排序方式: 共有87条查询结果,搜索用时 0 毫秒
31.
There is sometimes an inherent assumption that the logical head will overrule the emotional heart in matters of science and technology. However, the literature on decision making under risk and uncertainty suggests that emotional responses may be more potent. A representative sample of Australians participated in a large, national, online survey (n = 8037), in which we measured the influence of knowledge and emotion in predicting support for possible synthetic biology (synbio) solutions to conservation, environmental, and industrial problems. A hierarchical regression model was used to examine the relative influence of affect- and emotion-related factors beyond the influence of knowledge factors in predicting support for synbio solutions. Subsequently, interaction analyses were conducted to examine the potentially moderating role of emotions in the knowledge–support relationship. There was 64% variance in overall support for synbio solutions (R2 = 0.64, p < 0.001). The most influential predictor of support in the model was positive emotion. Feeling hopeful, excited, and curious toward a synbio technology was related to greater overall support for the development of that technology. The second strongest set of predictors was affect-related measures that evaluate the technology as bad or good, harmful or beneficial, and risky or safe. Positive emotion and an assessment that the technology was good significantly moderated the effect of knowledge on support. These findings suggest that, at least initially, people are more likely to be guided by their emotions when considering support for synbio technologies, which has implications for how researchers design and implement engagement and communication strategies more broadly. 相似文献
32.
Enrico Di Minin Christoph Fink Anna Hausmann Jens Kremer Ritwik Kulkarni 《Conservation biology》2021,35(2):437-446
Social media data are being increasingly used in conservation science to study human–nature interactions. User-generated content, such as images, video, text, and audio, and the associated metadata can be used to assess such interactions. A number of social media platforms provide free access to user-generated social media content. However, similar to any research involving people, scientific investigations based on social media data require compliance with highest standards of data privacy and data protection, even when data are publicly available. Should social media data be misused, the risks to individual users' privacy and well-being can be substantial. We investigated the legal basis for using social media data while ensuring data subjects’ rights through a case study based on the European Union's General Data Protection Regulation. The risks associated with using social media data in research include accidental and purposeful misidentification that has the potential to cause psychological or physical harm to an identified person. To collect, store, protect, share, and manage social media data in a way that prevents potential risks to users involved, one should minimize data, anonymize data, and follow strict data management procedure. Risk-based approaches, such as a data privacy impact assessment, can be used to identify and minimize privacy risks to social media users, to demonstrate accountability and to comply with data protection legislation. We recommend that conservation scientists carefully consider our recommendations in devising their research objectives so as to facilitate responsible use of social media data in conservation science research, for example, in conservation culturomics and investigations of illegal wildlife trade online. 相似文献
33.
ALISON G. BOYER 《Conservation biology》2010,24(2):511-519
Abstract: Understanding the ecological mechanisms that lead to extinction is a central goal of conservation. Can understanding ancient avian extinctions help to predict extinction risk in modern birds? I used classification trees trained on both paleoecological and historical data from islands across the Pacific to determine the ecological traits associated with extinction risk. Intrinsic traits, including endemism, large body size, and certain feeding guilds, were tightly linked with avian extinction over the past 3500 years. Species ecology and phylogeny were better predictors of extinction risk through time than extrinsic or abiotic factors. Although human impacts on birds and their habitats have changed over time, modern endangered birds share many of the same ecological characteristics as victims of previous extinction waves. My use of detailed predictions of extinction risk to identify species potentially in need of conservation attention demonstrates the utility of paleoecological knowledge for modern conservation biology. 相似文献
34.
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. 相似文献
35.
Quantitative tools for implementing the new definition of significant portion of the range in the U.S. Endangered Species Act
下载免费PDF全文

Julia E. Earl Sam Nicol Ruscena Wiederholt Jay E. Diffendorfer Darius Semmens D. T. Tyler Flockhart Brady J. Mattsson Gary McCracken D. Ryan Norris Wayne E. Thogmartin Laura López‐Hoffman 《Conservation biology》2018,32(1):35-49
In 2014, the Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) and National Marine Fisheries Service announced a new policy interpretation for the U.S. Endangered Species Act (ESA). According to the act, a species must be listed as threatened or endangered if it is determined to be threatened or endangered in a significant portion of its range (SPR). The 2014 policy seeks to provide consistency by establishing that a portion of the range should be considered significant if the associated individuals’ “removal would cause the entire species to become endangered or threatened.” We reviewed 20 quantitative techniques used to assess whether a portion of a species’ range is significant according to the new guidance. Our assessments are based on the 3R criteria—redundancy (i.e., buffering from catastrophe), resiliency (i.e., ability to withstand stochasticity), and representation (i.e., ability to evolve)—that the FWS uses to determine if a species merits listing. We identified data needs for each quantitative technique and considered which methods could be implemented given the data limitations typical of rare species. We also identified proxies for the 3Rs that may be used with limited data. To assess potential data availability, we evaluated 7 example species by accessing data in their species status assessments, which document all the information used during a listing decision. In all species, an SPR could be evaluated with at least one metric for each of the 3Rs robustly or with substantial assumptions. Resiliency assessments appeared most constrained by limited data, and many species lacked information on connectivity between subpopulations, genetic variation, and spatial variability in vital rates. These data gaps will likely make SPR assessments for species with complex life histories or that cross national boundaries difficult. Although we reviewed techniques for the ESA, other countries require identification of significant areas and could benefit from this research. 相似文献
36.
Ayesha I.T. Tulloch Richard F. Maloney Liana N. Joseph Joseph R. Bennett Martina M.I. Di Fonzo William J.M. Probert Shaun M. O'Connor Jodie P. Densem Hugh P. Possingham 《Conservation biology》2015,29(2):513-524
Conservation outcomes are uncertain. Agencies making decisions about what threat mitigation actions to take to save which species frequently face the dilemma of whether to invest in actions with high probability of success and guaranteed benefits or to choose projects with a greater risk of failure that might provide higher benefits if they succeed. The answer to this dilemma lies in the decision maker's aversion to risk—their unwillingness to accept uncertain outcomes. Little guidance exists on how risk preferences affect conservation investment priorities. Using a prioritization approach based on cost effectiveness, we compared 2 approaches: a conservative probability threshold approach that excludes investment in projects with a risk of management failure greater than a fixed level, and a variance‐discounting heuristic used in economics that explicitly accounts for risk tolerance and the probabilities of management success and failure. We applied both approaches to prioritizing projects for 700 of New Zealand's threatened species across 8303 management actions. Both decision makers’ risk tolerance and our choice of approach to dealing with risk preferences drove the prioritization solution (i.e., the species selected for management). Use of a probability threshold minimized uncertainty, but more expensive projects were selected than with variance discounting, which maximized expected benefits by selecting the management of species with higher extinction risk and higher conservation value. Explicitly incorporating risk preferences within the decision making process reduced the number of species expected to be safe from extinction because lower risk tolerance resulted in more species being excluded from management, but the approach allowed decision makers to choose a level of acceptable risk that fit with their ability to accommodate failure. We argue for transparency in risk tolerance and recommend that decision makers accept risk in an adaptive management framework to maximize benefits and avoid potential extinctions due to inefficient allocation of limited resources. El Efecto de la Aversión de Riesgo sobre la Priorización de Proyectos de Conservación 相似文献
37.
Robert P. Anderson 《Conservation biology》2023,37(1):e14019
Estimates of species geographic ranges constitute critical input for biodiversity assessments, including those for the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Red List of Threatened Species. Area of occupancy (AOO) is one metric that IUCN uses to quantify a species’ range, but data limitations typically lead to either under- or overestimates (and unnecessarily wide bounds of uncertainty). Fortunately, existing methods in which range maps and land-cover data are used to estimate the area currently holding habitat for a species can be extended to yield an unbiased range of plausible estimates for AOO. Doing so requires estimating the proportion of sites (currently containing habitat) that a species occupies within its range (i.e., prevalence). Multiplying a quantification of habitat area by prevalence yields an estimate of what the species inhabits (i.e., AOO). For species with intense sampling at many sites, presence–absence data sets or occupancy modeling allow calculation of prevalence. For other species, primary biodiversity data (records of a species’ presence at a point in space and time) from citizen-science initiatives and research collections of natural history museums and herbaria could be used. In such cases, estimates of sample prevalence should be corrected by dividing by the species’ detectability. To estimate detectability from these data sources, extensions of inventory-completeness analyses merit development. With investments to increase the quality and availability of online biodiversity data, consideration of prevalence should lead to tighter and more realistic bounds of AOO for many taxonomic groups and geographic regions. By leading to more realistic and representative characterizations of biodiversity, integrating maps of current habitat with estimates of prevalence should empower conservation practitioners and decision makers and thus guide actions and policy worldwide. 相似文献
38.
Luca Santini Stuart H. M. Butchart Carlo Rondinini Ana Benítez-López Jelle P. Hilbers Aafke M. Schipper Mirza Cengic Joseph A. Tobias Mark A. J. Huijbregts 《Conservation biology》2019,33(5):1084-1093
The IUCN (International Union for Conservation of Nature) Red List categories and criteria are the most widely used framework for assessing the relative extinction risk of species. The criteria are based on quantitative thresholds relating to the size, trends, and structure of species’ distributions and populations. However, data on these parameters are sparse and uncertain for many species and unavailable for others, potentially leading to their misclassification or classification as data deficient. We devised an approach that combines data on land-cover change, species-specific habitat preferences, population abundance, and dispersal distance to estimate key parameters (extent of occurrence, maximum area of occupancy, population size and trend, and degree of fragmentation) and hence predict IUCN Red List categories for species. We applied our approach to nonpelagic birds and terrestrial mammals globally (∼15,000 species). The predicted categories were fairly consistent with published IUCN Red List assessments, but more optimistic overall. We predicted 4.2% of species (467 birds and 143 mammals) to be more threatened than currently assessed and 20.2% of data deficient species (10 birds and 114 mammals) to be at risk of extinction. Incorporating the habitat fragmentation subcriterion reduced these predictions 1.5–2.3% and 6.4–14.9% (depending on the quantitative definition of fragmentation) for threatened and data deficient species, respectively, highlighting the need for improved guidance for IUCN Red List assessors on the application of this aspect of the IUCN Red List criteria. Our approach complements traditional methods of estimating parameters for IUCN Red List assessments. Furthermore, it readily provides an early-warning system to identify species potentially warranting changes in their extinction-risk category based on periodic updates of land-cover information. Given our method relies on optimistic assumptions about species distribution and abundance, all species predicted to be more at risk than currently evaluated should be prioritized for reassessment. 相似文献
39.
Developments in CRISPR-based gene-editing technologies have generated a growing number of proposals to edit genes in wildlife to meet conservation goals. As these proposals have attracted greater attention, controversies have emerged among scientists and stakeholder groups over potential consequences and ethical implications of gene editing. Responsible governance cannot occur without consulting broader publics, yet little effort has been made to systematically assess public understandings and beliefs in relation to this new area of applied genetic engineering. We analyzed data from a survey of U.S. adults (n = 1600), collected by YouGov, and that examined respondents’ concerns about gene editing in animal and plant wildlife and how those concerns are shaped by cultural dispositions toward science and beliefs about the appropriateness of intervening in nature at the genetic level. On average, respondents perceived more risk than benefit in using these tools. Over 70% agreed that gene editing in wildlife could be “easily used for the wrong purposes.” When evaluating the moral acceptability of gene editing in wildlife, respondents evaluated applications to improve survival in endangered wildlife as more morally acceptable than applications to decrease abundance in a population or eliminate a population. Belief in the authority of scientific knowledge was positively related to favorable views of the benefits, risks, and moral acceptability of editing genes in wildlife. The belief that editing genes in wildlife inappropriately intervenes in nature predicted relatively more concern about risks and moral acceptability and skepticism about benefits. Given high levels of concern and skepticism about gene editing in wildlife for conservation among the U.S. public, a take-it-slow approach to making decisions about when or whether to use these tools is advisable. Early opinions, including those uncovered in this study, are likely to be provisional. Thus, consulting the public should be an ongoing process. 相似文献
40.
Frank Hawkins;Craig R. Beatty;Thomas M. Brooks;Rebekah Church;Wendy Elliott;Edit Kiss;Nicholas B. W. Macfarlane;Juliette Pugliesi;Aafke M. Schipper;Maria Walsh; 《Conservation biology》2024,38(2):e14183
Ensuring that companies can assess and manage their impacts on biodiversity will be crucial to solving the current biodiversity crisis, and regulatory and public pressure to disclose these impacts is increasing. Top-down intactness metrics (e.g., Mean Species Abundance) can be valuable for generating high-level or first-tier assessments of impact risk but do not provide sufficient precision or guidance for companies, regulators, or third-party assessors. New metrics based on bottom-up assessments of biodiversity (e.g., the Species Threat Abatement and Restoration metric) can accommodate spatial variation of biodiversity and provide more specific guidance for actions to avoid, reduce, remediate, and compensate for impacts and to identify positive opportunities. 相似文献