Conservation Prioritization in a Tiger Landscape: Is Umbrella Species Enough?

Vaishali Vasudeva, Sujata Upgupta, Ajay Singh, Nazrukh Sherwani, Supratim Dutta, Rajasekar Rajaraman, Sankarshan Chaudhuri, Satyam Verma, Jeyaraj Antony Johnson and Ramesh Krishnamurthy
Additional contact information
Vaishali Vasudeva: Wildlife Institute of India, Chandrabani, Dehradun 24800, India
Sujata Upgupta: Wildlife Institute of India, Chandrabani, Dehradun 24800, India
Ajay Singh: Wildlife Institute of India, Chandrabani, Dehradun 24800, India
Nazrukh Sherwani: Wildlife Institute of India, Chandrabani, Dehradun 24800, India
Supratim Dutta: Wildlife Institute of India, Chandrabani, Dehradun 24800, India
Rajasekar Rajaraman: Wildlife Institute of India, Chandrabani, Dehradun 24800, India
Sankarshan Chaudhuri: Wildlife Institute of India, Chandrabani, Dehradun 24800, India
Satyam Verma: Wildlife Institute of India, Chandrabani, Dehradun 24800, India
Jeyaraj Antony Johnson: Wildlife Institute of India, Chandrabani, Dehradun 24800, India
Ramesh Krishnamurthy: Wildlife Institute of India, Chandrabani, Dehradun 24800, India

Land, 2022, vol. 11, issue 3, 1-21

Abstract: Conservation approaches in tiger landscapes have focused on single species and their habitat. Further, the limited extent of the existing protected area network in India lacks representativeness, habitat connectivity, and integration in the larger landscape. Our objective was to identify sites important for connected tiger habitat and biodiversity potential in the Greater Panna Landscape, central India. Further, we aimed to set targets at the landscape level for conservation and prioritize these sites within each district in the landscape as specific management/conservation zones. We used earth observation data to derive an index of biodiversity potential. Marxan was used to identify sites that met tiger and biodiversity conservation targets with minimum costs. We found that to protect 50% of the tiger habitat with connectivity, 20% of the landscape area must be conserved. To conserve 100% of high biodiversity potential, 50% moderate biodiversity potential, and 25% low biodiversity potential, 55% of the landscape area must be conserved. To represent both tiger habitat and biodiversity, 62% of the total landscape area requires conservation or restoration intervention. The prioritized zones can prove significant for hierarchical decision making, involving multiple stakeholders in the landscape, including other tiger range areas.

Keywords: Marxan; systematic conservation planning; integrated landscape management; central India; protected area; targets; spatial prioritization; decision making (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: Q15 Q2 Q24 Q28 Q5 R14 R52 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2022
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/11/3/371/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/11/3/371/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jlands:v:11:y:2022:i:3:p:371-:d:763206

Access Statistics for this article

Land is currently edited by Ms. Carol Ma

More articles in Land from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().