No net loss for people and biodiversity

Governments, businesses, and lenders worldwide are adopting an objective of no net loss (NNL) of biodiversity that is often partly achieved through biodiversity offsetting within a hierarchy of mitigation actions. Offsets aim to balance residual losses of biodiversity caused by development in one location with commensurate gains at another. Although ecological challenges to achieve NNL are debated, the associated gains and losses for local stakeholders have received less attention. International best practice calls for offsets to make people no worse off than before implementation of the project, but there is a lack of clarity concerning how to achieve this with regard to people's use and nonuse values for biodiversity, especially given the inevitable trade-offs when compensating biodiversity losses with gains elsewhere. This is particularly challenging for countries where poor people depend on natural resources. Badly planned offsets can exacerbate poverty, and development and offset impacts can vary across spatial-temporal scales and by location, gender, and livelihood. We conceptualize the no-worse-off principle in the context of NNL of biodiversity, by exploring for whom and how the principle can be achieved. Changes in the spatial and temporal distribution of biodiversity-related social impacts of a development and its associated offset can lead to social inequity and negatively impact people's well-being. The level of aggregation (regional, village, interest group, household, and individual) at which these social impacts are measured and balanced can again exacerbate inequity in a system. We propose that a determination that people are no worse off, and preferably better off, after a development and biodiversity offset project than they were before the project should be based on the perceptions of project-affected people (assessed at an appropriate level of aggregation); that their well-being associated with biodiversity losses and gains should be at least as good as it was before the project; and that this level of well-being should be maintained throughout the project life cycle. Employing this principle could help ensure people are no worse off as a result of interventions to achieve biodiversity NNL.     

Effects of uncertainty and variability on population declines and IUCN Red List classifications

The International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Red List Categories and Criteria is a quantitative framework for classifying species according to extinction risk. Population models may be used to estimate extinction risk or population declines. Uncertainty and variability arise in threat classifications through measurement and process error in empirical data and uncertainty in the models used to estimate extinction risk and population declines. Furthermore, species traits are known to affect extinction risk. We investigated the effects of measurement and process error, model type, population growth rate, and age at first reproduction on the reliability of risk classifications based on projected population declines on IUCN Red List classifications. We used an age‐structured population model to simulate true population trajectories with different growth rates, reproductive ages and levels of variation, and subjected them to measurement error. We evaluated the ability of scalar and matrix models parameterized with these simulated time series to accurately capture the IUCN Red List classification generated with true population declines. Under all levels of measurement error tested and low process error, classifications were reasonably accurate; scalar and matrix models yielded roughly the same rate of misclassifications, but the distribution of errors differed; matrix models led to greater overestimation of extinction risk than underestimations; process error tended to contribute to misclassifications to a greater extent than measurement error; and more misclassifications occurred for fast, rather than slow, life histories. These results indicate that classifications of highly threatened taxa (i.e., taxa with low growth rates) under criterion A are more likely to be reliable than for less threatened taxa when assessed with population models. Greater scrutiny needs to be placed on data used to parameterize population models for species with high growth rates, particularly when available evidence indicates a potential transition to higher risk categories.     

Critical factors for the recovery of marine mammals

{en} Over the past decades, much research has focused on understanding the critical factors for marine extinctions with the aim of preventing further species losses in the oceans. Although conservation and management strategies are enabling several species and populations to recover, others remain at low abundance levels or continue to decline. To understand these discrepancies, we used a published database on abundance trends of 137 populations of marine mammals worldwide and compiled data on 28 potentially critical factors for recovery. We then applied random forests and additive mixed models to determine which intrinsic and extrinsic factors are critical for the recovery of marine mammals. A mix of life‐history characteristics, ecological traits, phylogenetic relatedness, population size, geographic range, human impacts, and management efforts explained why populations recovered or not. Consistently, species with lower age at maturity and intermediate habitat area were more likely to recover, which is consistent with life‐history and ecological theory. Body size, trophic level, social interactions, dominant habitat, ocean basin, and habitat disturbance also explained some differences in recovery patterns. Overall, a variety of intrinsic and extrinsic factors were important for species’ recovery, pointing to cumulative effects. Our results provide insight for improving conservation and management strategies to enhance recoveries in the future.     

Practical Science Communication Strategies for Graduate Students

Development of skills in science communication is a well‐acknowledged gap in graduate training, but the constraints that accompany research (limited time, resources, and knowledge of opportunities) make it challenging to acquire these proficiencies. Furthermore, advisors and institutions may find it difficult to support graduate students adequately in these efforts. The result is fewer career and societal benefits because students have not learned to communicate research effectively beyond their scientific peers. To help overcome these hurdles, we developed a practical approach to incorporating broad science communication into any graduate‐school time line. The approach consists of a portfolio approach that organizes outreach activities along a time line of planned graduate studies. To help design the portfolio, we mapped available science communication tools according to 5 core skills essential to most scientific careers: writing, public speaking, leadership, project management, and teaching. This helps graduate students consider the diversity of communication tools based on their desired skills, time constraints, barriers to entry, target audiences, and personal and societal communication goals. By designing a portfolio with an advisor's input, guidance, and approval, graduate students can gauge how much outreach is appropriate given their other commitments to teaching, research, and classes. The student benefits from the advisors’ experience and mentorship, promotes the group's research, and establishes a track record of engagement. When graduate student participation in science communication is discussed, it is often recommended that institutions offer or require more training in communication, project management, and leadership. We suggest that graduate students can also adopt a do‐it‐yourself approach that includes determining students’ own outreach objectives and time constraints and communicating these with their advisor. By doing so we hope students will help create a new culture of science communication in graduate student education. Estrategias Prácticas para la Comunicación Científica para Estudiantes de Posgrado     

Integrating Biological and Social Values When Prioritizing Places for Biodiversity Conservation

The consideration of information on social values in conjunction with biological data is critical for achieving both socially acceptable and scientifically defensible conservation planning outcomes. However, the influence of social values on spatial conservation priorities has received limited attention and is poorly understood. We present an approach that incorporates quantitative data on social values for conservation and social preferences for development into spatial conservation planning. We undertook a public participation GIS survey to spatially represent social values and development preferences and used species distribution models for 7 threatened fauna species to represent biological values. These spatially explicit data were simultaneously included in the conservation planning software Zonation to examine how conservation priorities changed with the inclusion of social data. Integrating spatially explicit information about social values and development preferences with biological data produced prioritizations that differed spatially from the solution based on only biological data. However, the integrated solutions protected a similar proportion of the species’ distributions, indicating that Zonation effectively combined the biological and social data to produce socially feasible conservation solutions of approximately equivalent biological value. We were able to identify areas of the landscape where synergies and conflicts between different value sets are likely to occur. Identification of these synergies and conflicts will allow decision makers to target communication strategies to specific areas and ensure effective community engagement and positive conservation outcomes. Integración de Valores Biológicos y Sociales al Priorizar Sitios para la Conservación de la Biodiversidad     

Characterizing the trophy hunting debate on Twitter

Social media is an arena of debate for contentious political and social topics. One conservation topic debated online is the acceptability of trophy hunting, a debate that has implications for national and international policy. We used a mixed-methods approach (grounded theory and quantitative clustering) to identify themes in the trophy hunting debate on Twitter. We examined commonly co-occurring categories that describe people's stances on trophy hunting. We identified 12 categories and 4 preliminary archetypes opposing trophy hunting—activism, scientific, condemning, and objecting—whose opposition derived from different moral reasoning. Few tweets (22) in our sample of 500 supported trophy hunting, whereas 350 opposed it. The debate was hostile; 7% of tweets in our sample were categorized as abusive. Online debates can be unproductive, and our findings may be important for stakeholders wishing to effectively engage in the trophy hunting debate on Twitter. More generally, we contend that because social media is increasingly influential, it is important to formally contextualize public responses to contentious conservation topics in order to aid communication of conservation evidence and to integrate diverse public perspectives in conservation practice.