TY - JOUR

T1 - Incorporating threat in hotspots and coldspots of biodiversity and ecosystem services

AU - Schröter, Matthias

AU - Kraemer, Roland

AU - Ceauşu, Silvia

AU - Rusch, Graciela M.

PY - 2017/11/1

Y1 - 2017/11/1

N2 - Spatial prioritization could help target conservation actions directed to maintain both biodiversity and ecosystem services. We delineate hotspots and coldspots of two biodiversity conservation features and five regulating and cultural services by incorporating an indicator of ‘threat’, i.e. timber harvest profitability for forest areas in Telemark (Norway). We found hotspots, where high values of biodiversity, ecosystem services and threat coincide, ranging from 0.1 to 7.1% of the area, depending on varying threshold levels. Targeting of these areas for conservation follows reactive conservation approaches. In coldspots, high biodiversity and ecosystem service values coincide with low levels of threat, and cover 0.1–3.4% of the forest area. These areas might serve proactive conservation approaches at lower opportunity cost (foregone timber harvest profits). We conclude that a combination of indicators of biodiversity, ecosystem services and potential threat is an appropriate approach for spatial prioritization of proactive and reactive conservation strategies.

AB - Spatial prioritization could help target conservation actions directed to maintain both biodiversity and ecosystem services. We delineate hotspots and coldspots of two biodiversity conservation features and five regulating and cultural services by incorporating an indicator of ‘threat’, i.e. timber harvest profitability for forest areas in Telemark (Norway). We found hotspots, where high values of biodiversity, ecosystem services and threat coincide, ranging from 0.1 to 7.1% of the area, depending on varying threshold levels. Targeting of these areas for conservation follows reactive conservation approaches. In coldspots, high biodiversity and ecosystem service values coincide with low levels of threat, and cover 0.1–3.4% of the forest area. These areas might serve proactive conservation approaches at lower opportunity cost (foregone timber harvest profits). We conclude that a combination of indicators of biodiversity, ecosystem services and potential threat is an appropriate approach for spatial prioritization of proactive and reactive conservation strategies.

KW - Carbon sequestration

KW - Carbon storage

KW - Conservation management

KW - Existence value

KW - Recreation

KW - Spatial priority setting

KW - Ecosystems Research

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85019170287&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/s13280-017-0922-x

DO - 10.1007/s13280-017-0922-x

M3 - Journal articles

C2 - 28503701

AN - SCOPUS:85019170287

VL - 46

SP - 756

EP - 768

JO - Ambio

JF - Ambio

SN - 0044-7447

IS - 7

ER -