This page has only limited features, please log in for full access.
Ian Harrison obtained his Ph.D. in systematic ichthyology at the University of Bristol, UK. He has conducted research on marine and freshwater fishes from several parts of the world, including fieldwork in Europe, Central and South America, West and Western Central Africa, the Philippines, and the Central Pacific. He has worked for Conservation International (CI) and IUCN’s Global Species Programme and is currently the Freshwater Specialist for the CI’s Moore Center for Science, where he is helping develop CI’s Freshwater Science Strategy as well as CI’s broader, institutional-wide Freshwater Initiative. He is also the Technical Officer for the IUCN SSC Freshwater Fish Specialist Group, and co-chair of the IUCN-SSC Freshwater Conservation Committee. He has published over 50 scientific papers and book/report chapters on the biology and conservation of fishes, and conservation of freshwater ecosystems.
Freshwater biodiversity is declining at an unprecedented rate. Freshwater conservationists and environmental managers have enough evidence to demonstrate that action must not be delayed but have insufficient evidence to identify those actions that will be most effective in reversing the current trend. Here, the focus is on identifying essential research topics that, if addressed, will contribute directly to restoring freshwater biodiversity through supporting ‘bending the curve’ actions (i.e. those actions leading to the recovery of freshwater biodiversity, not simply deceleration of the current downward trend). The global freshwater research and management community was asked to identify unanswered research questions that could address knowledge gaps and barriers associated with ‘bending the curve’ actions. The resulting list was refined into six themes and 25 questions. Although context-dependent and potentially limited in global reach, six overarching themes were identified: (i) learning from successes and failures; (ii) improving current practices; (iii) balancing resource needs; (iv) rethinking built environments; (v) reforming policy and investments; and (vi) enabling transformative change. Bold, efficient, science-based actions are necessary to reverse biodiversity loss. We believe that conservation actions will be most effective when supported by sound evidence, and that research and action must complement one another. These questions are intended to guide global freshwater researchers and conservation practitioners, identify key projects and signal research needs to funders and governments. Our questions can act as springboards for multidisciplinary and multisectoral collaborations that will improve the management and restoration of freshwater biodiversity.
Meagan Harper; Hebah S. Mejbel; Dylan Longert; Robin Abell; T. Douglas Beard; Joseph R. Bennett; Stephanie M. Carlson; William Darwall; Anthony Dell; Sami Domisch; David Dudgeon; Jörg Freyhof; Ian Harrison; Kathy A. Hughes; Sonja C. Jähnig; Jonathan M. Jeschke; Richard Lansdown; Mark Lintermans; Abigail J. Lynch; Helen M. R. Meredith; Sanjay Molur; Julian D. Olden; Steve J. Ormerod; Harmony Patricio; Andrea J. Reid; Astrid Schmidt‐Kloiber; Michele Thieme; David Tickner; Eren Turak; Olaf L. F. Weyl; Steven J. Cooke. Twenty‐five essential research questions to inform the protection and restoration of freshwater biodiversity. Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems 2021, 1 .
AMA StyleMeagan Harper, Hebah S. Mejbel, Dylan Longert, Robin Abell, T. Douglas Beard, Joseph R. Bennett, Stephanie M. Carlson, William Darwall, Anthony Dell, Sami Domisch, David Dudgeon, Jörg Freyhof, Ian Harrison, Kathy A. Hughes, Sonja C. Jähnig, Jonathan M. Jeschke, Richard Lansdown, Mark Lintermans, Abigail J. Lynch, Helen M. R. Meredith, Sanjay Molur, Julian D. Olden, Steve J. Ormerod, Harmony Patricio, Andrea J. Reid, Astrid Schmidt‐Kloiber, Michele Thieme, David Tickner, Eren Turak, Olaf L. F. Weyl, Steven J. Cooke. Twenty‐five essential research questions to inform the protection and restoration of freshwater biodiversity. Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems. 2021; ():1.
Chicago/Turabian StyleMeagan Harper; Hebah S. Mejbel; Dylan Longert; Robin Abell; T. Douglas Beard; Joseph R. Bennett; Stephanie M. Carlson; William Darwall; Anthony Dell; Sami Domisch; David Dudgeon; Jörg Freyhof; Ian Harrison; Kathy A. Hughes; Sonja C. Jähnig; Jonathan M. Jeschke; Richard Lansdown; Mark Lintermans; Abigail J. Lynch; Helen M. R. Meredith; Sanjay Molur; Julian D. Olden; Steve J. Ormerod; Harmony Patricio; Andrea J. Reid; Astrid Schmidt‐Kloiber; Michele Thieme; David Tickner; Eren Turak; Olaf L. F. Weyl; Steven J. Cooke. 2021. "Twenty‐five essential research questions to inform the protection and restoration of freshwater biodiversity." Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems , no. : 1.
Freshwater ecosystems are poorly represented in global networks of protected areas. This situation underscores an urgent need for the creation, application, and expansion of durable (long-term and enforceable) protection mechanisms for free-flowing rivers that go beyond conventional protected area planning. To address this need, we must first understand where and what types of protections exist that explicitly maintain the free-flowing integrity of rivers, as well as the efficacy of such policy types. Through policy analysis and an in-depth literature review, our study identifies three main policy mechanisms used for such protections: (1) River Conservation Systems; (2) Executive Decrees and Laws; and (3) Rights of Rivers. We found that globally only eight counties have national river conservation systems while seven countries have used executive decrees and similar policies to halt dam construction, and Rights of Rivers movements are quickly growing in importance, relative to other protection types. Despite the current extent of protection policies being insufficient to tackle the freshwater and biodiversity crises facing the world’s rivers, they do provide useful frameworks to guide the creation and expansion of protections. Ultimately, as countries act on global calls for protections, policy mechanisms must be tailored to their individual social and ecological geographies.
Denielle Perry; Ian Harrison; Stephannie Fernandes; Sarah Burnham; Alana Nichols. Global Analysis of Durable Policies for Free-Flowing River Protections. Sustainability 2021, 13, 2347 .
AMA StyleDenielle Perry, Ian Harrison, Stephannie Fernandes, Sarah Burnham, Alana Nichols. Global Analysis of Durable Policies for Free-Flowing River Protections. Sustainability. 2021; 13 (4):2347.
Chicago/Turabian StyleDenielle Perry; Ian Harrison; Stephannie Fernandes; Sarah Burnham; Alana Nichols. 2021. "Global Analysis of Durable Policies for Free-Flowing River Protections." Sustainability 13, no. 4: 2347.
Derek Vollmer; Ian J Harrison. H2O ≠ CO2: framing and responding to the global water crisis. Environmental Research Letters 2021, 16, 011005 .
AMA StyleDerek Vollmer, Ian J Harrison. H2O ≠ CO2: framing and responding to the global water crisis. Environmental Research Letters. 2021; 16 (1):011005.
Chicago/Turabian StyleDerek Vollmer; Ian J Harrison. 2021. "H2O ≠ CO2: framing and responding to the global water crisis." Environmental Research Letters 16, no. 1: 011005.
In 2010, Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) adopted the Strategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011–2020 to address the loss and degradation of nature. Subsequently, most biodiversity indicators continued to decline. Nevertheless, conservation actions can make a positive difference for biodiversity. The emerging Post‐2020 Global Biodiversity Framework has potential to catalyze efforts to “bend the curve” of biodiversity loss. Thus, the inclusion of a goal on species, articulated as Goal B in the Zero Draft of the Post‐2020 Framework, is essential. However, as currently formulated, this goal is inadequate for preventing extinctions, and reversing population declines; both of which are required to achieve the CBD's 2030 Mission. We contend it is unacceptable that Goal B could be met while most threatened species deteriorated in status and many avoidable species extinctions occurred. We examine the limitations of the current wording and propose an articulation with robust scientific basis. A goal for species that strives to end extinctions and recover populations of all species that have experienced population declines, and especially those at risk of extinction, would help to align actors toward the transformative actions and interventions needed for humans to live in harmony with nature.
Brooke A. Williams; James E.M. Watson; Stuart H.M. Butchart; Michelle Ward; Thomas M. Brooks; Nathalie Butt; Friederike C. Bolam; Simon N. Stuart; Louise Mair; Philip J. K. McGowan; Richard Gregory; Craig Hilton‐Taylor; David Mallon; Ian Harrison; Jeremy S. Simmonds. A robust goal is needed for species in the Post‐2020 Global Biodiversity Framework. Conservation Letters 2020, 1 .
AMA StyleBrooke A. Williams, James E.M. Watson, Stuart H.M. Butchart, Michelle Ward, Thomas M. Brooks, Nathalie Butt, Friederike C. Bolam, Simon N. Stuart, Louise Mair, Philip J. K. McGowan, Richard Gregory, Craig Hilton‐Taylor, David Mallon, Ian Harrison, Jeremy S. Simmonds. A robust goal is needed for species in the Post‐2020 Global Biodiversity Framework. Conservation Letters. 2020; ():1.
Chicago/Turabian StyleBrooke A. Williams; James E.M. Watson; Stuart H.M. Butchart; Michelle Ward; Thomas M. Brooks; Nathalie Butt; Friederike C. Bolam; Simon N. Stuart; Louise Mair; Philip J. K. McGowan; Richard Gregory; Craig Hilton‐Taylor; David Mallon; Ian Harrison; Jeremy S. Simmonds. 2020. "A robust goal is needed for species in the Post‐2020 Global Biodiversity Framework." Conservation Letters , no. : 1.
The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) purport to report holistically on progress towards sustainability and do so using more than 231 discrete indicators, with a primary objective to achieve a balance between the environment, social and economic aspects of development. The research question underpinning the analyses presented in this paper is: are the indicators in the SDGs sufficient and fit for purpose to assess the trajectory of natural resources towards sustainability? We extracted the SDG indicators that monitor the state of natural resources, or alternately support policy or governance for their protection, and determined whether these are adequate to provide the essential data on natural resources to achieve the aims of the SDGs. The indicators are clustered into four natural resource categories—land, water (both marine and freshwater), air and biodiversity. Indicators for monitoring land resources show that the most comprehensive land resource indicator for degraded land is not fully implemented and that missing from land monitoring is an evaluation of vegetation health outside of forests and mountains, the condition of soils, and most importantly the overall health of terrestrial ecosystems. Indicators for monitoring water resources have substantial gaps, unable to properly monitor water quality, water stress, many aspects of marine resources and, most significantly, the health of fresh and salt water ecosystems. Indicators for monitoring of air have recently become more comprehensive, but linkage to IPCC results would benefit both programs. Monitoring of biodiversity is perhaps the greatest weakness of the SDG Agenda, having no comprehensive assessment even though narrow aspects are monitored. Again, deliberate linkages to other global biodiversity programs (e.g., CBD and the Post-2020 Biodiversity Framework, IPBES, and Living Planet) are recommended on condition that data can be defined at a country level. While the SDG list of indicators in support of natural resource is moderately comprehensive, it lacks holistic monitoring in relation to evaluation of ecosystems and biodiversity to the extent that these missing but vital measures of sustainability threaten the entire SDG Agenda. In addition, an emerging issue is that even where there are appropriate indicators, the amount of country-level data remains inadequate to fully evaluate sustainability. This signals the delicate balance between the extent and complexity of the SDG Agenda and uptake at a country level.
Christopher Dickens; Matthew McCartney; David Tickner; Ian Harrison; Pablo Pacheco; Brown Ndhlovu. Evaluating the Global State of Ecosystems and Natural Resources: Within and Beyond the SDGs. Sustainability 2020, 12, 7381 .
AMA StyleChristopher Dickens, Matthew McCartney, David Tickner, Ian Harrison, Pablo Pacheco, Brown Ndhlovu. Evaluating the Global State of Ecosystems and Natural Resources: Within and Beyond the SDGs. Sustainability. 2020; 12 (18):7381.
Chicago/Turabian StyleChristopher Dickens; Matthew McCartney; David Tickner; Ian Harrison; Pablo Pacheco; Brown Ndhlovu. 2020. "Evaluating the Global State of Ecosystems and Natural Resources: Within and Beyond the SDGs." Sustainability 12, no. 18: 7381.
The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) purport to report holistically on progress towards sustainability and do so using more than 231 discrete indicators with a primary objective to achieve a balance between the environment, social and economic aspects of development. The research question underpinning the analyses presented in this paper is: are the indicators in the SDGs sufficient and fit-for-purpose to assess the trajectory of natural resources towards sustainability? We extracted the SDG indicators that monitor the state of natural resources, or alternately support policy or governance for their protection, and determined if these are adequate to provide the essential data on natural resources to achieve the aims of the SDGs. The indicators are clustered into four natural resource categories; land, water (both marine and freshwater), air and biodiversity. Indicators for monitoring land resources show that the most comprehensive land resource indicator, for degraded land, is not fully implemented and that missing from land monitoring is an evaluation of vegetation health outside of forests and mountains, the condition of soils, and most importantly the overall health of terrestrial ecosystems. Indicators for monitoring water resources have substantial gaps, unable to properly monitor water quality, water stress, many aspects of marine resources and most significantly, the health of fresh and salt water ecosystems. Indicators for monitoring of air have recently become more comprehensive, but linkage to IPCC results would benefit both programmes. Monitoring of biodiversity is perhaps the greatest weakness of the SDG Agenda, having no comprehensive assessment even though narrow aspects are monitored. Again, deliberate linkages to other global biodiversity programmes (e.g. CBD and the Post 2020 Biodiversity Framework; IPBES; Living Planet, etc.) are recommended on condition that data can be defined at a country level. While the SDG list of indicators in support of natural resource is moderately comprehensive, it lacks holistic monitoring in relation to evaluation of ecosystems and biodiversity to the extent that these missing but vital measures of sustainability threaten the entire SDG Agenda. In addition, an emerging issue is that even where there are appropriate indicators, the amount of country-level data remains inadequate to fully evaluate sustainability. This signals the delicate balance between the extent and complexity of the SDG Agenda and uptake at a country level
Christopher Dickens; Matthew McCartney; David Tickner; Ian J. Harrison; Pablo Pacheco; Brown Ndhlovu. Evaluating The Global State of Ecosystems and Natural Resources: within and beyond The SDGs. 2020, 1 .
AMA StyleChristopher Dickens, Matthew McCartney, David Tickner, Ian J. Harrison, Pablo Pacheco, Brown Ndhlovu. Evaluating The Global State of Ecosystems and Natural Resources: within and beyond The SDGs. . 2020; ():1.
Chicago/Turabian StyleChristopher Dickens; Matthew McCartney; David Tickner; Ian J. Harrison; Pablo Pacheco; Brown Ndhlovu. 2020. "Evaluating The Global State of Ecosystems and Natural Resources: within and beyond The SDGs." , no. : 1.
Inland fish provide food for billions and livelihoods for millions of people worldwide and are integral to effective freshwater ecosystem function, yet the recognition of these services is notably absent in development discussions and policies, such as the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). How might the SDGs be enhanced if inland fishery services were integrated into policies and development schemes? Here, we examine the relationships between inland fish, sustainable fisheries, and functioning freshwater systems and the targets of the SDGs. Our goal is to highlight synergies across the SDGs, particularly No Poverty (SDG 1), Zero Hunger (SDG 2), Clean Water and Sanitation (SDG 6), Responsible Consumption and Production (SDG 12) and Life on Land (SDG 15), that can be achieved with the inclusion of these overlooked inland fishery services.
Abigail J. Lynch; Vittoria Elliott; Sui Chian Phang; Julie E. Claussen; Ian Harrison; Karen J. Murchie; E. Ashley Steel; Gretchen L. Stokes. Inland fish and fisheries integral to achieving the Sustainable Development Goals. Nature Sustainability 2020, 3, 579 -587.
AMA StyleAbigail J. Lynch, Vittoria Elliott, Sui Chian Phang, Julie E. Claussen, Ian Harrison, Karen J. Murchie, E. Ashley Steel, Gretchen L. Stokes. Inland fish and fisheries integral to achieving the Sustainable Development Goals. Nature Sustainability. 2020; 3 (8):579-587.
Chicago/Turabian StyleAbigail J. Lynch; Vittoria Elliott; Sui Chian Phang; Julie E. Claussen; Ian Harrison; Karen J. Murchie; E. Ashley Steel; Gretchen L. Stokes. 2020. "Inland fish and fisheries integral to achieving the Sustainable Development Goals." Nature Sustainability 3, no. 8: 579-587.
Ian Harrison; Robin Abell; William Darwall; Michele Thieme; David Tickner; Ingrid Timboe. The freshwater biodiversity crisis. Science 2018, 362, 1369.1 -1369.
AMA StyleIan Harrison, Robin Abell, William Darwall, Michele Thieme, David Tickner, Ingrid Timboe. The freshwater biodiversity crisis. Science. 2018; 362 (6421):1369.1-1369.
Chicago/Turabian StyleIan Harrison; Robin Abell; William Darwall; Michele Thieme; David Tickner; Ingrid Timboe. 2018. "The freshwater biodiversity crisis." Science 362, no. 6421: 1369.1-1369.
Global pressures on freshwater ecosystems are high and rising. Viewed primarily as a resource for humans, current practices of water use have led to catastrophic declines in freshwater species and the degradation of freshwater ecosystems, including their genetic and functional diversity. Approximately three‐quarters of the world's inland wetlands have been lost, one‐third of the 28 000 freshwater species assessed for the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Red List are threatened with extinction, and freshwater vertebrate populations are undergoing declines that are more rapid than those of terrestrial and marine species. This global loss continues unchecked, despite the importance of freshwater ecosystems as a source of clean water, food, livelihoods, recreation, and inspiration. The causes of these declines include hydrological alterations, habitat degradation and loss, overexploitation, invasive species, pollution, and the multiple impacts of climate change. Although there are policy initiatives that aim to protect freshwater life, these are rarely implemented with sufficient conviction and enforcement. Policies that focus on the development and management of fresh waters as a resource for people almost universally neglect the biodiversity that they contain. Here we introduce the Alliance for Freshwater Life, a global initiative, uniting specialists in research, data synthesis, conservation, education and outreach, and policymaking. This expert network aims to provide the critical mass required for the effective representation of freshwater biodiversity at policy meetings, to develop solutions balancing the needs of development and conservation, and to better convey the important role freshwater ecosystems play in human well‐being. Through this united effort we hope to reverse this tide of loss and decline in freshwater biodiversity. We introduce several short‐ and medium‐term actions as examples for making positive change, and invite individuals, organizations, authorities, and governments to join the Alliance for Freshwater Life.
William Darwall; Vanessa Bremerich; Aaike De Wever; Anthony I. Dell; Jörg Freyhof; Mark O. Gessner; Hans-Peter Grossart; Ian Harrison; Ken Irvine; Sonja C. Jähnig; Jonathan M. Jeschke; Jessica J. Lee; Cai Lu; Aleksandra Lewandowska; Michael T. Monaghan; Jens C. Nejstgaard; Harmony Patricio; Astrid Schmidt-Kloiber; Simon N. Stuart; Michele Thieme; Klement Tockner; Eren Turak; Olaf Weyl. TheAlliance for Freshwater Life: A global call to unite efforts for freshwater biodiversity science and conservation. Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems 2018, 28, 1015 -1022.
AMA StyleWilliam Darwall, Vanessa Bremerich, Aaike De Wever, Anthony I. Dell, Jörg Freyhof, Mark O. Gessner, Hans-Peter Grossart, Ian Harrison, Ken Irvine, Sonja C. Jähnig, Jonathan M. Jeschke, Jessica J. Lee, Cai Lu, Aleksandra Lewandowska, Michael T. Monaghan, Jens C. Nejstgaard, Harmony Patricio, Astrid Schmidt-Kloiber, Simon N. Stuart, Michele Thieme, Klement Tockner, Eren Turak, Olaf Weyl. TheAlliance for Freshwater Life: A global call to unite efforts for freshwater biodiversity science and conservation. Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems. 2018; 28 (4):1015-1022.
Chicago/Turabian StyleWilliam Darwall; Vanessa Bremerich; Aaike De Wever; Anthony I. Dell; Jörg Freyhof; Mark O. Gessner; Hans-Peter Grossart; Ian Harrison; Ken Irvine; Sonja C. Jähnig; Jonathan M. Jeschke; Jessica J. Lee; Cai Lu; Aleksandra Lewandowska; Michael T. Monaghan; Jens C. Nejstgaard; Harmony Patricio; Astrid Schmidt-Kloiber; Simon N. Stuart; Michele Thieme; Klement Tockner; Eren Turak; Olaf Weyl. 2018. "TheAlliance for Freshwater Life: A global call to unite efforts for freshwater biodiversity science and conservation." Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems 28, no. 4: 1015-1022.
The Congo River is the second only to the Amazon in terms of size and freshwater species diversity. The basin covers 4 million km2. The basin has over 1,200 fish species, 400 mammal species, 1,000 bird species and over 10,000 vascular plant species. It provides about 30% of Africa’s freshwater resources, and about 77 million people living in the Congo basin rely on them. The basin has remained relatively undeveloped compared to other basins in Africa, but increased political stability is allowing development, with loss of riparian habitat through deforestation, and reduction of water quality through pollution and sedimentation being some of the main threats to the freshwater ecosystems. Effective environmental planning is essential to ensure that resources are managed wisely and the ecosystems that provide them are adequately protected. Additional surveying and monitoring of biodiversity throughout the basin is required. It will also be important to designate additional protected areas with a focus on freshwaters.
Ian J. Harrison; Randall Brummett; Melanie L. J. Stiassny. Congo River Basin. The Wetland Book 2018, 1199 -1216.
AMA StyleIan J. Harrison, Randall Brummett, Melanie L. J. Stiassny. Congo River Basin. The Wetland Book. 2018; ():1199-1216.
Chicago/Turabian StyleIan J. Harrison; Randall Brummett; Melanie L. J. Stiassny. 2018. "Congo River Basin." The Wetland Book , no. : 1199-1216.
The Congo River is the second only to the Amazon in terms of size and freshwater species diversity. The basin covers 4 million km2. The basin has over 1200 fish species, 400 mammal species, 1,000 bird species and over 10,000 vascular plant species. It provides about 30 % of Africa’s freshwater resources, and about 77 million people living in the Congo basin rely on them. The basin has remained relatively undeveloped compared to other basins in Africa, but increased political stability is allowing development, with loss of riparian habitat through deforestation, and reduction of water quality through pollution and sedimentation being some of the main threats to the freshwater ecosystems. Effective environmental planning is essential to ensure that resources are managed wisely and the ecosystems that provide them are adequately protected. Additional surveying and monitoring of biodiversity throughout the basin is required. It will also be important to designate additional protected areas with a focus on freshwaters.
Ian J. Harrison; Randall Brummett; Melanie L. J. Stiassny. Congo River Basin. The Wetland Book 2016, 1 -18.
AMA StyleIan J. Harrison, Randall Brummett, Melanie L. J. Stiassny. Congo River Basin. The Wetland Book. 2016; ():1-18.
Chicago/Turabian StyleIan J. Harrison; Randall Brummett; Melanie L. J. Stiassny. 2016. "Congo River Basin." The Wetland Book , no. : 1-18.
The Congo River is the second only to the Amazon in terms of size and freshwater species diversity. The basin covers 4 million km2. The basin has over 1200 fish species, 400 mammal species, 1,000 bird species and over 10,000 vascular plant species. It provides about 30 % of Africa’s freshwater resources, and about 77 million people living in the Congo basin rely on them. The basin has remained relatively undeveloped compared to other basins in Africa, but increased political stability is allowing development, with loss of riparian habitat through deforestation, and reduction of water quality through pollution and sedimentation being some of the main threats to the freshwater ecosystems. Effective environmental planning is essential to ensure that resources are managed wisely and the ecosystems that provide them are adequately protected. Additional surveying and monitoring of biodiversity throughout the basin is required. It will also be important to designate additional protected areas with a focus on freshwaters.
Ian J. Harrison; Randall Brummett; Melanie L. J. Stiassny. The Congo River Basin. The Wetland Book 2016, 1 -18.
AMA StyleIan J. Harrison, Randall Brummett, Melanie L. J. Stiassny. The Congo River Basin. The Wetland Book. 2016; ():1-18.
Chicago/Turabian StyleIan J. Harrison; Randall Brummett; Melanie L. J. Stiassny. 2016. "The Congo River Basin." The Wetland Book , no. : 1-18.
Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Ian J. Harrison; Pamela A. Green; Tracy A. Farrell; Diego Juffe-Bignoli; Leonardo Sáenz; Charles J. Vörösmarty. Protected areas and freshwater provisioning: a global assessment of freshwater provision, threats and management strategies to support human water security. Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems 2016, 26, 103 -120.
AMA StyleIan J. Harrison, Pamela A. Green, Tracy A. Farrell, Diego Juffe-Bignoli, Leonardo Sáenz, Charles J. Vörösmarty. Protected areas and freshwater provisioning: a global assessment of freshwater provision, threats and management strategies to support human water security. Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems. 2016; 26 ():103-120.
Chicago/Turabian StyleIan J. Harrison; Pamela A. Green; Tracy A. Farrell; Diego Juffe-Bignoli; Leonardo Sáenz; Charles J. Vörösmarty. 2016. "Protected areas and freshwater provisioning: a global assessment of freshwater provision, threats and management strategies to support human water security." Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems 26, no. : 103-120.
Globally, fresh water is a limited resource, covering only about 0.8 % of the world’s surface area. With over 126,000 species living in its ecosystems, freshwater harbours a disproportionate share of the planet’s biodiversity; it is essential for life, and central to satisfying human development needs. However, as we enter the Anthropocene, multiple threats are affecting freshwater systems at a global scale. The combined challenges of an increasing need for water from a growing and wealthier human population, and the uncertainty of how to adapt to definite but unpredictable climate change, significantly add to this stress. It is imperative that landscape managers and policy-makers think carefully about strategic adaptive management of freshwater systems in order to both effectively conserve natural ecosystems, and the plants and animals that live within, and continue to supply human populations with the freshwater benefits they need. Maintaining freshwater biodiversity is necessary to ensure the functioning of freshwater ecosystems and thereby secure the benefits they can provide for people. Thus freshwater biodiversity is also an important element of viable economic alternatives for the sustainable use of the freshwater ecosystems natural capital. In order to achieve this we need to do a better job at monitoring our freshwater biodiversity, understanding how the ecosystems function, and evaluating what that means in terms of service delivery.
Jaime Garcia-Moreno; Ian J. Harrison; D. Dudgeon; V. Clausnitzer; W. Darwall; T. Farrell; C. Savy; K. Tockner; N. Tubbs. Sustaining Freshwater Biodiversity in the Anthropocene. The Global Water System in the Anthropocene 2014, 247 -270.
AMA StyleJaime Garcia-Moreno, Ian J. Harrison, D. Dudgeon, V. Clausnitzer, W. Darwall, T. Farrell, C. Savy, K. Tockner, N. Tubbs. Sustaining Freshwater Biodiversity in the Anthropocene. The Global Water System in the Anthropocene. 2014; ():247-270.
Chicago/Turabian StyleJaime Garcia-Moreno; Ian J. Harrison; D. Dudgeon; V. Clausnitzer; W. Darwall; T. Farrell; C. Savy; K. Tockner; N. Tubbs. 2014. "Sustaining Freshwater Biodiversity in the Anthropocene." The Global Water System in the Anthropocene , no. : 247-270.