Increased efforts are required to prevent further losses to terrestrial biodiversity and the ecosystem services that it provides
. Ambitious targets have been proposed, such as reversing the ...declining trends in biodiversity
; however, just feeding the growing human population will make this a challenge
. Here we use an ensemble of land-use and biodiversity models to assess whether-and how-humanity can reverse the declines in terrestrial biodiversity caused by habitat conversion, which is a major threat to biodiversity
. We show that immediate efforts, consistent with the broader sustainability agenda but of unprecedented ambition and coordination, could enable the provision of food for the growing human population while reversing the global terrestrial biodiversity trends caused by habitat conversion. If we decide to increase the extent of land under conservation management, restore degraded land and generalize landscape-level conservation planning, biodiversity trends from habitat conversion could become positive by the mid-twenty-first century on average across models (confidence interval, 2042-2061), but this was not the case for all models. Food prices could increase and, on average across models, almost half (confidence interval, 34-50%) of the future biodiversity losses could not be avoided. However, additionally tackling the drivers of land-use change could avoid conflict with affordable food provision and reduces the environmental effects of the food-provision system. Through further sustainable intensification and trade, reduced food waste and more plant-based human diets, more than two thirds of future biodiversity losses are avoided and the biodiversity trends from habitat conversion are reversed by 2050 for almost all of the models. Although limiting further loss will remain challenging in several biodiversity-rich regions, and other threats-such as climate change-must be addressed to truly reverse the declines in biodiversity, our results show that ambitious conservation efforts and food system transformation are central to an effective post-2020 biodiversity strategy.
Despite substantial growth in the field of conservation planning, the speed and success with which conservation plans are converted into conservation action remains limited. This gap between science ...and action extends beyond conservation planning into many other applied sciences and has been linked to complexity of current societal problems, compartmentalization of knowledge and management sectors, and limited collaboration between scientists and decision makers. Transdisciplinary approaches have been proposed as a possible way to address these challenges and to bridge the gap between science and action. These approaches move beyond the bridging of disciplines to an approach in which science becomes a social process resolving problems through the participation and mutual learning of stakeholders. We explored the principles of transdisciplinarity, in light of our experiences as conservation-planning researchers working in South Africa, to better understand what is required to make conservation planning transdisciplinary and therefore more effective. Using the transdisciplinary hierarchy of knowledge (empirical, pragmatic, normative, and purposive), we found that conservation planning has succeeded in integrating many empirical disciplines into the pragmatic stakeholder-engaged process of strategy development and implementation. Nevertheless, challenges remain in engagement of the social sciences and in understanding the social context of implementation. Farther up this knowledge hierarchy, at the normative and purposive levels, we found that a lack of integrated land-use planning and policies (normative) and the dominant effect of national values (purposive) that prioritize growth and development limit the effectiveness and relevance of conservation plans. The transdisciplinary hierarchy of knowledge highlighted that we need to move beyond bridging the empirical and pragmatic disciplines into the complex normative world of laws, policies, and planning and become engaged in the purposive processes of decision making, behavior change, and value transfer. Although there are indications of progress in this direction, working at the normative and purposive levels requires time, leadership, resources, skills that are absent in conservation training and practice, and new forms of recognition in systems of scientific reward and funding.
After the grizzly Alagona, Peter S
2013., 20130528, 2013, 2013-05-28
eBook
Thoroughly researched and finely crafted, After the Grizzly traces the history of endangered species and habitat in California, from the time of the Gold Rush to the present. Peter S. Alagona shows ...how scientists and conservationists came to view the fates of endangered species as inextricable from ecological conditions and human activities in the places where those species lived. Focusing on the stories of four high-profile endangered species—the California condor, desert tortoise, Delta smelt, and San Joaquin kit fox—Alagona offers an absorbing account of how Americans developed a political system capable of producing and sustaining debates in which imperiled species serve as proxies for broader conflicts about the politics of place. The challenge for conservationists in the twenty-first century, this book claims, will be to redefine habitat conservation beyond protected wildlands to build more diverse and sustainable landscapes.
Area-based conservation is essential to safeguard nature’s diversity. In view of expanding human land use, increasing climate change and unmet conservation targets, area-based conservation requires ...efficiency and effectiveness more than ever. In this review, I identify and relate pressing challenges to promising opportunities for effective and efficient protected area governance and management, to enhance research, decision-making and capacity building in area-based conservation under uncertain future developments. I reveal that protected area management is particularly challenged by human land use, climate change, invasive species, and social, political and economic limitations. Protected area management often lacks the continuous availability of data on current states and trends of nature and threats. Biocultural conservation, climate-smart management and biosecurity approaches help to overcome challenges induced by human needs, climate change and invasive species, respectively. Economic valuation and shifts in funding priorities can boost protected area effectiveness and efficiency. In-situ monitoring techniques, remote sensing and open data infrastructures can fill data and information gaps for protected area planning and management. Moreover, adaptive management is an auspicious concept in the framework of systematic conservation planning to ensure the enduring effectiveness of protected areas despite unpredictable future developments. Post-2020 international biodiversity and sustainable development goals could be met earlier if protected areas were more effective. I consequently conclude with the need for a global information system that is to support area-based conservation by synthesizing challenges and opportunities for protected area management effectiveness and efficiency at the local to global level.
“Landscape approaches” seek to provide tools and concepts for allocating and managing land to achieve social, economic, and environmental objectives in areas where agriculture, mining, and other ...productive land uses compete with environmental and biodiversity goals. Here we synthesize the current consensus on landscape approaches. This is based on published literature and a consensus-building process to define good practice and is validated by a survey of practitioners. We find the landscape approach has been refined in response to increasing societal concerns about environment and development tradeoffs. Notably, there has been a shift from conservation-orientated perspectives toward increasing integration of poverty alleviation goals. We provide 10 summary principles to support implementation of a landscape approach as it is currently interpreted. These principles emphasize adaptive management, stakeholder involvement, and multiple objectives. Various constraints are recognized, with institutional and governance concerns identified as the most severe obstacles to implementation. We discuss how these principles differ from more traditional sectoral and project-based approaches. Although no panacea, we see few alternatives that are likely to address landscape challenges more effectively than an approach circumscribed by the principles outlined here.
An increasing number of applied disciplines are utilizing evidence-based frameworks to review and disseminate the effectiveness of management and policy interventions. The rationale is that increased ...accessibility of the best available evidence will provide a more efficient and less biased platform for decision making. We argue that there are significant benefits for conservation in using such a framework, but the scientific community needs to undertake and disseminate more systematic reviews before the full benefit can be realized. We devised a set of guidelines for undertaking formalized systematic review, based on a health services model. The guideline stages include planning and conducting a review, including protocol formation, search strategy, data inclusion, data extraction, and analysis. Review dissemination is addressed in terms of current developments and future plans for a Web-based open-access library. By the use of case studies we highlight critical modifications to guidelines for protocol formulation, data-quality assessment, data extraction, and data synthesis for conservation and environmental management. Ecological data presented significant but soluble challenges for the systematic review process, particularly in terms of the quantity, accessibility, and diverse quality of available data. In the field of conservation and environmental management there needs to be further engagement of scientists and practitioners to develop and take ownership of an evidence-based framework.
Recognizing that protected areas (PAs) are essential for effective biodiversity conservation action, the Convention on Biological Diversity established ambitious PA targets as part of the 2020 ...Strategic Plan for Biodiversity. Under the strategic goal to "improve the status of biodiversity by safeguarding ecosystems, species, and genetic diversity," Target 11 aims to put 17% of terrestrial and 10% of marine regions under PA status by 2020. Additionally and crucially, these areas are required to be of particular importance for biodiversity and ecosystem services, effectively and equitably managed, ecologically representative, and well-connected and to include "other effective area-based conservation measures" (OECMs). Whereas the area-based targets are explicit and measurable, the lack of guidance for what constitutes important and representative; effective; and OECMs is affecting how nations are implementing the target. There is a real risk that Target 11 may be achieved in terms of area while failing the overall strategic goal for which it is established because the areas are poorly located, inadequately managed, or based on unjustifiable inclusion of OECMs. We argue that the conservation science community can help establish ecologically sensible PA targets to help prioritize important biodiversity areas and achieve ecological representation; identify clear, comparable performance metrics of ecological effectiveness so progress toward these targets can be assessed; and identify metrics and report on the contribution OECMs make toward the target. By providing ecologically sensible targets and new performance metrics for measuring the effectiveness of both PAs and OECMs, the science community can actively ensure that the achievement of the required area in Target 11 is not simply an end in itself but generates genuine benefits for biodiversity. En reconocimiento de que las areas protegidas (APs) son esenciales para la acción efectiva de la conservación de la biodiversidad, la Convención Biológica sobre la Diversidad estableció objetivos ambiciosos de áreas protegidas como parte del Plan Estratégico para la Biodiversidad 2020. Bajo la meta estratégica de "mejorar el estado de la biodiversidad por medio de salvaguardar a los ecosistemas, las especies y la diversidad genética", el Objetivo 11 busca poner 17% de las regiones terrestres y 10% de las marinas en estado de AP para 2020. Además y de manera crucial, estas áreas necesitan ser de particular importancia para la biodiversidad y los servicios ambientales, estar manejadas efectiva y equitativamente, ser representativas ecológicamente, estar bien conectadas e incluir "otras medidas de conservación efectiva basadas en el área" (OMCE). Mientras que los objetivos basados en el área son explícitos y medibles, la falta de dirección para qué significan importante, representativo, efectivo y OMCE está afectando cómo las naciones están implementando el objetivo. Existe un riesgo real de que el Objetivo 11 se alcance en términos de área y falle en el objetivo estratégico general por el cual fue establecido ya que las áreas se encuentran mal ubicadas, manejadas inadecuadamente o basadas en una inclusión injustificada de las OMCE. Argumentamos que la comunidad de científicos de la conservación puede ayudar a establecer objetivos de APs ecológicamente sensibles para ayudar a priorizar áreas de biodiversidad importantes y alcanzar la representación ecológica; identificar medidas claras y comparables de la efectividad ecológica para poder evaluar el progreso hacia estos objetivos; e identificar medidas y reportar sobre la contribución que las OMCE aportan al objetivo. Si proporcionamos objetivos ecológicamente sensibles y nuevas medidas de desempeño para calcular la efectividad de las APs y las OMCE, la comunidad científica puede asegurar activamente que la obtención del área exigida en el Objetivo 11 no sea sólo un fin por sí misma, sino también que genere beneficios genuinos para la biodiversidad.
PDF
