A scale dynamics approach to integrate landscape conservation within and across jurisdictional boundaries

• Published in: Landscape ecology Vol. 38; no. 3; pp. 725 - 736
• Main Authors: Rittenhouse, Chadwick D., Tirpak, John M., Thompson, Frank R.
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Dordrecht Springer Netherlands 01-03-2023; Springer Nature B.V
• Subjects: Biomedical and Life Sciences; Boundaries; Case studies; Conservation; Cooperatives; Coordination; Ecological effects; Ecology; Ecosystems; Environmental Management; Integration; Jurisdiction; Landscape; Landscape design; Landscape Ecology; Landscape preservation; Landscape/Regional and Urban Planning; Life Sciences; Natural resources; Nature Conservation; Perspective; Planning; Public private partnerships; Sustainable Development; Wildlife conservation; Social-ecological system; Restoration; Landscape conservation; Landscape management; Protection; Conservation planning
• ISSN: 0921-2973; 1572-9761
• DOI: 10.1007/s10980-022-01456-2

Context
Public-private partnerships are needed to conserve landscapes, waterscapes, and seascapes. Landscape conservation design (LCD) translates shared objectives into spatial priorities to guide conservation efforts and foster collaboration among partners at the landscape level.
Objective
We examined LCD projects in the eastern United States to identify implementation and coordination challenges and propose solutions that facilitate integration across projects in instances when coordination and continuity of conservation efforts is paramount.
Methods
We apply a scale dynamics approach to LCD that identifies
what
conservation actions to take (goals scale),
how
to conduct those actions (implementation scale), and where to take those actions (spatial scale) to benefit species and ecosystems (ecological scale). Additional steps include identify
who
(jurisdiction scale) will take those actions and
when
(threats scale) those actions should be taken.
Results
We found that although LCD projects span ecological, spatial, temporal, and jurisdictional scales, focusing only on spatial or ecological scales resulted in poor integration among adjacent projects when few species or ecosystems were the target of more than one LCD project.
Conclusions
Variation in approach among LCD projects poses a challenge to project coordination and project integration with existing conservation planning efforts and products. This challenge exists within and across jurisdictional boundaries. The scale dynamics approach provides a trans-project basis for integration across multiple LCD projects.