Please cite this article in press as: Hepcan, S ¸., et al., Ecological networks as a new approach for nature conservation in Turkey: A case study of ˙ Izmir Province. Landscape Urban Plann (2008), doi:10.1016/j.landurbplan.2008.10.023 ARTICLE IN PRESS G Model LAND-1650; No. of Pages 12 Landscape and Urban Planning xxx (2008) xxx–xxx Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Landscape and Urban Planning journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/landurbplan Ecological networks as a new approach for nature conservation in Turkey: A case study of ˙ Izmir Province S ¸ erif Hepcan a,* ,C ¸i˘ gdem Cos ¸ kun Hepcan a , Irene M. Bouwma b , Rob H.G. Jongman b , Mehmet Bülent Özkan a a Ege University, Faculty of Agriculture, Department of Landscape Architecture, Bornova, 35100 Bornova- ˙ Izmir, Turkey b Alterra, Wageningen UR, PO Box 47, 6708 AA Wageningen, The Netherlands article info Article history: Received 9 November 2007 Received in revised form 9 October 2008 Accepted 24 October 2008 Available online xxx Keywords: Ecological network Target species Key Biodiversity Areas Minimum Viable Population Turkey abstract This paper aims to identify and evaluate a potential ecological network including core areas and large- scale corridors in the ˙ Izmir Province and its surrounding areas, Turkey. It is one of the first studies on the connectivity for mammal species and the detection of potential ecological corridors for Turkey. Four wide-ranging species (Hyaena hyaena, Lynx lynx, Caracal caracal, and Felis chaus) have been chosen as target species. Existing Key Biodiversity Areas (KBAs) and surrounding lands have been evaluated based on a three criteria: (1) vegetation/habitat types, (2) carrying capacity and (3) road density using simple GIS-based models. The results are evaluated using the Minimum Viable Metapopulation (MVMP) standards. No KBA in the study region has a Key Population (KP) or Minimum Viable Population (MVP) with the exception of Boz Da˘ glar. Least cost-path analysis has been applied to identify linkages between KBAs relevant for the four target species. The conclusion is that it is possible to maintain MVPs in the region when the KBAs are linked by ecological corridors. © 2008 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. 1. Introduction Soulé (1986) and Forman (1996) stated that habitat fragmenta- tions and losses have become an important subject of ecological research (Wiegand et al., 2005) as fragmentation is considered to be one of the major threats to biological diversity (Forman, 1998; Cook, 2002; Bouwma et al., 2003; Jongman, 2004). The planning and establishment of ecological networks as a means of creating spatially integrated landscapes and habitats is being increasingly accepted as an appropriate approach for improving the ecological quality of natural ecosystems and pro- tecting biodiversity (Van Rooij et al., 2003; Verboom and Pouwels, 2004; Smith, 2004). Where fragmentation occurs, establishing or restoring linkages between patches through ecological corridors is essential to facilitate their ecological functions (Cook, 2002). Eco- logical linkages also provide opportunities for human services such as recreation, education, human benefits both cultural and aes- thetic as well as being compatible with the concept of sustainable land use (Ahern, 2002; Cook, 2000). * Corresponding author. Tel.: +90 232 3884000 (3098 extension); fax: +90 232 3881864. E-mail address: serif.hepcan@ege.edu.tr (S ¸ . Hepcan). An ecological network is recognized as a framework of ecolog- ical components, e.g. core areas (nodes), corridors (natural and/or artificial linkages) and buffer zones which provide the physical conditions necessary for ecosystems and species populations to survive in a human-dominated landscape (Jongman, 2004). In this context, conservation biology is an integral science for the delin- eation of ecological networks (Noss, 1993, 1996; Carroll et al., 2003). The planning of ecological networks and greenways largely focuses on the integration and application of landscape ecological princi- ples and conservation biology (Ahern, 2002). These principles have guided nature conservation and landscape planning in recent years throughout the world (Jongman, 2004). Turkey is a key country in terms of conservation of global bio- diversity owing to its location at the junction of three continents as well as Anatolia’s complex biogeoclimate regimes and geo- morphology. These geographical features account for a high level of biodiversity, especially an exceptionally rich flora (Eken et al., 2004). Biodiversity in Turkey has been seriously threatened by land-use changes in recent decades (Evrendilek and Doygun, 2000; Eken et al., 2006; Yücel, 2005). There are many areas of high bio- logical biodiversity that are not preserved by the existing legal protection system in the country. Nearly 80% of the total surface area of Turkey’s known high Key Biodiversity Areas (KBAs) has no protection (Eken et al., 2004; Yücel, 2005). 0169-2046/$ – see front matter © 2008 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.landurbplan.2008.10.023