Socioeconomic and political trade-offs in biodiversity conservation: a case study of the Cerrado Biodiversity Hotspot, Brazil
Article first published online: 22 APR 2013
© 2013 John Wiley & Sons Ltd
Diversity and Distributions
Volume 19, Issue 8, pages 977–987, August 2013
How to Cite
Faleiro, F. V., Loyola, R. D. (2013), Socioeconomic and political trade-offs in biodiversity conservation: a case study of the Cerrado Biodiversity Hotspot, Brazil. Diversity and Distributions, 19: 977–987. doi: 10.1111/ddi.12072
- Issue published online: 9 JUL 2013
- Article first published online: 22 APR 2013
- Conservation International Brazil
- FAPEG. Grant Numbers: #563727/2010-1, #563624/2010-8
- CNPq. Grant Numbers: #563727/2010-1, #563624/2010-8
- CNPq. Grant Numbers: #563727/2010-1, #563624/2010-8, #304703/2011-7
- Conservation conflict;
- conservation planning;
- multi-criterion analysis;
- spatial prioritization;
To analyse spatial trade-offs in conservation of mammals, considering benefits of biodiversity conservation and socioeconomic costs.
Cerrado Biodiversity Hotspot, Brazil.
We built ecological niche models (ENMs) for 154 mammals inhabiting the cerrado. We combined model projections to produce consensus maps of species' distributions for three types of models (envelope, statistical and machine-learning models). We used these range summaries as input data in spatial prioritization analyses. We compared six conservation scenarios, considering human population density, land cost, anthropogenic land use, political willingness to act and the distribution of species using trade-off analyses. We complemented the current network of protected areas, aiming to achieve a target of 17% of land protection in the cerrado.
Species-rich sites coincide with regions with high human population, high land cost, high anthropogenic land use and diverse levels of political willingness to act. We found a significant change in spatial priorities when we included socioeconomic and political dimensions in analyses: top-priority sites moved north, reduced by 68% potential conservation conflicts with human population, reduced by 72% the total monetary cost of actions and reduced by 68% conflict with other anthropogenic land uses. It also increased by 80% the beneficial effect of political willingness to act.
Our results reinforce the idea that using only biological criteria for proposing spatial conservation priorities can undermine conservation plans given increases in socioeconomic and political conflicts.