The first Zonation 5 reference; new methods

Moilanen, A., Lehtinen, P., Kohonen, I., Virtanen, E., Jalkanen, J. and Kujala, H. 2022. Novel methods for spatial prioritization with applications in conservation, land use planning and ecological impact avoidance. Methods in Ecology and Evolution

The concepts and structure of spatial prioritization, and the role of data quality

Effects of data amount

Kujala, H., Lahoz‐Monfort, J.J., Elith, J. and Moilanen, A. 2018a. Not all data are equal: Influence of data type and amount in spatial conservation prioritisation. Methods in Ecology and Evolution 9: 2249–2261.

Structure of spatial prioritization in general

Kujala, H., Moilanen, A. and Gordon, A. 2018b. Spatial characteristics of species distributions as drivers in conservation prioritization. Methods in Ecology and Evolution 9: 1121-1132.

Concepts of spatial prioritization and their relationships

Kukkala, A. and A. Moilanen. 2013. The core concepts of spatial prioritization in systematic conservation planning. Biological Reviews, 88: 443-464.

On expert judgment

Selwood, K. E., Wintle, B. A., & Kujala, H. 2019. Collaborative conservation planning: Quantifying the contribution of expert engagement to identify spatial conservation priorities. Conservation Letters, 12:e12673.

Running Zonation planning projects

A bit old, but still useful review of Zonation

Lehtomäki, J. and A. Moilanen. 2013. Methods and workflow for spatial conservation prioritization using Zonation. Environmental Modelling & Software, 47: 128-137.

Meta-aspects of using Zonation in a planning project

Lehtomäki, J., Moilanen, A., Toivonen, T. and J. Leathwick, 2016. Running a Zonation planning project, 60 pp. ISBN: 978-951-51-1922-3 (paperback)

General methodological Zonation references

First impact avoidance paper

Kareksela, S., Moilanen, A., Tuominen, S. and J.S. Kotiaho. 2013. Use of Inverse spatial conservation prioritization to avoid biodiversity loss outside protected areas. Conservation Biology, 27: 1294–1303.

The differences of regional and global analyses

Moilanen, A., and Arponen A. 2011. Administrative regions in conservation: balancing local priorities with regional to global preferences in spatial planning. Biological Conservation, 144: 1719-1725.

First paper with negatively weighted layers. Note methodological changes in the 2022 paper.

Moilanen, A., B.J. Anderson, F. Eigenbrod, A. Heinemeyer, D. B. Roy, S. Gillings, P. R. Armsworth, K. J. Gaston, and C.D. Thomas. 2011. Balancing alternative land uses in conservation prioritization. Ecological Applications, 21: 1419-1426.

Considerations and alternatives for using ecosystem services in prioritization

Kukkala, A.S., and A. Moilanen 2016. Ecosystem services and connectivity in spatial conservation prioritization. Landscape Ecology 32: 5-14.

All time first Zonation paper

Moilanen, A., Franco, A.M.A., Early, R. I., Fox, R., Wintle, B. & Thomas, C.D. 2005. Prioritizing multiple-use landscapes for conservation: methods for large multi-species planning problems. Proceedings of the Royal Society B. 272: 1885–1891.

Useful, comparatively recent, illustrative examples

Interesting example of identifying large-scale networks

Jalkanen, J., Toivonen, T., and A. Moilanen. 2020. Identification of ecological networks for land-use planning with spatial conservation prioritization. Landscape Ecology 35: 353–371.

One example of global analysis

Pouzols, F.M., Toivonen, T., Di Minin, E., Kukkala, A., Kullberg, P., Kuusterä,J, Lehtomäki, J., Tenkanen, H., Verburg, P.H. & Moilanen, A. (2014) Global protected area expansion is compromised by projected land-use and parochialism. Nature 516: 383–386.

Recent paper that does both regional and global analysis

Lehtomäki, J., Kusumoto, B., Shiono, T., Tanaka, T., Kubota, Y., and A. Moilanen. 2019. Spatial conservation prioritization for the East Asian islands: a balanced representation of multi-taxon biogeography in a protected area network. Diversity and Distributions 25: 414-429. DOI: 10.1111/ddi.12869

Relatively recent global example

Di Minin, E., Brooks, T.M., Toivonen, T., Butchart, S.H.M., Heikinheimo, V., Watson, J.E.M., Burgess, N.D., Challender, D.W.S., Goettsch, B., Jenkins, R., and A. Moilanen. 2019. Identifying global centers of unsustainable commercial harvesting of species. Science Advances 5, eaau2879. DOI: 10.1126/sciadv.aau2879.

Good example of competent Zonation analysis in the marine environment

Virtanen, E.A., Viitasalo, M., Lappalainen, J., and Moilanen, A. 2018. Evaluation, gap analysis, and potential expansion of the Finnish marine protected area network. Frontiers in Marine Science 5: article 402.

Balancing three data baskets: ecological, societal and economic

Virtanen, E.A., Lappalainen, J., Nurmi, M., Viitasalo, M., Tikanmäki, M. Heinonen, J., Atlaskin, E., Kallasvuo, M., Tikkanen, H. & Moilanen, A. 2022. Balancing profitability of energy production, societal impacts and biodiversity in offshore wind farm design. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 158, 112087.

Nice national study

Di Minin, E., Soutullo, A., Bartesaghi, L., Rios, M., Szephegyi, M. N. and A. Moilanen. 2017. Integrating biodiversity, ecosystem services and socio-economic data to identify priority areas and landowners for conservation actions at the national scale. Biological Conservation, 206: 56-64.

Use of prioritization in the context of biodiversity offsets

Kujala, H., Whitehead, A.L., Morris, W.K. & Wintle, B.A. 2015. Towards strategic offsetting of biodiversity loss using spatial prioritization concepts and tools: A case study on mining impacts in Australia. Biological Conservation 192: 513–21.

Effects of data uncertainty on the stability of priorities

Kujala, H., Minunno, F., Junttila, V., Mikkonen, N., Mäkelä, A., Virkkala, R., Akujärvi, A., Leikola, N. & Heikkinen, R.K. 2023 Role of data uncertainty when identifying important areas for biodiversity and carbon in boreal forests. Ambio 52: 1804-1818.