Advertisement

Archive for History of Exact Sciences

, Volume 66, Issue 4, pp 397–426 | Cite as

Complementarity and the selection of nature reserves: algorithms and the origins of conservation planning, 1980–1995

  • Sahotra SarkarEmail author
Article

Abstract

This paper reconstructs the history of the introduction and use of iterative algorithms in conservation biology in the 1980s and early 1990s in order to prioritize areas for protection as nature reserves. The importance of these algorithms was that they led to greater economy in spatial extent (“efficiency”) in the selection of areas to represent biological features adequately (that is, to a specified level) compared to older methods of scoring and ranking areas using criteria such as biotic “richness” (the number of features of interest). The development of these algorithms was critical to producing a research program for conservation biology that was distinct from ecology and eventually led to what came to be called systematic conservation planning. Very similar algorithmic approaches were introduced independently in the 1980–1990 period in Australia, South Africa, and (arguably) the United Kingdom. The key rules in these algorithms were the use of rarity and what came to be called complementarity (the number of new or under-represented features in an area relative to those that had already been selected). Because these algorithms were heuristic, they were not guaranteed to produce optimal (most “efficient”) solutions. However, complementarity came to be seen as a principle rather than a rule in an algorithm and its use was also advocated for the former reason. Optimal solutions could be produced by reformulating the reserve selection problem in a mathematical programming formalism and using exact algorithms developed in that context. A dispute over the relevance of full optimality arose and was never resolved. Moreover, exact algorithms could not easily incorporate criteria determining the spatial configuration of networks of selected areas, in contrast to heuristic algorithms. Meanwhile metaheuristic algorithms emerged in the 1990s and came to be seen as a credible more effective alternative to the heuristic algorithms. Ultimately what was important about these developments was that the reserve selection problem came to be viewed a complex optimal decision problem under uncertainty, resource, and other constraints. It was a type of problem that had no antecedent in traditional ecology.

Keywords

Biodiversity Complementarity Conservation biology, history Reserve design Reserve selection Systematic conservation planning 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Ackery P.R., Vane-Wright R.I (1984) Milkweed butterflies: Their cladistics and biology. Cornell University Press, IthacaGoogle Scholar
  2. Ball, I.R. 1996. Mathematical applications for conservation ecology: The dynamics of tree hollows and the design of nature reserves. PhD dissertation, University of AdelaideGoogle Scholar
  3. Ball, I.R., H.P. Possingham, and M.E. Watts. 2009. Marxan and relatives: Software for spatial conservation prioritization. In Spatial Conservation prioritization: Quantitative methods and computational tools, ed. A. Moilanen, K.A. Wilson, and H.P. Possingham, 185–195. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Bradstock, R., and J.C. Noble. 1989. Mallee ecosystems and their management. Melbourne: Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation.Google Scholar
  5. Brockington D., Duffy R., Igoe J. (2008) Nature unbound: Conservation, capitalism, and the future of protected areas. Earthscan, LondonGoogle Scholar
  6. Chvatal V. (1979) A greedy heuristic for the set-covering problem. Mathematics of Operations Research 4: 233–235MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Ciarleglio, M. 2008. Modular abstract self-learning tabu search (MASTS): Metaheuristic search theory and practice. PhD dissertation, University of Texas at Austin, Graduate Program in Computational and Applied MathematicsGoogle Scholar
  8. Ciarleglio M., Barnes J.W., Sarkar S. (2009) ConsNet: New software for the selection of conservation area networks with spatial and multi-criteria analyses. Ecography 32: 205–209CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cocks K.D., Baird I.A. (1989) Using mathematical programming to address the multiple reserve selection problem: An example from the Eyre peninsula, South Australia. Biological Conservation 49: 113–130CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Csuti B., Polasky 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 of Oregon. Biological Conservation 80: 83–97CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Diamond J.M. (1975) The island dilemma: Lessons of modern biogeographic studies for the design of nature reserves. Biological Conservation 7: 129–146CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Diamond, J.M. 1986. The design of a nature reserve system for Indonesian New Guinea. In Conservation biology: The science of scarcity and diversity, ed. M.E. Soulé, 485–503. Sunderland: Sinauer.Google Scholar
  13. Diamond, J.M., and R.M. May. 1976. Island biogeography and the design of nature reserves. In Theoretical ecology: Principles and applications, ed. R.M. May, 163–186. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  14. Dowie M. (2009) Conservation refugees: The hundred-year conflict between global conservation and native peoples. MIT Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  15. Faith, D.P. 1995. Biodiversity and regional sustainability analysis. Tech. Rep. Lyneham: Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation.Google Scholar
  16. Finkel E. (1998a) Forest pact bypasses computer model. Science 282: 1968–1969CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Finkel E. (1998b) Software helps Australia manage forest debate. Science 281: 1789–1791CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Gilbert F.S. (1980) The equilibrium theory of island biogeography: Fact or fiction?. Journal of Biogeography 7: 209–235CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Glover F. (1986) Future paths for integer programming and links to Artificial Intelligence. Computers and Operations Research 13(5): 533–549MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Higgs, A.J. 1981. Island biogeography and nature reserve design. Journal of Biogeography 8: 117–124Google Scholar
  21. International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN). 1980. World conservation strategy.Google Scholar
  22. Justus J., Sarkar S. (2002) The principle of complementarity in the design of reserve networks to conserve biodiversity: A preliminary history. Journal of Biosciences 27(S2): 421–435CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Karmakar N. (1984) A new polynomial time algorithm for linear programming. Combinatorica 4: 375–395Google Scholar
  24. Kelley, C., J.Garson, A. Aggarwal, and S. Sarkar. 2002. Place prioritization for biodiversity reserve network design: A comparison of the SITES and ResNet software packages for coverage and efficiency. Diversity and Distributions 8: 297–306.Google Scholar
  25. Kingsland S.E. (2002) Designing nature reserves: Adapting ecology to real-world problems. Endeavour 26: 9–14CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Kirkpatrick J.B. (1983) An iterative method for establishing priorities for the selection of nature reserves: An example from Tasmania. Biological Conservation 25: 127–134CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Kirkpatrick J.B. (1986) Conservation of plant species, alliances abd associations of the treeless high country of Tasmania, Australia. Biological Conservation 25: 43–57CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Kirkpatrick J.B., Harwood C.E. (1983) Conservation of Tasmanian macrophytic wetland vegetation. Papers and Proceedings of the Royal Society of Tasmania 117: 5–20Google Scholar
  29. Kirkpatrick, J.B., M.J. Brown, and A. Moscal. 1980. Threatened plants of the Tasmanian Central East Coast. Hobart: Tasmanian Conservation Trust.Google Scholar
  30. Kirkpatrick, J.B., L. Gilfedder, F.D. Duncan, and S. Harris. 1991. Reservation status and priorities for Tasmanian plants. 1. Angiospermae (Dicotyldonae). In Aspects of Tasmanian botany, ed. M.R. Banks, S.J. Smith, A.E. Orchard, and G. Kantvilas, 163–172. Hobart: Royal Society of Tasmania.Google Scholar
  31. Krebs C.J. (1985) Ecology: The experimental analysis of distribution and abundance. Harper & Row, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  32. Linquist S. (2008) But is it progress? on the alleged advances of conservation biology over ecology. Biology and Philosophy 23: 529–544CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. MacArthur R.H., Wilson E.O. (1967) The theory of island biogeography. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  34. Magurran A.E. (2003) Measuring biological diversity. Blackwell, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  35. Margules C.R. (1989) Introduction to some Australian developments in conservation evaluation. Biological Conservation 50: 1–11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Margules, C.R. 1989b. Selecting nature reserves in the South Australian mallee. In Mallee ecosystems and their management, ed. R. Bradstock, J.C. Noble, 398–405. Melbourne: Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation.Google Scholar
  37. Margules, C.R., and A.O. Nicholls. 1987. Assessing the conservation value of remnant habitat ‘islands’: Mallee patches on the Western Eyre peninsula, South Australia. In Nature conservation: The role of remnants of native vegetation, ed. D.A. Saunders, G.W. Arnold, A.A. Burbridge, and A.J.M. Hopkins, 89–102. Chipping Norton: Surrey Beatty and Sons.Google Scholar
  38. Margules C.R., Pressey R.L. (2000) Systematic conservation planning. Nature 405: 245–253CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Margules C.R., Sarkar S. (2007) Systematic Conservation Planning. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  40. Margules C.R., Usher M.B. (1981) Criteria used in assessing wildlife conservation potential: A review. Biological Conservation 21: 79–109CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Margules C.R., Higgs A.J., Rafe R.W. (1982) Modern biogeographic thoery: Are there any lessons for reserve design?. Biological Conservation 24: 115–128CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Margules C.R., Nicholls A.O., Pressey R.L. (1988) Selecting networks of reserves to maximize biological diversity. Biological Conservation 43: 63–76CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Moffett A., Sarkar S. (2006) Incorporating multiple criteria into the design of conservation area networks: A minireview with recommendations. Diversity and Distributions 12: 125–137CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Moilanen, A., A.M.A. Franco, R.I. Early, R. Fox, B. Wintle, and C.D. Thomas. 2005. Prioritizing multiple-use landscapes for conservation: Methods for large multi-species planning problems. Proceedings of the Royal Society (London) B 272: 1885–1891Google Scholar
  45. Myers N. (1988) Threatened biotas: “Hot spots” in tropical forests. Environmentalist 8: 187–208CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Nicholls, A.O., C.R. Margules. 1993. An updated reserve selection algorithm. Biological Conservation 64: 165–169Google Scholar
  47. Okin, W.J. 1997. The biodiversity management area selection model: Constructing a solution approach. Master’s thesis, Univesity of California, Santa BarbaraGoogle Scholar
  48. Possingham, H.P., J. Day, M. Goldfinch, and F. Salzborn. 1983. The mathematics of designing a network of protected areas for conservation. In Decision sciences: Tools for today, ed. D. Sutton, E. Cousins, and C. Pierce, 536–545. Proceedings of the 12th Australian Operations Research Conference, Australian Society for Operations Research, Adelaide, AustraliaGoogle Scholar
  49. Reserve selection in New South Wales: Where to from here? Australian Zoologist 26: 70–75.Google Scholar
  50. Pressey R.L. (1994) Ad Hoc reservations: Forward or backward steps in developing representative reserve systems. Conservation Biology 8: 662–668CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Pressey, R.L. 1998. Algorithms, politics, and timber: An example of the role of science in a public, political negotiation process over new conservation areas in production forests. In Ecology for everyone: Communicating ecology to scientists, the public and the politicians, ed. R. Wills and R. Hobbs, 73–87. Sydney: Surrey Beatty.Google Scholar
  52. Pressey R.L. (2002) The first reserve selection algorithm: A retrospective on Jamie Kirkpatrick’s 1983 paper. Progress in Physical Geography 26: 434–441CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Pressey R.L., Nicholls A.O. (1989a) Application of numerical algorithm to the selection of reserves in semi-arid New South Wales. Biological Conservation 50: 263–278CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Pressey R.L., Nicholls A.O. (1989b) Efficiency in conservation evaluation: Scoring versus iterative approaches. Biological Conservation 50: 199–218CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Pressey R.L., Tully S.L. (1994) The cost of ad hoc reservation: A case study in New South Wales. Australian Journal of Ecology 19: 375–384CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Pressey R.L., Humphries C.J., Margules C.R., Vane-Wright R.I., Williams P.H. (1993) Beyond opportunism: Key principles for systematic reserve selection. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 8: 124–128CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Pressey R.L., Possingham H.P., Margules C.R. (1996) Optimality in reserve selection algorithms: When does it matter and how much?. Biological Conservation 76: 259–267CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Pressey, R.L., H.P. Possingham, and J.R. Day. 1997. Effectiveness of alternative heuristic algorithms for identifying indicative minimum requirements for conseravtion reserves. Biological Conservation 80: 207–219.Google Scholar
  59. Ratcliffe D. (1971) Criteria for the selection of nature reserves. Advances in Science 27: 294–296Google Scholar
  60. Rebelo A.G., Siegfried W.R. (1990) Protection of Fynbos vegetation: Ideal and real-world options. Biological Conservation 54: 15–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Rebelo A.G., Siegfried W.R. (1992) Where should nature reserves be located in the cape floristic region, south africa?. Conservation Biology 6: 243–252CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Revelle C.S., Williams J.C., Boland J.J. (2002) Counterpart models in facility location science and reserve selection science. Environmental Modeling and Assessment 7: 71–80CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Rodrigues A.S., Gaston K.J. (2002) Optimisation in reserve selection procedures—Why not?. Biological Conservation 107: 123–129CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Rodrigues A.S., Cerdeira J.O., Gaston K.J. (2000) Flexibility, efficiency, and accountability: Adapting reserve selection algorithms to more complex conservation problems. Ecography 23: 565–574CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Sarkar S. (1998) Restoring wilderness or reclaiming forests?. Terra Nova 3(3): 35–52Google Scholar
  66. Sarkar S. (2002) Preface: Conservation biology: The new consensus. Journal of Biosciences 27(S2), i–ivGoogle Scholar
  67. Sarkar, S. 2003. Conservation area networks. Conservation and Society 1: v–vii.Google Scholar
  68. Sarkar, S. 2004. Conservation biology. In The stanford encyclopedia of philosophy, ed. E.N. Zalta. Stanford: Stanford University. http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2004/entries/conservation-biology/.
  69. Sarkar, S. 2005. Biodiversity and environmental philosophy: An introduction to the issues. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  70. Sarkar S. (2007) Doubting Darwin? Creationist designs on evolution. Blackwell Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  71. Sarkar, S. 2007b. From ecological diversity to biodiversity. In The cambridge companion to the philosophy of biology, ed. D.L. Hull and M. Ruse, 388–409. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  72. Sarkar, S. 2007c. Haldane and the emergence of modern evolutionary theory. In Handbook of the philosophy of biology, ed. M. Matthen and C. Stephens, 49–86. New York: Elsevier.Google Scholar
  73. Sarkar S., Margules C.R. (2002) Operationalizing biodiversity for conservation planning. Journal of Biosciences 27(S2): 299–308CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Sarkar S., Aggarwal A., GarsonJ.MargulesC.R. Zeidler J. (2002) Place prioritization for biodiveristy content. Journal of Biosciences 27(S2): 339–346CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Sarkar, S., R.L. Pressey, D.P. Faith, C.R. Margules, T. Fuller, D.M. Stoms, A. Moffett, K. Wilson, K.J. Williams, P.H. Williams, and S. Andelman. 2006. Biodiversity conservation planning tools: Present status and challenges for the future. Annual Review of Environment and Resources 31: 123–159.Google Scholar
  76. Simberloff D. (1988) The contribution of population and community biology to conservation science. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 19: 473–511CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Simberloff D., Cox J. (1987) Consequences and costs of conservation corridors. Conservation Biology 1: 63–71CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Soulé M.E. (1985) What is conservation biology?. BioScience 35: 727–734CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Soulé M.E., Simberloff D. (1986) What do genetics and ecology tell us about the design of nature reserves?. Biological Conservation 35: 19–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Takacs, D. 1996. The idea of biodiversity: Philosophies of paradise. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
  81. Thomas C.D., Mallorie H.C. (1985) Rarity, species richness and conservation: Butterflies in the Atlas mountains of morocco. Biological Conservation 33: 95–117CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Toregas C., Swain R., ReVelle C., Bergman L. (1971) The location of emergency service facilities. Operations Research 19: 1363–1373zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Underhill L.G. (1994) Optimal and suboptimal reserve selection algorithms. Biological Conservation 70: 85–87CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Vane-Wright, R.I. 1996. Identifying priorities for the conservation of biodiversity: Systematic biological criteria within a socio-political framework. In Biodiversity: A biology of numbers and difference, ed. K.J. Gaston, 309–344. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  85. Vane-Wright, R.I., C.J. Humphries, and P.H. Williams. 1991. What to protect? Systematics and the agony of choice. Biological Conservation 55: 235–254.Google Scholar
  86. Walker, P.A., and D.P. Faith. 1998. TARGET software package. Tech. Rep. Canberra: Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation.Google Scholar
  87. Whittaker, R.H. 1960. Vegetation of the Siskiyou Mountains, Oregon and California. Ecological Monographs 30: 279–338.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. Williams J.C., ReVelle C.S., Levin S.A. (2005) Spatial attributes and reserve design models: A review. Environmental Modeling and Assessment 10: 163–181CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. Wilson, E.O., and E.O. Willis. 1975. Applied biogeography. In Ecology and the evolution of communities, ed. M.L. Cody and J.M. Diamond, 522–534. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  90. Zimmerman B.L., Bierregaard R.O. (1986) Relevance of the equilibrium theory of biogeography and species–area relations to conservation with a case from Amazonia. Journal of Biogeography 13: 133–143CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Philosophy and Section of Integrative BiologyUniversity of Texas at AustinAustinUSA

Personalised recommendations