Designing Systematic Conservation Assessments that Promote Effective Implementation: Best Practice from South Africa

Abstract:  Systematic conservation assessment and conservation planning are two distinct fields of conservation science often confused as one and the same. Systematic conservation assessment is the technical, often computer-based, identification of priority areas for conservation. Conservation planning is composed of a systematic conservation assessment coupled with processes for development of an implementation strategy and stakeholder collaboration. The peer-reviewed conservation biology literature abounds with studies analyzing the performance of assessments (e.g., area-selection techniques). This information alone, however, can never deliver effective conservation action; it informs conservation planning. Examples of how to translate systematic assessment outputs into knowledge and then use them for "doing" conservation are rare. South Africa has received generous international and domestic funding for regional conservation planning since the mid-1990s. We reviewed eight South African conservation planning processes and identified key ingredients of best practice for undertaking systematic conservation assessments in a way that facilitates implementing conservation action. These key ingredients include the design of conservation planning processes, skills for conservation assessment teams, collaboration with stakeholders, and interpretation and mainstreaming of products (e.g., maps) for stakeholders. Social learning institutions are critical to the successful operationalization of assessments within broader conservation planning processes and should include not only conservation planners but also diverse interest groups, including rural landowners, politicians, and government employees.     

Rapid Evolution in the Wild: Changes in Body Size, Life-History Traits, and Behavior in Hunted Populations of the Japanese Mamushi Snake

Abstract:  Rapid evolution caused by human exploitation of wildlife is not usually addressed in studies of the impacts of such exploitation despite its direct relevance to population persistence. Japanese mamushi ( Gloydius blomhoffii ), an endemic venomous snake of the Japanese archipelago, has been heavily hunted by humans, and many populations appear to be declining or are already extirpated. We compared local populations that have been hunted regularly with populations that have not been hunted. Mamushi in hunted populations were smaller, had fewer vertebrae, produced more and smaller offspring, had increased reproductive effort among smaller females, and in nature fled at greater distances from an approaching human and were less defensive than mamushi in unhunted populations, as predicted from life-history theory. Heritability estimates for body size, number of vertebrae, and antipredator behavior were statistically significant, and neonates from hunted sites showed the same distribution of altered characters (compared with those from unhunted sites) as adults. Thus, distribution of the divergent trait between hunted and unhunted sites appeared in part to be genetically based, which suggests rapid evolution to human predation pressures. Trait distributions in hunted populations probably deviate from naturally (as opposed to anthropogenically) selected optima and, therefore, may have long-term negative repercussions on population persistence. Because rapid evolution affects a suite of parameters that characterize exploited populations, accurate understanding of the impacts of exploitation and effective resource management and conservation can only be achieved if evolutionary consequences are considered explicitly.     

Knowing But Not Doing: Selecting Priority Conservation Areas and the Research–Implementation Gap

Abstract: Conservation assessment is a rapidly evolving discipline whose stated goal is the design of networks of protected areas that represent and ensure the persistence of nature (i.e., species, habitats, and environmental processes) by separating priority areas from the activities that degrade or destroy them. Nevertheless, despite a burgeoning scientific literature that ever refines these techniques for allocating conservation resources, it is widely believed that conservation assessments are rarely translated into actions that actually conserve nature. We reviewed the conservation assessment literature in peer‐reviewed journals and conducted survey questionnaires of the authors of these studies. Two‐thirds of conservation assessments published in the peer‐reviewed scientific literature do not deliver conservation action, primarily because most researchers never plan for implementation. This research–implementation gap between conservation science and real‐world action is a genuine phenomenon and is a specific example of the “knowing–doing gap” that is widely recognized in management science. Given the woefully inadequate resources allocated for conservation, our findings raise questions over the utility of conservation assessment science, as currently practiced, to provide useful, pragmatic solutions to conservation planning problems. A reevaluation of the conceptual and operational basis of conservation planning research is urgently required. We recommend the following actions for beginning a process for bridging the research–implementation gap in conservation planning: (1) acknowledge the research–implementation gap is real, (2) source research questions from practitioners, (3) situate research within a broader conservation planning model, (4) expand the social dimension of conservation assessments, (5) support conservation plans with transdisciplinary social learning institutions, (6) reward academics for societal engagement and implementation, and (7) train students in skills for “doing” conservation.     

Comparing and Integrating Community-Based and Science-Based Approaches to Prioritizing Marine Areas for Protection

Abstract:  We compared and integrated marine protected areas proposed through community and scientific assessments in 2 regions of British Columbia, Canada. The community priorities were identified during individual and group interviews with knowledgeable resource users. The scientific priorities were developed with abiotic and biotic data in Marxan, a decision-support tool. The resulting maps of community-based and science-based priorities were very similar for the inshore areas, which lent credibility to both approaches. The resource users thought the science-based maps were fairly good at highlighting areas important for conservation, but preferred the scenarios that integrated the 2 maps to either constituent map. Incorporating spatial variation in human impacts on the marine areas and commercial fishing, which are both costs of protection, into our Marxan analyses led to scenarios that were different from either constituent map. Our results show the value of integrating community-based and science-based approaches in conservation planning to achieve community acceptance and conservation utility. They also reveal that people's assessments on the basis of their traditional ecological knowledge may serve as a reasonable proxy for scientific approaches in selecting areas of ecological value.