DOI: 10.5061/dryad.crjdfn34p
title: Spatially explicit models for decision-making in animal conservation and restoration

description: Models are useful tools for understanding and predicting ecological
 patterns and processes. Under ongoing climate and biodiversity change,
 they can greatly facilitate decision-making in conservation and
 restoration and help designing adequate management strategies for an
 uncertain future. Here, we review the use of spatially explicit models for
 decision support and identify key gaps in current modelling in
 conservation and restoration. Of 650 reviewed publications, 217
 publications had a clear management application and were included in our
 quantitative analyses. Overall, modelling studies were biased towards
 static models (79 %), towards the species and population level (80 %) and
 towards conservation (rather than restoration) applications (71 %).
 Correlative niche models were the most widely used model type. Dynamic
 models as well as the gene-to-individual level and the
 community-to-ecosystem level were underrepresented, and explicit cost
 optimisation approaches were only used in 10 % of the studies. We present
 a new model typology for selecting models for animal conservation and
 restoration, characterising model types according to organisational
 levels, biological processes of interest and desired management
 applications. This typology will help to more closely link models to
 management goals. Additionally, future efforts need to overcome important
 challenges related to data integration, model integration, and
 decision-making. We conclude with five key recommendations, suggesting
 that wider usage of spatially explicit models for decision support can be
 achieved by (1) developing a toolbox with multiple, easier-to-use methods,
 (2) improving calibration and validation of dynamic modelling approaches,
 and (3) developing best-practise guidelines for applying these models.
 Further, more robust decision-making can be achieved by (4) combining
 multiple modelling approaches to assess uncertainty, and (5) placing
 models at the core of adaptive management. These efforts must be
 accompanied by long-term funding for modelling and monitoring, and
 improved communication between research and practise to ensure optimal
 conservation and restoration outcomes.
description: We conducted a Web of Science search on
 9<sup>th</sup> February 2021, searching for studies employing
 different model types (see Box 1 in main text) for specific management
 applications (see Box 2 in main text) in the period 1900-2021 (for a
 complete list of keywords cf. Appendix S1, Table S1). We initially
 identified 5179 papers, which we further refined to papers that fell under
 the Web of Science category “biodiversity conservation”, yielding a list
 of 650 papers. We screened these and only kept papers that had a clear
 management application (Box 2) and that provided some form of spatial
 planning and decision support. The latter requirement was met when at
 least a map of the status quo was derived from the model and presented.
 Papers that had potential implications for conservation but did not
 provide a basis for spatial planning and management decisions were
 excluded. The final list contained 217 research articles that met our
 inclusion criteria.