Interviews with Key Informants and Household Surveys: Central Ethiopia

Nutrition surveillance as part of, or complement to, the famine early warning system in Ethiopia has been used to collect reports on local food security from community leaders using structured interviews. As this information is crucial in the interpretation of other quantitative data, it is important to assess the extent to which leaders' information reflects the food related behaviour of the community. Information on various socio-economic variables related to nutrition were collected at the household level and at the community level through structured interviews with householders and community leaders. The information given by householders and by community leaders was compared. In general the correspondence between the two was good and the continued collection of local information from local leaders justified. There were a few topics on which information might be missed using only the local leader and ways to improve collecting this information are discussed.     

Species Listing under Canada's Species at Risk Act

Abstract: In a preliminary analysis of listing decisions under Canada's Species at Risk Act (SARA), Mooers et al. (2007) demonstrated an apparent bias against marine and northern species. As a follow‐up, we expanded the set of potential explanatory variables, including information on jurisdictional and administrative elements of the listing process, and considered an additional 16 species recommended for listing by SARA's scientific advisory committee as of 15 August 2006. Logistic model selection based on Akaike differences suggested that species were less likely to be listed if they were harvested or had commercial or subsistence harvesting as an explicitly identified threat; had Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO) as a responsible authority (RA); were located in Canada's north generally, and especially in Nunavut; or were found mostly or entirely within Canada. Subsequent model validation with an independent set of 50 species for which a listing decision was handed down in December 2007 showed an overall misclassification rate of <0.10, indicating reasonable predictive power. In light of these results, we recommend that RAs under SARA adopt a two‐track listing approach to address problems of delays arising from extended consultations and the inconsistent use by the RAs of socioeconomic analysis; consider revising SARA so that socioeconomic analysis occurs during decisions about protecting species and their habitats rather than at the listing stage; and maintain an integrated database with information on species’ biology, threats, and agency actions to enable future evaluation of SARA's impact.     

Accounting for the Impact of Conservation on Human Well‐Being

Conservationists are increasingly engaging with the concept of human well‐being to improve the design and evaluation of their interventions. Since the convening of the influential Sarkozy Commission in 2009, development researchers have been refining conceptualizations and frameworks to understand and measure human well‐being and are starting to converge on a common understanding of how best to do this. In conservation, the term human well‐being is in widespread use, but there is a need for guidance on operationalizing it to measure the impacts of conservation interventions on people. We present a framework for understanding human well‐being, which could be particularly useful in conservation. The framework includes 3 conditions; meeting needs, pursuing goals, and experiencing a satisfactory quality of life. We outline some of the complexities involved in evaluating the well‐being effects of conservation interventions, with the understanding that well‐being varies between people and over time and with the priorities of the evaluator. Key challenges for research into the well‐being impacts of conservation interventions include the need to build up a collection of case studies so as to draw out generalizable lessons; harness the potential of modern technology to support well‐being research; and contextualize evaluations of conservation impacts on well‐being spatially and temporally within the wider landscape of social change. Pathways through the smog of confusion around the term well‐being exist, and existing frameworks such as the Well‐being in Developing Countries approach can help conservationists negotiate the challenges of operationalizing the concept. Conservationists have the opportunity to benefit from the recent flurry of research in the development field so as to carry out more nuanced and locally relevant evaluations of the effects of their interventions on human well‐being. Consideración del Impacto de la Conservación sobre el Bienestar Humano     

The Why,What, and How of Global Biodiversity Indicators Beyond the 2010 Target

Abstract: The 2010 biodiversity target agreed by signatories to the Convention on Biological Diversity directed the attention of conservation professionals toward the development of indicators with which to measure changes in biological diversity at the global scale. We considered why global biodiversity indicators are needed, what characteristics successful global indicators have, and how existing indicators perform. Because monitoring could absorb a large proportion of funds available for conservation, we believe indicators should be linked explicitly to monitoring objectives and decisions about which monitoring schemes deserve funding should be informed by predictions of the value of such schemes to decision making. We suggest that raising awareness among the public and policy makers, auditing management actions, and informing policy choices are the most important global monitoring objectives. Using four well‐developed indicators of biological diversity (extent of forests, coverage of protected areas, Living Planet Index, Red List Index) as examples, we analyzed the characteristics needed for indicators to meet these objectives. We recommend that conservation professionals improve on existing indicators by eliminating spatial biases in data availability, fill gaps in information about ecosystems other than forests, and improve understanding of the way indicators respond to policy changes. Monitoring is not an end in itself, and we believe it is vital that the ultimate objectives of global monitoring of biological diversity inform development of new indicators.     

Conflicting and Complementary Ethics of Animal Welfare Considerations in Reintroductions

Despite differences in focus, goals, and strategies between conservation biology and animal welfare, both are inextricably linked in many ways, and greater consideration of animal welfare, although important in its own right, also has considerable potential to contribute to conservation success. Nevertheless, animal welfare and animal ethics are not always considered explicitly within conservation practice. We systematically reviewed the recent scientific peer‐reviewed and online gray literature on reintroductions of captive‐bred and wild‐caught animals (mammals, birds, amphibians, and reptiles) to quantify the occurrence of animal welfare issues. We considered monitoring that could be indicative of the animal's welfare status and supportive management actions that could improve animal welfare (regardless of whether the aim was explicitly animal‐welfare orientated). Potential welfare issues (of variable nature and extent) were recorded in 67% of 199 projects reviewed; the most common were mortality >50%, dispersal or loss of animals, disease, and human conflict. Most (>70%) projects monitored survival, 18% assessed body condition, and 2% monitored stress levels. Animal welfare, explicitly, was referred to in 6% of projects. Supportive actions, most commonly use of on‐site prerelease pens and provision of supplemental food or water, were implemented in 79% of projects, although the extent and duration of support varied. Practitioners can address animal‐welfare issues in reintroductions by considering the potential implications for individual animals at all stages of the release process using the decision tree presented. We urge practitioners to report potential animal‐welfare issues, describe mitigation actions, and evaluate their efficacy to facilitate transparent evaluation of common moral dilemmas and to advance communal strategies for dealing with them. Currently, comparative mortality rates, health risks, postrelease stress, effectiveness of supportive measures, and behavior of individuals warrant further research to improve animal welfare in reintroductions and to increase success of such projects. Ética Conflictiva y Complementaria al Considerar el Bienestar Animal en Reintroducciones     

The Status and Conservation of the Wolf in Gujarat and Rajasthan, India

Abstract: Populations of wolves were estimated for the states of Gujarat and Rajasthan, India, based on interviews and surveys. The wolf range is continuous. The total number of wolves in Gujarat is between 190 and 270 and in Rajasthan is between 253 and 350. Recommendations for a wolf conservation strategy include: (1) encouraging public support and education, (2) enforcing legal protection, (3) paying compensation for wolf-killed livestock, (4) conducting surveys of wolf populations and research on the dynamics of select populations, (5) protecting breeding habitats, and (6) eradicating feral dogs from wolf conservation areas. It is not too late to save the wolf if such a conservation strategy is implemented immediately.