Spatial optimization for the zoning of protected areas

Territorial Optimization Algorithms for the Zoning of Protected Areas

Most Natura 2000 zones and other protected area designations lack a management plan that sets clear conservation and socioeconomic development objectives. However, management plans are crucial to ensuring the effectiveness of the Natura 2000 network in the next decade and achieving the goals outlined in the Biodiversity Strategy for 2030.

In the journal Biodiversity and Conservation, we have published a study demonstrating an innovative methodology for zoning protected areas through the use of spatial planning algorithms in the Montseny Natural Park. You can find this scientific article at https://rdcu.be/cHPWm.

We aim to harmonize conservation and human development objectives:

Species

We include 96 species listed in Annex I of the Birds Directive and species and habitats listed in Annexes I and II of the Habitats Directive, as well as in regional special conservation plans and the IUCN Red List (assessed as threatened).

Habitats

We include the spatial distribution of 75 habitats of conservation interest based on the Catalonia Habitat Cartography.

Human Activities

We include the spatial distribution of 11 human activities: agriculture, pastures, forestry operations, tourist pressure, recreational fishing (with catch and release management or without extractive limitations), and quarries.

Three Management Zones to Ensure Objectives

In this case, we use typical management zones:

• Strict Conservation Zone
• Mixed Objectives Zone
• Human Use Zone

However, in a model intended for real-world application, as many management zones could be created as deemed necessary based on the characteristics of the protected area.

Then, we quantify the suitable area for each objective according to its ecology. This is a very important task that should be based on expert judgment and the specific characteristics of the area. By also knowing the compatibility relationships between elements, we can maximize synergies and minimize incompatibilities, thus preventing territorial conflicts. In other words, the open spaces generated by agriculture are fundamental for many birds of prey, while certain types of tourism are incompatible with the conservation of some species of fauna.

We also establish our connectivity preferences.

We want to prevent the strict conservation zone from being established near human infrastructures to avoid restrictions on local communities.

We also want the mixed objectives zone to act as a buffer between the strict conservation zones and human use zones. With this, we aim to reduce impacts on biodiversity.

But what happens if we expand the surface area we consider suitable for human uses more and more?

In the GIF, you can see how the distribution of the three zones changes to adapt to our demands in different scenarios.

The zones always meet our preferences, and despite the increase in demand for surface area for human uses, the optimization does not prevent the objectives for species and habitats from being achieved.

WE REACH 92% OF THE DESIRED SURFACE AREA!

This methodology is objective, flexible, transparent, and allows us to carry out territorial planning in a participatory manner.

Only by including the population can we build long-lasting management plans capable of effectively meeting the conservation objectives of protected areas.