TY - JOUR
T1 - Analysis of trade-offs between biodiversity, carbon farming and agricultural development in Northern Australia reveals the benefits of strategic planning
AU - Morán-Ordóñez, Alejandra
AU - Whitehead, Amy L.
AU - Luck, Gary W.
AU - Cook, Garry D.
AU - Maggini, Ramona
AU - Fitzsimons, James A.
AU - Wintle, Brendan A.
N1 - Includes bibliographical references.
PY - 2017/1/1
Y1 - 2017/1/1
N2 - Australia's northern savannas are one of the few remaining large and mostly intact natural areas on Earth. However, their biodiversity and ecosystem values could be threatened if proposed agricultural development proceeds. Through land-use change scenarios, we explored trade-offs and synergies among biodiversity conservation, carbon farming and agriculture production in northern Australia. We found that if all suitable soils were converted to agriculture, habitat at unique recorded locations of three species would disappear and 40 species and vegetation communities could lose more than 50% of their current distributions. Yet, strategically considering agriculture and biodiversity outcomes leads to zoning options that could yield >56,000 km2 of agricultural development with a significantly lower impact on biodiversity values and carbon farming. Our analysis provides a template for policy-makers and planners to identify areas of conflict between competing land-uses, places to protect in advance of impacts, and planning options that balance agricultural and conservation needs.
AB - Australia's northern savannas are one of the few remaining large and mostly intact natural areas on Earth. However, their biodiversity and ecosystem values could be threatened if proposed agricultural development proceeds. Through land-use change scenarios, we explored trade-offs and synergies among biodiversity conservation, carbon farming and agriculture production in northern Australia. We found that if all suitable soils were converted to agriculture, habitat at unique recorded locations of three species would disappear and 40 species and vegetation communities could lose more than 50% of their current distributions. Yet, strategically considering agriculture and biodiversity outcomes leads to zoning options that could yield >56,000 km2 of agricultural development with a significantly lower impact on biodiversity values and carbon farming. Our analysis provides a template for policy-makers and planners to identify areas of conflict between competing land-uses, places to protect in advance of impacts, and planning options that balance agricultural and conservation needs.
KW - Biodiversity conservation
KW - Carbon storage
KW - Conservation planning
KW - Economic development
KW - Intensive agriculture
KW - Land-use change
KW - MaxEnt
KW - Spatial conservation prioritization
KW - Species distributions
KW - Zonation
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84973360109&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84973360109&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1111/conl.12255
DO - 10.1111/conl.12255
M3 - Letter
AN - SCOPUS:84973360109
SN - 1755-263X
VL - 10
SP - 94
EP - 104
JO - Conservation Letters
JF - Conservation Letters
IS - 1
ER -