Sei sulla pagina 1di 114

Portfolio Selection

MARXAN
Created by Ian Ball and Hugh Possingham

Biodiversity Representation
Protected areas are now required to be representative of biodiversity.
Selection of protected areas in many places has historically been
opportunistic.

Many reserves were originally designated for their scenic beauty, cultural
significance, lack of economic value or to protect a few charismatic
flagship species.
These PAs do not adequately represent the diversity of ecosystems,
leading to duplication in the protection of some habitats and species and
inadequate protection of others.
Selection techniques improved with the understanding that the range of
biodiversity should be represented.
These techniques often concentrate on areas rich in well-studied habitats
and species, and do not provide quantitative representation or repeatability.

Priority Area Selection Methods


Systematic techniques using algorithms have been designed to select
priority conservation areas both for protected areas and use-zoning.
These decision support tools are:
- transparent and efficient
- driven by quantitative reservation goals
- flexible and
- repeatable.

It is vital to include expert and stakeholder knowledge in the process,


whilst allowing quantitative representation and repeatability.
Software such as MARXAN has been designed to implement
algorithms that allow such methodologies.
They can include many parameters believed to be important in
biologically meaningful priority area design.
These include multiple representations, patch size control and
minimum and maximum separation distances.
The techniques can also offer many alternative systems that can be
negotiated whilst maintaining all goals.

Reserve Design using Spatially Explicit Annealing


MARXAN delivers decision support for selecting networks of
priority conservation sites.
A region is divided into smaller areas known as planning units, to
allow comparison between the areas through quantification of their
characteristics.
The selection of any planning unit over another involves evaluating it
with regards to all the planning units in the area under consideration.
One unit with several valuable features on its own may or may not be
the best choice overall, depending on the distribution and replication
of those features in other planning units.

Marxan Utilization Worldwide


Marxan was developed to meet the decision support needs of the Great
Barrier Reef Marine Planning Authority (GBRMPA) in their
representative areas program that has rezoned the GBR. Other examples
include:
British Columbia (Canada)
Galapagos Islands (Ecuador)
Gulf of California (Mexico)
Joint Nature Conservancy Council (UK)
The Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary (USA)
Channel Islands National Marine Sanctuary (USA)
South Australia, University of Queensland
Northern Gulf of Mexico (USA)
Trough-Georgia Basin (USA/ Canada)
North East Atlantic (USA / Canada)

Designing a Portfolio
Marxan can offer decision support for teams of experts choosing
between thousands of planning units and many biodiversity targets.
It selects a portfolio of spatially cohesive units that meet a suite of
biodiversity goals whilst minimizing the cost.
The cost of the portfolio consists of a weighted sum of planning unit
cost, boundary length and penalties for not representing biodiversity
targets to their user defined goal.
A portfolio consists of a network of planning units, some of which are
clustered into potential sites, with others serving to connect isolated
areas of existing or intended conservation management.

The MARXAN algorithm:


Objective Function
The algorithm attempts to minimize the total cost of a portfolio:

Or: Total Portfolio Cost =


(cost of selected sites) +
(penalty cost for not meeting conservation goals) +
(cost of spatial distribution of the selected sites).

Simulated Annealing
MARXAN uses an simulated annealing optimization algorithm to
select a portfolio.
The algorithm is based on iterative improvement with stochastic
acceptance of bad moves.
This allows the algorithm to choose less than optimal planning units
early in the process that may allow for better choices and overall
portfolio later.
As the program progresses, the criteria for a good selection gets
progressively stricter, until finally the portfolio is built.

Planning Units
Planning units can be any shape or size, but appropriate units should be
designed according to the available target data and to best facilitate
conservation efforts in the priority sites identified.
Planning units can be natural, administrative or arbitrary sub divisions of
the land and seascape.
The units should be small enough to reflect differences between
fragmented and non fragmented habitats or distributions, but large enough
to reflect quantitative differences between units.
Data on distributions within very small units becomes presence / absence
information and does not reflect differences regarding the size of patches
or the co-existence of biodiversity elements or targets between the units.

Factors That Can Be Included In Portfolio Analysis


Measures can be incorporated by careful setup of targets and goals. For example:
Representation: quantitative representation of all targets.
Multiple sites: a minimum number of sites can be stipulated and/or a minimum
separation distance to lower stochastic occurrence risk.
Connectivity: a maximum separation distance can be stipulated and sites thought
to be connected can be split into separate sub-targets ensuring representation
within all connected sites.
Resistance or resilience indicators: (if map-able eg shaded, well mixed, well
flushed areas etc) if a high level of confidence is achieved, these can be
incorporated as separate (fine filter) targets.
Resistant or resilient sites: can be incorporated as separate targets.

Outputs
Portfolios and Irreplaceability Maps

Outputs

Information on the number of times a planning unit is chosen in a


priority area network, and the best network can be mapped using GIS.
Planning units that are chosen more than 50% of the time can be
thought of as being essential for efficiently meeting biodiversity goals.
Areas with lower irreplaceability are not unimportant but are more
interchangeable with other similar planning units.
Many design scenarios can be explored, and flexible units can be
removed and alternatives found.

Portfolio Selection
Marxan Inputs

Marxan Inputs

1) Target abundance per planning unit


2) Goals
3) Cost per planning unit
4) Planning unit boundary lengths (optional)
5) Biological constraints (optional)
6) Spatial clustering (optional)
7) Species penalty factors (optional but extremely important)

1) Target Abundance per Planning Unit

2) Goals

20%

30%

3) Planning Unit Cost

The cost is a relative value applied to planning units such that


some may be more difficult or expensive to set aside than others.

Marxan attempts to minimize the total cost of the portfolio. This


consists of cost, boundary length and penalties for not representing
the targets to the goals.

Cost can represent:

Actual or modeled cost of planning unit area

Cost of lost opportunity (e.g. fishing yield etc)

Threat

Inverted resilience indicators

Any other measure to minimize in the portfolio as a whole.

4) Biological Constraints
Measures can be introduced to assure the portfolio contains targets
that have:

a minimum target patch size

minimum separation distance between patches (avoidance of


stochastic disasters)

maximum separation distance (connectivity)

minimum number of patches.

5) Species Penalty Factors

The species penalty factor (SPF) sets the relative importance of


target representation when selecting areas.

A spf value should be chosen that allows an acceptable number of


targets to reach goal representation.

Testing is required to calculate this value.

6) Spatial Clustering of Planning Units


Marxan facilitates the choice of a portfolio with increased spatial
clustering of planning units (PUs).
It can be set to minimize the boundary length of the portfolio, which
clusters the planning units together.
This effect can be set to have a strong or a only slight effect.
Clustering the sites can require an increase in the number of PUs
necessary to meet all representation goals, but is thought to increase
manageability of sites and likelihood of persistence of biodiversity
targets.

Increasing PU Clustering

0.0001

0.0005

0.001

0.01

0.1

Pre MARXAN Target Data


Preparation

Pre MARXAN Target Data


Preparation
Data compatibility: Data should ideally be of the same
scale or resolution, of a similar age and of similar accuracy.
Screening eg patch size, health, threat etc.
Stratification biologically diverse parts of targets should be
stratified.
Target weighting: fine and coarse filter targets should be
weighted carefully and have goals appropriate to the aims of
the portfolio.

Caribbean Ecoregional Assessment

Dominica

Exercise 1: An introduction to MARXAN

Exercise 1: An introduction to MARXAN


This first exercise describes how to use marxan to design a portfolio
using case study data.
The first section examines the target distribution and planning unit
shapefiles in ArcView, and the marxan input files in notepad.
The second section describes setting up a marxan run using input files
that have been prepared from this data, running the algorithm and
mapping the results.

Follow the instructions A1-6 to copy MARXAN and the tutorial data
onto your computer and then view the data in ArcView.

Using Tutorial Input Files


A7 Up to 5 text files are needed for MARXAN to run. (c:/
marxan/inputs)
They contain data concerning:

Target abundance
Target details (name, goal, spf etc)
Planning unit information
Boundary information (optional)
Block definitions (optional)

Input Tables

Target Abundance: puvspr.dat

Target Details File : spec.dat

Input Tables

Boundary file : bound.dat

Planning unit file: pu.dat

Input Tables

Block definition file


(optional but useful for setting
proportional goals)

Section B: Using Inedit to set up MARXAN

B1) MARXAN is set up using the Inedit program opened


from windows explorer

B2)

B3)

B4)

B5)

B6)

B7)

B8)

B9) MARXAN is opened and run by executing the


marxan.exe file.

B10) Examine the outputs:


Best - the units in the best portfolio

Sum - summary of each run,


including whether all goals have
been met.

Sum-summary of each run

Solution- number of times each unit was selected

Section C: Mapping MARXAN Results

Mapping Irreplaceability

C2) Add the text files tnc_tutorial_run1_ssoln.txt and


tnc_tutorial_run1_best.txt

C2) Join tables to the planning unit attribute table.

C3) Display the pu shapefile using graduated color.

Double click

C3 cont.) Use the run1_irr field as the classification field.

Irreplaceability based on 100 runs


(cost = area, no areas locked in)

Mapping the best Portfolio

C4) Display the pu shapefile using unique value.

C4 cont.) Use the run1_bst field as the classification field.

Best Portfolio based on 100 runs


(cost = area, no areas locked in)

C5) Run the algorithm again using a boundary length


modifier (BLM) and view the results of increased clustering.
C6) Run the algorithm with the protected area planning units
locked into the portfolio. Compare the results to identify
whether the present PA system is efficient or meets all
conservation goals.
C7) Run the algorithm for 200 runs and compare the best
portfolio cost with the best run of 100 runs. Have 200 runs
identified a more efficient portfolio?

Exercise 2
Creating Input Files using Tutorial Data

Creating Input Files using Tutorial Data

Exercise 2 describes the GIS processes and excel methods


that can be used to create the MARXAN input files from
target and planning unit files.

MARXAN Files:
1) Target Abundance File: puvspr.dat
2) Species File : spec_goals.dat
3) Planning Unit File: pu.dat
4) Boundary File: bound.dat
5) Block Definition File: block.dat (optional)

D) Target Abundance File: puvspr.dat


(Planning Unit versus Conservation Feature File)

D2) A dbf table is created that contains the ids of the PUs
from the planning unit file.

(puvspr.dat)

D2-D4) This table is used by the CLUZ abundance ArcView


script to produce an abundance table using the target
shapefiles and the planning unit shapefile.

(puvspr.dat)

D5) View the abundance dbf table.

(puvspr.dat)

D6) The CLUZ puvspr ArcView script is used to convert the


abundance table into the MARXAN puvspr file format.

(puvspr.dat)

D7) Resulting puvspr_abun file.

E) Species File : spec_goals.dat

Follow steps E1 to E3 to create the table containing a target


id column.

E4) Goals can be calculated using the abundance table

(spec.dat)

Follow steps E5 to E7 to complete the spec_goals file.

(spec.dat)

F) Planning Unit File: pu.dat

F1) The planning unit shapefile is exported to a dbf table.

(pu.dat)

F1 F4) The table can be manipulated in excel and saved as


a csv file, then renamed to .dat.

(pu.dat)

F5) Follow step F5 to create a PU table that identifies all PUs


with over 50% of their area under a PA.

G) Boundary File: bound.dat

G1-G2) The boundary file extension to ArcView is used to


create the boundary file from the planning unit shapefile
automatically.

F) Block Definition File: block.dat (optional)

Follow steps H1 and H2 to create the block definition file:

Exercise 3: Run marxan with new input files.

Follow steps J1 to J4 to run a series of marxan analyses with


varying parameters.
Check that marxan will run successfully using the new files.
View the effects of different parameters such as locking
protected areas into the portfolio and increasing clustering.

Results

Effect of Increasing Boundary Length Modifier

BLM

Number of Units in Best


Portfolio

Number of Targets
over Goal

0.001

593

16

0.01

579

16

0.03

567

18

0.06

550

18

0.1

547

17

0.5

674

22

Moist
Extrus
ive
oloniz
ed Be
drock
Moist
Alluvia
Reef P
l
atch R
eef in
div
Reef L
inear
Reef
Wetla
nd Fre
shwate
r
Wet e
xtrusiv
e
LM we
t extru
sive
Dry Lim
Reef C
eston
e
oloniz
ed Pa
veme
nt
Wet a
lluvial
Dry A
lluvial
Dry E
xtrusiv
e
Moist
Intrus
ive
Wet in
trusive
Wetla
nd Te
rrestria
l
Mang
rove
Reef L
inear
Reef
Wet u
ltrama
fic
Moist
ultram
a
fic
Moist
sedim
entary
Rain e
xtrusiv
e
LM we
t intru
sive
Wet li
mesto
ne
LM ra
in intr
usive
LM we
t alluv
ial
Dry In
trusive
Reef L
inear
Reef
LM ra
Reef C
in extr
oloniz
usive
ed Pa
veme
nt with
C
Wet s
edime
ntary
Dry se
dimen
tary
Moist
limesto
ne
LM we
t ultra
Reef S
mafic
cattere
d Cora
l-Rock
Rain a
lluvial
Dry ult
ramafi
c
Rain in
trusive
LM we
t limes
tone
Reef C

% of Goal

Proportion of Goal Held in Portfolio; 100 Runs BLM 0.001

16 Targets Over Goal

350

300

Portfolio = 593 Units

250

200

150

100

50

Target

Mois
t Ext
rusiv
Mois
e
t ultr
ama
f
ic
Wet
extru
Reef
sive
Patc
h Re
ef ind
iv
Mois
t Allu
vial
Wet
alluv
Wetla
ial
nd F
resh
wate
r
Dry E
xtrus
Reef
ive
Linea
r Ree
Dry L
f
Reef
im
e
stone
Colo
nize
Wetla d Bedroc
k
nd Te
rrest
rial
Man
grov
Reef
e
Linea
r Ree
f
Wet
intru
sive
Wet
ultra
mafic
LM w
et int
rusiv
e
Dry A
lluvia
W
l
et lim
Reef
eston
Colo
nized
e
Pave
Reef
men
Mois
t
Colo
t Intr
nized
usive
Pave
men
t with
LM w
C
Reef
et ex
Scat
trusiv
tered
e
Cora
l-Roc
Wet
k
sedim
enta
Mois
ry
t sed
imen
tary
Dry I
ntrus
ive
Rain
extru
sive
Reef
Linea
r Ree
LM r
f
ain e
xtrus
ive
Dry s
edim
enta
ry
LM w
et all
uvial
LM w
et ult
rama
fic
Mois
t lime
stone
LM r
ain in
trusiv
e
Rain
alluv
ia
l
Rain
intru
s
iv
e
Dry u
ltram
LM w
afic
et lim
eston
e

% Goal

Proportion of Goal Held In Portfolio; 100 runs BLM 0.01

16 Targets Over Goal

350

300

Portfolio = 579 Units

250

200

150

100

50

Target

imes
tone
Wet
extru
sive
Mois
Reef
t Allu
Colo
vial
nized
Bedr
ock
Mois
t Ext
Wetla
rusiv
e
n
d Fre
Reef
shwa
Colo
ter
nized
Pave
men
Reef
t
Linea
Reef
r Ree
Patc
f
h Re
ef ind
iv
Dry E
x
trusiv
Wetla
e
nd Te
rrest
rial
LM w
et ex
trusiv
e
Wet
intru
sive
Wet
sedim
enta
Reef
ry
Colo
Man
nized
grov
Pave
e
men
t with
Wet
C
ultra
mafic
Wet
limes
tone
Mois
t Intr
usive
Reef
Linea
r Ree
f
Dry I
ntrus
ive
Dry A
lluvia
LM w
l
et int
rusiv
e
Wet
alluv
ial
Mois
t ultr
ama
Dry s
fic
edim
enta
Mois
ry
t lime
stone
Reef
Linea
r Ree
Rain
f
extru
Mois
sive
t sed
imen
tary
LM r
ain e
xtrus
LM w
ive
Reef
et ult
rama
Scat
tered
fic
Cora
l-Roc
LM w
k
et all
uvial
LM r
ain in
trusiv
e
Rain
alluv
ial
Rain
intru
sive
Dry u
ltram
afic
LM w
et lim
eston
e

Dry L

% Goal

Proportion Of Goal Held in Portfolio; 100 runs, BLM 0.03

18 Targets over Goal

350

300

Portfolio = 567 Units

250

200

150

100

50

Target

Extrus
ive
Moist
Alluvia
l
Dry A
lluvial
Wetla
nd Fre
shwate
Reef C
r
oloniz
ed Be
drock
Wet a
lluvial
Wet e
xtrusiv
e
Reef L
inear
Reef C
Reef
oloniz
ed Pa
veme
nt
Moist
Intrus
ive
Wet u
ltrama
fic
Mang
rove
Reef P
atch R
eef in
div
Wetla
nd Te
rrestria
l
Dry Lim
eston
e
Moist
ultram
afic
Wet in
trusive
LM we
Reef C
t extru
oloniz
sive
ed Pa
veme
nt with
C
Dry E
xtrusiv
e
Reef L
inear
Reef
LM we
t intru
sive
LM ra
in intr
usive
Wet li
mesto
ne
LM we
t alluv
ial
Rain e
xtrusiv
e
Moist
sedim
entary
Wet s
edime
ntary
Reef L
inear
Reef
Dry se
dimen
tary
Dry In
trusive
LM ra
in extr
usive
LM we
t ultra
Reef S
m
afic
cattere
d Cora
l-Rock
Rain a
lluvial
Moist
limesto
ne
Dry ult
ramafi
c
Rain in
trusive
LM we
t limes
tone

Moist

% Goal

Proportion of Goal Held in Portfolio; 100 Runs, BLM 0.06

18 Targets Over Goal

350

300

Portfolio = 550 Units

250

200

150

100

50

Target

300

0
Wet
alluv
ial
Wet
extru
s
iv
Mois
e
t Ext
Reef
rusiv
Colo
e
nized
Bedr
Wetla
ock
nd F
resh
wate
Dry L
r
imes
tone
Man
grov
e
Mois
Reef
t Allu
Colo
vial
nized
Pave
men
Mois
t
t Intr
usive
Wet
intru
Mois
sive
t sed
imen
tary
Dry s
edim
Reef
e
n
tary
Patc
h Re
ef ind
iv
Dry E
xtrus
Reef
ive
Linea
r Ree
Wet
f
ultra
mafic
Dry A
lluvia
Wet
l
limes
Wetla
tone
nd Te
rrest
rial
Mois
Reef
t
u
lt
Scat
rama
tered
fic
Cora
l-Roc
LM w
k
et ex
trusiv
LM r
e
ain in
trusiv
Reef
LM w
e
Colo
et all
nized
uvial
Pave
men
t with
C
Dry I
ntrus
ive
LM w
et int
rusiv
Reef
e
Linea
r Ree
Rain
f
extru
s
Wet
sedim ive
enta
Mois
ry
t lime
stone
LM r
ain e
xtrus
Reef
ive
Linea
r Ree
f
Rain
alluv
ial
Dry u
ltram
afic
Rain
intru
sive
LM w
et lim
eston
LM w
e
et ult
rama
fic

% Goal

Proportion of Goal Held in Portfolio; 100 Runs BLM 0.1

17 Targets Over Goal

350

Portfolio = 547 Units

250

200

150

100

50

Target

t Ext
rusiv
Wet
e
extru
sive
M
oist A
Ree
f Co
lluvia
loniz
l
ed B
edro
c
k
Wet
Wetla
alluv
ial
nd F
resh
wate
r
Dry A
lluvia
Dry
l
Lime
ston
e
Man
Ree
grov
Ree
f Co
e
f Lin
loniz
ear R
ed P
eef
avem
ent w
it
Mois
hC
t ultr
Ree
ama
f Pat
fic
ch R
eef in
Wetla
div
nd T
Ree
erres
f Co
loniz
trial
ed P
LM w avement
et ex
trusiv
e
Wet
intru
sive
Ree
D
r
y
f Sca
Extru
ttere
sive
d Co
ral-R
ock
LM w
et all
u
v
ial
Mois
t Intr
usive
Wet
ultra
mafic
Ree
f Lin
ear R
Dry
sedim eef
en
Wet
sedim tary
e
ntary
Ree
f Lin
ear R
Mois
eef
t sed
imen
LM w
t
ary
et ult
rama
fic
Wet
lime
ston
LM w
e
et in
trusiv
e
Rain
alluv
ia
l
Dry
Intru
sive
Mois
t lim
esto
ne
Dry
ultra
mafic
LM w
et lim
esto
LM r
ne
ain in
trusiv
LM r
e
ain e
xtrus
ive
Rain
extru
sive
Rain
intru
sive

Mois

% Goal

Proportion of Goal Held in Portfolio; 100 Runs, BLM 0.5

22 Targets Over Goal

350

300

Portfolio = 674 Units

250

200

150

100

50

Target

Analysis of Highly Irreplaceable Areas

Additional information can be found in the MARXAN


manual which can be downloaded with the program from:
http://www.ecology.uq.edu.au/?page=20882&pid=

Please register as a user!

Potrebbero piacerti anche