IS THE TARGET FOR IN-LAND CONSERVATION SUGGESTED BY THE CONVENTION ON BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY (CBD) ADEQUATE FOR COLOMBIA?

Abstract The persistence of the biota is a fundamental element of sustainable development; it is impossible for us to survive without other species. Natural parks or reserves are fundamental pillars of any conservation... [ view full abstract ]

Abstract

The persistence of the biota is a fundamental element of sustainable development; it is impossible for us to survive without other species. Natural parks or reserves are fundamental pillars of any conservation strategy. They prevent the complete conversion of natural ecosystems and, in that way, provide intact habitats for wildlife. However, if conservation areas are not selected rigorously, gaps may lead to a species extinction. To be effective, reserves must include viable populations of all the species present in the territory as well as all the ecosystem components and processes that species may require in order to survive and persist. Guaranteeing minimum areas is important as well because of their impact on the size of populations. The Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) suggested a minimum extent of 17% of in-land ecosystems to be protected and 10% of marine areas. Nevertheless, it did not explain how to achieve these targets. Do these values represent the minimum extent for each ecosystem type? Establishing a general target like this might over or underestimate the real level of conservation needed for each type of ecosystem. Perhaps these values are just meant to be the result of a portfolio of conservation areas selected by applying other targets. In this article, targets are calculated for all in-land ecosystems of Colombia, a gap analysis is done and two portfolios of priorities for conservation are constructed using FOCALIZE: a decision support system that selects groups of spatially related ecosystems using minimum targets calculated based on the requirements of umbrella species. The first scenario considered the existing national parks whereas the second did not include them starting the selection from a hypothetical situation where no parks existed. The results highlight the importance of using effective selection methods including science-based minimum targets. Although the 17% of the in-land territory of Colombia could have been enough to reach the correct size of conservation areas and to cover all the variety of in-land ecosystems, the national parks selected in an ad hoc manner in the past overrepresented some ecosystems and added more area than necessary. Now this political target is not enough. 

Keywords: Conservation planning, FOCALIZE, minimum targets, political targets.