Book contents
- Sustainable Development: Asia-Pacific Perspectives
- Sustainable Development: Asia-Pacific Perspectives
- Copyright page
- Dedication
- Contents
- Notes on contributors
- Peer reviewers
- Editor’s note
- Foreword
- Foreword
- Foreword
- Foreword
- Foreword
- Environmental keystones: Remembering Dr Mostafa Kamal Tolba
- Remembering Dr Mostafa Kamal Tolba
- Remembering Dr Mostafa Kamal Tolba
- Acronyms and abbreviations
- SI prefixes
- Unit abbreviations
- Chemical formulae
- Part I Sustainable Development: Theories and Practices
- Part II Sustainable Development: Challenges and Opportunities
- 17 Scientific responses in an era of global change
- 18 Government communication on transboundary haze: The nexus between public health and tourism
- 19 Biomass energy prospects: A promising fuel for sustainable development in Asia and the Pacific
- 20 Pathways to a more sustainable electricity sector in India
- 21 Gender equality and energy access: Barriers to maximizing development effectiveness in the SAARC region
- 22 The biosphere and the interactions between stratospheric ozone depletion and climate change
- 23 The political challenge of linking climate change and sustainable development policies: Risks and prospects
- 24 Social vulnerability to climate change in Cambodia, Lao PDR, and Vietnam
- 25 Sustainable development in Bangladesh: Bridging the SDGs and climate action
- 26 Sustainable development in Pakistan: Vulnerabilities and opportunities
- 27 Beyond protected areas: Biodiversity conservation and global change in Asia and the Pacific
- 28 Causes of land-use change and biodiversity loss in Monsoon Asia
- 29 Assessing linkages between land use and biodiversity: A case study from the Eastern Himalayas using low-cost, high-return survey technology
- 30 Where to invade next: Inaction on biological invasions threatens sustainability in a small island developing state of the tropical South Pacific
- 31 Did the Indian Ocean tsunami trigger a shift towards disaster risk reduction?
- 32 Cyclone Nargis and disaster risk management in Myanmar
- Index
- Endmatter
- References
29 - Assessing linkages between land use and biodiversity: A case study from the Eastern Himalayas using low-cost, high-return survey technology
from Part II - Sustainable Development: Challenges and Opportunities
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 23 December 2021
Book contents
- Sustainable Development: Asia-Pacific Perspectives
- Sustainable Development: Asia-Pacific Perspectives
- Copyright page
- Dedication
- Contents
- Notes on contributors
- Peer reviewers
- Editor’s note
- Foreword
- Foreword
- Foreword
- Foreword
- Foreword
- Environmental keystones: Remembering Dr Mostafa Kamal Tolba
- Remembering Dr Mostafa Kamal Tolba
- Remembering Dr Mostafa Kamal Tolba
- Acronyms and abbreviations
- SI prefixes
- Unit abbreviations
- Chemical formulae
- Part I Sustainable Development: Theories and Practices
- Part II Sustainable Development: Challenges and Opportunities
- 17 Scientific responses in an era of global change
- 18 Government communication on transboundary haze: The nexus between public health and tourism
- 19 Biomass energy prospects: A promising fuel for sustainable development in Asia and the Pacific
- 20 Pathways to a more sustainable electricity sector in India
- 21 Gender equality and energy access: Barriers to maximizing development effectiveness in the SAARC region
- 22 The biosphere and the interactions between stratospheric ozone depletion and climate change
- 23 The political challenge of linking climate change and sustainable development policies: Risks and prospects
- 24 Social vulnerability to climate change in Cambodia, Lao PDR, and Vietnam
- 25 Sustainable development in Bangladesh: Bridging the SDGs and climate action
- 26 Sustainable development in Pakistan: Vulnerabilities and opportunities
- 27 Beyond protected areas: Biodiversity conservation and global change in Asia and the Pacific
- 28 Causes of land-use change and biodiversity loss in Monsoon Asia
- 29 Assessing linkages between land use and biodiversity: A case study from the Eastern Himalayas using low-cost, high-return survey technology
- 30 Where to invade next: Inaction on biological invasions threatens sustainability in a small island developing state of the tropical South Pacific
- 31 Did the Indian Ocean tsunami trigger a shift towards disaster risk reduction?
- 32 Cyclone Nargis and disaster risk management in Myanmar
- Index
- Endmatter
- References
Summary
To assess the impacts of global change and to sustainably manage biodiversity requires access to baseline data that can be used effectively by planners and resource managers. Too often, the high cost and severe logistical constraints associated with traditional methods of natural resource surveys limit the availability of such data. To address this problem, we present an alternative, low-cost, high-return, and readily transferable methodology that utilizes both ground-based and remotely sensed data. We illustrate this approach using results from an initial biodiversity baseline study of a proposed strategic conservation ‘hotspot’: the North Bank Landscape (NBL) of the Brahmaputra River in the eastern Himalayan foothills, which includes parts of Assam, Arunachal Pradesh, North Bengal, and Bhutan. The NBL contains significant populations of Asian elephants, tigers, clouded leopards, golden langurs, and other rare and endangered fauna. Following a brief training course in survey methodology, 14 trainees conducted a gradient-based (gradsect) survey of vascular plant species, plant functional types (PFTs), vegetation structure, site physical features, and mammalian habitat along a georeferenced land-use intensity gradient within the NBL. We found that plant species and PFT diversity were highly correlated with vegetation structure, which was, in turn, closely associated with mammalian habitat. This correlation provided a set of indicators for assessing and forecasting the impact of land use on both plant and animal biodiversity. The value of these indicators was further reinforced though their highly significant correlation with satellite imagery, which enhanced their potential for mapping habitat on a regional as well as local scale. Spatial modelling of the gradient-based survey locations revealed a high level of regional environmental representativeness. Our results from the field survey in India show that, compared with similarly sampled forested landscapes recorded so far in 20 countries, the NBL is second to the world’s richest hotspot (Sumatra) in plant species diversity and comparable in PFT diversity and Plant Functional Complexity (PFC). While the results satisfy key criteria for listing the NBL as a global hotspot, the generic, low-cost methodology has wider implications for assessing the impact of global change on biodiversity.
Keywords
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Sustainable Development: Asia-Pacific Perspectives , pp. 377 - 392Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2022
References
Azevedo-Ramos, C., de Carvalho, O. Jr. and Nasi, R. (2002) Animal Indicators: A Tool to Assess Biotic Integrity after Logging Tropical Forests? CIFOR Report. Bogor, Indonesia, Centre for International Forestry Research.Google Scholar
Basnet, K. (2003) Transboundary biodiversity conservation initiative: An example from Nepal. Journal of Sustainable Forestry, 17, 205–226.Google Scholar
Carpenter, G., Gillison, A. N. and Winter, J. (1993) DOMAIN: A flexible modelling procedure for mapping potential distributions of plants and animals. Biodiversity and Conservation, 2, 667–680.Google Scholar
Conservation International (2005) Biodiversity hotspots, Indo-Burma. http://www.biodiversityhotspots.org/xp/Hotspots/indo_burma/ (accessed 28 April 2005)Google Scholar
Díaz, S., Kattge, J., Cornelissen, J. H. C., Wright, I. J., Lavorel, S., Dray, S., Reu, B., Kleyer, M., Wirth, C., Prentice, I. C., Garnier, E., Bönisch, G., Westoby, M., Poorter, H., Reich, P. B., Moles, A. T., Dickie, J., Gillison, A. N., Zanne, A. E., Chave, J., Wright, S. J., Sheremet’ev, S. N., Jactel, H., Baraloto, C., Cerabolini, B., Pierce, S., Shipley, B., Kirkup, D., Casanoves, F., Joswig, J. S., Günther, A., Falczuk, V., Rüger, N., Mahecha, M. D. and Gorné, L. D. (2016) The global spectrum of plant form and function. Nature, 529, 167–171. DOI: 10.1038/nature16489Google Scholar
FAO (2005) Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Statistical Databases. http://apps.fao.org/page/form?collection=Production.Crops.Primary&Domain=Production&servlet=1&language=EN&hostname=apps.fao.org&version=default (accessed April 2005).Google Scholar
FAO (2013) Climate-Smart Agriculture: Sourcebook. Rome, FAO. http://www.fao.org/docrep/018/i3325e/i3325e.pdf (accessed 6 October 2020)Google Scholar
Ferrer-Paris, J. R., Sanchez-Mercado, A., Rodríguez, J. P. and Rodríguez, G. A (2012) Detection histories for eight species of Amazona parrots in Venezuela during the NeoMaps bird surveys in 2010. DOI:10.1594/PANGAEA.803430.Google Scholar
Gillison, A. N. (2001) Vegetation Survey and Habitat Assessment of the Tesso Nilo Forest Complex; Pekanbaru, Riau Province, Sumatra, Indonesia. Report prepared for WWF-US. October-November. https://www.cbmglobe.org/pdf/TessoNiloReport.pdf (accessed 6 October 2020)Google Scholar
Gillison, A. N. (2002) A generic, computer-assisted method for rapid vegetation classification and survey: Tropical and temperate case studies. Conservation and Ecology, 6, 3. http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol6/iss2/art3/print.pdfCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gillison, A. N. (2004) Biodiversity assessment in the North Bank landscape, north east India. WWF-India, New Delhi.Google Scholar
Gillison, A.N. (2013) Plant functional types and traits at the community, ecosystem and world level. In van der Maarel, E. and Franklin, J. (eds.), Vegetation Ecology (2nd ed.), pp. 347–386. Oxford, UK, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. DOI:10.1002/9781118452592.ch12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gillison, A. N. (2019a) Plant functional indicators of vegetation response to climate change, past present and future: I. Trends, emerging hypotheses and plant functional modality. Flora, 254, 12–30.Google Scholar
Gillison, A. N. (2019b) Plant functional indicators of vegetation response to climate change, past present and future: II. Modal plant functional types as response indicators for present and future climates. Flora, 254, 31–58.Google Scholar
Gillison, A. N. and Brewer, K. R. W. (1985) The use of gradient directed transects or gradsects in natural resource surveys. Journal of Environmental Management, 20, 103–127.Google Scholar
Gillison, A. N. and Carpenter, G. (1997). A plant functional attribute set and grammar for dynamic vegetation description and analysis. Functional Ecology, 11, 775–783.Google Scholar
Gillison, A. N. and Liswanti, N. (2004) Assessing biodiversity at landscape level: The importance of environmental context. In Tomich, T. P., van Noordwijk, M. and Thomas, D. E. (eds.), Environmental Services and Land Use Change: Bridging the Gap between Policy and Research in Southeast Asia. Special issue of Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment, 104, 75–86.Google Scholar
Gillison, A. N., Asner, G. P., Mafalacusser, J., Banze, A., Izidine, S., da Fonseca, A. R. and Pacate, H. (2016) Biodiversity and agriculture in dynamic landscapes: Integrating ground and remotely-sensed baseline surveys. Journal of Environmental Management., 177, 9–19. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27064732/Google Scholar
Gillison, A. N., Bignell, D. E., Brewer, K. R. W., Fernandes, E. C. M., Jones, D. T., Sheil, D., May, P. H., Watt, A. D., Constantino, R., Couto, E. G. and Hairiah, K. (2013) Plant functional types and traits as biodiversity indicators for tropical forests: Two biogeographically separated case studies including birds, mammals and termites. Biodiversity and Conservation, 22, 1,909–1,930.Google Scholar
Hobohm, C. (2003) Characterization and ranking of biodiversity hotspots: Centres of species richness and endemism. Biodiversity and Conservation, 12, 279–287.Google Scholar
Jones, D. T., Susilo, F.-X., Bignell, D. E., Hardiwinoto, S., Gillison, A. N. and Eggleton, P. (2002) Termite assemblage collapse along a land-use intensification gradient in lowland central Sumatra, Indonesia. Journal of Applied Ecology, 40, 380–391.Google Scholar
Lawton, J. H., Bignell, D. E., Bolton, B., Bloemers, G. F., Eggleton, P., Hammond, P. M., Hodda, M., Holt, R. D., Larsen, T. B., Mawdsley, N. A., Stork, N. E., Srivastava, D. S. and Watt, A. D. (1998) Biodiversity inventories, indicator taxa and effects of habitat modification in tropical forest. Nature, 391, 72–76. https://doi.org/10.1038/34166Google Scholar
MacKinnon, J. (ed.) (1997) Protected Areas Systems Review of the Indo-Malayan Realm. Asian Bureau for Conservation, Ltd., Hong Kong, China, and World Conservation Monitoring Centre, Cambridge, United Kingdom.Google Scholar
MacNally, R. and Fleishman, E. (2004) A successful predictive model of species richness based on indicator species. Conservation Biology, 18, 646–654.Google Scholar
Myers, M., Mittermeier, R. A., Mittermeier, C. G., da Fonseca, G. A. B. and Kent, J. (2000) Biodiversity hotspots for conservation priorities. Nature, 403, 853–858.Google Scholar
Negi, H. R. and Gadgil, M. (2002) Cross-taxon surrogacy of biodiversity in the Indian Garhwal Himalaya. Biological Conservation, 105, 143–155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
NPS (National Park Service, USA) (2012) Gradsect and Field Sampling Plan for Big Bend National Park/ Rio Grande National Wild and Scenic River. National Park Service. BiblioGov. 13 September.Google Scholar
Olson, D. M. and Dinerstein, E. (2002) The Global 200: Priority ecoregions for global conservation. Annals of the Missouri Botanical Garden, 89, 199–224.Google Scholar
Olson, D. M., Dinerstein, E., Wikramanayake, E. D., Burgess, N. D., Powell, G. V. N., Underwood, E. C., D’Amico, J. A., Itoua, I., Strand, H. E., Morrison, J. C. and Loucks, C. J. (2001) Terrestrial ecoregions of the world: a new map of life on Earth. BioScience, 51, 933–938.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Parker, V. T., Schile, L. M., Vasey, M. C. and Callaway, J. C. (2011) Efficiency in assessment and monitoring methods: scaling down gradient-directed transects. Ecosphere, 2, 99.Google Scholar
Pressey, R. L. and Cowling, R. M. (2001) Reserve selection algorithms and the real world. Conservation Biology, 15, 275–277.Google Scholar
Rastogi, A. and Chettri, N. (2001) Extended biodiversity ‘hotspot’ analysis: a case of eastern Himalayan region, India. International Conference on Tropical Ecosystems: Structure, Diversity and Human Welfare, Bangalore, India, pp. 622–628. 15–18 July.Google Scholar
Rawat, G. S., Desai, A., Somanathan, H. and Wikramanayake, E. D. (2001) Brahmaputra Valley semi-evergreen forests (IM0105) (see Olson et al., 2001). http://www.worldwildlife.org/wildworld/profiles/terrestrial_im.html (accessed 6 October 2020)Google Scholar
Rawat, G. S. and Wikramanayake, E. D. (2001) Eastern Himalayan broadleaf forests (IM0401) (see Olson et al., 2001). http://www.worldwildlife.org/wildworld/profiles/terrestrial/im/im0401_full.html (accessed 6 October 2020)Google Scholar
Rodgers, W. A. and Panwar, H. S. (1988) Planning a wildlife protected areas network in India. Dept. of Environment, Forests, and Wildlife/ Wildlife Institute of India Report, Vols. 1 and 2. Wildlife Institute of India.Google Scholar
Sala, O. E., Chapin III, F. S., Armesto, J. J., Berlow, E., Bloomfield, J., Dirzo, R., Huber-Sanwald, E., Huenneke, L. F., Jackson, R. B., Kinzig, A. and Leemans, R. (2000) Global biodiversity scenarios for the year 2100. Science, 287, 1,770–1,774.Google Scholar
Sandmann, H. and Lertzman, K. P. (2003) Combining high-resolution aerial photography with gradient-directed transects to guide field sampling and forest mapping in mountainous terrain. Forest Science, 49, 429–443.Google Scholar
Sauberer, N., Zulka, K. P., Abensperg-Traun, M., Berg, H.-M., Bieringer, G., Milasowszky, N., Moser, D., Plutzar, C., Pollheimer, M., Storch, C. and Tröstl, R. (2004) Surrogate taxa for biodiversity in agricultural landscapes of eastern Austria. Biological Conservation, 117, 181–190.Google Scholar
Sayer, J. and Campbell, B. (2004) The Science of Sustainable Development: Local Livelihoods and the Global Development. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Sayer, J., Sunderland, T., Ghazoul, J., Pfund, J.-L., Sheil, D., Meijard, E., Venter, M., Boedihartono, A. K., Day, M., Garcia, C., van Oosten, C. and Buck, L. E. (2013) Ten principles for a landscape approach to reconciling agriculture, conservation, and other competing land uses. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 110, 8,349-8,356. http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2013/05/14/1210595110 (Accessed 6 Oct. 2020)Google Scholar
SDSN (Sustainable Development Solutions Network) (2013) Solutions for Sustainable Agriculture and Food Systems. Technical Report for the Post-2015 Development Agenda 18 September. Prepared by the Thematic Group on Sustainable Agriculture and Food Systems. http://unsdsn.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/130919-TG07-Agriculture-Report-WEB.pdf (accessed 22 August 2016).Google Scholar
Sheil, D. and Burslem, D. F. R. P. (2003) Disturbing hypotheses in tropical forests. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 18, 18–26.Google Scholar
Sherpa, M. N. and Norbu, U. P. (1999) Linking protected areas for ecosystem conservation: a case study from Bhutan. PARKS, 9, 35–45.Google Scholar
Specht, R. L. (1970) Vegetation. In Leeper, G. W. (ed.), The Australian Environment, (4th ed.) pp. 44–67. Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Organisation (CSIRO), Melbourne, Melbourne University Press.Google Scholar
Statersfield, A. J., Corsby, M. J., Long, A. J. and Wege, D. C. (1998) Global Directory of Endemic Bird Areas. Cambridge, Birdlife International.Google Scholar
Udvardy, M. D. F. (1975) A Classification of the Biogeographical Provinces of the World. IUCN Occasional Paper No. 18.Google Scholar
UNEP-CBD (1996) United Nations Environment Programme, Convention on Biological Diversity. Assessment of Biological Diversity and Methodologies for Future Assessments.Google Scholar
UNEP-CBD (2001) United Nations Environment Programme, Convention on Biological Diversity. Review of the Impact of Climate Change on Forest Biological Diversity, UNEP/CBD/AHTEG-BDCC/1/2.Google Scholar
USGS-NPS (2003) United States Geological Survey – National Park Service, Vegetation Mapping Program 5.0: Field methods. http://biology.usgs.gov/npsveg/fieldmethods/sect5.html (accessed 6 October 2020)Google Scholar
Walker, P. A. and Faith, D. P. (1998) TARGET Software Priority Area Setting. Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization, Canberra.Google Scholar
Watt, A. W. and Zborowski, P. (2000) Canopy insects: Canopy arthropods and butterfly survey: Preliminary report. In Gillison, A. N. (ed.), Above-Ground Biodiversity Assessment Working Group Summary Report 1996–99: Impact of Different Land Uses on Biodiversity, pp. 69–90. Nairobi, Kenya, Alternatives to Slash and Burn project. ICRAF.Google Scholar
WCMC (1996) Assessing biodiversity status and sustainability. Groombridge, B. and Jenkins, M. D. (eds.). World Conservation Monitoring Centre, Biodiversity Series No 5. Cambridge, World Conservation Press.Google Scholar
Wessels, K. J., Van Jaarsveld, A. S., Grimbeek, J. D. and Van der Linde, M. J. (1998) An evaluation of the gradsect biological survey method. Biological Conservation, 7, 1,093–1,121.Google Scholar
Williams, A. C. (2002) Eastern Himalayas Conservation Alliance: setting the stage for on-the-ground conservation networks. World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF) and Asian Rhino and Elephant Action Strategy (AREAS) proposal (unpublished).Google Scholar
World Bank (2000) Transboundary Reserves: World Bank Implementation of the Ecosystem Approach. Report No. 20892. K. MacKinnon (compiler). Working paper. Washington, DC, World Bank.Google Scholar
WWF and ICIMOD (2001) Ecoregion-based conservation in the Eastern Himalaya: identifying important areas for biodiversity conservation. In Wikramanayake, E. D, Carpenter, C., Strand, H. and McKnight, M. (eds). World Wildlife Fund (WWF) and Centre for Integrated Mountain Development (ICIMOD), Kathmandu, Nepal Programme.Google Scholar