臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

保護區需要妥善的規劃才能有效的貢獻於生物多樣性保育。本研究回顧過去二十年來保護區網絡規劃所發展出的理論與技術，並以台灣河川魚類為例，闡述整數規劃技術與不可取代性指標所提供的指示性資訊並探討其應用性。在保育生物多樣性的前提下，保護區網絡需以代表性與持續性為規劃目標，以互補性為擴張現行保護區的原則，最佳化保護區設置的經濟效率以提高保育目標實踐的可行性，整數規劃技術與演算法是尋求以最低成本達成保育目標之規劃單元組合的工具，而不可取代性則是用於評估各規劃單元對達成保育目標之重要性的指標。本研究示範的規劃個案－台灣河川魚類保護區網絡規劃－設定72種魚為保護對象，選取34條河川為規劃單元，以特有生物研究保育中心建立與維護之河川魚類資料庫與相關文獻的紀錄合併整理出河川魚類分佈資料矩陣，應用整數規劃技術求解五個不同保育提案的最低成本河川組合，保育成本以網絡中含的河川數目或流域面積計；另確實計算各河川在三組保育目標與設定納入保護區網絡之河川數目不同之狀況下的不可取代性，並在固定保育目標與設定河川數目下，進行移除特定河川的操作，以檢視不可取代性數值隨各種操作的變動情形。整數規劃法的分析結果能用以預估與比較不同保育提案的投資門檻，協助制訂可行的保育決策。在固定保育目標下改變設定之河川數目不影響河川間不可取代性的排序，三組保育目標下河川間排序仍顯著正相關，但部分河川的不可取代性會有較大的變異，移除特定河川的操作也會造成部分河川不可取代性的改變。因此應用不可取代性指引保育優先順序或談判時，應對一個範圍或各種可能的保育目標皆進行分析，以確認對保育目標敏感的單元，並需因應區域內規劃單元狀況之改變而重新分析。如何建構規劃分析所需之生物多樣性資料、把規劃理論結合實務發展、將存續性目標與時空中的不確定性納入分析中，為未來保護區網絡規劃的重要課題。本研究旨在引介整數規劃技術與不可取代性指標在保護區規劃上的應用，所整理的魚類分布資料未臻完備，亦僅選取部分河川進行分析演算，所得結果不足以作為設立台灣河川魚類保護區網絡的依據，但文獻回顧與本研究之試算分析顯示，以管理科學與生物資料庫為基礎的保育區網絡規劃能協助管理者更有效率的使用保育資源以達成生物多樣性保育的目標。

Reserve network needs to be planned adequately to achieve the goal of biodiversity conservation. In this study, I reviewed related studies and, using freshwater fishes in Taiwan as an example, demonstrated the applications of integer programming and irreplaceability analysis in reserve network planning. The objectives of reserve network designed for biodiversity conservation are representativeness and persistence. Complementarity is the essential principle of reserve selection because a more efficient solution will increase the likelihood of achieving a fully representative reserve network. Integer programming and algorithms have been adapted to solve sets of planning units (land parcels) meeting the quantitative conservation targets with minimum cost. The conservation value of each unit in the planning region can be assessed by irreplaceability index. In this thesis, freshwater fishes are the natural features to be preserved by the set of rivers solved by integer programming, and the distribution data of 72 species of freshwater fishes in 34 rivers were developed by combining the records in the fish database of Endemic Species Research Institute and related reports. I used integer programming to derive minimum cost river sets for five conservation scenarios, and the cost is defined as number of rivers or total drainage area of the proposed river set. In order to observe how the irreplaceability of each river changes with other factors, I calculated irreplaceability for each river under three conservation targets with different combination size (number of rivers allowed in the river set), and, under the same target and combination size, computed and compared the irreplaceability of each river when certain rivers of different irreplaceability were included or excluded in the analysis. Integer programming can make planners aware of the approximate minimum costs of proposed scenarios and therefore make comparisons between them. The irreplaceability analysis shows that the rank orders of river sets by irreplaceability with different combination size under the same target do not change substantially. However, when comparing different targets, the irreplaceability of some rivers change greatly, even though the rank orders of the entire river sets are significantly correlated. The exclusion of certain river also alters the irreplaceability of some of the remaining rivers. I suggest that, when employing irreplaceability in area prioritization and conservation negotiation, it is crucial to examine the irreplaceability of planning units in a range of conservation targets and to perform the analysis as the condition of planning units change. The future challenges for reserve network planning include the improvement of data quality, the integration of theory and practice in conservation planning, and the incorporation of explicit consideration of persistence goal and spatiotemporal dynamics of ecological and human systems into reserve design. This study is aimed to demonstrate the applications of integer programming and irreplaceability analysis in reserve network planning. Due to the constraints of fish distribution data, the result cannot be used as proposed draft of reserve network for freshwater fishes in Taiwan. Nevertheless, literature review and the case analysis suggest that reserve network planning, when based on biodiversity database and management science, could guide managers to design a reserve network for biodiversity conservation more efficiently.

1. 前言 1
2. 文獻回顧 3
2.1 生物多樣性保護區網絡規劃 3
2.2 生物多樣性保護區網絡規劃個案介紹－南非開普植物區系 6
2.3 整數規劃技術與保護區選取演算法之發展與應用 8
2.4 不可取代性的發展與應用 10
3. 案例分析 13
3.1 研究限制 13
3.2 建立河川魚類分佈資料 13
3.3 以整數規劃法分析河川魚類保護區網絡之最低成本組合 14
3.4 河川不可取代性分析 18
3.5 結果 20
3.5.1 河川魚類分佈資料庫建立 20
3.5.2 河川魚類保護網絡規劃 20
3.5.3 不可取代性分析 22
4. 結論與討論 25
4.1 建立保護區網絡規劃所需的生物多樣性資料 25
4.2 整數規劃應用於保護區網絡分析 26
4.3 不可取代性應用之探討 28
4.4 生物多樣性保護區網絡規劃的應用與後續發展 31
5. 引用文獻 35

吳海音. 2001. 生物多樣性概念在保育規劃上之落實-以保護區的選取為例. 2001 國家公園生物多樣性保育策略之研究與生物多樣性保育策略研討會論文集: 63-72.
陳凱俐、陳子英. 2000. 台灣濕地保護網之建立--以鳥類歧異度為考量. 中華林學季刊 33（1）: 1-22.
陳義雄. 2001. 台灣淡水魚類的調查研究史、地理分布特性及生態保育策略與展望. 臺灣文獻 52（3）: 45-53.
陳義雄、方力行. 1999. 台灣淡水及河口魚類誌. 國立海洋生物博物館籌備處. 屏東縣.
Ando, A., J. Camm, S. Polasky, and A. Solow. 1998. Species distributions, land values, and efficient conservation. Science 279: 2126-2128.
Balmford, A. 2003. Conservation planning in the real world: South Africa shows the way. Trends in ecology and evolution 18（9）: 435-438.
Bedward, M., R. L.Pressey, and D. A. Keith. 1992. A new approach for selecting fully representative reserve networks: addressing efficiency, reserve design and land suitability with an iterative analysis. Biological Conservation 62: 115-125.
Bruner, A. G., R. E. Gullison, R. E. Rice, and G. A. B. d. Fonseca. 2001. Effectiveness of parks in protecting tropical biodiversity. Science 291: 125-128.
Cabeza, M., and A. Moilanen. 2001. Design of resersve networks and the persistence of biodiversity. Trends in ecology and evolution 16（5）: 242-247.
Camm, J. D., S. K. Norman, S. Polasky, and A. R. Solow. 2002. Nature reserve site selection to maximize expected species covered. Operations research 50（6）: 946-955.
Cocks, K. D., and I. A. Baird. 1989. Using mathematical programming to address the multiple reserve selection problem: An example from the Eyre Peninsula, South Australia. Biological Conservation 49: 113-130.
Costello, C., and S. Polasky. 2004. Dynamic reserve site selection. Resource and Energy Economics 26: 157-174.
Cowling, R. M., R. L. Pressey, A. T. Lombard, P. G. Desmet, and A. G. Ellis. 1999. From representation to persistence : requirements for a sustainable system of conservation areas in the species-rich mediterranean-climate desert of southern Africa. Diversity and Distributions 5: 51-71.
Cowling, R. M., and R. L. Pressey. 2003. Introduction to systematic conservation planning in the Cape Floristic Region. Biological Conservation 112: 1-13.
Cowling, R. M., R. L. Pressey, R. Sims-Castley, A. le Roux, E. Baard, C. J. Burgers and G. Palmer. 2003a. The expert or the algorithm?－comparison of priority conservation areas in the Cape Floristic Region identified by park managers and reserve selection software. Biological Conservation 112: 147-167.
Cowling, R. M., R. L. Pressey, M. Rouget, A. T. Lombard. 2003b. A conservation plan for a global biodiversity hotspot－the Cape Floristic Region, South Africa. Biological Conservation 112: 191-216.
Csuti, B., S. Polasky, P. H. Williams, R. L. Pressey, J. D. Camm, M. Kershaw, A. R. Kiester, B. Downs, R. Hamilton, M. Huso, and K. Sahr. 1997. A comparison of reserve selection algorithms using data on terrestrial vertebrates in Oregon. Biological Conservation 80: 83-97.
Faith, D. P., C. R. Margules, and P. A. Walker, 2001a. A biodiversity conservation plan for Papua New Guinea based on biodiversity trade-offs analysis. Pacific Conservation Biology 6（4）: 304-324.
Faith, D. P., C. R. Margules, P. A. Walker, J. Stein, and G. Natera. 2001b. Practical application of biodiversity surrogates and percentage targets for conservation in Papua New Guinea. Pacific Conservation Biology 6（4）: 289-303.
Faith, D. P., H. A. Nix, C. R. Margules, M. F. Hutchinson, P. A. Walker J. West, J. L. Stein, J L. Kesteven, A. Allison and G. Natera. 2001c. Introductory paper - The BioRap Biodiversity Assessment and Planning Study for Papua New Guinea. Pacific Conservation Biology 6（4）: 279-288.
Faith, D. P., and P. A. Walker. 2002.The Role of trade-offs in biodiversity conservation planning : linking local management, regional planning and global conservation efforts. Journal of Biosciences（Supplement 2） 27: 393-407
Ferrier, S., R. L. Pressey, and T. W. Barrett. 2000. A new predictor of the irreplaceability of areas for achieving a conservation goal, its application to real-world planning, and a research agenda for further refinement. Biological Conservation 93: 303-325.
Finkel, E. 1998. Ecology: Software helps Australia manage forest debate. Science 281: 1789-1791.
Freemark, K., H. Moore, D. M. Forsyth, A. R. E. Sinclair, D. White, T. Barrett, and R. L. Pressey. 1999. Identifying minimum sets of conservation sites for representing biodiversity in Canada: a complementarity approach. Technical Report., Canadian Wildlife Service, Headquarters, Environment Canada.
Gaston, K. L., A. S. L. Rodrigues, B. J. van Rensburg, P. Koleff, and S. L. Chown, 2001. Complementary representation and zones of ecological transition. Ecology letters 4:4-9.
Groves, C. R., D. B. Jensen, L. L. Valutis, K. H. Redford, M. L. Shaffer, J. M. Scott, J. V. Baumgartner, J. V. Higgins, M. W. Beck, and M. G. Anderson. 2002. Planning for biodiversity conservation: putting conservation science into practice. Bioscience 52（6）: 499-512.
Groves, C. R. 2003. Drafting a conservation blueprint: a practitioner’s guide to planning for biodiversity. Island Press. Washington, DC, USA.
Haight, R. G., C. S. Revelle, and S. A. Snyder. 2000. An integer optimization approach to a probabilistic reserve site selection problem. Operations research 48（5）: 697-708.
Hillier, F. S., M. Hillier, G. J. Lieverman. 2002. Introduction to Management Science, 2nd. McGraw-Hill Publishing Co. USA.
Justus, J., and S. Sarkar. 2002. The principle of complementarity in the design of reserve networks to conserve biodiversity: a preliminary history. Journal of Biosciences（Supplement 2）27: 421-435.
Kelley, C., J. Garson, A. Aggarwal, and S. Sarkar. 2002. Place prioritization for biodiversity reserve network design: a comparison of the SITES and ResNet software packages for coverage and efficiency. Diversity and Distributions 8（5）: 297-306.
Lawler, J. J., D. White, and L. L. Master. 2003. Integrating representation and vulnerability: two approaches for prioritizing areas for conservation. Ecological Applications 13（6）: 1762-1772.
Lombard, A. T., R. M. Cowling, R. L. Pressey, and A. G. Rebelo. 2003. Effectiveness of land classes as surrogates for species in conservation planning for Cape Floristic Region. Biological Conservation 112: 46-62.
Margules, C. R., A. O. Nicholls, and R. L. Pressey. 1988. Selecting networks of reserves to maximise biological diversity. Biological Conservation 43: 63-76.
Margules, C. R., and R. L. Pressey. 2000. Systematic conservation planning. Nature 405: 243-253.
Margules, C. R., R. L. Pressey, and P. H. Williams. 2002. Representing biodiversity: data and procedures for identifying priority areas for conservation. Journal of Biosciences（Supplement 2）27: 309-326.
Meir, E., S. Andelman and H. P. Possingham. 2004. Does conservation planning matter in a dynamic and uncertain world? Ecology Letters 7: 615-622.
Moilanen, A. 2005. Methods for reserve selection: Interior point search. Biological Conservation 124: 485-492.
Ｍoore, J., A. Balmford, T. Allnutt, and N. Burgess, 2004. Integrating costs into conservation planning across Africa. Biological Conservation 117:343-350.
Nalle, D. J. 2001. Optimizing spatial and temporal aspects of nature reserve design under economic and ecological objectives. Ph.D. thesis, Oregon State University, USA.
NPWS. 2001. C-Plan: conservation planning software : user manual version 3.06. National Parks and Wildlife Service , Armidale, New South Wales, Australia.
Önal, H. 2003. First-best, second-best, and heuristic solutions in conservation reserve site selection. Biological Conservation 115: 55-62.
Önal, H., and R. Bariers. 2002. Incorporating spatial criteria in optimum reserve network selection. Proceedings: Biological Sciences 269（1508）: 2437-2441.
Önal, H., and R. Bariers. 2003. Selection of a minimum-boundary reserve network using integer programming. Proceedings: Biological Sciences 270（1523）: 1487-1491.
Polasky, S., J. D. Camm, A. R. Solow, B. Csuti, D. White, and R. Ding. 2000. Choosing reserve networks with incomplete species information. Biological Conservation 94:1-10.
Possingham, H., I. Ball, and S. Andelman. 2000. Mathematical methods for identifying representative reserve networks. Pages 291-306 in S. Ferson and M. Burgman, eds. Quantitative methods for conservation biology. Springer-Verlag, New York.
Possingham, H. P., K. A. Wilson, S. J. Andelman, and C. H. Vynne. 2005. Protected area: Goals, Limitations, and Design in M. J. Groom, G. K. Meffe, and C. R. Carroll, eds. Principles of conservation biology. Sinauer Associates,Inc., Sunderland,USA.
Prendergast, J. R., R. M. Quinn, and J. H. Lawton. 1999. The gaps between theory and practice in selecting nature reserves. Conservation Biology 13（3）:484-492.
Pressey, R. L., and A. O. Nicholls. 1989. Efficiency in conservation evaluation: scoring versus iterative approaches. Biological Conservation 50: 199-218.
Pressey, R. L., C. J. Humphries, C. R. Margules, R. I. Vane-Wright, and P. H. Williams. 1993. Beyond opportunism: Key principles for systematic reserve selection. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 8: 124-128.
Pressey, R. L., I. R. Johnson, and P. D. Wilson. 1994. Shades of irreplaceability: towards a measure of the contribution of sites to a reservation goal. Biodiversity and Conservation 3: 242-262.
Pressey, R. L. 1996. Protected areas: where should they be and why should they be there? Pages 171-185 in I. F. Spellerberg, ed. Conservation biology. Longman Group Ltd., London.
Pressey, R. L., H. P. Possingham, and C. R. Margules. 1996. Optimality in reserve selection algorithms: when does it matter and how much? Biological Conservation 76: 259-267.
Pressey, R. L., H. P. Possinham, and J. R. Day. 1997. Effectiveness of alternative heuristic algorithms for identifying indicative minimum requirements for conservation reserves. Biological Conservation 80: 207-219.
Pressey, R. L. 1999. Applications of irreplaceability analysis to planning and management problems. Parks 9（1）: 42-51.
Pressey, R. L., H. P. Possingham, V. S. Logan, J. R. Day and P. H. Williams. 1999. Effects of data characteristics on the results of reserve selection algorithms. Journal of Biogeography 26（1）: 179-191.
Pressey, R. L., and K. H. Taffs. 2001. Scheduling conservation action in production landscapes: priority areas in western New South Wales defined by irreplaceability and vulnerability to vegetation loss. Biological Conservation 100 : 355-376.
Pressey, R. L. and R. M. Cowling. 2001.Reserve selection algorithms and the real world. Conservation Biology 15 : 275-281.
Pressey, R. L., M. E. Watts, and T. W. Barrett. 2004. Is maximizing protection the same as minimizing loss? Efficiency and retention as alternative measures of the effectiveness of proposed reserves. Ecology Letters 7: 1035-1046.
Rodrigues, A. S. L., J. O. Cerdeira and K. J. Gaston. 2000. Flexibility, efficiency, and accountability: adapting reserve selection algorithms to more complex conservation problems. Ecography 23:565-574.
Rodrigues, A. S. L., and K. J. Gaston. 2001. How large do reserve networks need to be? Ecology Letters 4: 602-609.
Rodrigues, A. S. L., and K. J. Gaston. 2002. Optimisation in reserve selection procedures─why not? Biological Conservation 2002: 123-129.
Rodrigues, A. L., S. J. Andelman, M. I. Bakar, L. Boitani, T. M. Brooks, R. M. Cowling, L. D. C. Fishpool, G. A. B. Da Fonseca, K. J. Gaston, M. Hoffman, J. S. Long, P. A. Marquet, J. D. Pilgrim, R. L. Pressey, J. Schipper, W. Sechrest, S. N. Stuart, L. G. Underhill, R. W. Waller, M. A. J. Watts, and X. Yan. 2004. Effectiveness of the global protected area network in representing species diversity. Nature 428: 640-643.
Rouget, M. 2003. Measuring conservation value at fine and broad scales: implications for a diverse and fragmented region, the Agulhas Plain. Biological Conservation 112: 217-232
Rouget, M., D. M. Richardson, and R. M. Cowling. 2003a. The current configuration of protected areas in the Cape Floristic Region, South Africa－reservation bias and representation of biodiversity patterns and processes. Biological Conservation 112: 129-145.
Rouget, M.,R. M. Cowling, R. L. Pressey, and D. M. Richardson, 2003b. Identifying spatial components of ecological and evolutionary processes for regional conservation planning in the Cape Floristic Region, South Africa. Biodiversity Research 9: 191-120.
Sætersdal, M., I. Gjerde, H. H. Blom, P. G. Ihlen, E. W. Myrseth, R. Pommeresche, J. Skartveit, T. Solhøy, and O. Aas. 2003. Vascular plants as a surrogate species group in complementary site selection for bryophytes, macrolichens, spiders, carabids, staphylinids, snails, and wood living polypore fungi in a northern forest. Biological Conservation 115: 21-31.
Sarakinos, H., A. O. Nicholls, A. Tubert, A. Aggarwal, C. R. Margules, and S. Sarkar. 2001. Area prioritization for biodiversity conservation in Québec on the basis of species distributions: a preliminary analysis. Biodiversity and Conservation 10: 1419-1472.
Sarkar, S., A. Aggarwal, J. Garson, C. R. Margules, and J. Zeidler. 2002. Place prioritization for biodiversity content. Journal of Biosciences（Supplement 2） 27: 339-346.
Sauberer, N., K. P. Zulka, M. Abensperg-Traun, H. M. Berg, G. Bieringer, N. Milasowszky, D. Moser, C. Plutzar, M. Pollheimer, C. Storch, R. Tröstl, H. Zechmeister, and G. Grabherr. 2004. Surrogate taxa for biodiversity in agricultural landscapes of eastern Austria. Biological Conservation 117: 181-190.
Scott, J. M., F. W. Davis, R. G. McGhie, G. Wright, C. Groves, and J. Estes. 2001. Nature reserves: do they capture the full range of America's biological diversity? Ecological Applications 11（4）: 999-1007.
Soulé, M. E., and M. A. Sanjayan. 1998. Conservation targets: do they help? Science 279: 2060-2061.
Tear, T. H., P. Kareiva, P. L. Angermeier, P. Comer, B. Czech, R. Kautz, L. Landon, D. Mehlman, K. Murphy, M. Ruckelshaus, J. M. Scott, and G. Wilhere. 2005. How much is enough? The recurrent problem of setting measurable objectives in conservation. Bioscience 55（10）: 835-849.
Tognelli, M. F., C. Silva-García, F. A. Labra, and P. A. Marquet. 2005. Priorty areas for the conservation of coastal marine vertebrates in Chile. Biological Conservation 126: 420-428.
Tsuji, N., and Y. Tsubaki. 2004. Three new algorithms to calculate the irreplaceability index for presence/absence data. Biological Conservation 119: 487-494.
Underhill, L. G. 1994. Optimal and suboptimal reserve selection algorithms. Biological Conservation 70: 85-87.
Warman, L. D., D. M. Forsyth, A. R. E. Sinclair, K. Freemark, H. D. Moore, T. W. Barrett, R. L. Pressey, and D. White. 2004a. Species distributions, surrogacy, and important conservation regions in Canada. Ecology Letters 7: 374-379.
Warman, L. D., A. R. E. Sinclair, G. G. E. Scudder, B. Klinkenberg, and R. L. Pressey. 2004b. Sensitivity of systematic reserve selection to decisions about scales, biological data and targets: case study from southern British Columbia. Conservation Biology 18（3）: 655-666.
Williams, P. H., C. R. Margules and D. H. Hilbert. 2002. Data requirements and data sources for biodiversity priority areas selection. Journal of Biosciences（Supplement 2） 27（4）: 327- 338.
Williams, J. C., C. S. R. Velle, and S. A. Levin. 2004. Using mathematical optimization models to design nature reserves. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 2（2）: 98-105.
Younge, A., and S. Fowkes. 2003. The Cape action plan for the environment : overview of an ecoregional planning process. Biological Conservation 112: 15-28.