Advertisement

Approaches to Corridor Planning: Transitioning TAMARIN from Mata Atlantica to Madagascar

  • Karl Morrison
  • Charlotte Boyd
  • Keith Alger
  • Miroslav Honzák
Part of the Developments in Primatology: Progress and Prospects book series (DIPR)

Introduction

Effective long-term species conservation requires a conservation approach targeted at all scales at which biodiversity occurs, from the scale of species occurrences to the scale of populations and the ecological processes needed to sustain them (Noss, 2002). Protected area- and site-level initiatives have proven to be effective at protecting habitat, even when resources for effective management are lacking (Bruner et al, 2001), but protected areas alone are often of insufficient size to sustain viable populations of the species they are designed to protect (see, for example, Newmark, 1995). The total area accessible to conservation target species can be increased by connecting protected areas through biological corridors and stepping stones of habitat (Beier and Noss, 1998). But even with large protected areas and effective connectivity networks, human population pressures and incompatible land and resource use in surrounding areas can compromise biodiversity conservation...

Keywords

Land Cover Biodiversity Conservation Primary Forest Conservation Goal Conservation Target 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. Beier, P., and Noss, R. (1998). Do habitat corridors really provide connectivity? Conservation Biology 12:1241–1252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Binswanger, H.P. (1989). Brazilian policies that encourage deforestation in the Amazon. The World Bank. Environment Department Working Paper No.16.Google Scholar
  3. Eastman, J.R. (2002). Idrisi for Windows user's guide version 32. Clark labs for cartography technology and geographic analysis. Worcester, Clark University.Google Scholar
  4. Bruner, A.G., Gullison, Rice, R.E., and da Fonseca, G.A.B. (2001). Effectiveness of parks in protecting tropical biodiversity. Science 291:125–128.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. CABS/IESB (2000). Designing Sustainable Landscapes. Center for Applied Biodiversity Science (CABS), Conservation International, Washington, DC, and Instituto de Estudos Sócio-Ambientais do Sul da Bahia (IESB), Ilhéus, BA, Brazil.Google Scholar
  6. Chomitz, K.M., Alger, K., Thomas, T.S., Orlando, H., Vila Nova, P. (2003) Opportunity costs of conservation in a biodiversity hotspot, The case of southern Bahia. Environment and Development Economics 10:293–312.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Gascon, C, Williamson, G, and da Fonseca, G. (2000). Receding forest edges and vanishing reserves. Science 288:1356–1358.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Landau, E.C., Hirsch, A., Musinsky, J. (2003). Cobertura Vegetal e Uso do Solo, escala 1:100 000, data dod dados:1996–97 (mapa em formato digital). In: Prado, P.I., Landau, E.C., Moura, R.T., Pinto, L.P.S., Fonseca, G.A.B., and Alger, K. (orgs.) Corredores de Biodiversidade na Mata Atlantica do Sul da Bahia. Publicacao em CD-ROM, Ilheus, IESB/CI/CABS/UFMG/UNICAMPGoogle Scholar
  9. Minten, B., and Razafindraibe, R. (2003). Relations Terres Agricoles—Pauvrete a Madagascar. FOFIFA, Cornell University, Madagascar.Google Scholar
  10. Mittermeier, R.A., Myers, N., Robles Gil, P., and Mittermeier, C.G (1999) Hotspots. Mexico City, Mexico, Cemex.Google Scholar
  11. Myers, N., Mittermeier, R.A., Mittermeier, C.G, da Fonseca, G.A.B., and Kent, J. (2000). Biodiversity hotspots for conservation priorities. Nature 403:853–858.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Newmark, WD. (1995). Extinction of mammal populations in western NorthAmerican national parks. Conservation Biology 9:512–526.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Noss, R.F (2002). Context Matters: Considerations for large-scale conservation. Conservation in Practice 3(iii):9–19.Google Scholar
  14. Ostrom, E. (1999). Coping with tragedies of the commons. Workshop in Political Theory and Policy Analysis Center for the Study of Institutions, Population, and Environmental Change, Annual Review of Political Science.Google Scholar
  15. Stoms, D., Chomitz, K.M., and Davis, FW (2004). TAMARIN: A landscape framework for evaluating economic incentives for rainforest restoration. Landscape Urban Plan 68(1):95–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Stoms, D.M., Davis, F.W., Church, R.L., and Gerard, R.A. (2002). Economic Instruments for Habitat Conservation: Final Report to The World Bank, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  17. Wiens, J. (1996). Wildlife in patchy environments: metapopulations, mosaics and management. In: McCullough, D.R. (ed.). Metapopulations and Wildlife Conservation. Island Press, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  18. World Bank. (2003). Sustainable Development in a Dynamic World: Transforming Institutions, Growth, and Quality of Life. World Bank, Washington, DC.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Karl Morrison
    • 1
  • Charlotte Boyd
    • 1
  • Keith Alger
    • 1
  • Miroslav Honzák
    • 1
  1. 1.Conservation InternationalWashington, D.C.USA

Personalised recommendations