Designing Connected and Compact Nature Reserves
- 310 Downloads
It is generally accepted that for many species, the ability to get around a reserve promotes their long-term persistence. Here, we measure the ease with which species can move by two spatial criteria: (i) the connectivity of the reserve, that is to say, the possibility to go through the whole reserve without leaving it, and (ii) the compactness of the reserve, that is to say, the remoteness of the sites in relation to each other, the distance between two sites being measured by the shortest distance to travel to get from one site to another without leaving the reserve. To protect the reserve of external disturbances, we also impose a connectivity constraint for the area outside the reserve. This article presents a method based on integer linear programming to define connected and compact reserves. Computational experiments carried out on artificial instances with 400 sites and 100 species are presented to illustrate the effectiveness of the approach.
KeywordsDesign of nature reserves Spatial criteria Connectivity Compactness Integer linear programming Experiments
The author would like to thank the anonymous reviewers for their helpful and constructive comments.
This work was supported by the Laboratory CEDRIC at the École Nationale Supérieure d’Informatique pour l’Industrie et l’Entreprise.
- 1.Alagador, D. (2011). Quantitative methods in spatial conservation planning. Thesis, Instituto Superior de Agronomia, Universidade Técnica de Lisboa.Google Scholar
- 12.CPLEX. (2013). IBM ILOG CPLEX version 12.6.Google Scholar
- 13.Fischer, D. T., & Church, R. L. (2003). Clustering and compactness in reserve site selection: an extension of the biodiversity management area selection model. Forest Science, 49, 555–565.Google Scholar
- 15.Fourer, R., Gay, D. M., & Kernighan, B. W. (1993). AMPL, a modeling language for mathematical programming. Danvers: Boyd & Fraser Publishing Company.Google Scholar
- 18.Lindenmayer, D., et al. (2008). A checklist for ecological management of landscapes for conservation. Ecology Letters, 11, 78–91.Google Scholar
- 22.Moilanen, A., Wilson, K.A., Possingham, H.P. (Eds.) (2009). Spatial conservation prioritization. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- 30.Sarkar, S., Pressey, R. L., Faith, D. P., Margules, C. R., Fuller, T., Stoms, D. M., Moffett, A., Wilson, K. A., Williams, K. J., Williams, P. H., & Andelman, S. (2006). Biodiversity conservation planning tools: present status and challenges for the future. Annual Review of Environment and Resources, 31, 123–159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 33.Vogiatzis, C., Veremyev, A., Pasiliao, E.L., Pardalos, P.M. (2014). An integer programming approach for finding the most and the least central cliques. Optimization Letters, available online.Google Scholar