Monitoring ecological corridors for nature and people

preprint OA: closed
Full text JSON View at publisher
Full text 2,290 characters · extracted from oa-doi-fallback · click to expand
This is a Preprint and has not been peer reviewed. This is version 2 of this Preprint. You must log in to post a comment. There are no comments or no comments have been made public for this article. This is a Preprint and has not been peer reviewed. This is version 2 of this Preprint. Add a Comment You must log in to post a comment. Comments There are no comments or no comments have been made public for this article. Ecological corridors designed to maintain ecological connectivity between protected and conserved areas is a conservation strategy that is increasingly embraced around the world. Monitoring corridor effectiveness is essential to gauge progress toward connectivity conservation objectives; it also fosters learning among diverse rightsholders and interested parties. In particular, monitoring how social dynamics contribute to successful corridor conservation can enhance benefits to conservation and to local communities. By adapting to people's needs, corridor initiatives become socially acceptable and resilient to changing environmental and socio-economic conditions. Moreover, tracking public perceptions of corridors can inform adjustments in planning, management, governance, and outreach strategies. To prescribe comprehensive corridor monitoring, we follow the Open Standards for the Practice of Conservation to set goals, establish objectives, select indicators, design monitoring activities, and set thresholds for triggering adaptive management. To illustrate the application of this framework, we present a case study from an ecological corridor in California. Finally, we propose various options for monitoring ecological outcomes, enabling conditions, and human well-being to ensure the effectiveness and sustainability of corridor conservation initiatives. We emphasize that creating a team environment among corridor players and holding regular meetings is vital for maintaining enthusiasm, participation, and funding over the long term. https://doi.org/10.32942/X25K82 Biodiversity, Life Sciences 30x30, adaptive management, Case study, Conservation Standards, ecological connectivity, ecological corridors, enabling conditions, governance, human well-being, monitoring Published: 2025-03-06 00:50 CC BY Attribution 4.0 International Language: English

Text is read by the "Ask this paper" AI Q&A widget below. Extraction quality varies by source — PMC NXML preserves structure cleanly, OA-HTML may include some navigation residue, and OA-PDF can have broken hyphenation. The publisher copy (via DOI) is the canonical version.

My notes (saved in your browser only)

Ask this paper AI returns verbatim quotes from the full text · source: oa-doi-fallback

Answers must be backed by verbatim quotes from this paper's full text. Hallucinated quotes are dropped automatically; if no verbatim passage answers the question, we say so. How this works

Citation neighborhood (no data yet)

We don't have any in-corpus citations linked to this paper yet. This is a recent paper (2025) — citers typically take a year or two to land, and the OpenAlex reference graph may still be filling in.

Source provenance

europepmc
last seen: 2026-05-20T01:45:00.602351+00:00