Reconciling diverse viewpoints within systematic conservation planning

Conservation encompasses numerous alternative viewpoints on what to value (features such as biodiversity, ecosystem services or socio-economic benefits) and how to convert these values into conservation policies that deliver for nature and people. Reconciling these differing values and viewpoints in policy development and implementation is a perennial challenge.
Balancing differing stakeholder viewpoints within a single conservation plan risks some viewpoints overshadowing others. This can occur as some dominant viewpoints may lead to more marginal views being suppressed, and also through social biases during the planning process.
Here we develop four separate ‘caricature’ conservation viewpoints, and spatially quantify each of them in order to test different approaches to equitable reconciliation. Each viewpoint prioritises different locations, dependent on the extent to which they deliver a variety of different biodiversity, well-being and economic goals.
We then show how these diffe...,
Please see the README.md document and the accompanying published article: Cunningham, C.A., Crick, H.Q., Morecroft, M.D., Thomas, C.D., Beale, C.M. 2023. Reconciling diverse viewpoints within systematic conservation planning. People and Nature. https://doi.org/10.1002/pan3.10449.
, Please see the README.md document and the accompanying published article: Cunningham, C.A., Crick, H.Q., Morecroft, M.D., Thomas, C.D., Beale, C.M. 2023. Reconciling diverse viewpoints within systematic conservation planning. People and Nature. https://doi.org/10.1002/pan3.10449.
Software used:
R
R version 4.2.2 (2022-10-31 ucrt) -- \"Innocent and Trusting\"Copyright (C) 2022 The R Foundation for Statistical ComputingPlatform: x86_64-w64-mingw32/x64 (64-bit)
Zonation
Zonation 4.0.0rc1_compact, build: Sep 19 2014 18:16:13