Detecting management gaps for biodiversity conservation: An integrated assessment.

The latest report on the state of nature in Europe (2013-2018) shows that biodiversity is declining at an alarming rate, with most protected species and habitats in poor condition. Despite an increasing volume of collected biodiversity information, urgent action is needed to integrate biodiversity data and knowledge to improve conservation efforts. We conducted a study in Catalonia (NE Spain), where we collected management measures implemented between 2013 and 2018, including allocation, budget, pressures aimed, and habitats/species potentially benefiting. We integrated information on pressures and habitats/species with the measures to identify non-spatial management gaps. Then, we integrated the spatially explicit information to determine the spatial management gap, identifying geographical areas where species/habitats are under pressure without registered measures. We demonstrated the importance of integrating existing information. Our findings revealed that resources were often not distributed adequately across species/habitats, with biases towards certain taxa being a common issue. The non-spatial management gap analysis identified taxonomic groups, especially plants and mollusks with the wider management gaps. We also identified threatened areas, especially in the northeast of the region with the larger spatial management gaps. These results could guide priority objectives to optimize conservation efforts. Integrating different information sources provided a broader view of the challenges that conservation science is facing nowadays. Our study offers a path toward bending the curve of biodiversity loss by providing an integrative framework that could optimize the use of the available information and help narrow the knowing-doing gap. In the context of the EU, this example demonstrates how information can be used to promote some environmental policy instruments, such as the Prioritized Action Frameworks (PAFs). Additionally, our findings highlight the importance of supporting decision-making with systematic assessments to identify deficiencies in the conservation process, reduce the loss of critical ecosystems and species, and avoid biases among taxa.

Designing a network of green infrastructure to enhance the conservation value of protected areas and maintain ecosystem services.

There is a growing demand for holistic landscape planning to enhance sustainable use of ecosystem services (ESS) and maintenance of the biodiversity that supports them. In this context, the EU is developing policy to regulate the maintenance of ESS and enhance connectivity among protected areas (PAs). This is known as the network of Green Infrastructure (GI). However, there is not a working framework defined to plan the spatial design of such network of GI. Here, we use the software Marxan with Zones, to prioritize the spatial distribution of different management zones that accommodate the needs of a network of GI. These zones included a conservation zone, mainly devoted to protecting biodiversity, a GI zone, that aimed at connecting PAs and maintaining regulating and cultural ESS; and a management zone devoted to exploiting provisioning ESS. We performed four planning scenarios that distribute the targets for ESS and biodiversity in different ways across management zones. We also conducted a sensitivity analysis by increasing ESS targets to explore trade-offs that may occur when managing together biodiversity and ESS. We use Catalonia (northeastern Spain) as a case study. We found that the representation of ESS could be achieved for intermediate targets in all scenarios. There was, however, a threshold on these targets over which trade-offs appeared between maintaining regulating and cultural ESS and biodiversity versus getting access to provisioning ESS. These "thresholds values" were displaced towards higher ESS targets when we moved from more strict to more flexible planning scenarios (i.e., scenarios that allowed mixing representation of objectives for biodiversity and ESS within the same zone). This methodological approach could help design a framework to integrate biodiversity and ESS management in holistic plans and decision making and, at the same time, meeting European mandates concerning the design of GI networks, or similar needs elsewhere.