Planning and Implementing Biodiversity Conservation Corridors1
Grace Wong*, Charlotte Boyd**
* Advisor, Corridor Economics and Strategies, People, Protected Areas and Conservation Corridors, RPD
** Senior Advisor, Biodiversity Conservation Corridors, Conservation Synthesis, CABS
Recognizing that biodiversity occurs across multiple scales of ecological organization – from the
genetic level to the scale of the biosphere – Conservation International (CI) defines
conservation targets at the three levels at which they can be consistently and comprehensively
identified: species, sites, and sea- and landscapes (CI 2004). At the species level, CI focuses
on species with a high probability of extinction in the short- to medium-term future, i.e. those
identified as globally threatened – Vulnerable (VU), Endangered (EN), or Critically Endangered
(CR) – in the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. At the site level, CI focuses on Key
Biodiversity Areas (KBAs) – these are sites of global conservation significance, based on the
regular occurrence of globally threatened or geographically concentrated species (Eken et al.
2004). At the sea/ landscape scale, biodiversity conservation corridors are designed to allow the
persistence of globally threatened species and KBAs (CI 2004, 2005). Tactically, conservation
actions at all three levels are designed to advance human well-being through their
implementation.
Biodiversity conservation corridors are defined as “biologically and strategically defined subregional spaces, selected as units for large-scale conservation planning and implementation
purposes, and comprised of integrated systems of protected areas, connecting linkages, and
biodiversity-compatible land and resource uses” (Sanderson et al. 2003). While many authors
use the term “corridor” to refer to a narrow strip of vegetation linking larger blocks of native
habitat (Levin 2000), we employ this term to refer to a broader landscape comprising a mosaic
of land uses.
CI and partners have recently completed an assessment of all globally threatened mammals,
birds, tortoises and turtles, and amphibians to identify those that require conservation action at a
sea or landscape scale within the short- to medium-term. Many such species are “areademanding”, in that they either regularly move between sites or naturally occur at such low
densities during part or all of their life-cycles such that it is not feasible to safeguard sites of
adequate size. Species that occur at low densities and/ or have sizeable home ranges are more
likely to become locally extinct in small habitat fragments. Mammals, birds and turtles exhibit a
range of seasonal movement patterns, such as nomadism (e.g. the Golden-plumed Parakeet
Leptosittaca branickii (VU)), altitudinal migration (e.g. the Three-wattled Bellbird Procnias
tricarunculatus (VU)), long-distance migration (e.g Southern Long-nosed Bat Leptonycteris
curasoae (VU)), and seasonal dispersal (e.g. the Leatherback Turtle Dermochelys coriacea
(CR)). For each of these species, we need to define area and connectivity requirements beyond
KBAs. As CI’s goal is to reduce the risk of global extinction, we develop population or area
targets based on the IUCN Red List criteria for each species and map the spatial requirements
to meet these targets.
Many globally threatened species and KBAs are also threatened by changes in broad-scale
ecological processes, such as freshwater flow regimes and water quality (e.g. the frog
Telmatobius atacamensis (CR) and many wetland KBAs), fire and other disturbance regimes
1
Manuscript prepared for the IUCN Mountain Connectivity Corridors book, expected date of publication in
late 2008
1
(e.g. Gouldian Finch Erythrura gouldiae (EN) and many KBAs in fire-maintained ecosystems),
and trophic interactions involving area-demanding species (e.g., reduced populations of the
ungulate prey base for large carnivores such as the Asiatic Wild Dog Cuon alpinus (EN)).
Setting targets for broad-scale ecological processes is more complex. In the case of speciesdriven processes, such as trophic interactions, we need to develop an understanding of
ecologically functional densities of relevant species. For non-species-driven processes, such as
fire regimes and hydrological processes, we need to define and understand process-specific
parameters (see below for discussion of the work with hydrological processes in the Brazilian
Pantanal). As with the area-demanding species, once these targets have been defined and their
spatial requirements mapped, the types of compatible land use and management requirements
are designed within the local socio-economic context and constraints.
A clear advantage of working at the scale of biodiversity conservation corridors is the
opportunity to proactively address biodiversity loss. The design and management of compatible
land and resource use in the corridor mosaic can provide a forward defense against the
incursion of dynamic threats such as human migration and colonization, and emerging
development scenarios such as the expansion of agricultural plantations or infrastructure
development. Biodiversity conservation corridors also provide a tactic for addressing human
needs and wellbeing.
Achieving biodiversity conservation goals in a large mosaic of land uses will thus require: 1)
understanding the area and connectivity needs of globally threatened species beyond KBAs,
and the creation or management of compatible land use systems to support these species; 2)
understanding the relationship between biodiversity, ecological processes and land use/cover
patterns at the landscape scale; 3) methodologies to fit or integrate biodiversity goals into the
socio-economic and decision-making landscapes of the corridor. This brief paper discusses CI’s
experiences in addressing these three key issues2.
Given that conservation must compete with the myriad of potential land uses within the mosaic,
such as recreation, human settlement, agricultural development and industrial resource
extraction, corridor design and planning must be interdisciplinary to be effective. And for a
conservation plan to be credible, it must adequately address local socio-economic needs to be
politically acceptable and practical. Much of the pioneering work in the early CI corridors has
been focused on negotiating the socio-political terrain of these large landscapes, and on framing
and integrating conservation objectives within the context of local socio-political and
development priorities. Regional socio-politics have both influenced the delineation of corridors
as well as the approaches to planning and implementing conservation actions with stakeholder
groups at various scales. Several examples of this early work are briefly illustrated below:
-
The Vilcabamba-Amboro Conservation Corridor (VACC) in Peru and Bolivia had its
roots in the Cooperation Agreement signed in the early 1990s by the two
governments within the framework of the Amazon Cooperation Treaty. This
agreement provided the opportunity for conservation of the Tambopata-Madidi
transborder complex, an area that has been actively advocated for conservation by
various groups throughout the next decade, and which now anchors the 30 million
hectare VACC landscape. The original corridor design process for the VACC was
driven largely by the interests and priorities of institutions in the two countries (see
the chapter by Surkin et al. in this book).
2
See CI (2005) for further discussion of these issues and additional corridor case studies of from
Madagascar, Brazil, Papua New Guinea and Venezuela/Colombia.
2
-
A key element of the conservation planning strategy in the Discovery Corridor of the
Brazilian Atlantic Forest was to use economic and spatial planning tools to identify
which areas within this landscape provide the greatest environmental services to
society, and where alternative economic uses are the lowest (CI 2000). Based on the
rational that not all land has the same income-producing potential, nor the same
potential to provide environmental services, compensating landowners for
conservation can cost less than uniformly applied restrictions on land use. Having
such flexible land use policies can be very politically attractive if it can be
demonstrated that conservation policies can cost society less and achieve more real
conservation, and that it is more efficient to allow landowners to choose whether to
be compensated for the conservation they provide, rather than obligating all to
observe the same standard.
-
In the province of Papua, East Indonesia where CI is engaged in two large
wilderness corridors – the Bird’s Head Seascape and the Mamberamo Biodiversity
Corridor – conservation planning and engagement were conducted at the broad
provincial level where development planning decisions are made (CI 2006). The
urgency of threat to biodiversity from large-scale forest conversion for palm oil
plantations, timber extraction and major infrastructure development provided the
catalyst for a conservation planning approach that focused on the macroeconomics
of development. A macroeconomic modeling tool was applied to various scenarios of
development growth paths to assess their potential economic and environmental
impacts, and used to convince the provincial government that achieving poverty
reduction and economic growth does not necessarily have to come at the expense of
Papua’s pristine environment and rich biodiversity.
With this wealth of experience in the socio-political realm, recent focus in biodiversity
conservation corridors is on testing approaches to map the area and connectivity requirements
of area-demanding species and broad-scale ecological processes, and then integrating these
targets (together with KBAs) with socio-economic data for the development of conservation
strategies and actions. The results of this work will lead to the continual adaptation and
refinement of corridor strategies to better address the conservation and development priorities
at various scales. The following two examples highlight ongoing analyses to map the linkages
between species and the hydrological regime in the Brazilian Pantanal, and the integration of
biodiversity priorities into land use planning processes in North Sumatra, Indonesia:
-
CI is currently working in several regions around the world to test approaches for
defining targets for hydrological processes. As a starting-point, we identify the
hydrological attributes critical for the persistence of globally threatened species and/
or KBAs. These may include various aspects of the flow regime (e.g. quantity and
timing) and/ or water quality (e.g. temperature, chemistry and sediment loads). As an
example, the Giant River Otter (Pteronura brasiliensis, EN) is an aquatic mammal
found in freshwater systems, whose presence is associated with the flooding regime,
physical integrity of river margins, freshwater quality and substantial stocks of fish as
a food source. Ongoing analysis in the Serra de Maracajú–Negro Corridor of the
Brazilian Pantanal is examining how hydrological processes such as seasonal
flooding pulses can drive behavior in terms of frequency of occurrence, group size
and age classes. Conservation planning for the Giant River Otter has focused on
mapping and classifying riparian forest along its records of occurrence, and mapping
changes in the extent of its habitat due to the flooding regime. These environmental
3
data will then be overlaid with behavioral monitoring data to assess the persistence
of the Giant River Otter and identify priority areas for its conservation.
-
An approach to designing compatible land and resource uses in the landscape
mosaic is the testing of spatial multi-criteria analyses to integrate biodiversity and
ecological targets into the regional development planning processes. In the Northern
Sumatra Biodiversity Corridor, Indonesia, CI is leading a process of collaborative
analyses with various land and resource management agencies to identify
compatible land uses that meet biodiversity and socio-economic objectives. This
approach uses spatial analyses to integrate the biodiversity targets at various scales
(KBAs and connectivity targets for species such as the Sumatran Serow (Capricornis
sumatraensis, VU) and Asian Elephant (Elephas maximus, EN)) alongside critical
production factors in land and resource use planning (such as soil suitability,
geophysical features, climate variability, economic costs) to identify the location of
compatible land uses for species in the landscape and their management
requirements, as well as potential areas designated to meet production demands.
References:
Conservation International
2006. Context Assessments for Designing Biodiversity Conservation Strategies at the
Corridor Scale: Papua Province, Indonesia. RPD Conservation Learning and Practice.
Conservation International, Washington, DC.
2005. Refining Biodiversity Conservation Corridors: Executive Summary of Workshop
proceedings, Alter Do Chao, Brazil, December 6-10, 2004. Conservation International,
Washington, DC.
2004. Conserving Earth’s Living Heritage: A Proposed Framework for Designing
Biodiversity Conservation Strategies. Conservation International, Washington, DC.
2000. Designing Sustainable Landscapes: The Brazilian Atlantic Forest. Center for
Applied Biodiversity Science, Conservation International, Washington, DC.
Eken, G., L. Bennun, T.M. Brooks, W. Darwall, L.D.C. Fishpool, M. Foster, D. Knox, P.
Langhammer, P. Matiku, E. Radford, P. Salaman, W. Sechrest, M.L. Smith, S. Spector,
and A. Tordoff. 2004. Key biodiversity areas as site conservation targets. BioScience 54:
1110–1118.
Levin, S.A. (ed.). 2000. Encyclopedia of Biodiversity. Academic Press, NY.
Sanderson, J., K. Alger, G.A.B. da Fonseca, C. Galindo-Leal, V.H. Inchausty, and K. Morrison.
2003. Biodiversity Conservation Corridors: Planning, Implementation, and Monitoring
Sustainable Landscapes. Conservation International, Washington. DC.
4