Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Representativeness Assessments

  • Chapter
A Guidebook for Integrated Ecological Assessments

Abstract

Conservation scientists, planners, and managers generally agree that the ultimate goal of conservation planning is the comprehensive protection of all aspects of biodiversity (Noss and Cooperrider, 1994); consequently maintaining all ecosystem components over time and over large areas is a primary objective (Noss, 1983). To achieve its goal, conservation planning requires knowledge of the linkages among the various components of ecosystems (e.g., species, biogeochemical processes), including human factors (see Chapters 27 and 29), across gradients of spatial and temporal variability (see Chapters 2, 3, and 26), and integrated within the socioeconomic context (see Chapter 9). Therefore, basic characterization of ecological patterns and processes of interest at all scales relevant to ecosystems (see Chapters 2, 3, 22, and 23) is needed. This knowledge should be used to formulate realistic conservation goals and strategies and to place networks of conservation areas into the proper ecological and socioeconomic context for implementation at relevant ecological, social, and economic scales (see Chapter 35).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Alverson, W.S.; Kuhlmann, W.; Waller, D.A. 1994. Wild forests: Conservation Biology and Public Policy. Washington, DC: Island Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Austin, M.P.; Margules, CR. 1986. Assessing representativeness. In: Usher, M.B., ed. Wildlife conservation evaluation.London: Chapman and Hall: 45–67.

    Google Scholar 

  • Austin, M.P.; Nicholls, A.O.; Margules, C.R. 1990. Measurement of the realized qualitative niche: environmental niches of five eucalyptus species. Ecol. Monogr.60:161–177.

    Google Scholar 

  • Austin, M.P.; Pausas, J.G.; Nicholls, A.O. 1996. Patterns of tree species richness in relation to environment in southeastern New South Wales, Australia. Australian J. Ecol.21:154–164.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bailey, R.G. 1995. Description of the ecoregions of the United States.Washington, DC: U.S. Dept. Agric., For. Serv. Misc. Publ. 1391.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bailey, R.G.; Jensen, M.E.; Cleland, D.T.; Bourgeron, P.S. 1994. Design and use of ecological mapping units. In: Jensen, M.E.; Bourgeron, P.S., eds. Volume II: Ecosystem management: principles and applications. PNW-GTR-318. Portland, OR: U.S. Dept. Agric., For. Serv., Pacific Northw. Res. Sta.: 95–106.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bedward, M.; Pressey, R.L.; Keith, D.A. 1992. A new approach for selecting fully representative reserve networks: addressing efficiency, reserve design and land suitability with an iterative analysis. Biol. Conserv. 62:115–125.

    Google Scholar 

  • Belbin, L. 1993. Environmental representativeness: regional partitioning and reserve selection. Biol. Conserv. 66:223–230.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bourgeron, P. S.; Jensen, M. E. 1994. An overview of ecological principles for ecosystem management. In: Jensen, M. E.; Bourgeron, P. S., eds. Volume II: Ecosystem management: principles and applications. PNW-GTR-318. Portland, OR: U.S. Dept. Agric., For. Serv., Pacific Northw. Res. Sta.: 45–67.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bourgeron, P. S.; Humphries, H. C.; DeVelice, R. L.; Jensen, M. E. 1994. Ecological theory in relation to landscape and ecosystem characterization. In: Jensen, M. E.; Bourgeron, P. S., eds. Volume II: Ecosystem management: principles and applications.PNW-GTR-318. Portland, OR: U.S. Dept. Agric., For. Serv., Pacific Northw. Res. Sta.: 58–72.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bourgeron, P. S.; Engelking, L. D.; Humphries, H. C.; Muldavin, E.; Moir, W. H. 1995a. Assessing the conservation value of the Gray Ranch: Rarity, diversity and representativeness. Desert Plants11:1–68.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bourgeron, P. S.; Jensen, M. E.; Engelking, L. D.; Everett, R. L.; Humphries, H. C. 1995b. Landscape ecology, conservation biology and principles of ecosystem management. In: Everett, R. L.; Baumgartner, D. M., eds. Proceedings from the ecosystem management in Western Interior Forests: symposium proceedings; May 3-5, 1994. Pullman, WA: Dept. of Natural Resource Sciences, Washington State University: 41–47.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bourgeron, P. S.; Humphries, H. C.; Barber, J. A.; Turner, S. J.; Jensen, M. E.; Goodman, I. A. 1999a. Impact of broad-and fine-scale patterns on regional landscape characterization using AVHRR-derived land cover data. Ecosystem Health5:234–258.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bourgeron, P. S.; Humphries, H.C.; Reynolds, K. 1999b. Selecting a regional conservation network using fuzzy logic and optimization procedures. Amer. Assoc. Geogr. 95th Annual Meeting; March 23-27, 1999, Honolulu, HI.

    Google Scholar 

  • Christensen, N. L.; Bartuska, A. M.; Brown, J. H.; Carpenter, S.; D’Antonio, C.; Francis, R.; Franklin, J. F.; MacMahon, J. A.; Noss, R. F.; Parsons, D. J.; Peterson, C. H.; Turner, M. G.; Woodmansee, R. G. 1996. The report of the Ecological Society of America Committee on the scientific basis for ecosystem management. Ecol. Appl.6(3):665–691.

    Google Scholar 

  • Church, R. L.; Stoms, D. M.; Davis, F. W. 1996. Reserve selection as a maximal covering location problem. Biol. Conserv.76:105–112.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cissel, J. H.; Swanson, F. J.; Grant, G. E.; Olson, D. H.; Gregory, S. V.; Garman, S. L.; Ashkenas, L. R.; Hunter, M. G.; Kertis, J. A.; Mayo, J. H.; McSwain, M. D.; Swetland, S. G.; Swindle, K. A.; Wallin, D. O. 1998. A landscape plan based on historical fire regimes for a managed forest ecosystem: the Augusta Creek study.PNW-GTR-422. Portland, OR: U.S. Dept. of Agric., For. Serv., Pacific Northw. Res. Sta.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cox, J.; Kautz, R.; MacLaughlin, M.; Gilbert, T. 1994. Closing the gaps in Florida’s wildlife habitat conservation system.Tallahassee: Office of Environmental Services, Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission.

    Google Scholar 

  • Csuti, B.; Polansky, S.; Williams, P. H.; Pressey, R. L.; Camm, J. D.; Kershaw, M.; Kiester, A. R.; Downs, B.; Hamilton, R.; Huso, M.; Sahr, K. 1997. A comparison of reserve selection algorithms using data on terrestrial vertebrates in Oregon. Biol. Conserv.80:83–97.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davis, F. W.; Stoms, D. M.; Church, R. L.; Okin, W. J.; Johnson, K. N. 1996. Selecting biodiversity management areas. In: Sierra Nevada ecosystem project: final report to Congress, Volume II: Assessments and scientific basis for management options.Davis, CA: University of California, Centers for Water and Wildland Resources: 1503–1528.

    Google Scholar 

  • DellaSala, D. A.; Olson, D. M.; Crane, S. L. 1995. Ecosystem management and biodiversity conservation: applications to inland Pacific Northwest forests. In: Baumgartner, D. M.; Everett, R. L., eds. Proceedings of ecosystem management in Western Interior Forests.Pullman, WA: Washington State University: 139–160.

    Google Scholar 

  • DeVantier, L.M.; De’ath, G.; Done, T. J.; Turak, E. 1998. Ecological assessment of a complex natural system: A case study from the Great Barrier Reef. Ecol. Appl. 8:480–496.

    Google Scholar 

  • Engelking, L.D.; Humphries, H. C.; Reid, M. S.; DeVelice, R. L.; Muldavin, E. H.; Bourgeron, P. S. 1994. Regional conservation strategies: assessing the value of conservation areas at regional scales. In: Jensen, M. E.; Bourgeron, P. S., eds. Volume II: Ecosystem management: principles and applications.PNW-GTR-318. Portland, OR: U.S. Dept. Agric., For. Serv., Pacific Northw. Res. Sta.: 208–224.

    Google Scholar 

  • Everett, R. L.; Lehmkuhl, J. F. 1997. A forum for presenting alternative viewpoints on the role of reserves in conservation biology? A reply to Noss (1996). Wildlife Soc. Bull.97:575–577.

    Google Scholar 

  • Faith, D. P. 1992. Conservation evaluation and phylogenetic diversity. Biol. Conserv.61:1–10.

    Google Scholar 

  • Faith, D. P.; Walker, P. A. 1996. Environmental diversity: on the best-possible use of surrogate data for assessing the relative biodiversity of sets of areas. Biodiversity Conserv.5:399–415.

    Google Scholar 

  • Franklin, J. 1998. Predicting the distribution of shrub species in southern California from climate and terrain-derived variables. J. Veg. Sci.9:733–748.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freitag, S.; Nicholls, A. O.; van Jaarsveld, A. S. 1998. Dealing with established reserve networks and incomplete distribution data sets in conservation planning. South African J. Sci.94:79–86.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glenn, S. M.; Collins, S. L. 1994. Species richness and scale: the application of distribution and abundance models. In: Jensen, M. E.; Bourgeron, P. S., eds. Volume II: Ecosystem management: principles and applications. PNW-GTR-318. Portland, OR: U.S. Dept. Agric., For. Serv., Pacific Northw. Res. Sta.: 135–142.

    Google Scholar 

  • Groom, M.; Jensen, D. B.; Knight, R. L.; Gatewood, L. M.; Boyd-Heger, D.; Mills, L. S.; Soulé. 1999. Buffer zones: benefits and dangers of compatible stewardship. In: Soulé, M. E.; Terborgh, J., eds. Continental conservation: scientific foundations of regional reserve networks. Washington, DC: Island Press: 171–197.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grossman, D. H.; Bourgeron, P. S.; Busch, W.-D. N.; Cleland, D.; Platts, W.; Ray, G. C.; Robins, C. R.; Roloff, G. 1999. Principles of ecological classification. In: Johnson, N. C.; Malk, A. J.; Sexton, W. T.; Szaro, R. C. Ecological stewardship: a common reference for ecosystem management.Amsterdam: Elsevier Science: 353–393.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haila, Y.; Margules, C. R. 1996. Survey research in conservation biology. Ecography19:323–331.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hann, W. J.; Jones, J. L.; Karl, M. G.; Hessburg, P. F.; Keane, R. E.; Long, D. G.; Menakis, J. P.; McNicol, C. H.; Leonard, S. G.; Gravenmier, R. A.; Smith, B. G. 1997. Landscape dynamics of the basin. In: Quigley, T. M.; Arbelbide, S. J., eds. An assessment of ecosystem components in the Interior Columbia Basin and portions of the Klamath and Great Basins: Volume II.PNW-GTR-405. Portland, OR: U.S. Dept. Agric., For. Serv., Pacific Northw. Res. Sta.: 337–1055.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harrison, S.; Quinn, J. F. 1989. Correlated environments and the persistence of metapopulations. Oikos 56:293–98.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hockings, M. 1998. Evaluating management of protected areas: integrating planning and evaluation. Environ. Manage.22:337–345.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Host, G. E.; Polzer, P. L.; Mladenoff, M. A.; White, M. A.; Crow, S. J. 1996. A quantitative approach to developing regional ecosystem classifications. Ecol. Appl.6:608–618.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jensen, M. E.; Bourgeron, P. S.; Everett, R.; Goodman, I. 1996. Ecosystem management: A landscape ecology perspective. J. Amer. Water Resour. Assoc.32: 208–216.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jensen, M.; Goodman, I.; Brewer, K.; Frost, T.; Ford, G.; Nesser, J. 1997. Biophysical, environments of the basin. In: Quigley, T. M.; Arbelbide, S. J., eds. An assessment of ecosystem components in the Interior Columbia Basin and portions of the Klamath and Great Basins: Volume II.PNW-GTR-405. Portland, OR: U.S. Dept. Agric., For. Serv., Pacific Northw. Res. Sta.: 99–314.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaufmann, M. R.; Huckaby, L. S.; Regan, C. S.; Popp, J. 1998. Forest reference conditions for ecosystem management in the Sacramento Mountains, New Mexico. RMRS-GTR-19. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Dept. Agric., For. Serv., Rocky Mountain Res. Sta.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kiester, A. R.; Scott, J. M.; Csuti, B.; Noss, R.; Butterfield, B.; Sahr, K.; White, D. 1996. Conservation prioritization using GAP data. Conserv. Biol.10:1332–1342.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kim, K. C.; Weaver, R. D., editors. 1994. Biodiversity and landscapes.Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kirkpatrick, J. B.; Brown, M. J. 1994. A comparison of direct and environmental domain approaches to planning reservation of forest higher plant communities and species in Tasmania. Conserv. Biol.8:217–224.

    Google Scholar 

  • Knight, R. L.; Clark, T. W. 1998. Boundaries between public and private lands: defining obstacles, finding solutions. In: Knight, R. L.; Landres, P. B., eds. Stewardship across boundaries.Washington, DC: Island Press: 175–191.

    Google Scholar 

  • Knight, R. L.; Landres, P. B., editors. 1998. Stewardship across boundaries. Washington, DC: Island Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lambeck, R. J. 1997. Focal species: a multi-species umbrella for nature conservation. Conserv. Biol.11:849–856.

    Google Scholar 

  • Landres, P. B. 1998. Integration: A beginning for landscape-scale stewardship. In: Knight, R. L.; Landres, P. B., eds. Stewardship across boundaries.Washington, DC: Island Press: 337–345.

    Google Scholar 

  • Landres, P. B.; Knight, R. L.; Pickett, S. T. A.; Cadenasso, M. L. 1998. Ecological effects of administrative boundaries. In: Knight, R. L.; Landres, P. B., eds. Stewardship across boundaries.Washington, DC: Island Press: 39–64.

    Google Scholar 

  • Landres, P. B.; Morgan, P.; Swanson, F. J. 1999. Evaluating the utility of natural variability concepts in managing ecological systems. Ecol. Appl.9:1179–1188.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leathwick, J. R. 1998. Are New Zealand’s Nothofagus species in equilibrium with their environment? J. Veg. Sci.9:719–732.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leser, H.; Nagel, P. 1998. Landscape diversity—a holistic approach. In: Barthlott, W.; Winiger, M., eds. Biodiversity: a challenge for development research and policy.New York: Springer-Verlag: 129–143.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levin, S. A. 1992. The problem of pattern and scale in ecology. Ecology73:1942–1968.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lombard, A. T.; Nicholls, A. O.; August, P. V. 1995. Where should nature reserves be located in South Africa? a snake’s perspective. Conserv. Biol.9:363–372.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mackey, B. G.; Nix, H. A.; Hutchinson, M. F.; MacMahon, J. P.; Fleming, P. M. 1988. Assessing representativeness of places for conservation reservation and heritage listing. Environ. Manage.12(4):501–514.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mackey, B. G.; Nix, H. A.; Stein, J. A.; Cork, S. E.; Bullen, F. T. 1989. Assessing the representativeness of the wet tropics of Queensland World Heritage Property. Biol. Conserv.50:279–303.

    Google Scholar 

  • Margules, C. R. 1989. Introduction to some Australian developments in conservation evaluation. Biol. Conserv. 50:1–11.

    Google Scholar 

  • Margules, C. R.; Stein, J. L. 1989. Patterns in the distributions of species and the selection of nature reserves: an example from Eucalyptus forests in south-eastern New South Wales. Biol. Conserv.50:219–238.

    Google Scholar 

  • Margules, C. R.; Nicholls, A. O.; Austin, M. P. 1987. Diversity of Eucalyptus species predicted by a multivariable environmental gradient. Oecologia (Berl.) 71:229–232.

    Google Scholar 

  • Margules, C. R.; Creswell, I. D.; Nicholls, A. O. 1994. A scientific basis for establishing networks of protected areas. In: Forey, P. L.; Humphries, C. J.; VaneWright, R. I., eds. Systematics and conservation evaluation. Oxford, UK: Clarendon Press: 327–350.

    Google Scholar 

  • Master, L. L. 1991. Assessing threats and setting priorities for conservation. Conserv. Biol.5:559–563.

    Google Scholar 

  • McHarg, I. L. 1969. Design with nature.Garden City, NY: Natural History Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • McKendry, J. E.; Machlis, G. E. 1993. The role of geography in extending biodiversity gap analysis. Appl. Geog.13:135–152.

    Google Scholar 

  • McKenzie, N. L.; Beibin, L.; Margules, C. R.; Keighery, G. J. 1989. Selecting representative reserve systems in remote areas: a case study in the Nullarbor Region, Australia. Biol. Conserv.50:239–261.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moore, S. A.; Lee, R. G. 1999. Understanding dispute resolution processes for American and Australian public wildlands: towards a conceptual framework for managers. Environ. Manage.23:453–465.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Morgan, P.; Aplet, G. H.; Haufler, J. B.; Humphries, H. C.; Moore, M. M.; Wilson, W. D. 1994. Historical range of variability: a useful tool for evaluating ecosystem change. J. Sustain. For.2:87–111.

    Google Scholar 

  • Naveh, Z. 1994. Biodiversity and landscape management. In: Kim, K. C.; Weaver, R. D., eds. Biodiversity and landscapes.Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press: 187–207.

    Google Scholar 

  • Noss, R. F. 1983. A regional landscape approach to maintain biodiversity. BioScience33:700–706.

    Google Scholar 

  • Noss, R. F. 1992. The wildlands project: land conservation strategy. Wild earth(Special Issue: The Wildlands Project): 10–25.

    Google Scholar 

  • Noss, R. F. 1993. Wildlife corridors. In: Smith, D. S.; Hellmund, P. C, eds. Ecology of greenways.Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press: 43–68.

    Google Scholar 

  • Noss, R. F. 1996. How much is enough? In Wright, R. G., ed. National Parks and protected areas.Oxford, UK: Blackwell Science.

    Google Scholar 

  • Noss, R. F.; Cooperrider, A. 1994. Saving nature’s legacy: protecting and restoring biodiversity.Washington, DC: Defenders of Wildlife and Island Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Noss, R. F.; O’Connell, M. A.; Murphy, D. D. 1997. The science of conservation planning: habitat conservation under the Endangered Species Act.Washington, DC: Island Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Noss, R. F.; Dinerstein, E., Gilbert, B.; Gilpin, M.; Miller, B. J.; Terborgh, J.; Trombulak, S. 1999. Core areas: where nature reigns. In: Soulé, M. E.; Terborgh, J., eds. Continental conservation: scientific foundations of regional reserve networks.Washington, DC: Island Press: 99–128.

    Google Scholar 

  • Olson, D. M.; Dinerstein, E. 1998. The global 200: a representation approach to conserving the earth’s most biologically valuable ecoregions. Conserv. Biol.3:502–515.

    Google Scholar 

  • Poiani, K. A.; Baumgartner, J. V.; Buttrick, S. C.; Green, S. L.; Hopkins, E.; Ivey, G. D.; Seaton, K. P.; Sutter, R. D. 1998. A scale-independent, site conservation planning framework in The Nature Conservancy. Landscape Urban Planning43:143–156.

    Google Scholar 

  • Preen, A. 1998. Marine protected areas and dugong conservation along Australia’s Indian Ocean coast. Environ. Manage.22:173–181.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Pressey, R. L. 1990. Preserve selection in New South Wales: where to from here? Austral. Zoologist26: 70–75.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pressey, R. L. 1994. Ad hoc reservations: forward or backward steps in developing representative reserve systems? Conserv. Biol.8:662–668.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pressey, R. L.; Nicholls, A. O. 1989a. Efficiency in conservation evaluation: scoring vs. iterative approaches. Biol. Conserv.50:199–218.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pressey, R. L.; Nicholls, A. O. 1989b. Application of a numerical algorithm to the selection of reserves in semiarid New South Wales. Biol. Conserv.50:263–278.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pressey, R. L.; Bedward, M.; Nicholls, A. O. 1990. Reserve selection in mallee lands. In: Noble, J. C.; Joss, P. J.; Jones, G. K., eds. The Mallee lands: a conservation perspective.Melbourne: Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization (CSIRO): 167–178.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pressey, R. L.; Humphries, C. J.; Margules, C. R.; VaneWright, R. I.; Williams, P. H. 1993. Beyond opportunism: key principles for systematic reserve selection. Trends Ecol. Evol.8:124–128.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Pressey, R. L.; Johnson, I. R.; Wilson, P. D. 1994. Shades of irreplaceability: towards a measure of the contribution of sites to a reservation goal. Biodiversity Conserv. 3:242–262.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pressey, R. L.; Possingham, H. P.; Day, J. R. 1997. Effectiveness of alternative heuristic algorithms for identifying indicative minimum requirements for conservation reserves. Biol. Conserv.80:207–219.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pulliam, H. R. 1988. Sources, sinks, and population regulation. Amer. Naturalist132:652–661.

    Google Scholar 

  • Quigley, T. M.; Arbelbide, S. J., editors. 1997. An assessment of ecosystem components in the interior Columbia Basin and portions of the Klamath and Great Basins: Volume I.PNW-GTR-405. Portland, OR: U.S. Dept. Agric., For. Serv., Pacific Northw. Res. Sta.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rebelo, A. G.; Siegfried, W. R. 1992. Where should nature reserves be located in the Cape Floristic Region, South Africa? Models for the spatial configuration of a reserve network aimed at the protection of floral diversity. Conserv. Biol.6:243–252.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reid, W. V. 1998. Biodiversity hotspots. Trends Ecol. Evol.13:275–280.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Ricketts, T. H.; Dinerstein, E.; Olson, D. M.; Loucks, C. J.; Eichbaum, W.; DellaSala, D.; Kavanagh, K.; Hedao, P.; Hurley, P. T.; Carney, K. M.; Abell, R.; Walters, S. 1999a. Terrestrial ecoregions of North America: a conservation assessment.Washington, DC: Island Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ricketts, T. H.; Dinerstein, E.; Olson, D. M.; Loucks, C. J. 1999b. Who’s where in North America: patterns of species richness and the utility of indicator taxa for conservation. BioScience49:381–396.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ritchie, M. E. 1997. Population in a landscape context: Sources, sinks, and metapopulations. In: Bissonette, J. A., ed. Wildlife and landscape ecology.New York: Springer-Verlag: 160–184.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scott, J. M.; Jennings, M. D. 1998. Large-area mapping of biodiversity. Annals Missouri Botanical Garden 85:34–47.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shelford, V. E. 1926. Naturalist’s guide to the Americas. Baltimore, MD: Williams and Wilkins.

    Google Scholar 

  • Slocombe, D. S. 1993a. Implementing ecosystem-based management. BioScience43(9):612–622.

    Google Scholar 

  • Slocombe, D. S. 1993b. Environmental planning, ecosystem science, and ecosystem approaches for integrating environment and development. Environ. Manage. 17:289–303.

    Google Scholar 

  • Slocombe, D. S. 1998. Defining goals and criteria for ecosystem-based management. Environ. Manage.22: 483–493.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • SNEP. 1996. Sierra Nevada ecosystem project: final report to Congress, assessments and scientific basis for management options.Davis, CA: Center for Water and Wildlands Resources, University of California.

    Google Scholar 

  • Soulé, M. E.; Terborgh, J., editors. 1999a. Continental conservation: scientific foundations of regional reserve networks.Washington, DC: Island Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Soulé, M. E.; Terborgh, J. 1999b. Conserving nature at regional and continental scales—a scientific program for North America. BioScience49:809–817.

    Google Scholar 

  • Steinitz, C.; Binford, M.; Cote, P.; Edwards, Jr., T.; Ervin, S.; Forman, R. T. T.; Johnson, C.; Kiester, R.; Mouat, D.; Olson, D.; Shearer, A.; Toth, R.: Wills, R. 1996. Biodiversity and landscape planning: alternative futures for the region of Camp Pendleton, California. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University School of Design.

    Google Scholar 

  • Swanson, F. J.; Jones, J. A.; Wallin, D. O.; Cissel, J. H. 1994. Natural variability—implications for ecosystem management. In: Jensen, M. E.; Bourgeron, P. S., tech. eds. Volume II: ecosystem management: principles and applications.PNW-GTR-318. Portland, OR: U.S. Dept. Agric., For. Serv., Pacific Northw. Res. Sta.: 80–94.

    Google Scholar 

  • Swetnam, T. W.; Allen, C. D.; Betancourt, J. L. 1999. Applied historical ecology: using the past to manage the future. Ecol. Appl.9:1189–1206.

    Google Scholar 

  • The Nature Conservancy. 1996. Conservation by design: a framework for mission success. Arlington, VA: The Nature Conservancy.

    Google Scholar 

  • Underwood, A. J. 1995. Ecological research and (and research into) environmental management. Ecol. Appl. 5:232–247.

    Google Scholar 

  • Urban, D. L.; O’Neill, R. V.; Shugart, H. H., Jr. 1987. Landscape ecology: a hierarchical perspective can help scientists understand spatial patterns. BioScience 37:119–127.

    Google Scholar 

  • Usher, M. B. 1986. Wildlife conservation evaluation: Attributes, criteria and values. In Usher, M. B., ed. Wildlife conservation evaluation.London: Chapman & Hall: 3–44.

    Google Scholar 

  • White, D.; Preston, E. M.; Freemark, K. E.; Kiester, R. A. 1999. A hierarchical framework for conserving biodiversity. In: Klopatek, J. M.; Gardner, R. H., eds. Landscape ecological analysis.New York: Springer-Verlag: 127–153.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wright, R. G.; Murray, M. P.; Merrill, T. 1998. Ecoregions as a level of ecological analysis. Biol. Conserv. 86:207–213.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yaffee, S. L. 1998. Cooperation: A strategy for achieving. In: Knight, R. L.; Landres, P. B., eds. Stewardship across boundaries.Washington, DC: Island Press: 299–324.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yee, T. W.; Mitchell, N. D. 1991. Generalised additive models in plant ecology. J. Veg. Sci.2:587–602.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zonneveld, I. S. 1989. The land unit—a fundamental concept in landscape ecology, and its applications. Landscape Ecol.3(2):67–89.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors
  1. Patrick S. Bourgeron
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Hope C. Humphries
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Mark E. Jensen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. USDA Forest Service, Northern Region, 200 East Broadway, Missoula, MT, 59807, USA

    Mark E. Jensen

  2. Institute of Alpine and Arctic Research, University of Colorado, 1560 30th Street, Boulder, CO, 80309-0450, USA

    Patrick S. Bourgeron

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2001 Springer Science+Business Media New York

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Bourgeron, P.S., Humphries, H.C., Jensen, M.E. (2001). Representativeness Assessments. In: Jensen, M.E., Bourgeron, P.S. (eds) A Guidebook for Integrated Ecological Assessments. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-8620-7_21

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-8620-7_21

  • Publisher Name: Springer, New York, NY

  • Print ISBN: 978-0-387-98583-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-4419-8620-7

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation