Transcending capitalism growth strategies for biodiversity conservation

The unlimited economic growth that fuels capitalism's metabolism has profoundly transformed a large portion of Earth. The resulting environmental destruction has led to an unprecedented rate of biodiversity loss. Following large-scale losses of habitats and species, it was recognized that biodiversity is crucial to maintaining functional ecosystems. We sought to continue the debate on the contradictions between economic growth and biodiversity in the conservation science literature and thus invite scholars to engage in reversing the biodiversity crisis through acknowledging the impacts of economic growth. In the 1970s, a global agenda was set to develop different milestones related to sustainable development, including green–blue economic growth, which despite not specifically addressing biodiversity reinforced the idea that economic development based on profit is compatible with the planet's ecology. Only after biodiversity loss captured the attention of environmental sciences researchers in the early 2000s was a global biodiversity agenda implemented. The agenda highlights biodiversity conservation as a major international challenge and recognizes that the main drivers of biodiversity loss derive from economic activities. The post-2000 biodiversity agendas, including the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and the post-2020 Convention on Biological Diversity Global Strategy Framework, do not consider the negative impacts of growth-oriented strategies on biodiversity. As a result, global biodiversity conservation priorities are governed by the economic value of biodiversity and its assumed contribution to people's welfare. A large body of empirical evidence shows that unlimited economic growth is the main driver of biodiversity loss in the Anthropocene; thus, we strongly argue for sustainable degrowth and a fundamental shift in societal values. An equitable downscaling of the physical economy can improve ecological conditions, thus reducing biodiversity loss and consequently enhancing human well-being.     

Conservation Biology in Asia: the Major Policy Challenges

Abstract:  With about half the world's human population and booming economies, Asia faces numerous challenges to its biodiversity. The Asia Section of the Society for Conservation Biology has identified some key policy issues in which significant progress can be made. These include developing new sources of funding for forest conservation; identifying potential impacts of energy alternatives on the conservation of biodiversity; curbing the trade in endangered species of plants and animals; a special focus on the conservation of mountain biodiversity; enhancing relevant research; ensuring that conservation biology contributes to major international conventions and funding mechanisms; using conservation biology to build a better understanding of zoonotic diseases; more effectively addressing human–animal conflicts; enhancing community-based conservation; and using conservation biology to help address the pervasive water-deficit problems in much of Asia. These challenges can be met through improved regional cooperation among the relevant stakeholders .     

Protected area downgrading,downsizing, and degazettement as a threat to iconic protected areas

Protected areas (PAs) are expected to conserve nature and provide ecosystem services in perpetuity, yet widespread protected area downgrading, downsizing, and degazettement (PADDD) may compromise these objectives. Even iconic protected areas are vulnerable to PADDD, although these PADDD events are often unrecognized. We identified 23 enacted and proposed PADDD events within World Natural Heritage Sites and examined the history, context, and consequences of PADDD events in 4 iconic PAs (Yosemite National Park, Arabian Oryx Sanctuary, Yasuní National Park, and Virunga National Park). Based on insights from published research and international workshops, these 4 cases revealed the diverse pressures brought on by competing interests to develop or exploit natural landscapes and the variety of mechanisms that enables PADDD. Knowledge gaps exist in understanding of the conditions through which development pressures translate to PADDD events and their impacts, partially due to a lack of comprehensive PADDD records. Future research priorities should include comprehensive regional and country-level profiles and analysis of risks, impacts, and contextual factors related to PADDD. Policy options to better govern PADDD include improving tracking and reporting of PADDD events, establishing transparent PADDD policy processes, coordinating among legal frameworks, and mitigating negative impacts of PADDD. To support PADDD research and policy reforms, enhanced human and financial capacities are needed to train local researchers and to host publicly accessible data. As the conservation community considers the achievements of Aichi Target 11 and moves toward new biodiversity targets beyond 2020, researchers, practitioners, and policy makers need to work together to better track, assess, and govern PADDD globally.     

Scales of integration for sustainable development governance

Efforts at integration are central in the Sustainable Development Goals and the wider Post-2015 Sustainable Development Agenda. While integration forms a major focus of this agenda, there are fundamental limitations on pursuing this focus. The global governance discussions on integration lack a clear conceptualization of what it is, do not have any tools for measurement or assessment, and are narrowly focused around policy integration between global institutions. This article develops a framework for conceptualizing cross-level and cross-scale integration which addresses these problems and introduces the opportunities and challenges of pursuing different types of integration in global governance. Cross-level integration involves governance efforts which seek to bridge similar institutions with one another (for example, bringing together efforts by environmental ministries and development ministries). Cross-scale integration, in contrast, deals with governance efforts that bring together institutions which have distinct scopes, jurisdictions, and epistemologies. With this important distinction, the article explores the opportunities for cross-scale integration as part of the global sustainable development efforts and particularly expanding the policy integration focus with spatial and temporal integration as well. The conclusion uses the Earth System Governance perspective to focus on the trade-offs that are likely as wider forms of institutional integration are pursued beyond environmental mainstreaming and policy integration.     

Identifying future research directions for biodiversity,ecosystem services and sustainability: perspectives from early-career researchers

We aimed to identify priority research questions in the field of biodiversity, ecosystem services and sustainability (BESS), based on a workshop held during the NRG BESS Conference for Early Career Researchers on BESS, and to compare these to existing horizon scanning exercises. This work highlights the need for improved data availability through collaboration and knowledge exchange, which, in turn, can support the integrated valuation and sustainable management of ecosystems in response to global change. In addition, clear connectivity among different research themes in this field further emphasizes the need to consider a wider range of topics simultaneously to ensure the sustainable management of ecosystems for human wellbeing. In contrast to other horizon scanning exercises, our focus was more interdisciplinary and more concerned with the limits of sustainability and dynamic relationships between social and ecological systems. The identified questions could provide a framework for researchers, policy makers, funding agencies and the private sector to advance knowledge in biodiversity and ES research and to develop and implement policies to enable sustainable future development.     

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 .     

Learning outcomes measured in zoo and aquarium conservation education

Communicating the topic of conservation to the public and encouraging proenvironmental behaviors can mitigate loss of biodiversity. Thus, the evaluation of educational efforts is important to ascertain the educational effects and provide high-quality conservation education. The learning outcomes of conservation education are diverse (e.g., attitudes, knowledge, and behavior). Considering the specific characteristics of these different outcomes and the factors that influence them is crucial to delivering successful conservation education. We reviewed 29 peer-reviewed articles published in English from January 2011 to April 2020 on empirical studies of learning outcomes of on-site conservation education in zoos and aquaria, institutions that seek to educate the public about conservation. We examined the range of learning outcomes, their definitions, and factors that influenced them. Cognitive outcomes were most frequently investigated (37%) in comparison with other outcomes (e.g., affective outcomes, 31%). The articles did not use explicit definitions for learning outcomes, and implicit or explorative definitions provided were inconsistent. Outcomes were influenced by various factors (e.g., prior experiences, staff interaction, animal behavior). Our results suggest the agenda of conservation education research should be broadened by examining all learning outcomes relevant to behavior change. Educational and behavior change theories should be used as a background for conservation education research to ensure clear and consistent definitions, derive appropriate instruments to measure learning outcomes, and relate learning outcomes to influencing factors. We recommend conservation education researchers and practitioners to treat conservation education holistically and acknowledge its learning outcomes’ full complexity.     

Using conservation science to advance corporate biodiversity accountability

Biodiversity declines threaten the sustainability of global economies and societies. Acknowledging this, businesses are beginning to make commitments to account for and mitigate their influence on biodiversity and report this in sustainability reports. We assessed the top 100 of the 2016 Fortune 500 Global companies' (the Fortune 100) sustainability reports to gauge the current state of corporate biodiversity accountability. Almost half (49) of the Fortune 100 mentioned biodiversity in reports, and 31 made clear biodiversity commitments, of which only 5 were specific, measureable, and time bound. A variety of biodiversity-related activities were disclosed (e.g., managing impacts, restoring biodiversity, and investing in biodiversity), but only 9 companies provided quantitative indicators to verify the magnitude of their activities (e.g., area of habitat restored). No companies reported quantitative biodiversity outcomes, making it difficult to determine whether business actions were of sufficient magnitude to address impacts and were achieving positive outcomes for nature. Conservation science can advance approaches to corporate biodiversity accountability by helping businesses make science-based biodiversity commitments, develop meaningful indicators, and select more targeted activities to address business impacts. With the biodiversity policy super year of 2020 rapidly approaching, now is the time for conservation scientists to engage with and support businesses in playing a critical role in setting the new agenda for a sustainable future for the planet with biodiversity at its heart.     

Single Species as Indicators of Species Richness and Composition in California Coastal Sage Scrub Birds and Small Mammals

Abstract: Individual species may be useful as indicators of biodiversity if an association exists between the presence of a species and another component of biodiversity. We evaluated 40 species of birds and small mammals, including 11 species of conservation concern, as potential indicators of species richness and species composition in southern California coastal sage scrub habitats. This habitat, which is the target of large-scale conservation planning, has been greatly reduced by human development and supports many plants and animals of conservation concern. We asked whether there is an association between the presence of a potential indicator species and the species richness and composition of the bird or small-mammal community in which it is found. We used point counts and live-trapping to quantify the distribution of birds and small mammals, respectively, at 155 points in 16 sites located in three counties. Of the few species we found associated with species richness, some were associated with higher species richness and others with lower richness, and species of conservation concern were not more frequently associated with species richness than were common species. Ordination analysis revealed a geographic gradient in coastal sage scrub bird and small-mammal species composition across southern California, and 18 of the species we evaluated were associated with the composition of the bird and small-mammal community in which they were found. Our results suggest that efforts to conserve bird and small-mammal biodiversity in coastal sage scrub should not focus exclusively on rare species or on locations with the highest species richness, but instead should focus on a diverse suite of species that are representative of the range of variation in communities found in coastal sage scrub habitats.     

Participatory development of incentives to coexist with jaguars and pumas

Reducing costs and increasing benefits for rural communities coexisting with large carnivores is necessary for conservation of jaguar (Panthera onca) and puma (Puma concolor). To design acceptable incentives, stakeholders must be involved in the process. We conducted an innovative, structured, group communication process based on a Delphi technique as a template for identifying potential incentives. Community workshops with 133 members of 7 communities and surveys with 25 multidisciplinary experts from government, nongovernmental organizations, and academia provided iterative data to design a plan of incentives through 4 rounds of discussion. The final product integrated 862 ideas into 6 types of incentives: organization of communities, mechanisms for improved dialogue, citizen technical assistance, green labeling for community products, payment for the ecosystem service of biodiversity, and an assessment of financial alternatives. We used quantitative and qualitative techniques to indicate support for decisions about the design of incentives, which reduced researcher subjectivity. The diverse incentives developed and the cooperation from multiple stakeholders resulted in an incentive plan that integrated issues of governance, equity, and social norms.     

Three lessons for gender equity in biodiversity conservation

Amid a growing global agenda, biodiversity conservation has embraced gender equity as a pillar of equitable and effective practice. Gender equity has become enshrined in the global environment and development agenda through global commitments, policy and funding. However, for various reasons, conservation biodiversity often takes a simplistic view of gender as synonymous with women or as a dualism between women and men. This narrow view risks promoting inequitable processes and ineffective outcomes. Deeper engagement with feminist theory, and feminist political ecology in particular, could help advance biodiversity conservation's approach to how gender is understood, framed and integrated. Engaging with lessons from feminist political ecology can help advance gender equity in conservation through attention to power dynamics, intersectionality, and subjectivity.     

Research priorities for conservation and natural resource management in Oceania's small‐island developing states

For conservation science to effectively inform management, research must focus on creating the scientific knowledge required to solve conservation problems. We identified research questions that, if answered, would increase the effectiveness of conservation and natural resource management practice and policy in Oceania's small‐island developing states. We asked conservation professionals from academia, governmental, and nongovernmental organizations across the region to propose such questions and then identify which were of high priority in an online survey. We compared the high‐priority questions with research questions identified globally and for other regions. Of 270 questions proposed by respondents, 38 were considered high priority, including: What are the highest priority areas for conservation in the face of increasing resource demand and climate change? How should marine protected areas be networked to account for connectivity and climate change? What are the most effective fisheries management policies that contribute to sustainable coral reef fisheries? High‐priority questions related to the particular challenges of undertaking conservation on small‐island developing states and the need for a research agenda that is responsive to the sociocultural context of Oceania. Research priorities for Oceania relative to elsewhere were broadly similar but differed in specific issues relevant to particular conservation contexts. These differences emphasize the importance of involving local practitioners in the identification of research priorities. Priorities were reasonably well aligned among sectoral groups. Only a few questions were widely considered answered, which may indicate a smaller‐than‐expected knowledge‐action gap. We believe these questions can be used to strengthen research collaborations between scientists and practitioners working to further conservation and natural resource management in this region.     

Regional policy models for forest biodiversity analysis: lessons from coastal Oregon.

The crisis in the early 1990s over conservation of biodiversity in the forests of the Pacific Northwest caused an upheaval in forest policies for public and private landowners. These events led to the development of the Coastal Landscape Assessment and Modeling Study (CLAMS) for the Coast Range Physiographic Province of Oregon, a province containing over two million hectares of forest with a complex mixture of public and private ownership. Over a decade, CLAMS scientists developed regional data bases and tools to enable assessments of the implications of current policies for biodiversity and have begun using these data and tools to test ideas for solving policy problems. We summarize here four main lessons from our work: (1) Regional ecosystem perspectives, while rewarding, are difficult to achieve. Helping policy makers and the public understand biodiversity policies for an entire province can assist in developing more reasoned policies. However, this result is difficult to achieve because needed scientific building blocks generally do not exist, few policy institutions address regional cross-ownership issues, people can find it difficult to take a regional view, and the appropriate region for analysis changes with the policy problem. (2) Interest in environmental policy analysis may come as much from a pursuit of power as a pursuit of understanding. Biodiversity policy analyses are often viewed as weapons in an ongoing political battle. Also, results that might destabilize existing policies generally will not be well received by those in power. (3) The relationship of regional analyses to civic processes remains challenging and unsettled. Communication between citizens and scientists takes real effort. Also, collaborative processes both inspire and constrain regional policy analysis, and scientific work often proceeds at a different pace than these processes. In the end, CLAMS's most important effect on the civic dialogue may be to change how people think about the Coast Range. (4) An important role exists for anticipatory assessments done independently by scientists. Independent review will be especially important as policy analyses shift to management of nonfederal forests. Our future efforts in CLAMS will focus on evaluating ideas for fundamental changes in forest management.     

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.     

Importance of greater interdisciplinarity and geographic scope when tackling the driving forces behind biological invasions

Invasive non-native species are important drivers of ecosystem change, yet the driving forces of biological invasions themselves are poorly understood. Such information is essential to ensure policies focus on the most relevant drivers, and that future scenarios capture the full range of potential outcomes for invasive non-native species. I carried out a bibliometric analysis of articles published from 2000 to 2020 that address either invasive non-native species or biodiversity and ecosystem services and that also mention 1 or more drivers of ecosystem change. I examined 5 indirect drivers (demographic, economic, governance, sociocultural, and technological) and 6 direct drivers (climate change, invasive non-native species, land-use or sea-use change, natural hazards, pollution, and resource extraction). Using the Web of Science core collection of citation indexes, I undertook searches of article titles and keywords and retrieved 27,462 articles addressing invasive non-native species and 110,087 articles dealing with biodiversity or ecosystem services. Most research to date on biological invasions as well as on biodiversity and ecosystem services has focused on anthropogenic direct drivers of ecosystem change rather than indirect drivers. Yet currently, less than 18% of articles addressing biological invasions examined drivers of ecosystem change, a similar level to that found over 20 years ago for biodiversity or ecosystem services. Knowledge of the drivers of biological invasions is limited, emphasizes tractable drivers over those that require an interdisciplinary approach, and is biased toward developed economies. Drivers generally deemed important for biological invasions, such as governance and resource extraction, accounted for less than 2% of research effort. The absence of a systematic understanding of the forces that drive invasive non-native species and how they interact means that attempts to mitigate or forecast biological invasions are likely to fail. To address biological invasions requires a much better orientation of national and international research on drivers in relation to both their actual importance as well as their policy relevance.     

A Science for Survival: Values and Conservation Biology

Practice of conservation biology that does not actively and continuously question the values that shape it is self-defeating: Conservation biology is inescapably normative. Advocacy for the preservation of biodiversity is part of the scientific practice of conservation biology. If the editorial policy of or the publications in Conservation Biology direct the discipline toward an "objective, value-free" approach, then they do not educate and transform society but rather narrow the focus to the "object of knowledge" (be this species, gene pools, landscapes, or ecosystems). To pretend that the acquisition of "positive knowledge" alone will avert mass extinctions is misguided. Conservation biologists should reflect on the constitutive values (especially contextual, but also methodological and bias) underlying their research programs and policy recommendations. Such reflection is itself an inherent element of scientific objectivity and takes into account the social nature of scientific knowledge. Without openly acknowledging such a perspective, conservation biology could become merely a subdiscipline of biology, intellectually and functionally sterile and incapable of averting an anthropogenic mass extinction.     

Forest floor depth mediates understory vigor in xeric Pinus palustris ecosystems.

Longleaf pine (Pinus palustris) woodlands and savannas are among the most frequently burned ecosystems in the world with fire return intervals of 1-10 years. This fire regime has maintained high levels of biodiversity in terms of both species richness and endemism. Land use changes have reduced the area of this ecosystem by >95%, and inadequate fire frequencies threaten many of the remnants today. In the absence of frequent fire, rapid colonization of hardwoods and shrubs occurs, and a broad-leaved midstory develops. This midstory encroachment has been the focus of much research and management concern, largely based on the assumption that the midstory reduces understory plant diversity through direction competition via light interception. The general application of this mechanism of degradation is questionable, however, because midstory density, leaf area, and hardwood species composition vary substantially along a soil moisture gradient from mesic to extremely xeric sites. Reanalysis of recently reported data from xeric longleaf pine communities suggests that the development of the forest floor, a less conspicuous change in forest structure, might cause a decline in plant biodiversity when forests remain unburned. We report here a test of the interactions among fire, litter accumulation, forest floor development, and midstory canopy density on understory plant diversity. Structural equation modeling showed that within xeric sites, forest floor development was the primary factor explaining decreased biodiversity. The only effects of midstory development on biodiversity were those mediated through forest floor development. Boundary line analysis of functional guilds of understory plants showed sensitivity to even minor development of the forest floor in the absence of fire. These results challenge the prevailing management paradigm and suggest that within xeric longleaf pine communities, the primary focus of managed fire regime should be directed toward the restoration of forest floor characteristics rather than the introduction of high-intensity fires used to regulate midstory structure.     

Perspectives on area-based conservation and its meaning for future biodiversity policy

During 2021, Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) are expected to meet in Kunming, China, to agree on a new global biodiversity framework aimed at halting and reversing biodiversity loss, encouraging the sustainable use of biodiversity, and ensuring the equitable sharing of its benefits. As the post-2020 global biodiversity framework evolves, parties to the convention are being exposed to a range of perspectives on the conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity, relating to the future framework as a whole or to aspects of it. Area-based conservation measures are one such aspect, and there are diverse perspectives on how new targets might be framed in relation to these measures. These perspectives represent different outlooks on the relationship between human and nonhuman life on Earth. However, in most cases there is a lack of clarity on how they would be implemented in practice, the implications this would have for biodiversity and human well-being, and how they would contribute to achieving the 2050 Vision for Biodiversity of “living in harmony with nature.” We sought to clarify these issues by summarizing some of these perspectives in relation to the future of area-based biodiversity conservation. We identified these perspectives through a review of the literature and expert consultation workshops and compiled them into 4 main groups: Aichi+, ambitious area-based conservation perspectives, new conservation, and whole-earth conservation. We found that although the perspectives Aichi+ and whole earth are in some cases at odds with one another, they also have commonalities, and all perspectives have elements that can contribute to developing and implementing the post-2020 global biodiversity framework and achieving the longer term CBD 2050 Vision.     

Synergies and trade-offs among integrated conservation approaches in Mexico

Integrated conservation approaches (ICAs) are employed by governments, communities, and nongovernmental organizations worldwide seeking to achieve outcomes with dual benefits for biodiversity conservation and poverty alleviation. Although ICAs are frequently implemented concurrently, interactions among ICAs and the synergies or trade-offs that result are rarely considered during program design, implementation, and evaluation. In support of more deliberate and effective use of ICAs, we examined interactions among four well-known strategies: biosphere reserves (BRs), voluntary protected areas (VPAs), payments for ecosystem services (PES), and community forest management (CFM). Through a comparative case study, we analyzed interactions among spatially or temporally clustered ICAs implemented on communally held and managed lands in three ecologically and socioeconomically distinct regions of Mexico. Our research methods combined policy analysis with data gathered through participant observation and semistructured interviews (n = 78) and focus groups (n = 5) with government officials, implementers, and participants involved in ICAs in 28 communities. Despite the significant differences among the regions in which they were implemented, we found that key actors at each level of involvement generally perceived interactions among ICAs as synergistic. The PES programs were perceived to strengthen protected areas by reducing forest cover loss in and around BRs, fostering proconservation attitudes, and incentivizing the establishment of VPAs. Communities that invested PES income in CFM were motivated to conserve forests beyond the duration of PES programs, and CFM in buffer zones was perceived to strengthen BRs by maintaining forest cover and generating income for communities. We also identified key social and environmental factors that can influence these interaction effects among ICAs. Based on these findings, we recommend further study of ICA interactions and intentionally complementary policy design to maximize positive environmental and social outcomes.