Biodiversity & Conservation

, Volume 13, Issue 6, pp 1195–1208 | Cite as

A collaborative GIS method for integrating local and technical knowledge in establishing biodiversity conservation priorities

  • Shivanand Balram
  • Suzana Dragićević
  • Thomas Meredith
Article

Abstract

Methods for establishing biodiversity conservation priorities are urgently required, as the number of species and habitats that are threatened increases relative to the material resources available for their conservation. The identification of priority areas demands the integration of biophysical data on ecosystems together with social data on human pressures and planning opportunities. But comprehensive and reliable data are rarely available to demarcate where the need for action is most urgent and where the benefits of conservation strategies can be maximized. Strategic conservation initiatives cannot wait for the creation of comprehensive databases. In order to fill the missing data gaps, the combined knowledge of local and technical experts can be used. This study presents a collaborative geographic information system (GIS) method for integrating the knowledge of local and technical experts with existing spatial environmental data to establish priority areas for biodiversity conservation. Procedures for structuring and framing the discussions, establishing assessment criteria, integrating knowledge with data, and building consensus are incorporated into the method. The method provides a novel cooperative mechanism to aid spatial knowledge management and inclusive biodiversity planning.

Biodiversity conservation Collaborative GIS Data management Geographic information systems (GIS) Local and technical experts 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Alabaster T. and Hawthorne M. 1999. Information for environmental citizenship. Sustainable Development 7: 25-34.Google Scholar
  2. Beatley T. 1994. Habitat Conservation Planning: Endangered Species and Urban Growth. The University of Texas Press, Austin, Texas.Google Scholar
  3. Beatley T. 2000. Preserving biodiversity: challenges for planners. APA Journal 66: 5-20.Google Scholar
  4. Bertalanffy L. 1969. General Systems Theory; Foundations, Development, Applications. G. Braziller, New York.Google Scholar
  5. CBED 2002. 'Consensus Mapper', http://cbed.geog.mcgill.ca, Accessed: 2002-01-01.Google Scholar
  6. Faber B.G., Watts R., Hautaluoma J.E., Knutson J., Wallace W.W. and Wallace L. 1996. A groupware-enabled GIS. In: Heit M., Parker H.D. and Shortreid A. (eds) GIS Applications in Natural Resources, Vol. 2. GIS World Inc., Fort Collins, Colorado.Google Scholar
  7. Grimble R. and Wellard K. 1997. Stakeholder methodologies in natural resource management: a review of principles, contexts, experiences, and opportunities. Agricultural Systems 55: 173-193.Google Scholar
  8. Habermas J. 1984. The Theory of Communicative Action: Reason and the Rationalization of Society. Beacon Press, Boston, Massachusetts.Google Scholar
  9. Haila Y. 1999. Biodiversity and the divide between culture and nature. Biodiversity and Conservation 8: 165-181.Google Scholar
  10. Heado P.M. 2001. Strategies and solutions: mapping the biodiversity. In: Novacek M.J. (ed) The Biodiversity Crisis: Losing What Counts. The New Press, New York, pp. 180-183.Google Scholar
  11. Hellier A., Newton A. and Gaona S.O. 1999. Use of indigenous knowledge for rapidly assessing trends in biodiversity: a case study from the Chiapas, Mexico. Biodiversity and Conservation 8: 869-889.Google Scholar
  12. Innes J.E. 1998. Information in communicative planning. APA Journal 64: 52-63.Google Scholar
  13. Innes J.E. and Booher D.E. 1999. Consensus building and complex adaptive systems: a framework for evaluating collaborative planning. APA Journal 65: 412-423.Google Scholar
  14. Jusoff K. and Majid N.M. 1995. Integrating needs of the local community to conserve forest biodiversity in the state of Kelantan. Biodiversity and Conservation 4: 108-114.Google Scholar
  15. Kamppinen M. and Walls M. 1999. Integrating biodiversity into decision making. Biodiversity and Conservation 8: 7-16.Google Scholar
  16. Kier G. and Barthlott W. 2001. Measuring and mapping endemism and species richness: a new methodological approach and its application on the flora of Africa. Biodiversity and Conservation 10: 1513-1529.Google Scholar
  17. MacNally R. 2000. Regression and model-building in conservation biology, biogeography and ecology: the distinction between-and reconciliation of-'predictive' and 'explanatory' models. Biodiversity and Conservation 9: 655-671.Google Scholar
  18. Maddock A. and Du Plessis M.A. 1999. Can species data only be appropriately used to conserve biodiversity? Biodiversity and Conservation 8: 603-615.Google Scholar
  19. Maddock A.H. and Samways M.J. 2000. Planning for biodiversity conservation based on the knowledge of biologists. Biodiversity and Conservation 9: 1153-1169.Google Scholar
  20. Maguire D.J. 1991. An overview and definition of GIS. In: Maguire D.J., Goodchild M.F. and Rhind D.W. (eds), Geographical Information Systems: Principles and Applications, Longman, London, pp. 9-20.Google Scholar
  21. Meredith T. 1996. Linking science and citizens: exploring the use of geographic information and analysis in community-based biodiversity conservation initiatives. Human Ecology Review 3: 231-237.Google Scholar
  22. Meredith T.C., Dias G., Ibrahim C., Tipple R. and Wilkinson T. 2000. Reaching Consensus on Biodiversity Conservation Priority Regions: A Report on the Commission for Environmental Cooperation Strategic Directions for the Conservation of Biodiversity. The Community Based Environmental Decision (CBED) Support Group, McGill University, Department of Geography, Montreal, Canada, p. 118.Google Scholar
  23. Myers N., Mittermeier R.A., Mittermeier C.G., da Fonseca G.A.B. and Kent J. 2000. Biodiversity hotspots for conservation priorities. Nature 403: 853-858.Google Scholar
  24. Ndibi B.P. and Kay E.J. 1999. Measuring the local community's participation in the management of community forests in Cameroon. Biodiversity and Conservation 8: 255-271.Google Scholar
  25. Pandey S. and Wells M.P. 1997. Ecodevelopment planning at India's Great Himalayan National Park for biodiversity conservation and participatory rural development. Biodiversity and Conservation 6: 1277-1292.Google Scholar
  26. Pearce J. and Ferrier S. 2001. The practical value of modelling relative abundance of species for regional conservation planning: a case study. Biological Conservation 98: 33-43.Google Scholar
  27. Petch J.P., Pauknerova E. and Heywood D.I. 1995. A strategy for GIS in nature conservation: the Zdarske Vrchy project. ITC Journal 2: 133-142.Google Scholar
  28. Redford K.H., Coppolillo P., Sanderson E.W., Da Fonseca G.A.B., Dinerstein E., Groves C., Mace G., Maginnis S., Mittermeier R.A., Noss R., Olson D., Robinson J.G., Vedder A. and Wright M. 2003. Mapping the conservation landscape. Conservation Biology 17: 116-131.Google Scholar
  29. Rowe S., Kavanagh K. and Iacobelli T. 1993. A Protected Areas Gap Analysis Methodology: Planning for the Conservation of Biodiversity. WWF, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.Google Scholar
  30. Sanderson E.W., Redford K.H., Chetkiewicz C.L.B., Medellin R.A., Rabinowitz A.R., Robinson J.G. and Taber A.B. 2002a. Planning to save a species: the jaguar as a model. Conservation Biology 16: 58-72.Google Scholar
  31. Sanderson E.W., Redford K.H., Vedder A., Coppolillo P.B. and Ward S.E. 2002b. A conceptual model for conservation planning based on landscape species requirements. Landscape and Urban Planning 58: 41-56.Google Scholar
  32. Sanoff H. 2000. Community Participation Methods in Design and Planning. Wiley, New York.Google Scholar
  33. Sarakinos H., Nicholls A.O., Tubert A., Aggarwal A., Margules C.R. and Sarkar S. 2001. Area prioritization for biodiversity conservation in Quebec on the basis of species distributions: a preliminary analysis. Biodiversity and Conservation 10: 1419-1472.Google Scholar
  34. Smith W., Meredith T.C. and Johns T. 1999. Exploring methods for rapid assessment of woody vegetation in the Batemi Valley, North-central Tanzania. Biodiversity and Conservation 8: 447-470.Google Scholar
  35. Theobald D.M., Hobbs N.T., Bearly T., Zack J.A., Shenk T. and Riebsame W.E. 2000. Incorporating biological information in local land-use decision-making: designing a system for conservation planning. Landscape Ecology 15: 35-45.Google Scholar
  36. Vira B. 2001. Claiming legitimacy: analysing conflict in the environmental policy process. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy 19: 637-650.Google Scholar
  37. Webler T., Tuler S. and Krueger R. 2001. What is a good public participation process? Five perspectives from the public. Environmental Management 27: 435-450.Google Scholar
  38. Wessels K.J., Van Jaarsveld A.S., Grimbeek J.D. and Van Der Linde M.J. 1998. An evaluation of the gradsect biological survey method. Biodiversity and Conservation 7: 1093-1121.Google Scholar
  39. Woodhouse S., Lovett A., Dolman P. and Fuller R. 2000. Using a GIS to select priority areas for conservation. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems 24: 79-93.Google Scholar
  40. Zurayk R., El-Awar F., Hamadeh S., Talhouk S., Sayegh C., Chehab A.-G. and Al Shab K. 2001. Using indigenous knowledge in land use investigations: a participatory study in a semi-arid mountainous region of Lebanon. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 86: 247-262.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • Shivanand Balram
    • 1
  • Suzana Dragićević
    • 1
  • Thomas Meredith
    • 2
  1. 1.Spatial Analysis and Modeling Laboratory, Department of GeographySimon Fraser UniversityBurnabyBritish Columbia, Canada
  2. 2.Department of Geography, Community-Based Environmental Decision (CBED) Support GroupMcGill UniversityMontrealCanada

Personalised recommendations