Keywords
habitat fragmentation
land-use planning
biodiversity
Corantioquia
How to Cite
Abstract
The growing fragmentation of natural ecosystems, driven by urban, agricultural, and mining expansion, has intensified the isolation of vegetation patches, generating negative effects on biodiversity such as loss of genetic connectivity, reduced ecological resilience, and diminished ecosystem services. Despite restoration efforts undertaken across various territories, these tend to be isolated actions, well-intentioned but lacking a regional framework to ensure their spatial and functional coherence. This lack of coordination has led many initiatives to develop under fragmented local logics, disconnected from one another, forming a mosaic of ecological islands with low systemic functionality.
In response to this problem, Corantioquia proposes consolidating a long-term regional strategy to ecologically link its territory: the Ecosystem Connectivity Scheme (Esquema de Conectividades Ecosistémicas, ECE), adopted through Resolution 040-RES2312-6660 of 2023. Although its adoption has raised concerns for constituting a new environmental determinant, the ECE does not impose absolute land-use restrictions; rather, it proposes territorial planning oriented around ecological functionality. Its approach acknowledges the need to move beyond fragmented visions and territories managed in isolated parcels, proposing instead an interconnected network of strategic nodes and functional corridors that cross administrative boundaries.
As a result of the technical process, 2,021 ecological networks were identified, covering approximately 846,049 hectares within Corantioquia's jurisdiction. The network was designed based on habitat quality models generated for seven landscape species and a multi-species resistance matrix that simulates territorial conditions for biological movement. Key nodes were selected (areas of more than 50 hectares of importance for biodiversity), using the home range and dispersal requirements of the Guagua Loba (Dinomys branickii) — an umbrella species used as the model's baseline criterion — as a reference.
References
Adriaensen, F., Chardon, J. P., De Blust, G., Swinnen, E., Villalba, S., Gulinck, H., 8. Matthysen, E. (2003). The application of 'least-- cost' modelling as a functional landscape model. Landscape and Urban Planning, 64(4), 233-247. https://doi.org/10.1016/50169-2046(02)00242-6
Bélisle, M. (2005). Measuring landscape connectivity: The challenge of behavioral landscape ecology. Ecology, 86(8), 1988-1995. https://doi.org/10.1890/04-0923
Coppolillo, P. B., Gómez, H., Maisels, F., & Wallace, R. (2004). Selection criteria for suites of landscape species as a basis for site-based conservation. Biological Conservation, 115(3), 419-430. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0006-3207(03)00160-5
Corantioquia. (2023a). Esquema de Conectividades Ecosistémicas — Documento soporte técnico. Medellín: Corantioquia.
Corantioquia. (2023b). Resolución 040-RES2312-6660 de 2023. Por la cual se adopta el Esquema de Conectividades Ecosistémicas como determinante ambiental.
Medellín. Corantioquia. (2023c). Términos de referencia para lineamientos de ajustes al modelo del Esquema de Conectividades Ecosistémicas. Medellín.
Díaz San Juan, M. (2025). Los parques nacionales no bastan: se necesita conectividad.
Pesquisa Javeriana. https://www.javeriana.edu.co/pesquisa/conectividad-parques-nacionales-pnn/ Forman, R. T. T. (1995). Land Mosaics: The
Ecology of Landscapes and Regions. Cambridge University Press. Freile, J. F., et al. (2022). Dinomys branickii (Rodentia: Dinomyidae). Mammalian Species, 54(1016), 13-27. https://doi.orgg/10.1093/mspecies/seacO1 5
Gobernación de Antioquia. (2022). Antioquia 2040: Visión de largo plazo para el desarrollo regional. Medellín.
Hesselbarth, M. H. K., Sciaini, M., With, K. A,, Wiegand, K., & Nowosad, J. (2019). Landscapemetrics: An open-source R tool to calculate landscape metrics. Ecography, 42(10), 1648-1657. https://doi.org/10.1111/ecog.04617
Hilty, J., Worboys, G. L., Keeley, A., Woodley, S., Lausche, B., Locke, H,, ... 8 Tabor, G. M. (2021). Guidelines for conserving connectivity through ecological networks and corridors. Gland: lUCN. https://doi.org/10.2305/1UCN.CH.2020.PAG.30.en
Leija, L. (2021). Conectividad ecológica en México: avances y desafíos. Madera y Bosques, 2701). https://doi.orgg/10.21829/myb.2021.2712032
Majka, D. R., Jenness, J. S., & Beler, P. (2007).
Least-cost path toolbox for ArcGIS. Flagstaff: Northern Arizona University. Mateo-Sánchez, M. C., Cushman, S. A., Saura, S., 8 Estrada, Á. (2014). Connecting biodiversity conservation in a fragmented Mediterranean landscape. Landscape Ecology, 29(4), 627-640. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10980-014-0018-0
McGarigal, K., 8 Marks, B. J. (1995). FRAGSTATS: Spatial pattern analysis program for quantifying landscape structure. USDA Forest Service General Technical Report PNW-GTR-351.
McGarigal, K., Cushman, S. A., & Ene, E. (2012). FRAGSTATS v4: Spatial pattern analysis program for categorical and continuous maps. University of Massachusetts,
Amherst. https://www.umass.edu/landeco/research/fragstats/fragstats.html McRae, B. H., 8 Kavanagh, D. M. (2011). Linkage Mapper Connectivity Analysis El Esquema de Conectividades Ecosistémicas (ECE) de Corantioquia
Software. The Nature Conservancy. https://circultscape.org/linkagemapper/ Moscoso-Marín, L. B., Arcila Marín, N., &: Hernández Restrepo, R. (2019). Cambios proyectados a 2040 en los ecosistemas de la jurisdicción de Corantioquia de acuerdo con los escenarios de cambio climático del
IDEAM. En Biodiversidad en la práctica. Documentos de trabajo del Instituto Humboldt, 4(1), 173-188. https://www.academia.edu/41854680/
Roncancio, N., & Vélez, M. (2019). Rutas de conectividad: una aproximación a la articulación de los sistemas de áreas protegidas en Colombia. En Conectando la biodiversidad, Instituto Humboldt.
Saaty, T. L. (1980). The analytic hierarchy process. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Sanderson, E. W., Redford, K. H., Vedder, A., Ward, S. E., 8 Coppolillo, P. B. (2002). A conceptual model for conservation planning based on landscape species requirements. Landscape and Urban Planning, 58(1), 41-56. https://doi.org/10.1016/S50169-2046(01)00231-6
Taylor, P. D., Fahrig, L., Henein, K., 8 Merriam, G. (1993). Connectivity is a vital element of landscape structure. Oikos, 68(3), 571-573. https://doi.org/10.2307/35449727