Strategic Planning for Species Conservation: A Handbook - IUCN

10. Integration of the SCS process with other
conservation planning efforts
This chapter reviews how the SCS process, as described in this Handbook, can be
connected with other conservation planning efforts, both for species and for areas.
Because the conservation planning literature is so large and diverse, this review can not
claim to be exhaustive. Rather we focus on two kinds of conservation planning most
relevant to SCSs: (a) other approaches focused on species which parallel or complement
SCSs as described here and (b) approaches to area or landscape planning which include
an explicit species planning element. We are aware that this chapter raises several
issues that would deserve much more extensive treatment, but it would go beyond the
scope of this Handbook to go into more depth than we have done here.
10.1 Introduction
Protecting species from threats, whether locally or globally, has been central to
conservation since the first recognition that “nature conservation” was worthwhile. These
guidelines on preparing SCSs represent the latest manifestation of this interest in saving
species. Of equal longevity has been the desire to conserve natural areas, whether for
their scenic values, cultural and spiritual importance or, more recently, for the values they
provide as habitat for species and for ecosystem services.
Today, the conservation of biological diversity encompasses both species-focused and
ecosystem- or area-based approaches (also formally referred to as “systematic
conservation planning” – see, for example, Margules and Pressey 2000). Today, the
conservation of biological diversity encompasses both species-focused and ecosystem- or
area-based approaches (also formally referred to as “systematic conservation planning” –
see, for example, Margules and Pressey 2000). Most conservationists agree that these
two approaches represent different sides of the same coin, complementing each other.
While it is now recognised that many species require conservation effort, how to use
limited and usually inadequate human and financial resources most effectively remains a
critical issue when designing practical conservation strategies. Should funds be used to
pursue the conservation of particular species or to invest in the management and
protection of areas that are of notable biological value? Within IUCN, SSC, and the World
Commission on Protected Areas (WCPA) represent the two different, but closely
interrelated sets of interests and both approaches are critical to saving the world’s
biodiversity.
Fortunately, the importance of integrating species and habitat conservation is beginning to
be fully appreciated at the global level. Since 1992, the global Convention on Biological
Diversity (CBD) has led the way in promoting an integrated approach by including
“diversity within species, between species and of ecosystems” in its definition of biological
diversity (CBD 2001).
This is of general importance, but is particularly useful when considering the high diversity
and overall importance of the invertebrates, which are often overlooked in conservation
planning. Use of species groups links closely with the interests of the WCPA, particularly
in assessing the biodiversity value of particular sites, their management, and the creation
of protected area networks. It is worth remembering here that in an era of climate change,
80