FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W4284994611> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W4284994611 endingPage "2519" @default.
• W4284994611 startingPage "2507" @default.
• W4284994611 abstract "Abstract Plans for expanding protected area systems (prioritizations) often aim to facilitate connectivity. To achieve this, many approaches—based on different assumptions and datasets—have been developed. However, little is known about how such approaches influence prioritizations. We examine eight approaches that aim to promote connectivity in prioritizations. Using Washington State (USA) and its avifauna as a case study, we generated prioritizations that aimed to meet species' representation targets and promote connectivity by (a) maximizing total area; (b) further maximizing species representation; (c) minimizing boundary length; and connecting areas based on (d) minimizing human pressure, (e) minimizing naturalness‐based landscape resistance, (f) minimizing focal species landscape resistance, (g) minimizing habitat heterogeneity and (h) maximizing environmental similarity. We controlled for total expenditure, species' representation, and existing land use policies to enable comparisons among prioritizations. We then used a hierarchical cluster analysis to compare prioritizations, based on which areas they selected. We also evaluated how well each approach facilitated connectivity as measured by the other approaches. We found that different approaches for promoting connectivity can lead to very different or very similar prioritizations, depending on their underlying assumptions. In particular, the boundary length approach—which is widely used in systematic conservation planning—resulted in a prioritization that was highly dissimilar to all other prioritizations. Surprisingly, approaches based on very different underlying assumptions produced similar prioritizations, such as maximizing total area and minimizing focal species landscape resistance approaches. Moreover, when comparing the prioritizations based on the level of connectivity they could facilitate, we found that none of the prioritizations facilitated a high level of connectivity for all eight approaches. Synthesis and applications . We recommend carefully considering the assumptions and limitations that underpin approaches for promoting connectivity. Our findings demonstrate that different connectivity approaches can produce marked differences in priorities and, in turn, produce trade‐offs between different approaches. Indeed, despite the ubiquity of the boundary length approach, practitioners might find that other approaches can better achieve conservation objectives. Practitioners can use our methodology for comparing different connectivity approaches to help to navigate trade‐offs among them." @default.
• W4284994611 created "2022-07-11" @default.
• W4284994611 creator A5005855544 @default.
• W4284994611 creator A5015382947 @default.
• W4284994611 creator A5029978764 @default.
• W4284994611 creator A5034472885 @default.
• W4284994611 creator A5038984603 @default.
• W4284994611 creator A5040755320 @default.
• W4284994611 creator A5052067324 @default.
• W4284994611 creator A5077531020 @default.
• W4284994611 creator A5083574650 @default.
• W4284994611 date "2022-07-29" @default.
• W4284994611 modified "2023-10-01" @default.
• W4284994611 title "A comparison of approaches for including connectivity in systematic conservation planning" @default.
• W4284994611 cites W1546020371 @default.
• W4284994611 cites W1586890123 @default.
• W4284994611 cites W192395927 @default.
• W4284994611 cites W1977369115 @default.
• W4284994611 cites W1982689115 @default.
• W4284994611 cites W1989758149 @default.
• W4284994611 cites W2012022456 @default.
• W4284994611 cites W2042769597 @default.
• W4284994611 cites W2051043423 @default.
• W4284994611 cites W2055280728 @default.
• W4284994611 cites W2055961607 @default.
• W4284994611 cites W2106318667 @default.
• W4284994611 cites W2121619280 @default.
• W4284994611 cites W2133218997 @default.
• W4284994611 cites W2141006953 @default.
• W4284994611 cites W2411334469 @default.
• W4284994611 cites W2616962235 @default.
• W4284994611 cites W2765123347 @default.
• W4284994611 cites W2784805535 @default.
• W4284994611 cites W2789288582 @default.
• W4284994611 cites W2796160828 @default.
• W4284994611 cites W2804233742 @default.
• W4284994611 cites W2901702420 @default.
• W4284994611 cites W2902354130 @default.
• W4284994611 cites W2908758646 @default.
• W4284994611 cites W2918167658 @default.
• W4284994611 cites W2939045474 @default.
• W4284994611 cites W2968739729 @default.
• W4284994611 cites W2986405203 @default.
• W4284994611 cites W2990427812 @default.
• W4284994611 cites W2996149315 @default.
• W4284994611 cites W3005825300 @default.
• W4284994611 cites W3080802731 @default.
• W4284994611 cites W3085308359 @default.
• W4284994611 cites W3103644820 @default.
• W4284994611 cites W3132073286 @default.
• W4284994611 cites W3160410908 @default.
• W4284994611 cites W4229950759 @default.
• W4284994611 cites W4245798420 @default.
• W4284994611 cites W4284994611 @default.
• W4284994611 doi "https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2664.14251" @default.
• W4284994611 hasPublicationYear "2022" @default.
• W4284994611 type Work @default.
• W4284994611 citedByCount "3" @default.
• W4284994611 countsByYear W42849946112022 @default.
• W4284994611 countsByYear W42849946112023 @default.
• W4284994611 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W4284994611 hasAuthorship W4284994611A5005855544 @default.
• W4284994611 hasAuthorship W4284994611A5015382947 @default.
• W4284994611 hasAuthorship W4284994611A5029978764 @default.
• W4284994611 hasAuthorship W4284994611A5034472885 @default.
• W4284994611 hasAuthorship W4284994611A5038984603 @default.
• W4284994611 hasAuthorship W4284994611A5040755320 @default.
• W4284994611 hasAuthorship W4284994611A5052067324 @default.
• W4284994611 hasAuthorship W4284994611A5077531020 @default.
• W4284994611 hasAuthorship W4284994611A5083574650 @default.
• W4284994611 hasConcept C127413603 @default.
• W4284994611 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
• W4284994611 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
• W4284994611 hasConcept C2776359362 @default.
• W4284994611 hasConcept C2777615720 @default.
• W4284994611 hasConcept C33923547 @default.
• W4284994611 hasConcept C539667460 @default.
• W4284994611 hasConcept C94625758 @default.
• W4284994611 hasConceptScore W4284994611C127413603 @default.
• W4284994611 hasConceptScore W4284994611C17744445 @default.
• W4284994611 hasConceptScore W4284994611C199539241 @default.
• W4284994611 hasConceptScore W4284994611C2776359362 @default.
• W4284994611 hasConceptScore W4284994611C2777615720 @default.
• W4284994611 hasConceptScore W4284994611C33923547 @default.
• W4284994611 hasConceptScore W4284994611C539667460 @default.
• W4284994611 hasConceptScore W4284994611C94625758 @default.
• W4284994611 hasFunder F4320322680 @default.
• W4284994611 hasFunder F4320325263 @default.
• W4284994611 hasFunder F4320334593 @default.
• W4284994611 hasIssue "10" @default.
• W4284994611 hasLocation W42849946111 @default.
• W4284994611 hasOpenAccess W4284994611 @default.
• W4284994611 hasPrimaryLocation W42849946111 @default.
• W4284994611 hasRelatedWork W1587224694 @default.
• W4284994611 hasRelatedWork W1979597421 @default.
• W4284994611 hasRelatedWork W2007980826 @default.
• W4284994611 hasRelatedWork W2061531152 @default.
• W4284994611 hasRelatedWork W2077600819 @default.

• next