Generation of Priority Research Questions to Inform Conservation Policy and Management at a National Level

Abstract: Integrating knowledge from across the natural and social sciences is necessary to effectively address societal tradeoffs between human use of biological diversity and its preservation. Collaborative processes can change the ways decision makers think about scientific evidence, enhance levels of mutual trust and credibility, and advance the conservation policy discourse. Canada has responsibility for a large fraction of some major ecosystems, such as boreal forests, Arctic tundra, wetlands, and temperate and Arctic oceans. Stressors to biological diversity within these ecosystems arise from activities of the country's resource‐based economy, as well as external drivers of environmental change. Effective management is complicated by incongruence between ecological and political boundaries and conflicting perspectives on social and economic goals. Many knowledge gaps about stressors and their management might be reduced through targeted, timely research. We identify 40 questions that, if addressed or answered, would advance research that has a high probability of supporting development of effective policies and management strategies for species, ecosystems, and ecological processes in Canada. A total of 396 candidate questions drawn from natural and social science disciplines were contributed by individuals with diverse organizational affiliations. These were collaboratively winnowed to 40 by our team of collaborators. The questions emphasize understanding ecosystems, the effects and mitigation of climate change, coordinating governance and management efforts across multiple jurisdictions, and examining relations between conservation policy and the social and economic well‐being of Aboriginal peoples. The questions we identified provide potential links between evidence from the conservation sciences and formulation of policies for conservation and resource management. Our collaborative process of communication and engagement between scientists and decision makers for generating and prioritizing research questions at a national level could be a model for similar efforts beyond Canada.     

Conservation Focus on Europe: Major Conservation Policy Issues That Need to Be Informed by Conservation Science

Abstract:  Europe is one of the world's most densely populated continents and has a long history of human-dominated land- and seascapes. Europe is also at the forefront of developing and implementing multinational conservation efforts. In this contribution, we describe some top policy issues in Europe that need to be informed by high-quality conservation science. These include evaluation of the effectiveness of the Natura 2000 network of protected sites, implications of rapid economic and subsequent land-use change in Central and Eastern Europe, conservation of marine biodiversity and sustainability of fisheries, the effect of climate change on movement of species in highly fragmented landscapes, and attempts to assess the economic value of ecosystem services and biodiversity. Broad policy issues such as those identified are not easily amenable to scientific experiment. A key challenge at the science–policy interface is to identify the research questions underlying these problem areas so that conservation science can provide evidence to underpin future policy development .     

Infrastructure and Conservation Policy in Brazil

Abstract:  The development of transportation and energy infrastructure has been a major driver in the conversion of natural ecosystems in Brazil since the nineteenth century. Although this pattern is present in most countries, Brazil differs in the scale of opportunities that are still available to build its physical infrastructure while pursuing an ambitious conservation agenda. This advantage stems from the magnitude of intact ecosystems, a dynamic policy environment, and the increasing availability of biological and economic data needed to harmonize conservation with public works. Success depends on integrating conservation and infrastructure planning, rather than relying on the project based, largely ineffective environmental assessment process. Front-loading environmental mitigation and compensation will also help, as will improving public access to, and understanding of, information on the environmental and economic values at stake in major infrastructure decisions.     

Application of Conservation Biology Research to Management

Abstract: We conducted a survey of all primary authors of "Contributed Papers" and "Research Notes" in Conservation Biology from 1987 to 1998 to assess the perceived effectiveness of published management recommendations. No systematic survey has previously assessed the degree to which authors believe that resource managers are using the growing body of research published in Conservation Biology . In March 1999, we sent surveys to 667 authors of 790 published papers, asking whether their papers included management recommendations, whether such recommendations have been used in practice, and why they believed they have or have not been used. We received completed surveys from 198 authors of 223 papers. The percentage of papers that included management recommendations increased from 1987 to 1991, then stabilized at about 75%. Author perception of the use of management recommendations generally increased over the 5 years from 1994 to 1998. Initiatives of federal, state, and local agencies were the most often-cited cause of successful implementation of management recommendations, accounting for over half of all such cases. Our survey suggests that authors in Conservation Biology have increased the use of explicit management recommendations in their papers and that authors believe their recommendations are being used to an increasing degree.     

Lessons from Fragmentation Research: Improving Management and Policy Guidelines for Biodiversity Conservation

Abstract:  Ideally, science should inform policy development in all areas of human endeavor. Nowhere is this truer than in the case of human land use and our impact on the natural environment. Unfortunately, little recent science has percolated into policy guidelines for tropical forest management in areas facing serious threats. To help science inform policy we present six guidelines, which have been empirically proven important, for the management of fragmented landscapes: (1) incorporate protection measures as part of development projects; (2) protect large areas and prevent the fragmentation of currently contiguous large patches of forest; (3) manage forest edges when creating forest patches; (4) protect gallery forests along waterways to connect isolated forest patches; (5) control the use of fire and the introduction of exotic plant species and limit the use of toxic chemicals in areas near forest patches; and (6) promote reforestation and forest cover in critical areas of landscapes. Straightforward linkages between science and policy formulation can result in simple, yet powerful, changes in land-use patterns and have a concurrent positive effect on biodiversity and natural resources.     

Interdisciplinary Guidelines for Developing Effective Koala Conservation Policy

Abstract: Adequacy of the ongoing koala policy process and whether it can conserve koalas is currently in dispute. To address this issue, interdisciplinary guidelines are available to improve koala policy and management and to find consensus. These guidelines focus attention on five policy elements. The first three are rational, political, and moral perspectives on koala policy; the fourth the standpoint of a participant, and the fifth is knowledge integration for practical action. We discuss and illustrate these elements with koala case material. Rationality in policy is addressed through problem orientation, which requires participants to clarify goals, identify problems, and create alternatives in an iterative way. We examined the political dynamics—value clashes—in decision processes. A decision process ideally clarifies and secures common interests. We provide standards for each decision function, such as reliability, comprehensiveness, timeliness. Morality rests on basic premises that are used to justify policy positions. Clarification of the participant's standpoint addresses differing personalities, epistemologies, disciplines, and organizational and parochial biases. Integrating knowledge for practical policy action requires a conceptual framework that is up to the demands of the task. Together the five policy elements make up a logically comprehensive set of interrelated concepts for koala policy development, implementation, and appraisal. Many opportunities exist to use these guidelines skillfully in on-the-ground koala conservation efforts to improve koala policy outcomes.     

Integrating Top-Down with Bottom-Up Conservation Policy in Africa

Abstract:  Developed nations intervened in conservation policy across Africa during the 20th century to address needs to protect species and biodiversity that were based on their own perceptions and priorities. In the 21st century, conservationists in Africa have revised these perceptions and begun the process of identifying conservation priorities from an African perspective and in consideration of Africans' priorities. Although foreign conservation interveners struggled to identify mechanisms to which local people would respond, African conservationists are now demonstrating how to integrate the continent's unique socioeconomic circumstances into efforts to protect biodiversity. In Africa effective conservation policy must include the generation of wealth, reduction of disease and hunger, and support of traditional land-use practices.     

Macroeconomic Policy,Growth, and Biodiversity Conservation

Abstract: To successfully achieve biodiversity conservation, the amount of ecosystem structure available for economic production must be determined by, and subject to, conservation needs. As such, the scale of economic systems must remain within the limits imposed by the need to preserve critical ecosystems and the regenerative and waste assimilative capacities of the ecosphere. These limits are determined by biophysical criteria, yet macroeconomics involves the use of economic instruments designed to meet economic criteria that have no capacity to achieve biophysically based targets. Macroeconomic policy cannot, therefore, directly solve the biodiversity erosion crisis. Nevertheless, good macroeconomic policy is still important given that bad macroeconomy policy is likely to reduce human well‐being and increase the likelihood of social upheaval that could undermine conservation efforts.     

Investment and the Policy Process in Conservation Monitoring

Despite decades of discussion and implementation, conservation monitoring remains a challenge. Many current solutions in the literature focus on improving the science or making more structured decisions. These insights are important but incomplete in accounting for the politics and economics of the conservation decisions informed by monitoring. Our novel depiction of the monitoring enterprise unifies insights from multiple disciplines (conservation, operations research, economics, and policy) and highlights many underappreciated factors that affect the expected benefits of monitoring. For example, there must be a strong link between the specific needs of decision makers and information gathering. Furthermore, the involvement of stakeholders other than scientists and research managers means that new information may not be interpreted and acted upon as expected. While answering calls for sharply delineated objectives will clearly add focus to monitoring efforts, for practical reasons, high‐level goals may purposefully be left vague, to facilitate other necessary steps in the policy process. We use the expanded depiction of the monitoring process to highlight problems of cooperation and conflict. We critique calls to invest in monitoring for the greater good by arguing that incentives are typically lacking. Although the benefits of learning accrued within a project (e.g., improving management) provide incentives for investing in some monitoring, it is unrealistic, in general, to expect managers to add potentially costly measures to generate shared benefits. In the traditional linear model of the role of science in policy decisions, monitoring reduces uncertainty and decision makers are rational, unbiased consumers of the science. However, conservation actions increasingly involve social conflict. Drawing insights from political science, we argue that in high‐conflict situations, it is necessary to address the conflict prior to monitoring. Las Inversiones y el Proceso de Políticas en el Monitoreo de la Conservación Sanchirico et al.     

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 .     

Making Sense of the Policy Process for Carnivore Conservation

Grizzly bears ( Ursus arctos horribilis ), mountain lions ( Puma concolor ), wolverines ( Gulo gulo ), wolves ( Canis lupus ), and lynx ( Felis lynx ) are all top-level carnivores in the Rocky Mountains of the northern U.S. and southern Canada. Because of their body size and high trophic position, these species require abundant prey species and large habitat areas—requirements that make their conservation a controversial public policy problem. Because the challenge of conserving these species extends beyond biological issues, it is necessary to involve other relevant disciplines and perspectives in understanding and solving the problem. Our examination of the context, content, and process of large carnivore conservation policies suggests more effective and active roles for scientists in designing solutions to the problem of landscape-level carnivore conservation. Scientists must develop an understanding of the range of participants in the policy process and the ways in which these participants receive and utilize information. This knowledge of the policy process could help scientists to better understand their roles in framing and clarifying policy questions, projecting the consequences of various alternatives, and presenting policy information in appropriate fora.     

How Research‐Prioritization Exercises Affect Conservation Policy

Abstract: Conservation scientists are concerned about the apparent lack of impact their research is having on policy. By better aligning research with policy needs, conservation science might become more relevant to policy and increase its real‐world salience in the conservation of biological diversity. Consequently, some conservation scientists have embarked on a variety of exercises to identify research questions that, if answered, would provide the evidence base with which to develop and implement effective conservation policies. I synthesized two existing approaches to conceptualizing research impacts. One widely used approach classifies the impacts of research as conceptual, instrumental, and symbolic. Conceptual impacts occur when policy makers are sensitized to new issues and change their beliefs or thinking. Instrumental impacts arise when scientific research has a direct effect on policy decisions. The use of scientific research results to support established policy positions are symbolic impacts. The second approach classifies research issues according to whether scientific knowledge is developed fully and whether the policy issue has been articulated clearly. I believe exercises to identify important research questions have objectives of increasing the clarity of policy issues while strengthening science–policy interactions. This may facilitate the transmission of scientific knowledge to policy makers and, potentially, accelerate the development and implementation of effective conservation policy. Other, similar types of exercises might also be useful. For example, identification of visionary science questions independent of current policy needs, prioritization of best practices for transferring scientific knowledge to policy makers, and identification of questions about human values and their role in political processes could all help advance real‐world conservation science. It is crucial for conservation scientists to understand the wide variety of ways in which their research can affect policy and be improved systematically.