Acknowledging Conservation Trade‐Offs and Embracing Complexity

Abstract: There is a growing recognition that conservation often entails trade‐offs. A focus on trade‐offs can open the way to more complete consideration of the variety of positive and negative effects associated with conservation initiatives. In analyzing and working through conservation trade‐offs, however, it is important to embrace the complexities inherent in the social context of conservation. In particular, it is important to recognize that the consequences of conservation activities are experienced, perceived, and understood differently from different perspectives, and that these perspectives are embedded in social systems and preexisting power relations. We illustrate the role of trade‐offs in conservation and the complexities involved in understanding them with recent debates surrounding REDD (Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation), a global conservation policy designed to create incentives to reduce tropical deforestation. Often portrayed in terms of the multiple benefits it may provide: poverty alleviation, biodiversity conservation, and climate‐change mitigation; REDD may involve substantial trade‐offs. The gains of REDD may be associated with a reduction in incentives for industrialized countries to decrease carbon emissions; relocation of deforestation to places unaffected by REDD; increased inequality in places where people who make their livelihood from forests have insecure land tenure; loss of biological and cultural diversity that does not directly align with REDD measurement schemes; and erosion of community‐based means of protecting forests. We believe it is important to acknowledge the potential trade‐offs involved in conservation initiatives such as REDD and to examine these trade‐offs in an open and integrative way that includes a variety of tools, methods, and points of view.     

Incorporating Uncertainty of Management Costs in Sensitivity Analyses of Matrix Population Models

The importance of accounting for economic costs when making environmental‐management decisions subject to resource constraints has been increasingly recognized in recent years. In contrast, uncertainty associated with such costs has often been ignored. We developed a method, on the basis of economic theory, that accounts for the uncertainty in population‐management decisions. We considered the case where, rather than taking fixed values, model parameters are random variables that represent the situation when parameters are not precisely known. Hence, the outcome is not precisely known either. Instead of maximizing the expected outcome, we maximized the probability of obtaining an outcome above a threshold of acceptability. We derived explicit analytical expressions for the optimal allocation and its associated probability, as a function of the threshold of acceptability, where the model parameters were distributed according to normal and uniform distributions. To illustrate our approach we revisited a previous study that incorporated cost‐efficiency analyses in management decisions that were based on perturbation analyses of matrix population models. Incorporating derivations from this study into our framework, we extended the model to address potential uncertainties. We then applied these results to 2 case studies: management of a Koala (Phascolarctos cinereus) population and conservation of an olive ridley sea turtle (Lepidochelys olivacea) population. For low aspirations, that is, when the threshold of acceptability is relatively low, the optimal strategy was obtained by diversifying the allocation of funds. Conversely, for high aspirations, the budget was directed toward management actions with the highest potential effect on the population. The exact optimal allocation was sensitive to the choice of uncertainty model. Our results highlight the importance of accounting for uncertainty when making decisions and suggest that more effort should be placed on understanding the distributional characteristics of such uncertainty. Our approach provides a tool to improve decision making.     

The difficulties of systematic reviews

The need for robust evidence to support conservation actions has driven the adoption of systematic approaches to research synthesis in ecology. However, applying systematic review to complex or open questions remains challenging, and this task is becoming more difficult as the quantity of scientific literature increases. We drew on the science of linguistics for guidance as to why the process of identifying and sorting information during systematic review remains so labor intensive, and to provide potential solutions. Several linguistic properties of peer‐reviewed corpora—including nonrandom selection of review topics, small‐world properties of semantic networks, and spatiotemporal variation in word meaning—greatly increase the effort needed to complete the systematic review process. Conversely, the resolution of these semantic complexities is a common motivation for narrative reviews, but this process is rarely enacted with the rigor applied during linguistic analysis. Therefore, linguistics provides a unifying framework for understanding some key challenges of systematic review and highlights 2 useful directions for future research. First, in cases where semantic complexity generates barriers to synthesis, ecologists should consider drawing on existing methods—such as natural language processing or the construction of research thesauri and ontologies—that provide tools for mapping and resolving that complexity. These tools could help individual researchers classify research material in a more robust manner and provide valuable guidance for future researchers on that topic. Second, a linguistic perspective highlights that scientific writing is a rich resource worthy of detailed study, an observation that can sometimes be lost during the search for data during systematic review or meta‐analysis. For example, mapping semantic networks can reveal redundancy and complementarity among scientific concepts, leading to new insights and research questions. Consequently, wider adoption of linguistic approaches may facilitate improved rigor and richness in research synthesis.     

Long‐Term Impacts of Poaching on Relatedness,Stress Physiology,and Reproductive Output of Adult Female African Elephants

Abstract: Widespread poaching prior to the 1989 ivory ban greatly altered the demographic structure of matrilineal African elephant (Loxodonta africana) family groups in many populations by decreasing the number of old, adult females. We assessed the long‐term impacts of poaching by investigating genetic, physiological, and reproductive correlates of a disturbed social structure resulting from heavy poaching of an African elephant population in Mikumi National Park, Tanzania, prior to 1989. We examined fecal glucocorticoid levels and reproductive output among 218 adult female elephants from 109 groups differing in size, age structure, and average genetic relatedness over 25 months from 2003 to 2005. The distribution in group size has changed little since 1989, but the number of families with tusked old matriarchs has increased by 14.2%. Females from groups that lacked an old matriarch, first‐order adult relatives, and strong social bonds had significantly higher fecal glucocorticoid values than those from groups with these features (all females R²= 0.31; females in multiadult groups R²= 0.46). Females that frequented isolated areas with historically high poaching risk had higher fecal glucocorticoid values than those in low poaching risk areas. Females with weak bonds and low group relatedness had significantly lower reproductive output (R²[U]=0.21). Females from disrupted groups, defined as having observed average group relatedness 1 SD below the expected mean for a simulated unpoached family, had significantly lower reproductive output than females from intact groups, despite many being in their reproductive prime. These results suggest that long‐term negative impacts from poaching of old, related matriarchs have persisted among adult female elephants 1.5 decades after the 1989 ivory ban was implemented.     

Effects of Errors and Gaps in Spatial Data Sets on Assessment of Conservation Progress

Data on the location and extent of protected areas, ecosystems, and species’ distributions are essential for determining gaps in biodiversity protection and identifying future conservation priorities. However, these data sets always come with errors in the maps and associated metadata. Errors are often overlooked in conservation studies, despite their potential negative effects on the reported extent of protection of species and ecosystems. We used 3 case studies to illustrate the implications of 3 sources of errors in reporting progress toward conservation objectives: protected areas with unknown boundaries that are replaced by buffered centroids, propagation of multiple errors in spatial data, and incomplete protected‐area data sets. As of 2010, the frequency of protected areas with unknown boundaries in the World Database on Protected Areas (WDPA) caused the estimated extent of protection of 37.1% of the terrestrial Neotropical mammals to be overestimated by an average 402.8% and of 62.6% of species to be underestimated by an average 10.9%. Estimated level of protection of the world's coral reefs was 25% higher when using recent finer‐resolution data on coral reefs as opposed to globally available coarse‐resolution data. Accounting for additional data sets not yet incorporated into WDPA contributed up to 6.7% of additional protection to marine ecosystems in the Philippines. We suggest ways for data providers to reduce the errors in spatial and ancillary data and ways for data users to mitigate the effects of these errors on biodiversity assessments. Efectos de Errores y Vacíos en Conjuntos de Datos Espaciales sobre la Evaluación del Progreso de la Conservación     

Valuing Ecosystem Services in Terms of Ecological Risks and Returns

Abstract: The economic valuation of ecosystem services is a key policy tool in stemming losses of biological diversity. It is proposed that the loss of ecosystem function and the biological resources within ecosystems is due in part to the failure of markets to recognize the benefits humans derive from ecosystems. Placing monetary values on ecosystem services is often suggested as a necessary step in correcting such market failures. We consider the effects of valuing different types of ecosystem services within an economic framework. We argue that provisioning and regulating ecosystem services are generally produced and consumed in ways that make them amenable to economic valuation. The values associated with cultural ecosystem services lie outside the domain of economic valuation, but their worth may be expressed through noneconomic, deliberative forms of valuation. We argue that supporting ecosystem services are not of direct value and that the losses of such services can be expressed in terms of the effects of their loss on the risk to the provision of the directly valued ecosystem services they support. We propose a heuristic framework that considers the relations between ecological risks and returns in the provision of ecosystem services. The proposed ecosystem‐service valuation framework, which allows the expression of the value of all types of ecosystem services, calls for a shift from static, purely monetary valuation toward the consideration of trade‐offs between the current flow of benefits from ecosystems and the ability of those ecosystems to provide future flows.     

Effectiveness of Predator Removal for Enhancing Bird Populations

Abstract: Predation pressure on vulnerable bird species has made predator control an important issue for international nature conservation. Predator removal by culling or translocation is controversial, expensive, and time‐consuming, and results are often temporary. Thus, it is important to assess its effectiveness from all available evidence. We used explicit systematic review methodology to determine the impact of predator removal on four measurable responses in birds: breeding performance (hatching success and fledging success) and population size (breeding and postbreeding). We used meta‐analysis to summarize results from 83 predator removal studies from six continents. We also investigated whether characteristics of the prey, predator species, location, and study methodology explained heterogeneity in effect sizes. Removing predators increased hatching success, fledging success, and breeding populations. Removing all predator species achieved a significantly larger increase in breeding population than removing only a subset. Postbreeding population size was not improved on islands, or overall, but did increase on mainlands. Heterogeneity in effect sizes for the four population parameters was not explained by whether predators were native or introduced; prey were declining, migratory, or game species; or by the study methodology. Effect sizes for fledging success were smaller for ground‐nesting birds than those that nest elsewhere, but the difference was not significant. We conclude that current evidence indicates that predator removal is an effective strategy for the conservation of vulnerable bird populations. Nevertheless, the ethical and practical problems associated with predator removal may lead managers to favor alternative, nonlethal solutions. Research is needed to provide and synthesize data to determine whether these are effective management practices for future policies on bird conservation.     

Integrating Paleobiology,Archeology, and History to Inform Biological Conservation

The search for novel approaches to establishing ecological baselines (reference conditions) is constrained by the fact that most ecological studies span the past few decades, at most, and investigate ecosystems that have been substantially altered by human activities for decades, centuries, or more. Paleobiology, archeology, and history provide historical ecological context for biological conservation, remediation, and restoration. We argue that linking historical ecology explicitly with conservation can help unify related disciplines of conservation paleobiology, conservation archeobiology, and environmental history. Differences in the spatial and temporal resolution and extent (scale) of prehistoric, historic, and modern ecological data remain obstacles to integrating historical ecology and conservation biology, but the prolonged temporal extents of historical ecological data can help establish more complete baselines for restoration, document a historical range of ecological variability, and assist in determining desired future conditions. We used the eastern oyster (Crassostrea virginica) fishery of the Chesapeake Bay (U.S.A.) to demonstrate the utility of historical ecological data for elucidating oyster conservation and the need for an approach to conservation that transcends disciplinary boundaries. Historical ecological studies from the Chesapeake have documented dramatic declines (as much as 99%) in oyster abundance since the early to mid‐1800s, changes in oyster size in response to different nutrient levels from the sixteenth to nineteenth centuries, and substantial reductions in oyster accretion rates (from 10 mm/year to effectively 0 mm/year) from the Late Holocene to modern times. Better integration of different historical ecological data sets and increased collaboration between paleobiologists, geologists, archeologists, environmental historians, and ecologists to create standardized research designs and methodologies will help unify prehistoric, historic, and modern time perspectives on biological conservation. Integración de Paleobiología, Arqueología e Historia para Informar a la Biología de la Conservación     

Land‐use history as a guide for forest conservation and management

Conservation efforts to protect forested landscapes are challenged by climate projections that suggest substantial restructuring of vegetation and disturbance regimes in the future. In this regard, paleoecological records that describe ecosystem responses to past variations in climate, fire, and human activity offer critical information for assessing present landscape conditions and future landscape vulnerability. We illustrate this point drawing on 8 sites in the northwestern United States, New Zealand, Patagonia, and central and southern Europe that have undergone different levels of climate and land‐use change. These sites fall along a gradient of landscape conditions that range from nearly pristine (i.e., vegetation and disturbance shaped primarily by past climate and biophysical constraints) to highly altered (i.e., landscapes that have been intensely modified by past human activity). Position on this gradient has implications for understanding the role of natural and anthropogenic disturbance in shaping ecosystem dynamics and assessments of present biodiversity, including recognizing missing or overrepresented species. Dramatic vegetation reorganization occurred at all study sites as a result of postglacial climate variations. In nearly pristine landscapes, such as those in Yellowstone National Park, climate has remained the primary driver of ecosystem change up to the present day. In Europe, natural vegetation–climate–fire linkages were broken 6000–8000 years ago with the onset of Neolithic farming, and in New Zealand, natural linkages were first lost about 700 years ago with arrival of the Maori people. In the U.S. Northwest and Patagonia, the greatest landscape alteration occurred in the last 150 years with Euro‐American settlement. Paleoecology is sometimes the best and only tool for evaluating the degree of landscape alteration and the extent to which landscapes retain natural components. Information on landscape‐level history thus helps assess current ecological change, clarify management objectives, and define conservation strategies that seek to protect both natural and cultural elements.     

Equity trade‐offs in conservation decision making

Conservation decisions increasingly involve multiple environmental and social objectives, which result in complex decision contexts with high potential for trade‐offs. Improving social equity is one such objective that is often considered an enabler of successful outcomes and a virtuous ideal in itself. Despite its idealized importance in conservation policy, social equity is often highly simplified or ill‐defined and is applied uncritically. What constitutes equitable outcomes and processes is highly normative and subject to ethical deliberation. Different ethical frameworks may lead to different conceptions of equity through alternative perspectives of what is good or right. This can lead to different and potentially conflicting equity objectives in practice. We promote a more transparent, nuanced, and pluralistic conceptualization of equity in conservation decision making that particularly recognizes where multidimensional equity objectives may conflict. To help identify and mitigate ethical conflicts and avoid cases of good intentions producing bad outcomes, we encourage a more analytical incorporation of equity into conservation decision making particularly during mechanistic integration of equity objectives. We recommend that in conservation planning motivations and objectives for equity be made explicit within the problem context, methods used to incorporate equity objectives be applied with respect to stated objectives, and, should objectives dictate, evaluation of equity outcomes and adaptation of strategies be employed during policy implementation.     

Optimal Allocation of Conservation Resources to Species That May be Extinct

Abstract: Statements of extinction will always be uncertain because of imperfect detection of species in the wild. Two errors can be made when declaring a species extinct. Extinction can be declared prematurely, with a resulting loss of protection and management intervention. Alternatively, limited conservation resources can be wasted attempting to protect a species that no longer exists. Rather than setting an arbitrary level of certainty at which to declare extinction, we argue that the decision must trade off the expected costs of both errors. Optimal decisions depend on the cost of continued intervention, the probability the species is extant, and the estimated value of management (the benefit of management times the value of the species). We illustrated our approach with three examples: the Dodo (Raphus cucullatus), the Ivory‐billed Woodpecker (U.S. subspecies Campephilus principalis principalis), and the mountain pygmy‐possum (Burramys parvus). The dodo was extremely unlikely to be extant, so managing and monitoring for it today would not be cost‐effective unless the value of management was extremely high. The probability the Ivory‐billed woodpecker is extant depended on whether recent controversial sightings were accepted. Without the recent controversial sightings, it was optimal to declare extinction of the species in 1965 at the latest. Accepting the recent controversial sightings, it was optimal to continue monitoring and managing until 2032 at the latest. The mountain pygmy‐possum is currently extant, with a rapidly declining sighting rate. It was optimal to conduct as many as 66 surveys without sighting before declaring the species extinct. The probability of persistence remained high even after many surveys without sighting because it was difficult to determine whether the species was extinct or undetected. If the value of management is high enough, continued intervention can be cost‐effective even if the species is likely to be extinct.