Literature DB >> 17298512

Evaluating the potential for conservation development: biophysical, economic, and institutional perspectives.

Liba Pejchar1, Peter M Morgan, Margaret R Caldwell, Carl Palmer, Gretchen C Daily.   

Abstract

The widespread conversion of rural land to low-density residential development poses an immediate threat to biodiversity and to the provision of ecosystem services. Given that development will continue and environmental stakes are high, analyzing alternative growth strategies is critical. Conservation development is one such strategy that has the potential to benefit ecosystems and diverse stakeholders including developers, homebuyers, governments, and society as a whole. Conservation development clusters homes on one part of a property to manage the most ecologically important land for the conservation of biodiversity and ecosystem services. We draw on lessons learned from landscape ecology, open-space development, and regional planning to weigh the biophysical, economic, and institutional evidence for and against conservation development. Conservation development offers many potential environmental and economic advantages: relatively high home values and appreciation rates, lower development costs, and social and ecological benefits to society including landscape connectivity, protection and active stewardship of important ecological assets, and the maintenance of ecosystem services. But this approach also has shortcomings: it may require enlightened institutional regulations and regional planning (and/or ecologically aware developers), it is not always more profitable than conventional development and thus may require subsidies or incentives, and additional research is required to fully understand its benefits and drawbacks. With more information on the effects of clustering, the development of flexible zoning laws, and effective regional planning, conservation development could be a viable strategy for sustaining biodiversity and ecosystem services in changing landscapes.

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17298512     DOI: 10.1111/j.1523-1739.2006.00572.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Conserv Biol        ISSN: 0888-8892            Impact factor:   6.560


  2 in total

1.  Prevalence of conservation design in an agriculture-dominated landscape: the case of Northern Indiana.

Authors:  Julie Crick; Linda Stalker Prokopy
Journal:  Environ Manage       Date:  2009-02-18       Impact factor: 3.266

2.  Social Network Analysis Identifies Key Participants in Conservation Development.

Authors:  Cooper M Farr; Sarah E Reed; Liba Pejchar
Journal:  Environ Manage       Date:  2018-03-03       Impact factor: 3.266

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.