Insights for Integrated Conservation from Attitudes of People toward Protected Areas Near Hwange National Park,Zimbabwe

Increase in human settlements at the edge of protected areas (PAs) is perceived as a major threat to conservation of biodiversity. Although it is crucial to integrate the interests of surrounding communities into PA management, key drivers of changes in local populations and the effects of conservation on local livelihoods and perceptions remain poorly understood. We assessed population changes from 1990 to 2010 in 9 villages located between 2 PAs with different management policies (access to natural resources or not). We conducted semi‐directive interviews at the household level (n =217) to document reasons for settlement in the area and villager's attitudes toward the PAs. We examined drivers of these attitudes relative to household typology, feelings about conservation, and concerns for the future with mixed linear models. Population increased by 61% from 2000 to 2010, a period of political and economic crisis in Zimbabwe. Forty‐seven percent of immigrants were attracted by the area; others had been resettled from other villages or were returning to family lands. Attitudes toward PAs were generally positive, but immigrants attracted by the area and who used resources within the PA with fewer restrictions expressed more negative attitudes toward PAs. Household location, losses due to wild animals, and restrictions on access to natural resources were the main drivers of this negative attitude. Profit‐seeking migrants did not expect these constraints and were particularly concerned with local overpopulation and access to natural resources. To avoid socio‐ecological traps near PAs (i.e., unforeseen reduced adaptive capacity) integrated conservation should address mismatches between management policy and local expectations. This requires accounting for endogenous processes, for example, local socio‐ecological dynamics and values that shape the coexistence between humans and wildlife. Percepciones para Conservación Integrada a Partir de las Actitudes de las Personas hacia Áreas Protegidas cerca del Parque Nacional Hwangem Zimbabwe     

Drivers of support for citizen science across state wildlife management agencies in the United States

Citizen science (CS) is gaining recognition as a valuable approach to meet data needs for environmental projects while fostering collaboration between scientists and members of the public. Despite increasing implementation of CS by natural resource entities, organizations’ motivations for engaging in CS remain poorly understood. We examined the utility of the theory of planned behavior (TPB) and social exchange theory (SET) in identifying factors influencing support of CS by scientific organizations. To test predictions of the TPB and SET theories, we surveyed (quantitative, web based) state wildlife agency staff in the United States on their perceptions of organizational engagement in CS. We divided questions that measured TPB items into individual and organizational components to address the influence of personal- and organization-level decision-making on staff perceptions and attitudes. We used structural equation modeling to identify key constructs that influence staff support of CS in state wildlife agencies. The survey yielded 627 responses across 44 states. Both TPB and SET constructs accurately predicted staff support of CS; however, measures from SET (e.g., public engagement benefits and costs of CS to scientific credibility) were most influential (i.e., TPB constructs had less impact). Our findings indicate that organizational support for CS is primarily influenced by assessment of trade-offs among perceived costs and benefits. Indicators of support for CS were further elucidated by including measures from the TPB model. Based on our results, we suggest that natural resource entities give careful consideration to CS project design, develop thorough communication and data management plans, and practice iterative evaluation of CS project productivity.     

Desires and Management Preferences of Stakeholders Regarding Feral Cats in the Hawaiian Islands

Feral cats are abundant in many parts of the world and a source of conservation conflict. Our goal was to clarify the beliefs and desires held by stakeholders regarding feral cat abundance and management. We measured people's desired abundance of feral cats in the Hawaiian Islands and identified an order of preference for 7 feral cat management techniques. In 2011 we disseminated a survey to 5407 Hawaii residents. Approximately 46% of preidentified stakeholders and 20% of random residents responded to the survey (1510 surveys returned). Results from the potential for conflict index revealed a high level of consensus (86.9% of respondents) that feral cat abundance should be decreased. The 3 most common explanatory variables for respondents’ stated desires were enjoyment from seeing feral cats (84%), intrinsic value of feral cats (12%), and threat to native fauna (73%). The frequency with which respondents saw cats and change in the perceived abundance of cats also affected respondent's desired abundance of cats; 41.3% of respondents stated that they saw feral cats daily and 44.7% stated that the cat population had increased in recent years. Other potential environmental impacts of feral cats had little affect on desired abundance. The majority of respondents (78%) supported removing feral cats from the natural environment permanently. Consensus convergence models with data from 1388 respondents who completed the relevant questions showed live capture and lethal injection was the most preferred technique and trap‐neuter‐release was the least preferred technique for managing feral cats. However, the acceptability of each technique varied among stakeholders. Our results suggest that the majority of Hawaii's residents would like to see effective management that reduces the abundance of feral or free‐roaming cats. Deseos y Preferencias de Manejo de las Partes Interesadas con Respecto a los Gatos Ferales en las Islas Hawaianas.     

Quantifying current and potential contributions of Australian indigenous peoples to threatened species management

Formal engagement of indigenous peoples in conservation is increasing globally and leads to multiple benefits to communities while contributing to national and international biodiversity goals and obligations. This and ongoing declines in biodiversity have led to calls to increase opportunities for indigenous people to engage in managing their estates. However, there is no overarching understanding of indigenous peoples’ involvement in conservation, which limits the identification of new opportunities. We amalgamated information across governments and large nongovernmental organizations in the megadiverse country of Australia to quantify the involvement of indigenous people in management of threatened species. We identified 153 Australian‐based projects undertaken by different indigenous groups around the nation in 2015 and 2016 that included explicit funds for management of threatened species or threatened ecosystems. Most were in remote parts of western and northern Australia. Almost one‐quarter of all threatened animals and 2% of threatened plants were the subject of some formal conservation action by indigenous people. Occurrence records for 1574 threatened species showed that 823 (89.2%) of 923 species recorded on indigenous peoples’ lands were not listed in management projects. This gap may represent new opportunities for conservation initiatives. Because at least 59.5% of Australia's threatened species occur on indigenous peoples’ lands, efforts to build appropriate and effective indigenous conservation alliances are vital. However, it is also important to recognize that threatened species are part of complex social, ecological, economic and cultural systems, and to achieve successful outcomes requires consideration of indigenous peoples’ priorities, rights, and obligations and relationships with their traditionally owned land and sea.     

Conservation geopolitics

We reviewed recent work concerning the impact of geopolitics on wildlife conservation (and vice versa) and identified future priorities in conservation geopolitics research. Geopolitics is understood as both an analytical focus on geopolitical practices (especially concerning the behavior) of countries with respect to territory and national security and a set of theories developed to explain and predict those behaviors. We developed a typology of core geopolitical practices of relevance to conservation: territorial practices of colonization and the management of migrations and borders, and security practices relating to military, economic, and environmental security. We identified research that considers how these practices affect conservation situations and outcomes, noting the recent emergence of conceptual developments such as “environmental geopolitics” and “geopolitical ecology” that draw on multiple fields within the social sciences to theorize the links between geopolitics and environmental management. We defined a "geopolitical perspective" as a focus on geopolitical practices combined with an explicit engagement with geopolitical theory and identified conservation situations where this perspective could contribute to analytical clarity. We suggest the most pressing questions in conservation research to which the geopolitical perspective might contribute are how political and economic differences between countries affect biodiversity outcomes, how geopolitical practices to address those differences facilitate or frustrate conservation efforts, how national borders and human and wildlife movements can be better managed for the benefit of both, and how the most effective conservation strategies can be best selected to suit existing (and future) geopolitical realities.     

Conserving the abundance of nonthreatened species

Human modification of the environment is driving declines in population size and distributional extent of much of the world's biota. These declines extend to many of the most abundant and widespread species, for which proportionally small declines can result in the loss of vast numbers of individuals, biomass, and interactions. These losses could have major localized effects on ecological and cultural processes and services without elevating a species’ global extinction risk. Although most conservation effort is directed at species threatened with extinction in the very near term, the value of retaining abundance regardless of global extinction risk is justifiable based on many biodiversity or ecosystem service metrics, including cultural services, at scales from local to global. The challenges of identifying conservation priorities for widespread and abundant species include quantifying the effects of species’ abundance on services and understanding how these effects are realized as populations decline. Negative effects of population declines may be disconnected from the threat processes driving declines because of species movements and environment flows (e.g., hydrology). Conservation prioritization for these species shares greater similarity with invasive species risk assessments than extinction risk assessments because of the importance of local context and per capita effects of abundance on other species. Because conservation priorities usually focus on preventing the extinction of threatened species, the rationale and objectives for incorporating declines of nonthreatened species must be clearly articulated, going beyond extinction risk to encompass the range of likely harmful effects (e.g., secondary extinctions, loss of ecosystem services) if declines persist or are not reversed. Research should focus on characterizing the effects of local declines in species that are not threatened globally across a range of ecosystem services and quantifying the spatial distribution of these effects through the distribution of abundance. The case for conserving abundance in nonthreatened species can be made most powerfully when the costs of losing this abundance are better understood.     

Australian and U.S. News Media Portrayal of Sharks and Their Conservation

Investigation of the social framing of human–shark interactions may provide useful strategies for integrating social, biological, and ecological knowledge into national and international policy discussions about shark conservation. One way to investigate social opinion and forces related to sharks and their conservation is through the media's coverage of sharks. We conducted a content analysis of 300 shark‐related articles published in 20 major Australian and U.S. newspapers from 2000 to 2010. Shark attacks were the emphasis of over half the articles analyzed, and shark conservation was the primary topic of 11% of articles. Significantly more Australian articles than U.S. articles treated shark attacks (χ² = 3.862; Australian 58% vs. U.S. 47%) and shark conservation issues (χ² = 6.856; Australian 15% vs. U.S. 11%) as the primary article topic and used politicians as the primary risk messenger (i.e., primary person or authority sourced in the article) (χ² = 7.493; Australian 8% vs. U.S. 1%). However, significantly more U.S. articles than Australian articles discussed sharks as entertainment (e.g., subjects in movies, books, and television; χ² = 15.130; U.S. 6% vs. Australian 1%) and used scientists as the primary risk messenger (χ² = 5.333; U.S. 25% vs. Australian 15%). Despite evidence that many shark species are at risk of extinction, we found that most media coverage emphasized the risks sharks pose to people. To the extent that media reflects social opinion, our results highlight problems for shark conservation. We suggest that conservation professionals purposefully and frequently engage with the media to highlight the rarity of shark attacks, discuss preventative measures water users can take to reduce their vulnerability to shark encounters, and discuss conservation issues related to local and threatened species of sharks. When integrated with biological and ecological data, social‐science data may help generate a more comprehensive perspective and inform conservation practice. Descripción de Tiburones y su Conservación por Medios Informativos Australianos y Norteamericanos     

Power,politics, and culture of marine conservation technology in fisheries

The term conservation technology is applied widely and loosely to any technology connected to conservation. This overly broad understanding can lead to confusion around the actual mechanisms of conservation in a technological system, which can result in neglect and underdevelopment of the human dimensions of conservation technology. Ultimately, this hinders its effectiveness as technological fixes for conservation problems. Through a process of concept mapping based on key case studies and literature, I devised precise definitions of marine conservation technology and technological marine conservation system. Concerns about the use of marine conservation technologies included unintended consequences, halfway technologies that address the symptoms but not the causes of problems, and misguided techno-optimism (i.e., technology is a panacea that can solve any problem). Technology and technological systems can have power, politics, and culture, and these characteristics can influence the contextual fit of a technology, requiring that technology be thoughtfully created or adapted to the circumstances in which it will be used. Power, politics, and culture inherent in technology can also influence the distribution of conservation risks and benefits and potentially widen gaps in wealth, privilege, opportunities, and justice. Addressing these concerns can potentially be achieved through the better integration of social sciences in marine conservation technology and technological marine conservation system design and development and the application of the social-ecological-technological systems framework. This framework melds key concepts from the socioecological systems framework and science and technology studies. It recognizes as and elevates technology to be a central actor that can shape societies and the natural world. Such a framework incorporates broader understanding, so that the values and concerns of society are more effectively addressed in the creation and implementation of marine conservation technologies and technological marine conservation systems.