Professional Documents
Culture Documents
ENVIRONMENT
T
he field of biodiversity conservation is habitat types, or threatened species distribu- conservation performance. For example, if no
hampered by weak performance mea- tions. The proportions of an individual asset loss has occurred for a given asset relative to
surement and reporting standards (1). (i) secured or lost at time t (relative to some some historical reference point, Fit = +1, even
In other areas, such as the corporate world, historical reference point) are denoted as sit if a small amount of the asset is secured (see
weak reporting of performance is considered and lit, respectively. Here, secured means that table, p. 44, asset G). Likewise, Mi gives a
bad practice, if not illegal (2, 3). Although an action is implemented that maintains the score of +1 if there is a gain in area secured
various evaluation frameworks for conserva- biodiversity asset (e.g., legislated reserva- without loss, irrespective of the magnitude of
tion programs have been suggested (4–7), few tion, or actions that secure biodiversity, such that gain (table, assets D, E, and G); it will also
Mi =
(s it2 − sit
1
) − (l it2 − lit
1
) ,–1≤ M ≤1 indigenous habitats. However, when metrics
1Centre for Applied Environmental Decision Analysis, i are used that account for both loss and reserva-
School of Integrative Biology, University of Queensland, St.
Lucia, QLD 4075, Australia. 2RMIT University, Melbourne,
(s it2 − sit
1
) + (l it2 − lit
1
) tion, they tell a markedly different story. They
reveal that, overall, Queensland has lost more
VIC 3001, Australia. 3Centre for Applied Environmental
Decision Analysis, School of Botany, University of Mi is positive if an asset is protected at a habitat than has been reserved [(A) on chart, Fit
Melbourne, VIC 3010, Australia. 4Landcare Research, greater rate than it is lost (table, asset B), and ≈ –0.7 in 2003], and reservation had exceeded
Private Bag 1930, Dunedin, New Zealand. 5Departamento negative if loss exceeds protection (table, asset loss in only 37% of all land zones in 2003 [(B)
de Biologia Animal, Faculdade de Ciências da Universidade
de Lisboa, 1749-016 Lisboa, Portugal. 6CIBIO, Centro de C). The average of Mi across all assets is on chart]. On average, loss had exceeded reser-
Investigação em Biodiversidade e Recursos Genéticos da 1 N vation in 2003 and had occurred at a higher rate
Universidade do Porto, Instituto de Ciências Agrárias de
Vairão, R. Padre Armando Quintas, 4485-661 Vairão,
Mi =
N
∑M
i =1
i between 1997 and 2003, across all land zones
Portugal. 7Colección Nacional de Anfibios y Reptiles-
[chart (A) and (B)].
Instituto de Biología, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de Fit and Mi provide different information Although new reserves were established in
México, México DF, México. about conservation achievement. A limitation 89% of land zones, further investigation by
*Author for correspondence. E-mail: e.mcdonaldmadden@ of having “simple” interpretable metrics is that means of Mi indicates that loss rate exceeded
uq.edu.au a single metric may not cover all facets of rate secured within 55% of the land zones. To