Loading…
A gap analysis of terrestrial protected areas in England and its implications for conservation policy
Many protected area (PA) systems have developed in response to socio-economic and aesthetic criteria and need to be modified to increase their conservation value. National gap analyses are an important step in describing and addressing this problem, so we sought to determine the representativeness o...
Saved in:
Published in: | Biological conservation 2004-12, Vol.120 (3), p.303-309 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , , , |
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Subjects: | |
Citations: | Items that this one cites Items that cite this one |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
cited_by | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c462t-a5d95eb3f9507d77fe948a8016f1d207135940c30d6c680e9db87824e8c9ade3 |
---|---|
cites | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c462t-a5d95eb3f9507d77fe948a8016f1d207135940c30d6c680e9db87824e8c9ade3 |
container_end_page | 309 |
container_issue | 3 |
container_start_page | 303 |
container_title | Biological conservation |
container_volume | 120 |
creator | Oldfield, Thomasina E.E Smith, Robert J Harrop, Stuart R Leader-Williams, Nigel |
description | Many protected area (PA) systems have developed in response to socio-economic and aesthetic criteria and need to be modified to increase their conservation value. National gap analyses are an important step in describing and addressing this problem, so we sought to determine the representativeness of English PAs devoted to biodiversity conservation by using Natural Areas (NAs), elevation and PA boundary data. We found that National Nature Reserves (NNRs) and Sites of Special Scientific Interests (SSSIs) cover only 6.3% of England and are generally small, with respective median areas of 1.1 and 0.2 km
2. The English PA system under-represents lowland areas and provides a median level of 2.5% protection for the NA types, with seventy nine per cent of NA types having less than 10% protection. Therefore, we suggest that England's PA system needs to be expanded, although this would probably entail modification of existing legislation to increase involvement by landowners. We also compare our results with previous appraisals that used species distribution record data and suggest that landscape-level analyses may give a more accurate and less positive assessment. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1016/j.biocon.2004.03.003 |
format | article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_18038356</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0006320704001004</els_id><sourcerecordid>14725329</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c462t-a5d95eb3f9507d77fe948a8016f1d207135940c30d6c680e9db87824e8c9ade3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkE9LJDEQxcOisLO632APueit20qnO0lfBBH_geBl7iGTVA8Zejq9SSvMt7fcEbythxDy8qrq1Y-xPwJqAUJd7epNTD5NdQPQ1iBrAPmDrYTRsmp6oU_YCgBUJRvQP9mvUnb01FJ1K4Y3fOtm7iY3HkosPA18wZyxLDm6kc85LegXDNxldIXHid9N29FNJNCJC0n7eYzeLTFNhQ8pcwpSML_9U_ic6PNwzk4HNxb8_XmfsfX93fr2sXp-eXi6vXmufKuapXJd6DvcyKHvQAetB-xb4wytOIhA2YXs-ha8hKC8MoB92BhtmhaN711AecYuj20p9t9X2sHuY_E4Ul5Mr8UKA9LITn1vbHXTyaYnY3s0-pxKyTjYOce9ywcrwH6wtzt7ZG8_2FuQlthT2cVnf1e8G4fsJh_LV60CpZUU5Ls--pCgvEXMtviIk8cQM2G3IcX_D3oH_Zacyw</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>14725329</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>A gap analysis of terrestrial protected areas in England and its implications for conservation policy</title><source>Elsevier</source><creator>Oldfield, Thomasina E.E ; Smith, Robert J ; Harrop, Stuart R ; Leader-Williams, Nigel</creator><creatorcontrib>Oldfield, Thomasina E.E ; Smith, Robert J ; Harrop, Stuart R ; Leader-Williams, Nigel</creatorcontrib><description>Many protected area (PA) systems have developed in response to socio-economic and aesthetic criteria and need to be modified to increase their conservation value. National gap analyses are an important step in describing and addressing this problem, so we sought to determine the representativeness of English PAs devoted to biodiversity conservation by using Natural Areas (NAs), elevation and PA boundary data. We found that National Nature Reserves (NNRs) and Sites of Special Scientific Interests (SSSIs) cover only 6.3% of England and are generally small, with respective median areas of 1.1 and 0.2 km
2. The English PA system under-represents lowland areas and provides a median level of 2.5% protection for the NA types, with seventy nine per cent of NA types having less than 10% protection. Therefore, we suggest that England's PA system needs to be expanded, although this would probably entail modification of existing legislation to increase involvement by landowners. We also compare our results with previous appraisals that used species distribution record data and suggest that landscape-level analyses may give a more accurate and less positive assessment.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0006-3207</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1873-2917</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.biocon.2004.03.003</identifier><identifier>CODEN: BICOBK</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Oxford: Elsevier Ltd</publisher><subject>Animal, plant and microbial ecology ; Applied ecology ; Biological and medical sciences ; Conservation planning ; Conservation, protection and management of environment and wildlife ; England ; Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology ; Gap analysis ; Parks, reserves, wildlife conservation. Endangered species: population survey and restocking ; Positive incentives ; Protected areas</subject><ispartof>Biological conservation, 2004-12, Vol.120 (3), p.303-309</ispartof><rights>2004 Elsevier Ltd</rights><rights>2004 INIST-CNRS</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c462t-a5d95eb3f9507d77fe948a8016f1d207135940c30d6c680e9db87824e8c9ade3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c462t-a5d95eb3f9507d77fe948a8016f1d207135940c30d6c680e9db87824e8c9ade3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&idt=16067631$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Oldfield, Thomasina E.E</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Smith, Robert J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Harrop, Stuart R</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Leader-Williams, Nigel</creatorcontrib><title>A gap analysis of terrestrial protected areas in England and its implications for conservation policy</title><title>Biological conservation</title><description>Many protected area (PA) systems have developed in response to socio-economic and aesthetic criteria and need to be modified to increase their conservation value. National gap analyses are an important step in describing and addressing this problem, so we sought to determine the representativeness of English PAs devoted to biodiversity conservation by using Natural Areas (NAs), elevation and PA boundary data. We found that National Nature Reserves (NNRs) and Sites of Special Scientific Interests (SSSIs) cover only 6.3% of England and are generally small, with respective median areas of 1.1 and 0.2 km
2. The English PA system under-represents lowland areas and provides a median level of 2.5% protection for the NA types, with seventy nine per cent of NA types having less than 10% protection. Therefore, we suggest that England's PA system needs to be expanded, although this would probably entail modification of existing legislation to increase involvement by landowners. We also compare our results with previous appraisals that used species distribution record data and suggest that landscape-level analyses may give a more accurate and less positive assessment.</description><subject>Animal, plant and microbial ecology</subject><subject>Applied ecology</subject><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Conservation planning</subject><subject>Conservation, protection and management of environment and wildlife</subject><subject>England</subject><subject>Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology</subject><subject>Gap analysis</subject><subject>Parks, reserves, wildlife conservation. Endangered species: population survey and restocking</subject><subject>Positive incentives</subject><subject>Protected areas</subject><issn>0006-3207</issn><issn>1873-2917</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2004</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNqFkE9LJDEQxcOisLO632APueit20qnO0lfBBH_geBl7iGTVA8Zejq9SSvMt7fcEbythxDy8qrq1Y-xPwJqAUJd7epNTD5NdQPQ1iBrAPmDrYTRsmp6oU_YCgBUJRvQP9mvUnb01FJ1K4Y3fOtm7iY3HkosPA18wZyxLDm6kc85LegXDNxldIXHid9N29FNJNCJC0n7eYzeLTFNhQ8pcwpSML_9U_ic6PNwzk4HNxb8_XmfsfX93fr2sXp-eXi6vXmufKuapXJd6DvcyKHvQAetB-xb4wytOIhA2YXs-ha8hKC8MoB92BhtmhaN711AecYuj20p9t9X2sHuY_E4Ul5Mr8UKA9LITn1vbHXTyaYnY3s0-pxKyTjYOce9ywcrwH6wtzt7ZG8_2FuQlthT2cVnf1e8G4fsJh_LV60CpZUU5Ls--pCgvEXMtviIk8cQM2G3IcX_D3oH_Zacyw</recordid><startdate>20041201</startdate><enddate>20041201</enddate><creator>Oldfield, Thomasina E.E</creator><creator>Smith, Robert J</creator><creator>Harrop, Stuart R</creator><creator>Leader-Williams, Nigel</creator><general>Elsevier Ltd</general><general>Elsevier</general><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7ST</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>SOI</scope><scope>7SN</scope><scope>7U6</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20041201</creationdate><title>A gap analysis of terrestrial protected areas in England and its implications for conservation policy</title><author>Oldfield, Thomasina E.E ; Smith, Robert J ; Harrop, Stuart R ; Leader-Williams, Nigel</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c462t-a5d95eb3f9507d77fe948a8016f1d207135940c30d6c680e9db87824e8c9ade3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2004</creationdate><topic>Animal, plant and microbial ecology</topic><topic>Applied ecology</topic><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>Conservation planning</topic><topic>Conservation, protection and management of environment and wildlife</topic><topic>England</topic><topic>Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology</topic><topic>Gap analysis</topic><topic>Parks, reserves, wildlife conservation. Endangered species: population survey and restocking</topic><topic>Positive incentives</topic><topic>Protected areas</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Oldfield, Thomasina E.E</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Smith, Robert J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Harrop, Stuart R</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Leader-Williams, Nigel</creatorcontrib><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>Ecology Abstracts</collection><collection>Sustainability Science Abstracts</collection><jtitle>Biological conservation</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Oldfield, Thomasina E.E</au><au>Smith, Robert J</au><au>Harrop, Stuart R</au><au>Leader-Williams, Nigel</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>A gap analysis of terrestrial protected areas in England and its implications for conservation policy</atitle><jtitle>Biological conservation</jtitle><date>2004-12-01</date><risdate>2004</risdate><volume>120</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>303</spage><epage>309</epage><pages>303-309</pages><issn>0006-3207</issn><eissn>1873-2917</eissn><coden>BICOBK</coden><abstract>Many protected area (PA) systems have developed in response to socio-economic and aesthetic criteria and need to be modified to increase their conservation value. National gap analyses are an important step in describing and addressing this problem, so we sought to determine the representativeness of English PAs devoted to biodiversity conservation by using Natural Areas (NAs), elevation and PA boundary data. We found that National Nature Reserves (NNRs) and Sites of Special Scientific Interests (SSSIs) cover only 6.3% of England and are generally small, with respective median areas of 1.1 and 0.2 km
2. The English PA system under-represents lowland areas and provides a median level of 2.5% protection for the NA types, with seventy nine per cent of NA types having less than 10% protection. Therefore, we suggest that England's PA system needs to be expanded, although this would probably entail modification of existing legislation to increase involvement by landowners. We also compare our results with previous appraisals that used species distribution record data and suggest that landscape-level analyses may give a more accurate and less positive assessment.</abstract><cop>Oxford</cop><pub>Elsevier Ltd</pub><doi>10.1016/j.biocon.2004.03.003</doi><tpages>7</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0006-3207 |
ispartof | Biological conservation, 2004-12, Vol.120 (3), p.303-309 |
issn | 0006-3207 1873-2917 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_18038356 |
source | Elsevier |
subjects | Animal, plant and microbial ecology Applied ecology Biological and medical sciences Conservation planning Conservation, protection and management of environment and wildlife England Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology Gap analysis Parks, reserves, wildlife conservation. Endangered species: population survey and restocking Positive incentives Protected areas |
title | A gap analysis of terrestrial protected areas in England and its implications for conservation policy |
url | http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-24T15%3A28%3A05IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=A%20gap%20analysis%20of%20terrestrial%20protected%20areas%20in%20England%20and%20its%20implications%20for%20conservation%20policy&rft.jtitle=Biological%20conservation&rft.au=Oldfield,%20Thomasina%20E.E&rft.date=2004-12-01&rft.volume=120&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=303&rft.epage=309&rft.pages=303-309&rft.issn=0006-3207&rft.eissn=1873-2917&rft.coden=BICOBK&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.biocon.2004.03.003&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E14725329%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c462t-a5d95eb3f9507d77fe948a8016f1d207135940c30d6c680e9db87824e8c9ade3%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=14725329&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true |