Premium
Land‐sharing versus land‐sparing logging: reconciling timber extraction with biodiversity conservation
Author(s) -
Edwards David P.,
Gilroy James J.,
Woodcock Paul,
Edwards Felicity A.,
Larsen Trond H.,
Andrews David J. R.,
Derhé Mia A.,
Docherty Teegan D. S.,
Hsu Wayne W.,
Mitchell Simon L.,
Ota Takahiro,
Williams Leah J.,
Laurance William F.,
Hamer Keith C.,
Wilcove David S.
Publication year - 2014
Publication title -
global change biology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 4.146
H-Index - 255
eISSN - 1365-2486
pISSN - 1354-1013
DOI - 10.1111/gcb.12353
Subject(s) - logging , biodiversity , species richness , agroforestry , rainforest , ecology , geography , environmental science , forestry , biology
Selective logging is a major driver of rainforest degradation across the tropics. Two competing logging strategies are proposed to meet timber demands with the least impact on biodiversity: land sharing, which combines timber extraction with biodiversity protection across the concession; and land sparing, in which higher intensity logging is combined with the protection of intact primary forest reserves. We evaluate these strategies by comparing the abundances and species richness of birds, dung beetles and ants in Borneo, using a protocol that allows us to control for both timber yield and net profit across strategies. Within each taxonomic group, more species had higher abundances with land‐sparing than land‐sharing logging, and this translated into significantly higher species richness within land‐sparing concessions. Our results are similar when focusing only on species found in primary forest and restricted in range to Sundaland, and they are independent of the scale of sampling. For each taxonomic group, land‐sparing logging was the most promising strategy for maximizing the biological value of logging operations.