Integrating conservation and development: Effective trade-offs between biodiversity and cost in the selection of protected areas

Strategies are needed for reconciling competing demands at the regional level when areas are to be selected for protection and there are associated costs, possibly equivalent to forgone development opportunties. As an alternative to the fixed scaling (or weighting) of costs and benefits required by cost-benefit analysis, multi-criteria analyses allow the exploration of alternative weightings and a summary trade-off curve to determine preferred solutions. For alternative sets of areas, total cost could be plotted against total represented biodiversity, but a more consistent approach should look at trade-off space at the level of individual areas. For a given weighting, an area is assigned protection if and only if its contribution to total biodiversity, CB, exceeds its equivalent cost, EC (in biodiversity units). Because CB for a given area depends on which other areas are also protected, it can be more or less than EC. Here we develop an iterative strategy for selecting areas, such that, for a given weighting, an area is in the final protected set if and only if its final CB value is greater than its EC value. Sensitivity analysis is used to identify those areas that: (1) are assigned protection even when low weight is given to biodiversity, or (2) are not assigned protection even when high weight is given to biodiversity. This approach is applicable in principle to any surrogate measure for biodiversity; here examples are presented in which environmental data are summarized as an environmental space.