Developing an interdisciplinary and cross‐sectoral community of practice in the domain of forests and livelihoods

Although significant resources are being spent researching and fostering the relationship between forests and livelihoods to promote mutually beneficial outcomes, critical gaps in understanding persist. A core reason for such gaps is that researchers, practitioners, and policy makers lack the structured space to interact and collaborate, which is essential for effective, interdisciplinary research, practice, and evaluation. Thus, scientific findings, policy recommendations, and measured outcomes have not always been synthesized into deep, systemic understanding; learning from practice and implementation does not easily find its way into scientific analyses, and science often fails to influence policy. Communities of practice (CofPs) are dynamic sociocultural systems that bring people together to share and create knowledge around a common topic of interest. They offer participants a space and structure within which to develop new, systemic approaches to multidimensional problems on a common theme. Uniquely informed by a systems‐thinking perspective and drawing from the scientific and gray literatures and in‐depth interviews with representatives of established CofPs in the natural resource management and development domain, we argue that a well‐designed and adequately funded CofP can facilitate interdisciplinary and cross‐sectoral relationships and knowledge exchange. Well‐designed CofPs integrate a set of core features and processes to enhance individual, collective, and domain outcomes; they set out an initial but evolving purpose, encourage diverse leadership, and promote collective‐identity development. Funding facilitates effective communication strategies (e.g., in person meetings). We urge our colleagues across sectors and disciplines to take advantage of CofPs to advance the domain of forests and livelihoods.     

Defining the Impact of Non‐Native Species

Non‐native species cause changes in the ecosystems to which they are introduced. These changes, or some of them, are usually termed impacts; they can be manifold and potentially damaging to ecosystems and biodiversity. However, the impacts of most non‐native species are poorly understood, and a synthesis of available information is being hindered because authors often do not clearly define impact. We argue that explicitly defining the impact of non‐native species will promote progress toward a better understanding of the implications of changes to biodiversity and ecosystems caused by non‐native species; help disentangle which aspects of scientific debates about non‐native species are due to disparate definitions and which represent true scientific discord; and improve communication between scientists from different research disciplines and between scientists, managers, and policy makers. For these reasons and based on examples from the literature, we devised seven key questions that fall into 4 categories: directionality, classification and measurement, ecological or socio‐economic changes, and scale. These questions should help in formulating clear and practical definitions of impact to suit specific scientific, stakeholder, or legislative contexts. Definiendo el Impacto de las Especies No‐Nativas     

Plant blindness and the implications for plant conservation

Plant conservation initiatives lag behind and receive considerably less funding than animal conservation projects. We explored a potential reason for this bias: a tendency among humans to neither notice nor value plants in the environment. Experimental research and surveys have demonstrated higher preference for, superior recall of, and better visual detection of animals compared with plants. This bias has been attributed to perceptual factors such as lack of motion by plants and the tendency of plants to visually blend together but also to cultural factors such as a greater focus on animals in formal biological education. In contrast, ethnographic research reveals that many social groups have strong bonds with plants, including nonhierarchical kinship relationships. We argue that plant blindness is common, but not inevitable. If immersed in a plant‐affiliated culture, the individual will experience language and practices that enhance capacity to detect, recall, and value plants, something less likely to occur in zoocentric societies. Therefore, conservation programs can contribute to reducing this bias. We considered strategies that might reduce this bias and encourage plant conservation behavior. Psychological research demonstrates that people are more likely to support conservation of species that have human‐like characteristics and that support for conservation can be increased by encouraging people to practice empathy and anthropomorphism of nonhuman species. We argue that support for plant conservation may be garnered through strategies that promote identification and empathy with plants.     

Applying the zoo model to conservation of threatened exceptional plant species

Maintaining a living plant collection is the most common method of ex situ conservation for plant species that cannot be seed banked (i.e., exceptional species). Viability of living collections, and their value for future conservation efforts, can be limited without coordinated efforts to track and manage individuals across institutions. Using a pedigree-focused approach, the zoological community has established an inter-institutional infrastructure to support long-term viability of captive animal populations. We assessed the ability of this coordinated metacollection infrastructure to support the conservation of 4 plant species curated in living collections at multiple botanic gardens around the world. Limitations in current practices include the inability to compile, share, and analyze plant collections data at the individual level, as well as difficulty in tracking original provenance of ex situ material. The coordinated metacollection framework used by zoos can be adopted by the botanical community to improve conservation outcomes by minimizing the loss of genetic diversity in collections. We suggest actions to improve ex situ conservation of exceptional plant species, including developing a central database to aggregate data and track unique individuals of priority threatened species among institutions and adapting a pedigree-based population management tool that incorporates life-history aspects unique to plants. If approached collaboratively across regional, national, and global scales, these actions could transform ex situ conservation of threatened plant species.     

Why social values cannot be changed for the sake of conservation

The hope for creating widespread change in social values has endured among conservation professionals since early calls by Aldo Leopold for a “land ethic.” However, there has been little serious attention in conservation to the fields of investigation that address values, how they are formed, and how they change. We introduce a social–ecological systems conceptual approach in which values are seen not only as motivational goals people hold but also as ideas that are deeply embedded in society's material culture, collective behaviors, traditions, and institutions. Values define and bind groups, organizations, and societies; serve an adaptive role; and are typically stable across generations. When abrupt value changes occur, they are in response to substantial alterations in the social–ecological context. Such changes build on prior value structures and do not result in complete replacement. Given this understanding of values, we conclude that deliberate efforts to orchestrate value shifts for conservation are unlikely to be effective. Instead, there is an urgent need for research on values with a multilevel and dynamic view that can inform innovative conservation strategies for working within existing value structures. New directions facilitated by a systems approach will enhance understanding of the role values play in shaping conservation challenges and improve management of the human component of conservation.     

Global Effects of Local Human Population Density and Distance to Markets on the Condition of Coral Reef Fisheries

Coral reef fisheries support the livelihoods of millions of people but have been severely and negatively affected by anthropogenic activities. We conducted a systematic review of published data on the biomass of coral reef fishes to explore how the condition of reef fisheries is related to the density of local human populations, proximity of the reef to markets, and key environmental variables (including broad geomorphologic reef type, reef area, and net productivity). When only population density and environmental covariates were considered, high variability in fisheries conditions at low human population densities resulted in relatively weak explanatory models. The presence or absence of human settlements, habitat type, and distance to fish markets provided a much stronger explanatory model for the condition of reef fisheries. Fish biomass remained relatively low within 14 km of markets, then biomass increased exponentially as distance from reefs to markets increased. Our results suggest the need for an increased science and policy focus on markets as both a key driver of the condition of reef fisheries and a potential source of solutions. Efectos Globales de la Densidad de Población Humana Local y la Distancia a los Mercados sobre la Condición de Pesquerías en Arrecifes de Coral     

The Role of Prices in Conserving Critical Natural Capital

Abstract: Until recent decades, economic decision makers have largely ignored the nonmarket benefits provided by nature, resulting in unprecedented threats to ecological life‐support functions. The economic challenge today is to decide how much ecosystem structure can be converted to economic production and how much must be conserved to provide essential ecosystem services. Many economists and a growing number of life scientists hope to address this challenge by estimating the marginal value of environmental benefits and then using this information to make economic decisions. I assessed this approach first by examining the role and effectiveness of the price mechanism in a well‐functioning market economy, second by identifying the issues that prevent markets from pricing many ecological benefits, and third by focusing on problems inherent to valuing services generated by complex and poorly understood ecosystems subject to irreversible change. I then focus on critical natural capital (CNC), which generates benefits that are essential to human welfare and have few if any substitutes. When imminent ecological thresholds threaten CNC, conservation is essential and marginal valuation becomes inappropriate. Once conservation needs have been met, remaining ecosystem structure is potentially available for economic production. Demand for this available supply will determine prices. In other words, conservation needs should be price determining, not price determined. Conservation science must help identify CNC and the quantity and quality of ecosystem structure required to ensure its sustained provision.     

Key considerations and challenges in the application of social-network research for environmental decision making

Attempts to better understand the social context in which conservation and environmental decisions are made has led to increased interest in human social networks. To improve the use of social-network analysis in conservation, we reviewed recent studies in the literature in which such methods were applied. In our review, we looked for problems in research design and analysis that limit the utility of network analysis. Nineteen of 55 articles published from January 2016 to June 2019 exhibited at least 1 of the following problems: application of analytical methods inadequate or sensitive to incomplete network data; application of statistical approaches that ignore dependency in the network; or lack of connection between the theoretical base, research question, and choice of analytical techniques. By drawing attention to these specific areas of concern and highlighting research frontiers and challenges, including causality, network dynamics, and new approaches, we responded to calls for increasing the rigorous application of social science in conservation.     

Latent Extinction and Invasion Risk of Crayfishes in the Southeastern United States

Abstract: Crayfishes are both a highly imperiled invertebrate group as well as one that has produced many invasive species, which have negatively affected freshwater ecosystems throughout the world. We performed a trait analysis for 77 crayfishes from the southeastern United States in an attempt to understand which biological and ecological traits make these species prone to imperilment or invasion, and to predict which species may face extinction or become invasive in the future. We evaluated biological and ecological traits with principal coordinate analysis and classification trees. Invasive and imperiled crayfishes occupied different positions in multivariate trait space, although crayfishes invasive at different scales (extraregional vs. extralimital) were also distinct. Extraregional crayfishes (large, high fecundity, habitat generalists) were most distinct from imperiled crayfishes (small, low fecundity, habitat specialists), thus supporting the “two sides of the same coin” hypothesis. Correct classification rates for assignment of crayfishes as invasive or imperiled were high (70–80%), even when excluding the highly predictive but potentially confounding trait of range size (75–90%). We identified a number of species that, although not currently listed as imperiled or found outside their native range, possess many of the life‐history and ecological traits characteristic of currently invasive or imperiled taxa. Such species exhibit a high latent risk of extinction or invasion and consequently should be the focus of proactive conservation or management strategies. Our results illustrate the utility of trait‐based approaches for taxonomic groups such as invertebrates, for which detailed species‐specific data are rare and conservation resources are chronically limited.     

Effectiveness of terrestrial protected areas for conservation of lake fish communities

Freshwater protected areas are rare even though freshwater ecosystems are among the most imperiled in the world. Conservation actions within terrestrial protected areas (TPAs) such as development or resource extraction regulations may spill over to benefit freshwater ecosystems within their boundaries. Using data from 175 lakes across Ontario, Canada, we compared common indicators of fish‐assemblage status (i.e., species richness, Shannon diversity index, catch per unit effort, and normalized‐length size spectrum slopes) to evaluate whether TPAs benefit lake fish assemblages. Nearest neighbor cluster analysis was used to generate pairs of lakes: inside versus outside, inside versus bordering, and bordering versus outside TPAs based on lake characteristics. The diversity and abundance indicators did not differ significantly across comparisons, but normalized‐length size spectrum slopes (NLSS) were significantly steeper in lakes outside parks. The latter indicated assemblage differences (greater abundances of small‐bodied species) and less‐efficient energy transfer through the trophic levels of assemblages outside parks. Although not significantly different, pollution‐ and turbidity‐tolerant species were more abundant outside parks, whereas 3 of the 4 pollution‐intolerant species were more abundant within parks. Twenty‐one percent of the difference in slopes was related to higher total dissolved solids concentrations and angling pressure. Our results support the hypothesis that TPAs benefit lake fish assemblages and suggest that NLSS slopes are informative indicators for aquatic protected area evaluations because they represent compositional and functional aspects of communities.