• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文学位 >GIS mapping of 'two worlds': Comparing expert and non-expert conservation priorities.
【24h】

GIS mapping of 'two worlds': Comparing expert and non-expert conservation priorities.

机译：GIS对“两个世界”的映射：比较专家和非专家的保护重点。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

Increasing urbanization has been met with a call for setting aside lands for permanent protection. In order to maximize available conservation funds, previous research has argued that priority-setting exercises are critical to achieving this goal. In order to advance priority-setting exercises, Geographic Information Systems (GIS) are often used to facilitate conservation assessments. This process enables the identification of the highest priority areas for conservation based on certain ecological and biodiversity criteria. To date, conservation assessments largely have been expert-driven and based on ecological and biological data, while emerging research stresses the need to involve non-experts throughout the process of conservation planning. To some, the use of non-experts in the process creates a hybrid view of resource management and has the likelihood; it is argued, to increase the potential for success of conservation projects. From this perspective, greater conservation success results from identifying areas of correspondence between experts and non-experts. To date, however, there has been little examination of the correspondence between expert and non-expert conservation assessments and what this might mean for conservation planning. Using a case study of Charleston County, South Carolina, this thesis examines the issue of correspondence and non-correspondence between expert and non-expert conservation assessments, focusing on how they may contribute to potential success and conflict. Specifically, this research addresses how the incorporation of a particular group of people can affect conservation planning. The results suggest that non-experts in Charleston County identify areas, whose attributes correspond closely to the conservation priorities identified by experts. While this research does not explicitly evaluate conservation success, these findings support the idea that involvement of non-experts in conservation assessments might lay the groundwork for more successful conservation plans, given that potential areas of conflict can arise in the process. For example, past research indicates a focus on corresponding areas can lead to more successful planning; however, doing so may disregard a certain constituency, which itself can lead to conflict. Therefore, plans that proceed from a position that a focus on corresponding areas and a system of conservation comprises may relieve potential conflicts in conservation planning.
机译：日益城市化的呼声是要求拨出土地作永久保护。为了使可用的保护资金最大化，以前的研究认为，确定优先次序的练习对于实现此目标至关重要。为了推进确定重点的工作，经常使用地理信息系统（GIS）来促进保护评估。这一过程使人们能够根据某些生态和生物多样性标准确定最优先的保护领域。迄今为止，保护评估很大程度上是由专家驱动的，并基于生态和生物数据，而新兴研究强调需要在保护规划的整个过程中让非专家参与。在某些情况下，在该过程中使用非专家会产生资源管理的混合视图，并且具有可能性。有人认为，这增加了保护项目成功的潜力。从这个角度看，确定专家与非专家之间的对应关系将带来更大的保护成功。但是，迄今为止，几乎没有审查专家和非专家的保护评估之间的对应关系，这对保护规划可能意味着什么。本文以南卡罗来纳州查尔斯顿县为例，研究了专家保护评估与非专家保护评估之间的对应和不对应问题，重点是它们如何促进潜在的成功和冲突。具体而言，这项研究解决了特定人群的融入如何影响保护规划的问题。结果表明，查尔斯顿县的非专家确定了区域，其属性与专家确定的保护重点紧密对应。尽管这项研究并未明确评估保护成功的程度，但这些发现支持这样一种观点，即非专家参与保护评估可能会为更成功的保护计划奠定基础，因为在此过程中可能会出现潜在的冲突区域。例如，过去的研究表明，专注于相应领域可以导致更成功的计划。但是，这样做可能会忽略某些选区，这本身可能导致冲突。因此，从侧重于相应领域和保护体系的立场出发的计划可以缓解保护规划中的潜在冲突。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号