Conservation Assessment of Southern South American Freshwater Ecoregions on the Basis of the Distribution and Genetic Diversity of Crabs from the Genus Aegla

Abstract:  We assessed the conservation priority of 18 freshwater ecoregions in southern South America on the basis of Aegla (genus of freshwater crabs) genetic diversity and distribution. Geographical distributions for 66 Aegla species were taken from the literature and plotted against ecoregions and main river basins of southern South America. Species richness and number of threatened and endemic species were calculated for each area. To assess taxonomic and phylogenetic diversity, we generated a molecular phylogeny based on DNA sequences for one nuclear (28S) and 4 mitochondrial (12S, 16S, COI, and COII) genes. All species richness and phylogenetic methods agreed, to a large extent, in their rankings of the importance of conservation areas, as indicated by the Spearman's rank correlation coefficient ( p < 0.01); nonetheless, some of the lowest correlations were observed between taxonomic and phylogenetic diversity indices. The 5 ecoregions of the Laguna dos Patos Basin (Eastern Brazil), Central Chile, South Brazilian Coast, Chilean Lakes, and Subtropical Potamic Axis (northern Argentina and southern Uruguay and Paraguay) had the highest biodiversity scores. Conservation of these regions will preserve the largest number of species and the greatest amount of genetic diversity within the South American freshwater Aegla fauna. Biodiversity across rivers and within areas was heterogeneously distributed in the ecoregions of Upper Paraná, Ribeira do Iguape, Upper Uruguay, and South Brazilian Coast (i.e., one river showed significantly more biodiversity than any other river from the same ecoregion), but homogeneously distributed in the other ecoregions. Hence, conservation plans in the former regions will potentially require less effort than plans in the latter regions.     

The theory behind,and the challenges of,conserving nature's stage in a time of rapid change

Most conservation planning to date has focused on protecting today's biodiversity with the assumption that it will be tomorrow's biodiversity. However, modern climate change has already resulted in distributional shifts of some species and is projected to result in many more shifts in the coming decades. As species redistribute and biotic communities reorganize, conservation plans based on current patterns of biodiversity may fail to adequately protect species in the future. One approach for addressing this issue is to focus on conserving a range of abiotic conditions in the conservation‐planning process. By doing so, it may be possible to conserve an abiotically diverse “stage” upon which evolution will play out and support many actors (biodiversity). We reviewed the fundamental underpinnings of the concept of conserving the abiotic stage, starting with the early observations of von Humboldt, who mapped the concordance of abiotic conditions and vegetation, and progressing to the concept of the ecological niche. We discuss challenges posed by issues of spatial and temporal scale, the role of biotic drivers of species distributions, and latitudinal and topographic variation in relationships between climate and landform. For example, abiotic conditions are not static, but change through time—albeit at different and often relatively slow rates. In some places, biotic interactions play a substantial role in structuring patterns of biodiversity, meaning that patterns of biodiversity may be less tightly linked to the abiotic stage. Furthermore, abiotic drivers of biodiversity can change with latitude and topographic position, meaning that the abiotic stage may need to be defined differently in different places. We conclude that protecting a diversity of abiotic conditions will likely best conserve biodiversity into the future in places where abiotic drivers of species distributions are strong relative to biotic drivers, where the diversity of abiotic settings will be conserved through time, and where connectivity allows for movement among areas providing different abiotic conditions.     

How Broad-Scale Studies of Patterns and Processes Can Serve to Guide Conservation Planning in Africa

Abstract:  Analysis of large-scale biodiversity patterns can uncover general relationships and problems that need to be taken into account when conservation strategies are developed. Nevertheless, these large-scale patterns need to be supplemented with information from local studies that can identify specific problems and determine how the land can be divided between conservation and development interests. I analyzed biodiversity patterns at three different scales to show how various scales of research contributed to conservation planning. A gap analysis for all of sub-Saharan Africa revealed that the network of wildlife reserves provides insufficient protection of narrowly endemic and threatened species, mainly because such species are aggregated in certain areas with dense human populations. A more fine-grained analysis of the distribution of forest birds of eastern Africa generally confirmed the results obtained with coarse-scale data and added precision by identifying forest tracts where conservation actions should be concentrated. Detailed local distribution data for one of the prioritized areas, the Uluguru Mountains in Tanzania, suggest that the actions to halt the loss of biodiversity should be concentrated in the submontane zone, immediately adjacent to densely populated areas. To achieve conservation on the ground, these general planning tools must be supplemented with other kinds of research concerning land-use and local knowledge and with approaches that promote more sustainable development. Different types of institutions will be needed for these different tasks, but it is essential that researchers maintain a dialogue with planners in this area .     

The Links between Protected Areas, Faiths, and Sacred Natural Sites

Most people follow and are influenced by some kind of spiritual faith. We examined two ways in which religious faiths can in turn influence biodiversity conservation in protected areas. First, biodiversity conservation is influenced through the direct and often effective protection afforded to wild species in sacred natural sites and in seminatural habitats around religious buildings. Sacred natural sites are almost certainly the world's oldest form of habitat protection. Although some sacred natural sites exist inside official protected areas, many thousands more form a largely unrecognized "shadow" conservation network in many countries throughout the world, which can be more stringently protected than state-run reserves. Second, faiths have a profound impact on attitudes to protection of the natural world through their philosophy, teachings, investment choices, approaches to land they control, and religious-based management systems. We considered the interactions between faiths and protected areas with respect to all 11 mainstream faiths and to a number of local belief systems. The close links between faiths and habitat protection offer major conservation opportunities, but also pose challenges. Bringing a sacred natural site into a national protected-area system can increase protection for the site, but may compromise some of its spiritual values or even its conservation values. Most protected-area managers are not trained to manage natural sites for religious purposes, but many sacred natural sites are under threat from cultural changes and habitat degradation. Decisions about whether or not to make a sacred natural site an "official" protected area therefore need to be made on a case-by-case basis. Such sites can play an important role in conservation inside and outside official protected areas. More information about the conservation value of sacred lands is needed as is more informed experience in integrating these into wider conservation strategies. In addition, many protected-area staff need training in how to manage sensitive issues relating to faiths where important faith sites occur in protected areas.     

Major Conservation Policy Issues for Biodiversity in Oceania

Abstract:  Oceania is a diverse region encompassing Australia, Melanesia, Micronesia, New Zealand, and Polynesia, and it contains six of the world's 39 hotspots of diversity. It has a poor record for extinctions, particularly for birds on islands and mammals. Major causes include habitat loss and degradation, invasive species, and overexploitation. We identified six major threatening processes (habitat loss and degradation, invasive species, climate change, overexploitation, pollution, and disease) based on a comprehensive review of the literature and for each developed a set of conservation policies. Many policies reflect the urgent need to deal with the effects of burgeoning human populations (expected to increase significantly in the region) on biodiversity. There is considerable difference in resources for conservation, including people and available scientific information, which are heavily biased toward more developed countries in Oceania. Most scientific publications analyzed for four threats (habitat loss, invasive species, overexploitation, and pollution) are from developed countries: 88.6% of Web of Science publications were from Australia (53.7%), New Zealand (24.3%), and Hawaiian Islands (10.5%). Many island states have limited resources or expertise. Even countries that do (e.g., Australia, New Zealand) have ongoing and emerging significant challenges, particularly with the interactive effects of climate change. Oceania will require the implementation of effective policies for conservation if the region's poor record on extinctions is not to continue .     

Conservation Value of Multiple-Use Areas in East Africa

Abstract:  Despite wide agreement that strictly protected areas (World Conservation Union categories I–III) are the best strategy for conserving biodiversity, they are limited in extent and exclude many species of key conservation importance. In contrast, multiple-use management areas (categories IV–VI), comprising >60% of the world's protected-area network, are often considered of little value to biodiversity conservation, particularly in Africa, where they typically contain few charismatic large mammals. We sampled small mammals, amphibians, birds, butterflies, and trees at 41 sites along a four-step gradient of increasing human activity and decreasing conservation protection, from a well-protected Tanzanian national park to nonintensive agricultural land. Although preliminary, our results indicate that species richness of these five taxa did not decline along this gradient, but different management areas, occupying areas of largely similar habitat, hosted distinct communities of each taxon. Differences in species composition in the absence of manifest differences in species richness highlight the importance of developing landscape-scale conservation strategies and the danger of using either a limited suite of indicator taxa or umbrella species as surrogates for biodiversity. Although strictly protected areas perform a unique and vital conservation service in East Africa by protecting large mammals, areas that allow varied resource extraction activities still possess vital and complementary conservation value.     

Economic Valuation of Biodiversity Conservation: the Meaning of Numbers

Abstract:  Recognition of the need to include economic criteria in the conservation policy decision-making process has encouraged the use of economic-valuation techniques. Nevertheless, whether it is possible to accurately assign economic values to biodiversity and if so what these values really represent is being debated. We reviewed 60 recent papers on economic valuation of biodiversity and carried out a meta-analysis of these studies to determine what factors affect willingness to pay for biodiversity conservation. We analyzed the internal variables of the contingent-valuation method (measure of benefits, vehicle of payment, elicitation format, or timing of payment) and anthropomorphic, anthropocentric and scientific factors. Funding allocation mostly favored the conservation of species with anthropomorphic and anthropocentric characteristics instead of considering scientific factors. We recommend researchers and policy makers contemplate economic valuations of biodiversity carefully, considering the inherent biases of the contingent-valuation method and the anthropomorphic and anthropocentric factors resulting from the public's attitude toward species. Because of the increasing trend of including economic considerations in conservation practices, we suggest that in the future interdisciplinary teams of ecologists, economists, and social scientists collaborate and conduct comparative analyses, such as we have done here. Use of the contingent-valuation method in biodiversity conservation policies can provide useful information about alternative conservation strategies if questionnaires are carefully constructed, respondents are sufficiently informed, and the underlying factors that influence willingness to pay are identified.     

A strategy for the next decade to address data deficiency in neglected biodiversity

Measuring progress toward international biodiversity targets requires robust information on the conservation status of species, which the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Red List of Threatened Species provides. However, data and capacity are lacking for most hyperdiverse groups, such as invertebrates, plants, and fungi, particularly in megadiverse or high-endemism regions. Conservation policies and biodiversity strategies aimed at halting biodiversity loss by 2020 need to be adapted to tackle these information shortfalls after 2020. We devised an 8-point strategy to close existing data gaps by reviving explorative field research on the distribution, abundance, and ecology of species; linking taxonomic research more closely with conservation; improving global biodiversity databases by making the submission of spatially explicit data mandatory for scientific publications; developing a global spatial database on threats to biodiversity to facilitate IUCN Red List assessments; automating preassessments by integrating distribution data and spatial threat data; building capacity in taxonomy, ecology, and biodiversity monitoring in countries with high species richness or endemism; creating species monitoring programs for lesser-known taxa; and developing sufficient funding mechanisms to reduce reliance on voluntary efforts. Implementing these strategies in the post-2020 biodiversity framework will help to overcome the lack of capacity and data regarding the conservation status of biodiversity. This will require a collaborative effort among scientists, policy makers, and conservation practitioners.     

A Mesofilter Conservation Strategy to Complement Fine and Coarse Filters

Abstract:  Setting aside entire ecosystems in reserves is an efficient way to maintain biodiversity because large numbers of species are protected, but ecosystem conservation constitutes a coarse filter that does not address some species. A complementary, fine-filter approach is also required to provide tailored management for some species (e.g., those subject to direct exploitation). Mesofilter conservation is another complementary approach that focuses on conserving critical elements of ecosystems that are important to many species, especially those likely to be overlooked by fine-filter approaches, such as invertebrates, fungi, and nonvascular plants. Critical elements include structures such as logs, snags, pools, springs, streams, reefs, and hedgerows, and processes such as fires and floods. Mesofilter conservation is particularly appropriate for seminatural ecosystems that are managed for both biodiversity and commodity production (e.g., forests managed for timber, grasslands managed for livestock forage, and aquatic ecosystems managed for fisheries) and is relevant to managing some agricultural and urban environments for biodiversity.     

Status of Species Conservation Banking in the United States

Abstract:  Receiving financial gains for protecting habitat may be necessary to proactively protect endangered species in the United States. Species conservation banking, the creation and trading of "credits" that represent biodiversity values on private land, is nearly a decade old. We detail the biological, financial, and political experience of conservation banking in the United States. We contacted agencies, nongovernmental organizations, and bank owners and compiled comprehensive accounts of the experiences of current banks. There are 76 properties identified as conservation banks in the United States, but only 35 of these are established under a conservation banking agreement approved by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). The 35 official conservation banks cumulatively cover 15,987 ha and shelter a range of biodiversity, including more than 22 species listed under the U.S. Endangered Species Act. Financial motives drove the establishment of 91% of conservation banks, and the majority of for-profit banks are breaking even or making money. With credit prices ranging from $3,000 to $125,000/0.41 ha (1 acre), banking agreements offer financial incentives that compete with development and provide a business-based argument for conserving habitat. Although the bureaucracy of establishing an agreement with the USFWS was burdensome, 63% of bank owners reported they would set up another agreement given the appropriate opportunity. Increasing information sharing, decreasing the time to establish agreements (currently averaging 2.18 years), and reducing bureaucratic challenges can further increase the amount of private property voluntarily committed to banking. Although many ecological uncertainties remain, conservation banking offers at least a partial solution to the conservation versus development conflict over biodiversity.     

A Standard Lexicon for Biodiversity Conservation: Unified Classifications of Threats and Actions

Abstract: An essential foundation of any science is a standard lexicon. Any given conservation project can be described in terms of the biodiversity targets, direct threats, contributing factors at the project site, and the conservation actions that the project team is employing to change the situation. These common elements can be linked in a causal chain, which represents a theory of change about how the conservation actions are intended to bring about desired project outcomes. If project teams want to describe and share their work and learn from one another, they need a standard and precise lexicon to specifically describe each node along this chain. To date, there have been several independent efforts to develop standard classifications for the direct threats that affect biodiversity and the conservation actions required to counteract these threats. Recognizing that it is far more effective to have only one accepted global scheme, we merged these separate efforts into unified classifications of threats and actions, which we present here. Each classification is a hierarchical listing of terms and associated definitions. The classifications are comprehensive and exclusive at the upper levels of the hierarchy, expandable at the lower levels, and simple, consistent, and scalable at all levels. We tested these classifications by applying them post hoc to 1191 threatened bird species and 737 conservation projects. Almost all threats and actions could be assigned to the new classification systems, save for some cases lacking detailed information. Furthermore, the new classification systems provided an improved way of analyzing and comparing information across projects when compared with earlier systems. We believe that widespread adoption of these classifications will help practitioners more systematically identify threats and appropriate actions, managers to more efficiently set priorities and allocate resources, and most important, facilitate cross‐project learning and the development of a systematic science of conservation.     

Sensitivity of Systematic Reserve Selection to Decisions about Scale, Biological Data, and Targets: Case Study from Southern British Columbia

Abstract:  The identification of conservation areas based on systematic reserve-selection algorithms requires decisions related to both spatial and ecological scale. These decisions may affect the distribution and number of sites considered priorities for conservation within a region. We explored the sensitivity of systematic reserve selection by altering values of three essential variables. We used a 1:20,000–scale terrestrial ecosystem map and habitat suitability data for 29 threatened vertebrate species in the Okanagan region of British Columbia, Canada. To these data we applied a reserve-selection algorithm to select conservation sites while altering selection unit size and shape, features of biodiversity (i.e., vertebrate species), and area conservation targets for each biodiversity feature. The spatial similarity, or percentage overlap, of selected sets of conservation sites identified (1) with different selection units was ≤40%, (2) with different biodiversity features was 59%, and (3) with different conservation targets was ≥94%. Because any selected set of sites is only one of many possible sets, we also compared the conservation value (irreplaceability) of all sites in the region for each variation of the data. The correlations of irreplaceability were weak for different selection units (0.23 ≤ r ≤ 0.67), strong for different biodiversity features ( r = 0.84), and mixed for different conservation targets ( r = 0.16; 0.16; 1.00). Because of the low congruence of selected sites and weak correlations of irreplaceability for different selection units, recommendations from studies that have been applied at only one spatial scale must be considered cautiously.     

Social Capital in Biodiversity Conservation and Management

Abstract:  The knowledge and values of local communities are now being acknowledged as valuable for biodiversity conservation. Relationships of trust, reciprocity and exchange, common rules, norms and sanctions, and connectedness in groups are what make up social capital, which is a necessary resource for shaping individual action to achieve positive biodiversity outcomes. Agricultural and rural conservation programs address biodiversity at three levels: agrobiodiversity on farms, nearby nature in landscapes, and protected areas. Recent initiatives that have sought to build social capital have shown that rural people can improve their understanding of biodiversity and agroecological relationships at the same time as they develop new social rules, norms, and institutions. This process of social learning helps new ideas to spread and can lead to positive biodiversity outcomes over large areas. New ideas spread more rapidly where there is high social capital. There remain many practical and policy difficulties, however, not least regarding the need to invest in social capital formation and the many unresolved questions of how the state views communities empowered to make their own decisions. Nonetheless, attention to the value of social relations, in the form of trust, reciprocal arrangements, locally developed rules, norms and sanctions, and emergent institutions, has clearly been shown to deliver a biodiversity dividend in many contexts. This suggests a need to blend both the biological and social elements of conservation.     

Conservation and Adaptation to Climate Change

Abstract: The need to adapt to climate change has become increasingly apparent, and many believe the practice of biodiversity conservation will need to alter to face this challenge. Conservation organizations are eager to determine how they should adapt their practices to climate change. This involves asking the fundamental question of what adaptation to climate change means. Most studies on climate change and conservation, if they consider adaptation at all, assume it is equivalent to the ability of species to adapt naturally to climate change as stated in Article 2 of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. Adaptation, however, can refer to an array of activities that range from natural adaptation, at one end of the spectrum, to sustainability science in coupled human and natural systems at the other. Most conservation organizations deal with complex systems in which adaptation to climate change involves making decisions on priorities for biodiversity conservation in the face of dynamic risks and involving the public in these decisions. Discursive methods such as analytic deliberation are useful for integrating scientific knowledge with public perceptions and values, particularly when large uncertainties and risks are involved. The use of scenarios in conservation planning is a useful way to build shared understanding at the science–policy interface. Similarly, boundary organizations—organizations or institutions that bridge different scales or mediate the relationship between science and policy—could prove useful for managing the transdisciplinary nature of adaptation to climate change, providing communication and brokerage services and helping to build adaptive capacity. The fact that some nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) are active across the areas of science, policy, and practice makes them well placed to fulfill this role in integrated assessments of biodiversity conservation and adaptation to climate change.     

Conservation Easements: Biodiversity Protection and Private Use

Abstract:  Conservation easements are one of the primary tools for conserving biodiversity on private land. Despite their increasing use, little quantitative data are available on what species and habitats conservation easements aim to protect, how much structural development they allow, or what types of land use they commonly permit. To address these knowledge gaps, we surveyed staff responsible for 119 conservation easements established by the largest nonprofit easement holder, The Nature Conservancy, between 1985 and 2004. Most easements (80%) aimed to provide core habitat to protect species or communities on-site, and nearly all were designed to reduce development. Conservation easements also allowed for a wide range of private uses, which may result in additional fragmentation and habitat disturbance. Some residential or commercial use, new structures, or subdivision of the property were permitted on 85% of sampled conservation easements. Over half (56%) allowed some additional buildings, of which 60% restricted structure size or building area. Working landscape easements with ranching, forestry, or farming made up nearly half (46%) of the easement properties sampled and were more likely than easements without these uses to be designated as buffers to enhance biodiversity in the surrounding area. Our results demonstrate the need for clear restrictions on building and subdivision in easements, research on the compatibility of private uses on easement land, and greater public understanding of the trade-offs implicit in the use of conservation easements for biodiversity conservation.     

Applying the dark diversity concept to nature conservation

Linking diversity to biological processes is central for developing informed and effective conservation decisions. Unfortunately, observable patterns provide only a proportion of the information necessary for fully understanding the mechanisms and processes acting on a particular population or community. We suggest conservation managers use the often overlooked information relative to species absences and pay particular attention to dark diversity (i.e., a set of species that are absent from a site but that could disperse to and establish there, in other words, the absent portion of a habitat‐specific species pool). Together with existing ecological metrics, concepts, and conservation tools, dark diversity can be used to complement and further develop conservation prioritization and management decisions through an understanding of biodiversity relativized by its potential (i.e., its species pool). Furthermore, through a detailed understanding of the population, community, and functional dark diversity, the restoration potential of degraded habitats can be more rigorously assessed and so to the likelihood of successful species invasions. We suggest the application of the dark diversity concept is currently an underappreciated source of information that is valuable for conservation applications ranging from macroscale conservation prioritization to more locally scaled restoration ecology and the management of invasive species.     

Limitations of outsourcing on‐the‐ground biodiversity conservation

To counteract global species decline, modern biodiversity conservation engages in large projects, spends billions of dollars, and includes many organizations working simultaneously within regions. To add to this complexity, the conservation sector has hierarchical structure, where conservation actions are often outsourced by funders (foundations, government, etc.) to local organizations that work on‐the‐ground. In contrast, conservation science usually assumes that a single organization makes resource allocation decisions. This discrepancy calls for theory to understand how the expected biodiversity outcomes change when interactions between organizations are accounted for. Here, we used a game theoretic model to explore how biodiversity outcomes are affected by vertical and horizontal interactions between 3 conservation organizations: a funder that outsourced its actions and 2 local conservation organizations that work on‐the‐ground. Interactions between the organizations changed the spending decisions made by individual organizations, and thereby the magnitude and direction of the conservation benefits. We showed that funders would struggle to incentivize recipient organizations with set priorities to perform desired actions, even when they control substantial amounts of the funding and employ common contracting approaches to enhance outcomes. Instead, biodiversity outcomes depended on priority alignment across the organizations. Conservation outcomes for the funder were improved by strategic interactions when organizational priorities were well aligned, but decreased when priorities were misaligned. Meanwhile, local organizations had improved outcomes regardless of alignment due to additional funding in the system. Given that conservation often involves the aggregate actions of multiple organizations with different objectives, strategic interactions between organizations need to be considered if we are to predict possible outcomes of conservation programs or costs of achieving conservation targets.     

Assessing Conservation Management's Evidence Base: a Survey of Management-Plan Compilers in the United Kingdom and Australia

Abstract:  Conservation management is becoming increasingly resource intensive as threats to biodiversity grow through habitat destruction, habitat disturbance, and overexploitation. To achieve successful conservation and sustainable use of natural resources, we need to scientifically evaluate the effectiveness of conservation interventions and provide an efficient framework through which scientific evidence can be used to support decision making in policy and practice. We conducted the first formal assessment of the extent to which scientific evidence is used in conservation management through a questionnaire survey and follow-up interviews of compilers of protected-area management plans from major conservation organizations within the United Kingdom and Australia. Our survey results show that scientific information is not being used systematically to support decision making largely because it is not easily accessible to decision makers. This, in combination with limited monitoring and evaluation of effectiveness of management interventions, results in the majority of decisions being based on experience rather than on evidence. To address this problem we propose using an evidence-based framework adapted from that used in the health services and explain how we are currently putting an equivalent framework into practice by establishing review and dissemination units to serve the conservation sector.     

The Value of Biodiversity in Reserve Selection: Representation, Species Weighting, and Benefit Functions

Abstract:  The limited availability of resources for conservation has led to the development of many quantitative methods for selecting reserves that aim to maximize the biodiversity value of reserve networks. In published analyses, species are often considered equal, although some are in much greater need of protection than others. Furthermore, representation is usually treated as a threshold: a species is either represented or not, but varying levels of representation over or under a given target level are not valued differently. We propose that a higher representation level should also have higher value. We introduce a framework for reserve selection that includes species weights and benefit functions for under- and overrepresentation (number of locations for each species). We applied the method to conservation planning for herb-rich forests in southern Finland. Our use of benefit functions and weighting changed the identity of about 50% of the selected sites at different funding levels and improved the representation of rare and threatened species. We also identified a small area of additional land that would substantially enhance the existing reserve network. We suggest that benefit functions and species weighting should be considered as standard options in reserve-selection applications.