Projecting biodiversity benefits of conservation behavior-change programs

Biodiversity loss is driven by human behavior, but there is uncertainty about the effectiveness of behavior-change programs in delivering benefits to biodiversity. To demonstrate their value, the biodiversity benefits and cost-effectiveness of behavior changes that directly or indirectly affect biodiversity need to be quantified. We adapted a structured decision-making prioritization tool to determine the potential biodiversity benefits of behavior changes. As a case study, we examined two hypothetical behavior-change programs––wildlife gardening and cat containment––by asking experts to consider the behaviors associated with these programs that directly and indirectly affect biodiversity. We assessed benefits to southern brown bandicoot (Isoodon obesulus) and superb fairy-wren (Malurus cyaneus) by eliciting from experts estimates of the probability of each species persisting in the landscape given a range of behavior-change scenarios in which uptake of the behaviors varied. We then compared these estimates to a business-as-usual scenario to determine the relative biodiversity benefit and cost-effectiveness of each scenario. Experts projected that the behavior-change programs would benefit biodiversity and that benefits would rise with increasing uptake of the target behaviors. Biodiversity benefits were also predicted to accrue through indirect behaviors, although experts disagreed about the magnitude of additional benefit provided. Scenarios that combined the two behavior-change programs were estimated to provide the greatest benefits to species and be most cost-effective. Our method could be used in other contexts and potentially at different scales and advances the use of prioritization tools to guide conservation behavior-change programs.     

A mixed methodology for evaluating use of evidence in conservation planning

Conservation practitioners widely recognize the importance of making decisions based on the best available evidence. However, the effectiveness of evidence use in conservation planning is rarely assessed, which limits opportunities to improve evidence-based practice. We devised a mixed methodology for empirically evaluating use of evidence that applies social science tools to systematically appraise what kinds of evidence are used in conservation planning, to what effect, and under what limitations. We applied our approach in a case study of the Nature Conservancy of Canada (NCC), a leading land conservation organization. We conducted qualitative and quantitative analyses of 65 NCC planning documents (n = 13 in-depth) to identify patterns in evidence use, and surveyed 35 conservation planners to examine experiences of and barriers to using evidence. Although claims in plans contained a wide range of evidence types, 26% of claims were not referenced or associated with an identifiable source. Lack of evidence use was particularly apparent in claims associated with direct threats, particularly those identified as low (71% coded as insufficient or lacking evidence) or medium (45%) threats. Survey participants described relying heavily on practitioner experience and highlighted capacity limitations and disciplinary gaps in expertise among planning teams as barriers to using evidence effectively. We found that although time-intensive, this approach yielded actionable recommendations for improving evidence use in NCC conservation plans. Similar mixed-method assessments may streamline the process by including interviews and refining the document analysis frames to target issues or sections of concern. We suggest our method provides an accessible and robust point of departure for conservation practitioners to evaluate whether the use of conservation planning reflects in-house standards and more broadly recognized best practices.     

Poaching Risks in Community‐Based Natural Resource Management

Poaching can disrupt wildlife‐management efforts in community‐based natural resource management systems. Monitoring, estimating, and acquiring data on poaching is difficult. We used local‐stakeholder knowledge and poaching records to rank and map the risk of poaching incidents in 2 areas where natural resources are managed by community members in Caprivi, Namibia. We mapped local stakeholder perceptions of the risk of poaching, risk of wildlife damage to livelihoods, and wildlife distribution and compared these maps with spatially explicit records of poaching events. Recorded poaching events and stakeholder perceptions of where poaching occurred were not spatially correlated. However, the locations of documented poaching events were spatially correlated with areas that stakeholders perceived wildlife as a threat to their livelihoods. This result suggests poaching occurred in response to wildlife damage occurred. Local stakeholders thought that wildlife populations were at high risk of being poached and that poaching occurred where there was abundant wildlife. These findings suggest stakeholders were concerned about wildlife resources in their community and indicate a need for integrated and continued monitoring of poaching activities and further interventions at the wildlife‐agricultural interface. Involving stakeholders in the assessment of poaching risks promotes their participation in local conservation efforts, a central tenet of community‐based management. We considered stakeholders poaching informants, rather than suspects, and our technique was spatially explicit. Different strategies to reduce poaching are likely needed in different areas. For example, interventions that reduce human‐wildlife conflict may be required in residential areas, and increased and targeted patrolling may be required in more remote areas. Stakeholder‐generated maps of human‐wildlife interactions may be a valuable enforcement and intervention support tool. Riesgos de Cacería Furtiva en el Manejo de Recursos Naturales Basado en Comunidades     

Effectiveness of biodiversity-conservation marketing

Conservation marketing holds potential as a means to engage audiences with biodiversity conservation and help to address the human dimensions of biodiversity loss. Empirical evaluations of conservation marketing indicatives are growing, so we reviewed the literature on this research to inform future directions in the field. We used a systematic search strategy to identify studies that evaluated the effects of conservation marketing interventions (techniques and campaigns) on psychosocial outcomes, categorized as cognitive, affective, or behavioral. Six academic databases (Business Source Complete, Communication & Mass Media Complete, Greenfile, Proquest, Scopus, and Web of Science Core Collections), 3 gray-literature databases (BASE, Zenodo, and Google Scholar), and 2 websites (Rare and WildAid) were searched. Articles were subjected to critical appraisal to assess their methodological quality, and data were extracted from each article and analyzed using narrative synthesis. Altogether 28 studies from 26 articles were included in the review. Twenty-five studies were conducted from 2014 through 2016. Methodological quality of most studies was weak (n = 16, 57%) (moderate quality n = 8, 29%; high quality n = 4, 14%). The proportion of studies that evaluated a conservation-marketing technique (e.g., variants of texts, images, or videos) versus a campaign (e.g., community-based campaigns targeting locally relevant issues, such as unsustainable palm oil agriculture, light pollution, or wood fuel fire use) was relatively balanced. Although many studies reported statistically significant results in the intended direction, the utility of findings was limited by persistent methodological limitations, such as a lack of a comparator group, use of non-validated assessment tools, and a focus on self-reported data and subjective outcomes. Conservation marketing is clearly a nascent field of scientific enquiry that warrants further, high-quality research investigations.     

Developing shared qualitative models for complex systems

Understanding complex systems is essential to ensure their conservation and effective management. Models commonly support understanding of complex ecological systems and, by extension, their conservation. Modeling, however, is largely a social process constrained by individuals’ mental models (i.e., a small-scale internal model of how a part of the world works based on knowledge, experience, values, beliefs, and assumptions) and system complexity. To account for both system complexity and the diversity of knowledge of complex systems, we devised a novel way to develop a shared qualitative complex system model. We disaggregated a system (carbonate coral reefs) into smaller subsystem modules that each represented a functioning unit, about which an individual is likely to have more comprehensive knowledge. This modular approach allowed us to elicit an individual mental model of a defined subsystem for which the individuals had a higher level of confidence in their knowledge of the relationships between variables. The challenge then was to bring these subsystem models together to form a complete, shared model of the entire system, which we attempted through 4 phases: develop the system framework and subsystem modules; develop the individual mental model elicitation methods; elicit the mental models; and identify and isolate differences for exploration and identify similarities to cocreate a shared qualitative model. The shared qualitative model provides opportunities to develop a quantitative model to understand and predict complex system change.     

Empirical Trials of Plant Field Guides

We designed 3 image‐based field guides to tropical forest plant species in Ghana, Grenada, and Cameroon and tested them with 1095 local residents and 20 botanists in the United Kingdom. We compared users’ identification accuracy with different image formats, including drawings, specimen photos, living plant photos, and paintings. We compared users’ accuracy with the guides to their accuracy with only their prior knowledge of the flora. We asked respondents to score each format for usability, beauty, and how much they would pay for it. Prior knowledge of plant names was generally low (<22%). With a few exceptions, identification accuracy did not differ significantly among image formats. In Cameroon, users identifying sterile Cola species achieved 46–56% accuracy across formats; identification was most accurate with living plant photos. Botanists in the United Kingdom accurately identified 82–93% of the same Cameroonian species; identification was most accurate with specimens. In Grenada, users accurately identified 74–82% of plants; drawings yielded significantly less accurate identifications than paintings and photos of living plants. In Ghana, users accurately identified 85% of plants. Digital color photos of living plants ranked high for beauty, usability, and what users would pay. Black and white drawings ranked low. Our results show the potential and limitations of the use of field guides and nonspecialists to identify plants, for example, in conservation applications. We recommend authors of plant field guides use the cheapest or easiest illustration format because image type had limited bearing on accuracy; match the type of illustration to the most likely use of the guide for slight improvements in accuracy; avoid black and white formats unless the audience is experienced at interpreting illustrations or keeping costs low is imperative; discourage false‐positive identifications, which were common; and encourage users to ask an expert or use a herbarium for groups that are difficult to identify. Pruebas Empíricas de Guías de Campo de Plantas Hawthorne, Cable & Marshall     

The role of digital data entry in participatory environmental monitoring

Many argue that monitoring conducted exclusively by scientists is insufficient to address ongoing environmental challenges. One solution entails the use of mobile digital devices in participatory monitoring (PM) programs. But how digital data entry affects programs with varying levels of stakeholder participation, from nonscientists collecting field data to nonscientists administering every step of a monitoring program, remains unclear. We reviewed the successes, in terms of management interventions and sustainability, of 107 monitoring programs described in the literature (hereafter programs) and compared these with case studies from our PM experiences in Australia, Canada, Ethiopia, Ghana, Greenland, and Vietnam (hereafter cases). Our literature review showed that participatory programs were less likely to use digital devices, and 2 of our 3 more participatory cases were also slow to adopt digital data entry. Programs that were participatory and used digital devices were more likely to report management actions, which was consistent with cases in Ethiopia, Greenland, and Australia. Programs engaging volunteers were more frequently reported as ongoing, but those involving digital data entry were less often sustained when data collectors were volunteers. For the Vietnamese and Canadian cases, sustainability was undermined by a mismatch in stakeholder objectives. In the Ghanaian case, complex field protocols diminished monitoring sustainability. Innovative technologies attract interest, but the foundation of effective participatory adaptive monitoring depends more on collaboratively defined questions, objectives, conceptual models, and monitoring approaches. When this foundation is built through effective partnerships, digital data entry can enable the collection of more data of higher quality. Without this foundation, or when implemented ineffectively or unnecessarily, digital data entry can be an additional expense that distracts from core monitoring objectives and undermines project sustainability. The appropriate role of digital data entry in PM likely depends more on the context in which it is used and less on the technology itself.     

Scientists as Stakeholders in Conservation of Hydrothermal Vents

Abstract: Hydrothermal vents are deep‐sea ecosystems that are almost exclusively known and explored by scientists rather than the general public. Continuing scientific discoveries arising from study of hydrothermal vents are concommitant with the increased number of scientific cruises visiting and sampling vent ecosystems. Through a bibliometric analysis, we assessed the scientific value of hydrothermal vents relative to two of the most well‐studied marine ecosystems, coral reefs and seagrass beds. Scientific literature on hydrothermal vents is abundant, of high impact, international, and interdisciplinary and is comparable in these regards with literature on coral reefs and seagrass beds. Scientists may affect hydrothermal vents because their activities are intense and spatially and temporally concentrated in these small systems. The potential for undesirable effects from scientific enterprise motivated the creation of a code of conduct for environmentally and scientifically benign use of hydrothermal vents for research. We surveyed scientists worldwide engaged in deep‐sea research and found that scientists were aware of the code of conduct and thought it was relevant to conservation, but they did not feel informed or confident about the respect other researchers have for the code. Although this code may serve as a reminder of scientists’ environmental responsibilities, conservation of particular vents (e.g., closures to human activity, specific human management) may effectively ensure sustainable use of vent ecosystems for all stakeholders.     

Rank aggregation of local expert knowledge for conservation planning of the critically endangered saola

There has been much recent interest in using local knowledge and expert opinion for conservation planning, particularly for hard‐to‐detect species. Although it is possible to ask for direct estimation of quantities such as population size, relative abundance is easier to estimate. However, an expert's knowledge is often geographically restricted relative to the area of interest. Combining (or aggregating) experts’ assessments of relative abundance is difficult when each expert only knows a part of the area of interest. We used Google's PageRank algorithm to aggregate ranked abundance scores elicited from local experts through a rapid rural‐appraisal method. We applied this technique to conservation planning for the saola (Pseudoryx nghetinhensis), a poorly known bovid. Near a priority landscape for the species, composed of 3 contiguous protected areas, we asked groups of local people to indicate relative abundances of saola and other species by placing beans on community maps. For each village, we used this information to rank areas within the knowledge area of that village for saola abundance. We used simulations to compare alternative methods to aggregate the rankings from the different villages. The best‐performing method was then used to produce a single map of relative abundance across the entire landscape, an area larger than that known to any one village. This map has informed prioritization of surveys and conservation action in the continued absence of direct information about the saola.