redlistr: tools for the IUCN Red Lists of ecosystems and threatened species in R
Publisher: Wiley
Date: 31-01-2019
DOI: 10.1111/ECOG.04143
Using occupancy as a state variable for monitoring the Critically Endangered Alaotran gentle lemur Hapalemur alaotrensis
Publisher: Inter-Research Science Center
Date: 16-04-2010
DOI: 10.3354/ESR00274
The IUCN Red List of Ecosystems: Motivations, Challenges, and Applications
Publisher: Wiley
Date: 05-2015
DOI: 10.1111/CONL.12167
Using machine learning to understand the implications of meteorological conditions for fish kills
Publisher: Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Date: 12-10-2020
DOI: 10.1038/S41598-020-73922-3
Abstract: Fish kills, often caused by low levels of dissolved oxygen (DO), involve with complex interactions and dynamics in the environment. In many places the precise cause of massive fish kills remains uncertain due to a lack of continuous water quality monitoring. In this study, we tested if meteorological conditions could act as a proxy for low levels of DO by relating readily available meteorological data to fish kills of grey mullet ( Mugil cephalus ) using a machine learning technique, the self-organizing map (SOM). Driven by different meteorological patterns, fish kills were classified into summer and non-summer types by the SOM. Summer fish kills were associated with extended periods of lower air pressure and higher temperature, and concentrated storm events 2–3 days before the fish kills. In contrast, non-summer fish kills followed a combination of relatively low air pressure, continuous lower wind speed, and successive storm events 5 days before the fish kills. Our findings suggest that abnormal meteorological conditions can serve as warning signals for managers to avoid fish kills by taking preventative actions. While not replacing water monitoring programs, meteorological data can support fishery management to safeguard the health of the riverine ecosystems.
Using multiple lines of evidence to assess the risk of ecosystem collapse
Publisher: The Royal Society
Date: 20-09-2017
Abstract: Effective ecosystem risk assessment relies on a conceptual understanding of ecosystem dynamics and the synthesis of multiple lines of evidence. Risk assessment protocols and ecosystem models integrate limited observational data with threat scenarios, making them valuable tools for monitoring ecosystem status and diagnosing key mechanisms of decline to be addressed by management. We applied the IUCN Red List of Ecosystems criteria to quantify the risk of collapse of the Meso-American Reef, a unique ecosystem containing the second longest barrier reef in the world. We collated a wide array of empirical data (field and remotely sensed), and used a stochastic ecosystem model to backcast past ecosystem dynamics, as well as forecast future ecosystem dynamics under 11 scenarios of threat. The ecosystem is at high risk from mass bleaching in the coming decades, with compounding effects of ocean acidification, hurricanes, pollution and fishing. The overall status of the ecosystem is Critically Endangered (plausibly Vulnerable to Critically Endangered), with notable differences among Red List criteria and data types in detecting the most severe symptoms of risk. Our case study provides a template for assessing risks to coral reefs and for further application of ecosystem models in risk assessment.
Global Biodiversity Indicators Reflect the Modeled Impacts of Protected Area Policy Change
Publisher: Wiley
Date: 25-03-2015
DOI: 10.1111/CONL.12163
Ecosystem indices to support global biodiversity conservation
Publisher: Wiley
Date: 11-11-2019
DOI: 10.1111/CONL.12680
Quantifying the Short-Term Costs of Conservation Interventions for Fishers at Lake Alaotra, Madagascar
Publisher: Public Library of Science (PLoS)
Date: 24-06-2015
Introduction
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Date: 06-07-2017
Simultaneous-count models to estimate abundance from counts of unmarked individuals with imperfect detection.
Publisher: Wiley
Date: 07-01-2019
DOI: 10.1111/COBI.13261
Abstract: We developed a method to estimate population abundance from simultaneous counts of unmarked in iduals over multiple sites. We considered that at each s ling occasion, in iduals in a population could be detected at 1 of the survey sites or remain undetected and used either multinomial or binomial simultaneous-count models to estimate abundance, the latter being equivalent to an N-mixture model with one site. We tested model performance with simulations over a range of detection probabilities, population sizes, growth rates, number of years, s ling occasions, and sites. We then applied our method to 3 critically endangered vulture species in Cambodia to demonstrate the real-world applicability of the model and to provide the first abundance estimates for these species in Cambodia. Our new approach works best when existing methods are expected to perform poorly (i.e., few sites and large variation in abundance among sites) and if in iduals may move among sites between s ling occasions. The approach performed better when there were >8 s ling occasions and net probability of detection was high (>0.5). We believe our approach will be useful in particular for simultaneous surveys at aggregation sites, such as roosts. The method complements existing approaches for estimating abundance of unmarked in iduals and is the first method designed specifically for simultaneous counts.
Synergies and complementarities between ecosystem risk assessment and ecosystem accounting
Publisher: California Digital Library (CDL)
Date: 23-03-2022
Taking the measure of change
Publisher: American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS)
Date: 10-10-2014
Abstract: Predictive models of bio ersity change are required to inform conservation policy decisions
Cost and feasibility of a barrier to halt the spread of invasive cane toads in arid Australia: incorporating expert knowledge into model-based decision-making
Publisher: Wiley
Date: 10-08-2017
Integrating Biological and Social Values When Prioritizing Places for Biodiversity Conservation
Publisher: Wiley
Date: 11-03-2014
DOI: 10.1111/COBI.12257
Abstract: The consideration of information on social values in conjunction with biological data is critical for achieving both socially acceptable and scientifically defensible conservation planning outcomes. However, the influence of social values on spatial conservation priorities has received limited attention and is poorly understood. We present an approach that incorporates quantitative data on social values for conservation and social preferences for development into spatial conservation planning. We undertook a public participation GIS survey to spatially represent social values and development preferences and used species distribution models for 7 threatened fauna species to represent biological values. These spatially explicit data were simultaneously included in the conservation planning software Zonation to examine how conservation priorities changed with the inclusion of social data. Integrating spatially explicit information about social values and development preferences with biological data produced prioritizations that differed spatially from the solution based on only biological data. However, the integrated solutions protected a similar proportion of the species' distributions, indicating that Zonation effectively combined the biological and social data to produce socially feasible conservation solutions of approximately equivalent biological value. We were able to identify areas of the landscape where synergies and conflicts between different value sets are likely to occur. Identification of these synergies and conflicts will allow decision makers to target communication strategies to specific areas and ensure effective community engagement and positive conservation outcomes.
A function-based typology for Earth’s ecosystems
Publisher: Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Date: 12-10-2022
DOI: 10.1038/S41586-022-05318-4
Abstract: As the United Nations develops a post-2020 global bio ersity framework for the Convention on Biological Diversity, attention is focusing on how new goals and targets for ecosystem conservation might serve its vision of ‘living in harmony with nature’ 1,2 . Advancing dual imperatives to conserve bio ersity and sustain ecosystem services requires reliable and resilient generalizations and predictions about ecosystem responses to environmental change and management 3 . Ecosystems vary in their biota 4 , service provision 5 and relative exposure to risks 6 , yet there is no globally consistent classification of ecosystems that reflects functional responses to change and management. This h ers progress on developing conservation targets and sustainability goals. Here we present the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Global Ecosystem Typology, a conceptually robust, scalable, spatially explicit approach for generalizations and predictions about functions, biota, risks and management remedies across the entire biosphere. The outcome of a major cross-disciplinary collaboration, this novel framework places all of Earth’s ecosystems into a unifying theoretical context to guide the transformation of ecosystem policy and management from global to local scales. This new information infrastructure will support knowledge transfer for ecosystem-specific management and restoration, globally standardized ecosystem risk assessments, natural capital accounting and progress on the post-2020 global bio ersity framework.
Top‐down control of species distributions: feral cats driving the regional extinction of a threatened rodent in northern Australia
Publisher: Wiley
Date: 28-12-2016
DOI: 10.1111/DDI.12522
Selecting and applying indicators of ecosystem collapse for risk assessments
Publisher: Wiley
Date: 04-07-2018
DOI: 10.1111/COBI.13107
Abstract: Ongoing ecosystem degradation and transformation are major threats to bio ersity. Measuring ecosystem change toward collapse relies on monitoring indicators that quantify key ecological processes. Yet little guidance is available on selection and use of indicators for ecosystem risk assessment. We reviewed indicator use in ecological studies of ecosystem collapse in marine pelagic and temperate forest ecosystems. We examined indicator-selection methods, indicator types (geographic distribution, abiotic, biotic), methods of assessing multiple indicators, and temporal quality of time series. We compared how these factors were applied in the ecological studies with how they were applied in risk assessments by using the International Union for Conservation of Nature's Red List of Ecosystems (RLE), for which indicators are used to estimate risk of ecosystem collapse. Ecological studies and RLE assessments rarely reported how indicators were selected, particularly in terrestrial ecosystems. Few ecological studies and RLE assessments quantified ecosystem change based on all 3 indicator types, and indicators types used differed between marine and terrestrial ecosystems. Several studies used indices or multivariate analyses to assess multiple indicators simultaneously, but RLE assessments did not because as RLE guidelines advise against them. Most studies and RLE assessments used time-series data that spanned at least 30 years, which increases the probability of reliably detecting change. Limited use of indicator-selection protocols and infrequent use of all 3 indicator types may h er accurate detection of change. To improve the value of risk assessments for informing policy and management, we recommend using explicit protocols, including conceptual models, to identify and select indicators a range of indicators spanning distributional, abiotic, and biotic features indices and multivariate analyses with extreme care until guidelines are developed time series with sufficient data to increase ability to accurately diagnose directional change data from multiple sources to support assessments and explicitly reporting steps in the assessment process.
Navigating uncertainty in environmental composite indicators
Publisher: Elsevier BV
Date: 04-2017
Synthesis: Moving Forward Together
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Date: 06-07-2017
A practical guide to the application of the IUCN Red List of Ecosystems criteria
Publisher: The Royal Society
Date: 19-02-2015
Abstract: The newly developed IUCN Red List of Ecosystems is part of a growing toolbox for assessing risks to bio ersity, which addresses ecosystems and their functioning. The Red List of Ecosystems standard allows systematic assessment of all freshwater, marine, terrestrial and subterranean ecosystem types in terms of their global risk of collapse. In addition, the Red List of Ecosystems categories and criteria provide a technical base for assessments of ecosystem status at the regional, national, or subnational level. While the Red List of Ecosystems criteria were designed to be widely applicable by scientists and practitioners, guidelines are needed to ensure they are implemented in a standardized manner to reduce epistemic uncertainties and allow robust comparisons among ecosystems and over time. We review the intended application of the Red List of Ecosystems assessment process, summarize ‘best-practice’ methods for ecosystem assessments and outline approaches to ensure operational rigour of assessments. The Red List of Ecosystems will inform priority setting for ecosystem types worldwide, and strengthen capacity to report on progress towards the Aichi Targets of the Convention on Biological Diversity. When integrated with other IUCN knowledge products, such as the World Database of Protected Areas/Protected Planet, Key Bio ersity Areas and the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species, the Red List of Ecosystems will contribute to providing the most complete global measure of the status of bio ersity yet achieved.
Beyond the headline: roles of the Red List of Ecosystems in implementing the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework
Publisher: Center for Open Science
Date: 28-07-2023
Abstract: The Kunming-Montreal Global Bio ersity Framework (GBF) of the UN Convention on Biological Diversity set the agenda for global aspirations and action to reverse bio ersity loss. The Framework includes an explicit goal for maintaining and restoring bio ersity, encompassing ecosystems, species, and genetic ersity (Goal A), targets for ecosystem protection and restoration, and headline indicators to track progress and guide action1. One of the headline indicators is the Red List of Ecosystems2, the global standard for ecosystem risk assessment. The Red List of Ecosystems provides a systematic framework for collating, analysing and synthesising data on ecosystems, including their distribution, integrity and risk of collapse3. Here, we examine how it can contribute to implementing the Global Bio ersity Framework, as well as monitoring progress. We find that the Red List of Ecosystems provides common theory and practical data, while fostering collaboration, cross-sector cooperation and knowledge sharing, with important roles in 16 of the 23 targets. In particular ecosystem maps, descriptions and risk categories are key to spatial planning for protection, restoration and halting loss (Targets 1, 2 and 3). The Red List of Ecosystems is therefore well-placed to aid Parties as they assess, plan and act to achieve the targets and goals. We outline future work to further strengthen this potential and improve bio ersity outcomes, including expanding spatial coverage of Red List of Ecosystems assessments and partnerships between practitioners, policy-makers, and scientists.
Anthropogenic effects on the occurrence of medium‐sized mammals on the Brazilian Pampa biome
Publisher: Wiley
Date: 13-07-2020
DOI: 10.1111/ACV.12618
Cost‐effective assessment of extinction risk with limited information
Publisher: Wiley
Date: 30-05-2015
Accounting for career breaks
Publisher: American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS)
Date: 15-05-2015
The use of range size to assess risks to biodiversity from stochastic threats
Publisher: Wiley
Date: 17-01-2017
DOI: 10.1111/DDI.12533
Mapping Ocean Wealth Australia: The value of coastal wetlands to people and nature
Publisher: The Nature Conservancy
Date: 25-11-2019
The impact of data realities on conservation planning
Publisher: Elsevier BV
Date: 07-2011
NEW HORIZONS FOR MANAGING THE ENVIRONMENT: A REVIEW OF COUPLED SOCIAL‐ECOLOGICAL SYSTEMS MODELING
Publisher: Wiley
Date: 30-12-2011
A biodiversity-crisis hierarchy to evaluate and refine conservation indicators
Publisher: Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Date: 26-03-2018
DOI: 10.1038/S41559-018-0504-8
Abstract: The Convention on Biological Diversity and its Strategic Plan for Bio ersity 2011-2020 form the central pillar of the world's conservation commitment, with 196 signatory nations yet its capacity to reign in catastrophic bio ersity loss has proved inadequate. Indicators suggest that few of the Convention on Biological Diversity's Aichi targets that aim to reduce bio ersity loss will be met by 2020. While the indicators have been criticized for only partially representing the targets, a bigger problem is that the indicators do not adequately draw attention to and measure all of the drivers of the bio ersity crisis. Here, we show that many key drivers of bio ersity loss are either poorly evaluated or entirely lacking indicators. We use a bio ersity-crisis hierarchy as a conceptual model linking drivers of change to bio ersity loss to evaluate the scope of current indicators. We find major gaps related to monitoring governments, human population size, corruption and threat-industries. We recommend the hierarchy is used to develop an expanded set of indicators that comprehensively monitor the human behaviour and institutions that drive bio ersity loss and that, so far, have impeded progress towards achieving global bio ersity targets.
MAKING CONSERVATION DECISIONS UNDER UNCERTAINTY FOR THE PERSISTENCE OF MULTIPLE SPECIES
Publisher: Wiley
Date: 2007
DOI: 10.1890/1051-0761(2007)017[0251:MCDUUF]2.0.CO;2
Abstract: Population models for multiple species provide one of the few means of assessing the impact of alternative management options on the persistence of bio ersity, but they are inevitably uncertain. Is it possible to use population models in multiple-species conservation planning given the associated uncertainties? We use information-gap decision theory to explore the impact of parameter uncertainty on the conservation decision when planning for the persistence of multiple species. An information-gap approach seeks robust outcomes that are most immune from error. We assess the impact of uncertainty in key model parameters for three species, whose extinction risks under four alternative management scenarios are estimated using a metapopulation model. Three methods are described for making conservation decisions across the species, taking into account uncertainty. We find that decisions based on single species are relatively robust to uncertainty in parameters, although the estimates of extinction risk increase rapidly with uncertainty. When identifying the best conservation decision for the persistence of all species, the methods that rely on the rankings of the management options by each species result in decisions that are similarly robust to uncertainty. Methods that depend on absolute values of extinction risk are sensitive to uncertainty, as small changes in extinction risk can alter the ranking of the alternative scenarios. We discover that it is possible to make robust conservation decisions even when the uncertainties of the multiple-species problem appear overwhelming. However, the decision most robust to uncertainty is likely to differ from the best decision when uncertainty is ignored, illustrating the importance of incorporating uncertainty into the decision-making process.
Estimating changes and trends in ecosystem extent with dense time‐series satellite remote sensing
Publisher: Wiley
Date: 17-07-2020
DOI: 10.1111/COBI.13520
Should payments for biodiversity conservation be based on action or results?
Publisher: Wiley
Date: 07-06-2011
Extinction risk in cloud forest fragments under climate change and habitat loss
Publisher: Wiley
Date: 05-2013
DOI: 10.1111/DDI.12064
Testing the focal species approach to making conservation decisions for species persistence
Publisher: Wiley
Date: 05-2013
DOI: 10.1111/DDI.12066
Combating ecosystem collapse from the tropics to the Antarctic
Publisher: Wiley
Date: 25-02-2021
DOI: 10.1111/GCB.15539
Abstract: Globally, collapse of ecosystems—potentially irreversible change to ecosystem structure, composition and function—imperils bio ersity, human health and well‐being. We examine the current state and recent trajectories of 19 ecosystems, spanning 58° of latitude across 7.7 M km 2 , from Australia's coral reefs to terrestrial Antarctica. Pressures from global climate change and regional human impacts, occurring as chronic ‘presses’ and/or acute ‘pulses’, drive ecosystem collapse. Ecosystem responses to 5–17 pressures were categorised as four collapse profiles—abrupt, smooth, stepped and fluctuating. The manifestation of widespread ecosystem collapse is a stark warning of the necessity to take action. We present a three‐step assessment and management framework (3As Pathway Awareness , Anticipation and Action ) to aid strategic and effective mitigation to alleviate further degradation to help secure our future.
Assessing the Threat Status of Ecological Communities
Publisher: Wiley
Date: 16-03-2009
DOI: 10.1111/J.1523-1739.2008.01158.X
Abstract: Conservationists are increasingly interested in determining the threat status of ecological communities as a key part of their planning efforts. Such assessments are difficult because of conceptual challenges and a lack of generally accepted criteria. We reviewed 12 protocols for assessing the threat status of communities and identified conceptual and operational issues associated with developing a rigorous, transparent, and universal set of criteria for assessing communities, analogous to the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Red List standards for species. We examined how each protocol defines a community and its extinction and how each applies 3 overarching criteria: decline in geographic distribution, restricted geographic distribution, and changes to ecological function. The protocols vary widely in threshold values used to assess declines and distribution size and the time frames used to assess declines, leading to inconsistent assessments of threat status. Few of the protocols specify a scale for measuring distribution size, although assessment outcomes are highly sensitive to scale. Protocols that apply different thresholds for species versus communities tend to require greater declines and more restricted distributions for communities than species to be listed in equivalent threat categories. Eleven of the protocols include a reduction in ecological function as a criterion, but almost all assess it qualitatively rather than quantitatively. We argue that criteria should be explicit and repeatable in their concepts, parameters, and scale, applicable to a broad range of communities, and address synergies between types of threats. Such criteria should focus on distribution size, declines in distribution, and changes to key ecological functions, with the latter based on workable proxies for assessing the severity, scope, and immediacy of degradation. Threat categories should be delimited by thresholds that are assessed at standard scales and are logically consistent with the viability of component species and important ecological functions.
A common typology for ecosystem characteristics and ecosystem condition variables
Publisher: Pensoft Publishers
Date: 27-01-2021
Abstract: The UN System of Environmental-Economic Accounting Experimental Ecosystem Accounting (SEEA EEA) aims at regular and standardised stocktaking on the extent of ecosystems, their condition and the services they provide to society. Recording the condition of ecosystems is one of the most complex pieces in this exercise, needing to be supported by robust and consistent guidelines. SEEA EEA defines the condition of an ecosystem as its overall quality, measured in terms of quantitative metrics describing both abiotic and biotic characteristics. The main objective of this paper is to propose a simple universal classification (typology) for these ecosystem condition characteristics and metrics, based on long standing ecological concepts and traditions. The proposed SEEA EEA Ecosystem Condition Typology (SEEA ECT) is a hierarchical classification consisting of six classes grouped into three main groups (abiotic, biotic and landscape-level ecosystem characteristics). In order to facilitate practical applications, SEEA ECT is cross-linked to the most relevant existing typologies for ecosystem characteristics currently used for other purposes. To ensure clarity and practicality, we identified potential overlaps between classes and also identified the most important groups of ‘ancillary data’ that should not be considered as ecosystem condition characteristics. We consider that this new typology for ecosystem condition will create a meaningful reporting structure for ecosystem condition accounts, thus facilitating its standardisation and broad application.
Measuring impacts on species with models and metrics of varying ecological and computational complexity
Publisher: Wiley
Date: 03-07-2020
DOI: 10.1111/COBI.13524
Optimal planning to mitigate the impacts of roads on multiple species
Publisher: Wiley
Date: 26-09-2019
Priority research areas for ecosystem services in a changing world
Publisher: Wiley
Date: 26-11-2009
DOI: 10.1111/J.1365-2664.2009.01716.X
Abstract: 1. Ecosystem services are the benefits humans obtain from ecosystems. The importance of research into ecosystem services has been widely recognized, and rapid progress is being made. However, the prevailing approach to quantifying ecosystem services is still based on static analyses and single services, ignoring system dynamics, uncertainty and feedbacks. This is not only partly due to a lack of mechanistic understanding of processes and a dearth of empirical data, but also due to a failure to engage fully with the interdisciplinarity of the problem. 2. We argue that there is a tendency to ignore the feedbacks between and within both social and ecological systems, and a lack of explicit consideration of uncertainty. Metrics need to be developed that can predict thresholds, which requires strong linkages to underlying processes, while the development of policy for management of ecosystem services needs to be based on a broader understanding of value and drivers of human well‐being. 3. We highlight the complexities, gaps in current knowledge and research, and the potentially promising avenues for future investigation in four priority research areas: agendas, processes, metrics and uncertainty. 4. Synthesis and applications . The research interest in the field of ecosystem services is rapidly expanding, and can contribute significantly to the sustainable management of natural resources. However, a narrow disciplinary approach, or an approach which does not consider feedbacks within and between ecological and social systems, has the potential to produce dangerously misleading policy recommendations. In contrast, if we explicitly acknowledge and address uncertainties and complexities in the provision of ecosystem services, progress may appear slower but our models will be substantially more robust and informative about the effects of environmental change.
Making Robust Policy Decisions Using Global Biodiversity Indicators
Publisher: Public Library of Science (PLoS)
Date: 18-07-2012
Drivers of the Distribution of Fisher Effort at Lake Alaotra, Madagascar
Publisher: Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Date: 02-2016
A new method for conservation planning for the persistence of multiple species
Publisher: Wiley
Date: 22-08-2006
DOI: 10.1111/J.1461-0248.2006.00956.X
Abstract: Although the aim of conservation planning is the persistence of bio ersity, current methods trade-off ecological realism at a species level in favour of including multiple species and landscape features. For conservation planning to be relevant, the impact of landscape configuration on population processes and the viability of species needs to be considered. We present a novel method for selecting reserve systems that maximize persistence across multiple species, subject to a conservation budget. We use a spatially explicit metapopulation model to estimate extinction risk, a function of the ecology of the species and the amount, quality and configuration of habitat. We compare our new method with more traditional, area-based reserve selection methods, using a ten-species case study, and find that the expected loss of species is reduced 20-fold. Unlike previous methods, we avoid designating arbitrary weightings between reserve size and configuration rather, our method is based on population processes and is grounded in ecological theory.
Towards consistency, rigour and compatibility of risk assessments for ecosystems and ecological communities
Publisher: Wiley
Date: 12-07-2014
DOI: 10.1111/AEC.12148
Satellite imagery as a single source of predictor variables for habitat suitability modelling: how Landsat can inform the conservation of a critically endangered lemur
Publisher: Wiley
Date: 16-08-2010
The Why, What, and How of Global Biodiversity Indicators Beyond the 2010 Target
Publisher: Wiley
Date: 17-11-2010
DOI: 10.1111/J.1523-1739.2010.01605.X
Abstract: The 2010 bio ersity target agreed by signatories to the Convention on Biological Diversity directed the attention of conservation professionals toward the development of indicators with which to measure changes in biological ersity at the global scale. We considered why global bio ersity indicators are needed, what characteristics successful global indicators have, and how existing indicators perform. Because monitoring could absorb a large proportion of funds available for conservation, we believe indicators should be linked explicitly to monitoring objectives and decisions about which monitoring schemes deserve funding should be informed by predictions of the value of such schemes to decision making. We suggest that raising awareness among the public and policy makers, auditing management actions, and informing policy choices are the most important global monitoring objectives. Using four well-developed indicators of biological ersity (extent of forests, coverage of protected areas, Living Planet Index, Red List Index) as ex les, we analyzed the characteristics needed for indicators to meet these objectives. We recommend that conservation professionals improve on existing indicators by eliminating spatial biases in data availability, fill gaps in information about ecosystems other than forests, and improve understanding of the way indicators respond to policy changes. Monitoring is not an end in itself, and we believe it is vital that the ultimate objectives of global monitoring of biological ersity inform development of new indicators.
Principles of Landscape Design that Emerge from a Formal Problem-Solving Approach
Publisher: Wiley
Date: 15-10-2007
The role of satellite remote sensing in structured ecosystem risk assessments
Publisher: Elsevier BV
Date: 04-2018
DOI: 10.1016/J.SCITOTENV.2017.11.034
Abstract: The current set of global conservation targets requires methods for monitoring the changing status of ecosystems. Protocols for ecosystem risk assessment are uniquely suited to this task, providing objective syntheses of a wide range of data to estimate the likelihood of ecosystem collapse. Satellite remote sensing can deliver ecologically relevant, long-term datasets suitable for analysing changes in ecosystem area, structure and function at temporal and spatial scales relevant to risk assessment protocols. However, there is considerable uncertainty about how to select and effectively utilise remotely sensed variables for risk assessment. Here, we review the use of satellite remote sensing for assessing spatial and functional changes of ecosystems, with the aim of providing guidance on the use of these data in ecosystem risk assessment. We suggest that decisions on the use of satellite remote sensing should be made a priori and deductively with the assistance of conceptual ecosystem models that identify the primary indicators representing the dynamics of a focal ecosystem.
Related Organisations
Related Funding Activities
Planning For Sustainable Development And Biodiversity On Indigenous Lands
Start Date: 2018
End Date: 2020
Funder: Australian Research Council
View Funded ActivityEcosystem Risk Assessment
Start Date: 2018
End Date: 2020
Funder: Australian Research Council
View Funded ActivityOptimal Management Of Coastal Ecosystems For Blue Carbon Sequestration
Start Date: 2016
End Date: 2018
Funder: Australian Research Council
View Funded ActivityLinkage Projects - Grant ID: LP170100305
Start Date: 2019
End Date: 12-2024
Amount: $490,233.00
Funder: Australian Research Council
View Funded ActivityDiscovery Projects - Grant ID: DP170100609
Start Date: 06-2017
End Date: 12-2021
Amount: $390,500.00
Funder: Australian Research Council
View Funded ActivityLinkage Projects - Grant ID: LP130100435
Start Date: 04-2014
End Date: 12-2017
Amount: $389,065.00
Funder: Australian Research Council
View Funded ActivityARC Future Fellowships - Grant ID: FT190100234
Start Date: 05-2020
End Date: 07-2024
Amount: $931,148.00
Funder: Australian Research Council
View Funded ActivityLinkage Projects - Grant ID: LP160100242
Start Date: 12-2016
End Date: 12-2020
Amount: $326,000.00
Funder: Australian Research Council
View Funded ActivityLinkage Projects - Grant ID: LP170101143
Start Date: 02-2019
End Date: 02-2024
Amount: $416,000.00
Funder: Australian Research Council
View Funded Activity