1. Steve Schill, The Nature Conservancy
VIABILITY
THREAT
MNGNT
I want to acknowledge the funders of the EAR tool – IABIN/OAS through a GEF grant from the World Bank
Dr George Raber was the programmer of the tool
Steve Schill, The Nature Conservancy
George Raber, University of Southern Mississippi

2. Tool Objectives
Integrate IABIN’s Ecosystem and Protected Area Thematic Networks
Provide a simplistic “manager’s dashboard” approach for querying and visualization of effective conservation
Permit conservation decision-makers to cross-query ecosystems with protected area information
Spatial and tabular reporting of ecosystems and protected areas

3. What questions does EAR help you to answer?
What is the current protection status of each ecosystem?
How close are we to meeting conservation goals, what percentage has been achieved?
If I need additional hectares to reach my goal, where are the most suitable areas to implement a protection strategy?

4. What questions does EAR help you to answer?
What is secure and expected to persist?
Where are the gaps in protection and threat abatement?
Where are there opportunities to expand and enhance biodiversity protection?
What progress are we making?
What the status of management for our ecosystems?

5. A Few Facts about EAR
Available as an Desktop (ArcToolbox for ArcGIS v.9-10) or Internet version
Desktop version written in Python –reports output as html (JavaScript and CSS)
Internet version wraps the desktop tool using ArcGIS Server. Web app written with OpenLayers.
Free
The tool is provided in both Internet-based Server and Desktop versions, providing a “manager’s dashboard” approach for querying current spatial information on ecosystem condition, socioeconomic threat to these ecosystem, and protected area management status.

6. Evaluating Effective Conservation
Mitigate Threats
Implement Mngmt Plan
= Effective
Conservation
Implement Mngmt Plan
Viability
Status
Mitigate Threats
Improve Viability
Implement Mngmt Plan
Improve Viability
Mitigate Threats
Threats
Status
Mngmt
Status
Viability Status ‐ the biological potential for a given ecosystem to persist (e.g. ecosystem size, condition, and landscape context).
Threats Status ‐ the degree of anticipated negative impact (i.e. socio‐economic activity) to a given ecosystem (e.g. severity, scope of threat).
Conservation Management Status ‐ the likelihood that management activities will secure biodiversity and allow it to persist within a protected area (e.g. intent, tenure, and effective management potential).
Effective conservation of an ecosystem is achieved when acceptable levels are reached for all three measures: viability, threat, and conservation management status. Knowing the status of each measure for each ecosystem will help decision‐makers to know when and where to prioritize and guide effective conservation actions.
Improve Viability
(Higgins et al, 2007)

7. EFFECTIVE CONSERVATION
Evaluating Effective Conservation
MEASURE
INDICATOR
Viability
Status
Size
Condition
Landscape Context
Conservation
Management
Intent
Duration
Effective Management
Potential
Threats
Severity
Scope
EFFECTIVE CONSERVATION
Size: The abundance/density of a population, or the area of a population or ecological system.
Condition: The quality of biotic and abiotic factors, structures and processes within a population or ecological system occurrence, such as age structure, species composition, ecological processes and physical/chemical factors.
Landscape context: The quality of structures, processes and biotic/abiotic factors of the landscape immediately surrounding a population or ecological system, including degrees of connectivity and isolation to adjacent habitats, populations and ecological systems.
Intent: The relative degree to which stated protection and/or management objectives of activities are intended to secure biodiversity.
Tenure: The duration of the commitment to the protection and/or management activities.
Effective Management Potential: The potential for an entity to be effective in implementing activities to achieve stated protection and/or management objectives.
Severity is defined as the level and irreversibility of the impact that one or more threats may reasonably be expected to have on a given population, community or ecosystem. Distinguishing the severity of a given threat to different components of biodiversity helps to better understand the nature of the threat.
Scope is a description of the spatial extent of potential impact(s) from one or more threats to a given population, community or ecosystem. Scope can be calculated using a variety of attributes such as: the area extent of proposed resource extraction overlay on a terrestrial ecosystem; the linear extent of a river threatened from flow alteration from a planned dam, and the amount of an ecosystem occurrence encompassed within a threat decay function model.
(Higgins et al, 2007)

8. EAR Data Model: Eight possible Conservation Action Classes
Based on the intersection of the three indicators (viability, threat, and conservation management status), there are eight possible conservation action classes that are assigned to each ecosystem occurrences.

9. Requirements for Running EAR Tool
Ecosystems GIS Data:
Attribute Fields: VIABILITY and THREAT
SCORES: Very Good (VG)
Good (G)
Fair (F)
Poor (P)
Protected/Managed Areas GIS Data:
Attribute Fields: MANAGEMENT
To run the EAR tool, the user needs to have two GIS input files: Ecosystems and Protected/Managed Areas. These files must have VIABILITY and THREAT; and MANAGEMENT attributes fields assigned respectively. The scores for each of these fields must be assigned one of four categories: VG, G, F, or P. The way you calculate these fields is up to the user as no specific methodology is required.

10. Requirements for Running EAR Tool
To run the EAR tool, the user needs to have two GIS input files: Ecosystems and Protected/Managed Areas. These files must have VIABILITY and THREAT; and MANAGEMENT attributes fields assigned respectively. The scores for each of these fields must be assigned one of four categories: VG, G, F, or P. The way you calculate these fields is up to the user as no specific methodology is required.

11. EAR Tool: Desktop Version for ArcGIS
The desktop version of the EAR tool was created as an ArcGIS Toolbox for use inside of ArcMap or ArcCatalog. The program that executes when the tool is run is written in Python (Version 2.5). The only non-standard Python module used is the arcgisscripting module provided as part of the install of ArcGIS. Therefore, the only installation needed to copy the toolbox and the associated files onto a computer hard drive in any convenient location. The output report is an html page. The dynamic elements utilize JavaScript and CSS. The open source library EXT.js was used to speed development. The chart on the report uses the charting library of EXT.js which is utilizes Adobe FLEX / Flash technology.
All features projected in the appropriate projection. The desktop tool does not project your data for you, so it is important that you do not use unprojected (geographic coordinate system) data, otherwise the tool will not be able to calculate correct areas or lengths if input files are in Geographic projection (e.g. decimal degrees). You need to use a projection that uses units such as meters or feet (e.g. UTM, State Plane).   
Effective Conservation Measures defined and scored (e.g. VIABILITY, THREAT for Ecosystems; and MANAGEMENT for Protected Areas). The required fields are the same as for the server tool above, except that the NAME field for the protected area input layer can have any name as it is specified when the tool is run.
If multiple layers exist for either ecosystems or protected areas, they should first be merged prior to executing the EAR tool. Prior to doing this, they should have the required measures fields properly defined and calculated.

12. EAR Tool: Internet Server Version
The server tool wraps the desktop tool in another ArcGIS toolbox that helps it to work online. This includes automatically keeping track of uploaded data through storing data in a database. The client front end (what the user sees) was created in a similar manner as the report above using JavaScript, HTML and Cascading Style Sheets (CSS). In addition to the open source EXT.js library, the open source library OpenLayers was used to create the interactive map on the page. OpenLayers is completely free and makes it easy to put a dynamic map in any web page. Finally, the interaction with ArcGIS server is done through utilizing Asynchronous JavaScript and XML (AJAX) style calls to ArcGIS server using the ESRI Representational State Transfer (REST) Application Programming Interface (API).

13. Viability and Threat Models
Current conditions
THREAT:
Future conditions
So how do you assign viability and threat scores? EAR does not limit you to one particular method. You can generate models of viability (representing current conditions) and threat (representing future conditions) that can be used to assigned viability and threat scores to the ecosystem data.

14. Developing Future Threat Models
SLR
RESILIENCE
In this example of future threat for the Mesoamerican Reef, we used a combination of sea-level rise and reef resilience.

15. Conservation Management Status (CMS)
Intent: Are management objectives intended to secure biodiversity?
Duration: How long will the commitment to protection last?
Effective Management Potential (EMP): Are there available resources, adequate governance, and a planning framework for the management objectives to be achieved?
CMS is assigned by combining three indicators: Intent, Duration, and Effective Mgnt Potential for each protected area.
(Higgins et al, 2007)

16. Evaluating Conservation Management Status (CMS)
Intent
Reserve is established to provide high-quality spawning, rearing and adult habitat for fishes. No fishing or diving allowed.
Biodiversity
Focus
Duration
The fishing and diving ban is stated for 5 years.
Short Term
Effective
Management
Potential (EMP)
Planning
Framework:
There is a management prescription in place to address instances of fishing and diving.
Most to Full
Potential
Governance:
The local island community holds regular meetings to evaluate reserve mgnt and resolve issues that arise.
Resources:
There is sufficient funding and staffing for a patrol boat. VG F VG
CMS is assigned by combining three indicators: Intent, Duration, and Effective Mgnt Potential for each protected area.

17. Calculating CMS: INTENT
Based on IUCN categories:
I, II, IV = Very Good (VG)
V, VI = Good (G)
III = Fair (F)
Non-designated = Good (G)*
* based on assumption that these areas are most likely set up for a sustainable conservation focus.
Biodiversity Conservation Focus
Sustainable Conservation Focus
Incidental Biodiversity Conservation
Intent can use IUCN category
CATEGORY Ia: Strict Nature Reserve: protected area managed mainly for science
CATEGORY Ib Wilderness Area: protected area managed mainly for wilderness protection
CATEGORY II National Park: protected area managed mainly for ecosystem protection and recreation
CATEGORY III Natural Monument: protected area managed mainly for conservation of specific natural features
CATEGORY IV Habitat/Species Management Area: protected area managed mainly for conservation through management intervention
CATEGORY V Protected Landscape/Seascape: protected area managed mainly for landscape/seascape conservation and recreation
CATEGORY VI Managed Resource Protected Area: protected area managed mainly for the sustainable use of natural ecosystems
Very Good
The stated objectives are focused on biodiversity conservation. An intent to be focused on or compatible with biodiversity conservation is explicit. Examples9: TNC preserve; Wilderness and Special Biological Interest Areas
Good
The stated objectives are primarily focused on ecologically sustainable multiple uses. An intent for activities to be compatible with biodiversity conservation is explicit.
Examples: Indigenous reserve or territory; Ecologically sustainable water management plans; Conservation Leases;
Fair
The stated objectives are primarily directed at the extraction of multiple resource uses. An intent to be compatible with biodiversity conservation is not explicit except as in required mandates, e.g., protected by overarching government or organizational polices only.
Examples: Community managed lands; Recreation areas; American Farmland Trust Conservation Easements; State Wildlife Areas; Resource production areas;

18. Calculating CMS: DURATION
Permanent declared protected areas = Very Good (VG)
Short term declaration = Fair (F)
Non-declared protected areas = Poor (P) for no commitment.

19. Using ME survey data for calculating EMP 40+ methods applied to 100+
Using ME
survey data
for calculating
EMP
40+ methods
applied to 100+
countries

20. Calculating CMS: Effective Management Potential
GOVERNANCE c
PLANNING
RESOURCES

21. Calculating CMS: Effective Management Potential
“Majority rules”
If at least two of the three indicators share the same rating, then the occurrence receives that rating
Exceptions:
• If any one indicator is rated as poor the CMS is rated poor.
• If one indicator is rated very good, one good, and one fair, then
CMS is rated good.
• If two indicators are rated very good, and one fair, then CMS is rated good.

22. Evaluating Conservation Management Status

23. Habitat Assessment: Mangroves
VIABILITY
THREAT
MNGNT

24. Effective Conservation of Mangroves

25. Output Tables
AMOUNT: Total hectares for each ecosystem by protected area management score
PERC_PA: Percentage for each ecosystem that lies within each protected area management score
C1: Total hectares of the ecosystem for each management score that lies within the conservation action class: Maintain Effective Conservation
C1_PERC: Percentage of the ecosystem for each management score that lies within the conservation action class: Maintain Effective Conservation
The remaining fields follow each of the conservation action classes in the following order, reporting hectare totals and percentages by ecosystem for each of the four protected area management scores:
C2 Improve Viability
C3 Abate Threats
C4 Implement Better Management
C5 Improve Viability and Abate Threats
C6 Abate Threats and Implement Better Management
C7 Improve Viability and Implement Better Management
C8 No Status (No acceptable levels on any of the 3 measures)
OTHER TABLE OUTPUT:
AMOUNT_PA: Total hectare within a protected area boundary
AMOUNT_TAR: Total number of hectares for a particular type of ecosystem (i.e. total hectares of all patches combined)
PERC_T_PA: Of all the ecosystems in this Protected Area, this percentage has the same conservation action class as this record. For example, if for a hypothetical record the protected area name was “Deep River” and the ecosystem name was “mangroves” and the conservation action class (EMC_TEXT field) was “Maintain Effective Conservation” and the value in this field were “10” you would read the explanation this way: 10 percent of the mangroves in the “Deep River” protected area have the conservation action class “Maintain Effective Conservation.”
PERC_TAR: Based on the entire study area, this percentage is the percent of each ecosystem that falls within this protected area and has the same conservation action class. For example, if for a hypothetical record the protected area name was “Deep River” and the ecosystem name was “mangroves” and the conservation action class (EMC_TEXT field) was “Maintain Effective Conservation” and the value in this field were “10,” you would read the explanation this way: 10 percent of the mangroves in the study area fall within the “Deep River” protected area and have the conservation action class “Maintain Effective Conservation.”
PERC_PA: This is the percentage of this ecosystem within this protected area to the total amount of this ecosystem within the study area. For example, if for a hypothetical record the protected area name was “Deep River” and the ecosystem name was “mangroves” and the conservation action class (EMC_TEXT field) was “Maintain Effective Conservation” and the value in this field were “10” you would read the explanation this way: 10 percent of all mangroves in the study area are within the “Deep River” Protected area.
PERC_SA: This is the percentage of all ecosystems in the input data layers that have the same conservation action class as this record. For example, if for a hypothetical record the protected area name was “Deep River” and the ecosystem name was “mangroves” and the conservation action class (EMC_TEXT field) was “Maintain Effective Conservation” and the value in this field were “10,” you would read the explanation this way: 10 percent of all the ecosystems in the input data layer in the study area have the conservation action class “Maintain Effective Conservation.” Note that if you input your ecosystems as separate data layers (for example not merged or you are using the batch tool), this statistic will have less meaning, and may have the same value as the PERC_SA_T value below (i.e. if every input data had only one ecosystem per ecosystem input).
PERC_SA_T: This is the total percentage of each ecosystem contained within each conservation action class. For example, for a hypothetical record the protected area name was “Deep River” and the ecosystem name was “mangroves” and the conservation action class (EMC_TEXT field) was “Maintain Effective Conservation” and the value in this field were “10” you would read the explanation this way: 10 percent of the mangroves in the study area have the conservation action class “Maintain Effective Conservation.”
SUM_AMOUNT: The total hectares of the conservation action class for that particular ecosystem.
PERC_SA_T: This is the total percentage of each ecosystem contained within each conservation action class (same field as in the raw output file).

26. Output Graphs

27. Output Reports: By Ecosystem/Species and Protected Area
C1 Improve Viability
C2 Abate Threats
C3 Implement Better Management
C4 Improve Viability and Abate Threats
C5 Abate Threats and Implement Better Management
C6 Improve Viability and Implement Better Management
C7 No Status (No acceptable levels on any of the 3 measures)
ECOSYSTEM
Amount: Total hectares by protected area
Percentage: Percentage of the ecosystem within the protected area
EC: Total hectares of the ecosystem within the protected area that are in the conservation action class “Maintain Effective Conservation”
EC%: Percentage of the ecosystem within the protected area that are in the conservation action class “Maintain Effective Conservation”
PROTECTED AREA
Amount: Total hectares of the ecosystem within the protected area
Percentage: Percentage of the ecosystem within the protected area

28. EAR Summary
Provides a GIS-based reporting framework for strategic conservation decision-making
Permits the calculation, visualization, and reporting of eight conservation action classes
Requires two input layers: Ecosystems/species and Protected/Managed areas
Operates using pre-defined viability, threat, and management scores
Flexible in that it does not require pre-determined methods for defining and ranking these scores

29. Questions? sschill@tnc.org
Support for EAR
Questions?
Download tool
Sample datasets
User manual
English
Español