Difference between revisions of "Biological valuation"
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
For environments for which data are available, subzones within a study area are [[Scoring system for marine evaluation|scored]] against two biological valuation criteria: [[Rarity criterion in marine biological evaluation|rarity]] and [[Aggregation and marine biological value|aggregation]] or [[Fitness consequence criterion in marine biological valuation|fitness consequences]].<ref name="ma">[http://www.marbef.org/documents/glossybook/MarBEFbooklet.pdf Heip, C., Hummel, H., van Avesaath, P., Appeltans, W., Arvanitidis, C., Aspden, R., Austen, M., Boero, F., Bouma, TJ., Boxshall, G., Buchholz, F., Crowe, T., Delaney, A., Deprez, T., Emblow, C., Feral, JP., Gasol, JM., Gooday, A., Harder, J., Ianora, A., Kraberg, A., Mackenzie, B., Ojaveer, H., Paterson, D., Rumohr, H., Schiedek, D., Sokolowski, A., Somerfield, P., Sousa Pinto, I., Vincx, M., Węsławski, JM., Nash, R. (2009). Marine Biodiversity and Ecosystem Functioning. Printbase, Dublin, Ireland ISSN 2009-2539]</ref> | For environments for which data are available, subzones within a study area are [[Scoring system for marine evaluation|scored]] against two biological valuation criteria: [[Rarity criterion in marine biological evaluation|rarity]] and [[Aggregation and marine biological value|aggregation]] or [[Fitness consequence criterion in marine biological valuation|fitness consequences]].<ref name="ma">[http://www.marbef.org/documents/glossybook/MarBEFbooklet.pdf Heip, C., Hummel, H., van Avesaath, P., Appeltans, W., Arvanitidis, C., Aspden, R., Austen, M., Boero, F., Bouma, TJ., Boxshall, G., Buchholz, F., Crowe, T., Delaney, A., Deprez, T., Emblow, C., Feral, JP., Gasol, JM., Gooday, A., Harder, J., Ianora, A., Kraberg, A., Mackenzie, B., Ojaveer, H., Paterson, D., Rumohr, H., Schiedek, D., Sokolowski, A., Somerfield, P., Sousa Pinto, I., Vincx, M., Węsławski, JM., Nash, R. (2009). Marine Biodiversity and Ecosystem Functioning. Printbase, Dublin, Ireland ISSN 2009-2539]</ref> | ||
| − | + | <P> | |
| − | + | <BR> | |
| + | <P> | ||
| + | ===Are all species equal?=== | ||
| + | This approach was developed for the establishment of the best criteria for delineating [[MPAs_(Marine_Protected_Areas)|marine protected areas]]. Since any kind of valuation requires ranking selected objects as more or less valuable, it raises ethical and philosophical questions, namely, whether all species are equal or not. Some recent studies discuss this dilemma, including Linder (1988)<ref>Linder D.O. 1988 Are all species created equal.? and other questions which are shaping wildlife law. Harvard Environmental.Law Review 12, 157pp.</ref>, Singer (1989), Schmidtz (2002)<ref>Schmidtz D. 2002 Are all species equal.? Journal.Applied Philosphy 15, 57- 67 | ||
| + | Singer P 1989 All animals are equal. In: Animal.rights and human obligations. Edited T. Regan & P. Singer. Englweood Cliffs, NJ, Prentice Hall</ref>, and Jennings (2009)<ref>[http://www.nature.org/tncscience/bigideas/people/art23931.html Jennings M 2009 The next big ideas in conservation. Are all species equal.? The Nature Conservancy;]</ref>. Although it is accepted that all species are equal in moral terms, their contributions to ecosystem structure and function differ, and this can be assessed in scientific terms. | ||
| + | <P> | ||
| + | <BR> | ||
| + | <P> | ||
===Biological valuation maps=== | ===Biological valuation maps=== | ||
| Line 14: | Line 21: | ||
[[Image:val1.jpg|thumb|centre|650px|Biological valuation of seabed communities in Polish Exclusive Economic Zone ]] | [[Image:val1.jpg|thumb|centre|650px|Biological valuation of seabed communities in Polish Exclusive Economic Zone ]] | ||
| − | + | <P> | |
| + | <BR> | ||
| + | <P> | ||
== See also == | == See also == | ||
Revision as of 15:28, 6 October 2009
Contents
Biological valuation method
The marine biological valuation methodology is able to integrate all available biological information on an area into one indicator of intrinsic value of marine biodiversity, without reference to anthropogenic use. This methodology can be used in every marine environment, independent of the amount and quality of the available biological data or the habitat type.
For environments for which data are available, subzones within a study area are scored against two biological valuation criteria: rarity and aggregation or fitness consequences.[1]
Are all species equal?
This approach was developed for the establishment of the best criteria for delineating marine protected areas. Since any kind of valuation requires ranking selected objects as more or less valuable, it raises ethical and philosophical questions, namely, whether all species are equal or not. Some recent studies discuss this dilemma, including Linder (1988)[2], Singer (1989), Schmidtz (2002)[3], and Jennings (2009)[4]. Although it is accepted that all species are equal in moral terms, their contributions to ecosystem structure and function differ, and this can be assessed in scientific terms.
Biological valuation maps
Biological value is not a direct measure of ecosystem health, although areas regarded as of high biological value are often considered to be valuable providers of socio-economic goods and services and are of high quality in terms of environmental health. The main difference is, however, that biological valuation focuses on the features of species and communities themselves, and not on the contamination or the extractable/usable part of the ecosystem.
Therefore marine biological valuation provides a comprehensive concept for assessing the intrinsic value of the subzones within a study area. It is a tool for calling attention to subzones that have particularly high ecological or biological significance. The biological valuation maps can also be used as baseline maps for future spatial planning in the marine environment. [1]
See also
- Aggregation and marine biological value
- Biodiversity as a marine valuation concept
- Conclusions from the MarBEF and Encora workshop on marine biological valuation
- Marine biological valuation maps - an example from Belgium
- Potential application of the concept of marine biological valuation
- Rapport of the MarBEF and Encora workshop on marine biological valuation
- Rarity criterion in marine biological evaluation
- Resilience as a criterion in marine biological evaluation
- Selected marine biological valuation criteria
- The importance of geographical scale in marine biological evaluation
References
- ↑ 1.0 1.1 Heip, C., Hummel, H., van Avesaath, P., Appeltans, W., Arvanitidis, C., Aspden, R., Austen, M., Boero, F., Bouma, TJ., Boxshall, G., Buchholz, F., Crowe, T., Delaney, A., Deprez, T., Emblow, C., Feral, JP., Gasol, JM., Gooday, A., Harder, J., Ianora, A., Kraberg, A., Mackenzie, B., Ojaveer, H., Paterson, D., Rumohr, H., Schiedek, D., Sokolowski, A., Somerfield, P., Sousa Pinto, I., Vincx, M., Węsławski, JM., Nash, R. (2009). Marine Biodiversity and Ecosystem Functioning. Printbase, Dublin, Ireland ISSN 2009-2539
- ↑ Linder D.O. 1988 Are all species created equal.? and other questions which are shaping wildlife law. Harvard Environmental.Law Review 12, 157pp.
- ↑ Schmidtz D. 2002 Are all species equal.? Journal.Applied Philosphy 15, 57- 67 Singer P 1989 All animals are equal. In: Animal.rights and human obligations. Edited T. Regan & P. Singer. Englweood Cliffs, NJ, Prentice Hall
- ↑ Jennings M 2009 The next big ideas in conservation. Are all species equal.? The Nature Conservancy;
