Prospects for stakeholder coordination by protected‐area managers in Europe

Growing resource demands by humans, invasive species, natural hazards, and a changing climate have created broad‐scale impacts and the need for broader‐extent conservation activities that span ownerships and even political borders. Implementing regional‐scale conservation brings great challenges, and learning how to overcome these challenges is essential for maintaining biodiversity (i.e., richness and evenness of biological communities) and ecosystem functions and services across scales and borders in the face of system change. We administered an online survey to examine factors potentially driving perspectives of protected‐area (PA) managers regarding coordination with neighboring PAs and other stakeholders (i.e., stakeholder coordination) for conserving biodiversity and ecosystem services during the next decade within diverse regions across Europe. Although >70% (n = 58) of responding PA managers indicated that climate change and invasive species are relevant for their PAs, they gave <50% probability that these threats could be mitigated through stakeholder coordination. They thought there was a >60% probability (n = 85) that stakeholder coordination would take place with the aim to improve conservation outcomes. Consistent with the foundation on which many European PAs were established, managers viewed maintaining or enhancing biodiversity as the most important (>70%; n = 61) expected benefit. Other benefits included maintaining or enhancing human resources and environmental education (range of Bayesian credibility intervals [CIs] 57–93%). They thought the main barriers to stakeholder coordination were the lack of human and economic resources (CI 59–67% chance of hindering; n = 64) followed by communication and interstakeholder differences in political structures and laws (CI 51–64% probability of hindering). European policies and strategies that address these hindering factors could be particularly effective means of enabling implementation of green infrastructure networks in which PAs are the nodes.     

Conservation and the 4 Rs,which are rescue,rehabilitation, release,and research

Vertebrate animals can be injured or threatened with injury through human activities, thus warranting their “rescue.” Details of wildlife rescue, rehabilitation, release, and associated research (our 4 Rs) are often recorded in large databases, resulting in a wealth of available information. This information has huge research potential and can contribute to understanding of animal biology, anthropogenic impacts on wildlife, and species conservation. However, such databases have been little used, few studies have evaluated factors influencing success of rehabilitation and/or release, recommended actions to conserve threatened species have rarely arisen, and direct benefits for species conservation are yet to be demonstrated. We therefore recommend that additional research be based on data from rescue, rehabilitation, and release of animals that is broader in scope than previous research and would have community support.     

Connectivity Planning to Address Climate Change

As the climate changes, human land use may impede species from tracking areas with suitable climates. Maintaining connectivity between areas of different temperatures could allow organisms to move along temperature gradients and allow species to continue to occupy the same temperature space as the climate warms. We used a coarse‐filter approach to identify broad corridors for movement between areas where human influence is low while simultaneously routing the corridors along present‐day spatial gradients of temperature. We modified a cost–distance algorithm to model these corridors and tested the model with data on current land‐use and climate patterns in the Pacific Northwest of the United States. The resulting maps identified a network of patches and corridors across which species may move as climates change. The corridors are likely to be robust to uncertainty in the magnitude and direction of future climate change because they are derived from gradients and land‐use patterns. The assumptions we applied in our model simplified the stability of temperature gradients and species responses to climate change and land use, but the model is flexible enough to be tailored to specific regions by incorporating other climate variables or movement costs. When used at appropriate resolutions, our approach may be of value to local, regional, and continental conservation initiatives seeking to promote species movements in a changing climate. Planificación de Conectividad para Atender el Cambio Climático     

Expert judgment and uncertainty regarding the protection of imperiled species

Decisions concerning the appropriate listing status of species under the U.S. Endangered Species Act (ESA) can be controversial even among conservationists. These decisions may determine whether a species persists in the near term and have long‐lasting social and political ramifications. Given the ESA's mandate that such decisions be based on the best available science, it is important to examine what factors contribute to experts’ judgments concerning the listing of species. We examined how a variety of factors (such as risk perception, value orientations, and norms) influenced experts’ judgments concerning the appropriate listing status of the grizzly bear (Ursus arctos horribilis) population in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem. Experts were invited to complete an online survey examining their perceptions of the threats grizzly bears face and their listing recommendation. Although experts’ assessments of the threats to this species were strongly correlated with their recommendations for listing status, this relationship did not exist when other cognitive factors were included in the model. Specifically, values related to human use of wildlife and norms (i.e., a respondent's expectation of peers’ assessments) were most influential in listing status recommendations. These results suggest that experts’ decisions about listing, like all human decisions, are subject to the use of heuristics (i.e., decision shortcuts). An understanding of how heuristics and related biases affect decisions under uncertainty can help inform decision making about threatened and endangered species and may be useful in designing effective processes for protection of imperiled species.     

Wrestling with the complexity of evaluation for organizations at the boundary of science,policy, and practice

Boundary organizations are situated between science, policy, and practice and have a goal of supporting communication and collaboration among these sectors. They have been promoted as a way to improve the effectiveness of conservation efforts by building stronger relationships between scientists, policy makers, industry, and practitioners (Cook et al. 2013). Although their promise has been discussed in theory, the work of and expectations for boundary organizations are less defined in practice. Biodiversity conservation is characterized by complexity, uncertainty, dissent, and tight budgets, so boundary organizations face the challenging task of demonstrating their value to diverse stakeholders. We examined the challenges boundary organizations face when seeking to evaluate their work and thus aimed to encourage more productive conversations about evaluation of boundary organizations and their projects. Although no off‐the‐shelf solution is available for a given boundary organization, we identified 4 principles that will support effective evaluation for boundary organizations: engage diverse stakeholders, support learning and reflection, assess contribution to change, and align evaluation with assumption and values.