...
  • 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Conservation Biology >Ecoregions in context: a critique with special reference to Indonesia [Review]
【24h】

Ecoregions in context: a critique with special reference to Indonesia [Review]

机译：背景中的生态区：特别针对印度尼西亚的评论[评论]

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

World Wildlife Fund-United States (WWF) is promoting an ecoregional framework internationally as a new hierarchical approach to organizing and prioritizing conservation efforts. We assessed WWF ecoregions against existing frameworks: (1) the Dasmann-Udvardy (World Conservation Union [IUCN]) Biogeographical Representation Framework, (2) the Bailey Ecoregional Framework (U.S. Forest Service), and (3) the hotspot approach, as exemplified by the BirdLife Endemic Bird Area Approach and the WWF-IUCN Centres of Plant Diversity Program. We examined the genealogy of the schemes from three perspectives: methodological explicitness, transparency and repeatability, and whether the WWF-ecoregions system improves on existing schemes. We considered Indonesia as a case study and assessed the efficacy of each system in the Indonesian context. The existing planning frameworks achieved their objective; in general had explicit, transparent, and repeatable methods; and, in the case of the Dasmann-Udvardy system, attained an institutional reality in Indonesia. The central purpose of the WWF-ecoregions framework is the same as the 25-year-old Dasmann-Udvardy system, and at the coarsest spatial scales it relies on similar spatial delineators (biomes and faunal regions). The WWF methodology, however, employs a gestalt approach to defining ecoregion boundaries. In the Indonesian context the resulting map appears problematic both in terms of the underlying rationale of the ecoregion approach and in terms of apparent conflict with preexisting protected-area design. To suggest, insofar as refined planning frameworks are needed, that an alternative route that builds oil rather than competes with existing approaches would be to combine at the mesoscale the landform delineators that characterize the Bailey ecoregion system with the existing macroscale ecoclimatic and biogeographic delineators of the Dasmann-Udvardy system. We question the investment in developing and promoting the WWF-ecoregion scheme in Indonesia when the existing Dasmann-Udvardy system, used in conjunction with hotspot studies, provides a seemingly adequate system and when the reserve system itself is under considerable pressure. [References: 101]
机译：美国世界野生动物基金会（WWF）正在国际上推广生态区域框架，作为一种新的分级方法来组织和优先保护工作。我们根据现有框架评估了世界自然基金会的生态区：（1）Dasmann-Udvardy（世界自然保护联盟[IUCN]）生物地理代表框架;（2）Bailey生态区框架（美国森林服务局）;以及（3）热点方法，以例证为例由BirdLife特有鸟类区域方法和WWF-IUCN植物多样性中心计划提供。我们从三个角度检查了该计划的家谱：方法的明确性，透明性和可重复性，以及WWF生态区系统是否在现有计划上有所改进。我们将印度尼西亚作为案例研究，并在印度尼西亚的背景下评估了每个系统的有效性。现有的规划框架实现了其目标;一般而言，有明确，透明和可重复的方法;就达斯曼-乌德瓦第（Dasmann-Udvardy）制度而言，在印度尼西亚实现了制度现实。世界自然基金会生态区框架的主要目的与拥有25年历史的Dasmann-Udvardy系统相同，并且在最粗糙的空间尺度上，它依赖于类似的空间划界符（生物群落和动物区系）。但是，世界自然基金会的方法采用了格式塔方法来定义生态区域的边界。在印度尼西亚语境中，从生态区方法的基本原理以及与先前存在的保护区设计的明显冲突方面来看，得出的地图都存在问题。建议，在需要完善的规划框架的情况下，建立石油而不是与现有方法竞争的替代途径是在中尺度上将表征贝利生态区系统的地貌轮廓线与该州现有的宏观生态气候和生物地理轮廓线相结合。 Dasmann-Udvardy系统。当现有的Dasmann-Udvardy系统与热点研究结合使用时，提供了一个看似适当的系统，而储备系统本身也承受着巨大的压力时，我们质疑在印度尼西亚开发和推广WWF生态区计划的投资。 [参考：101]

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