Evaluation of Local Ecological Knowledge as a Method for Collecting Extensive Data on Animal Abundance

Abstract:  The use of local ecological knowledge (LEK) has been advocated for biodiversity monitoring and management. To date, however, it has been underused in studying wild populations of animals and, particularly, in obtaining quantitative abundance estimates. We evaluated LEK as a tool for collecting extensive data on local animal abundance and population trends. We interviewed shepherds in southeastern Spain, asking them to estimate the local abundance of the terrestrial tortoise Testudo graeca . We quantified reliability of abundance estimates derived from interviews by comparing them with those obtained from standard field-sampling protocols (distance sampling). We also explored the complementarity of these 2 approaches. LEK provided high-quality and low-cost information about both distribution and abundance of T. graeca . Interviews with shepherds yielded abundance estimates in a much wider range than linear transects, which only detected the species in the upper two-thirds of its abundance range. Abundance estimates from both methodologies showed a close relationship. Analysis of confidence intervals indicated local knowledge could be used to estimate mean local abundances and to detect mean population trends. A cost analysis determined that the information derived from LEK was 100 times cheaper than that obtained through linear-transect surveys. Our results should further the use of LEK as a standard tool for sampling the quantitative abundance of a great variety of taxa, particularly when population densities are low and traditional sampling methods are expensive or difficult to implement.     

Optimal Control Models and Elicitation of Attitudes towards Climate Damages

This paper examines the consequences of various attitudes towards climate damages through a family of stochastic optimal control models (RESPONSE): cost-efficiency for a given temperature ceiling; cost-benefit analysis with a pure preference for current climate regime and full cost-benefit analysis. The choice of a given proxy of climate change risks is actually more than a technical option. It is essentially motivated by the degree of distrust regarding the legitimacy of an assessment of climate damages and the possibility of providing in due time reliable and non controversial estimates. Our results demonstrate that (a) for early decades abatement, the difference between various decision-making frameworks appears to matter less than the difference between stochastic and non stochastic approach given the cascade of uncertainty from emissions to damages; (b) in a stochastic approach, the possibility of non-catastrophic singularities in the damage function is sufficient to significantly increase earlier optimal abatements; (c) a window of opportunity for action exists up to 2040: abatements further delayed may induce significant regret in case of bad news about climate response or singularities in damages.