Common ground for biodiversity and ecosystem services: the "partial protection" challenge

Area of Science:

• Ecology
• Conservation Biology
• Environmental Management

Background:

• Global initiatives necessitate understanding biodiversity and ecosystem services distinctions and overlaps.
• Ecosystem services are often linked to utilitarian values, while biodiversity is associated with intrinsic values, though biodiversity also stems from anthropogenic use.
• Biodiversity measures offer insights into future uses and benefits, highlighting option values.

Purpose of the Study:

• To clarify the similarities and differences between biodiversity and ecosystem services.
• To explore how these differences can form a basis for common ground in conservation.
• To investigate how regional biodiversity trade-offs and partial protection by land uses can enhance conservation planning.

Main Methods:

• Conceptual analysis of the relationship between biodiversity and ecosystem services values.
• Review of systematic conservation planning frameworks.
• Examination of regional biodiversity trade-offs and the role of partial protection in land use.

Main Results:

• Biodiversity and ecosystem services, despite differing value associations (utilitarian vs. intrinsic/option), can be integrated.
• Systematic conservation planning effectively manages trade-offs and synergies between different societal values.
• Regional planning incorporating partial biodiversity protection from land uses offers an under-explored avenue for common ground.

Conclusions:

• Enhanced common ground between biodiversity and ecosystem services is achievable through better integration in conservation planning.
• Acknowledging and integrating the partial protection of biodiversity by various land uses is crucial for effective conservation strategies.
• A spectrum approach, from natural ecosystems to transformed landscapes, can optimize the combined delivery of ecosystem services and biodiversity conservation.