We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
Accurately predicting the vulnerabilities of species to climate change requires a more detailed understanding of the functional and life-history traits that make some species more susceptible to declines and extinctions in shifting climates. This is because existing trait-based correlates of extinction risk from climate and environmental disturbances vary widely, often being idiosyncratic and context dependent. A powerful solution is to analyse the growing volume of biological data on changes in species ranges and abundances using process-explicit ecological models that run at fine temporal and spatial scales and across large geographical extents. These simulation-based approaches can unpack complex interactions between species’ traits and climate and other threats. This enables species-responses to climatic change to be contextualised and integrated into future biodiversity projections and to be used to formulate and assess conservation policy goals. By providing a more complete understanding of the traits and contexts that regulate different responses of species to climate change, these process-driven approaches are likely to result in more certain predictions of the species that are most vulnerable to climate change.
Different stakeholders and actors frequently describe environmental challenges as ‘crises’. These crises are often wicked problems that are difficult to resolve due to the complex and contradictory nature of the evidence and knowledge systems surrounding them. Here, we examine a crisis narrative surrounding the IUCN-declared Asian Songbird Crisis (ASC), with its epicentre in Indonesia, where an extensive birdkeeping culture persists. We investigate how bird extinction is perceived by different actors, particularly conservation law enforcement and practitioners working in this space. We unravel local perspectives on the complex relationship between bird trade and extinction through one-to-one interviews and focus groups. Our examination reveals a diversity of attitudes to the ASC, with many law enforcement actors not recognising the crisis label. Market mechanisms result in complex shifts in harvesting pressure onto one or more closely related similar species. The findings challenge the prevailing notion that species extinction significantly affects wildlife trades, emphasising the plastic nature of trade and the coming and going of species fashions. By revealing the divergent views of actors on extinction and the ASC, we highlight the need for shared language, particularly the implications of the ‘crisis’ label, around species extinction.
Capacity development is crucial for enduring conservation success. Recent scholarship has called for a systems perspective based on input from local stakeholders to better understand and develop conservation capacity. However, few studies have adopted such an approach to explore interactions among capacities or how capacity development needs and priorities evolve. We address this gap through a case study from Bhutan, centred on perceptions from 52 local conservation practitioners, planners, funders and community members. We use mixed methods to identify which capacities have been important for conservation success, which capacities are needed for future success, which capacities are foundational and how capacities interact. We find that capacity needs have shifted from individual-level knowledge and skills to community- and societal-level capacities in response to changing political and economic dynamics. Participants identified political support and leadership, reliable and sufficient funding, strengthening the research base, and increasing community awareness and engagement as critical future needs. Investing in these capacities holds the promise of further augmenting capacity development, thus increasing the value of limited resources. Our results demonstrate that capacity development should be viewed as a dynamic process and supported by strategic investment even in countries with track records of conservation success.
The conservation sector increasingly values reflexivity, in which professionals critically reflect on the social, institutional and political aspects of their work. Reflexivity offers diverse benefits, from enhancing individual performance to driving institutional transformation. However, integrating reflexivity into conservation practice remains challenging and is often confined to informal reflections with limited impact. To overcome this challenge, we introduce co-reflexivity, offering an alternative to the binary distinction between social science on or for conservation, which respectively produce critical outsider accounts of conservation or provide social science instruments for achieving conservation objectives. Instead, co-reflexivity is a form of social science with conservation, in which conservation professionals and social scientists jointly develop critical yet constructive perspectives on and approaches to conservation. We demonstrate the value of co-reflexivity by presenting a set of reflections on the project model, the dominant framework for conservation funding, which organizes conservation activity into distinct, target-oriented and temporally bounded units that can be funded, implemented and evaluated separately. Co-reflexivity helps reveal the diverse challenges that the project model creates for conservation practice, including for the adoption of reflexivity itself. Putting insights from social science research in dialogue with reflections from conservation professionals, we co-produce a critique of project-based conservation with both theoretical and practical implications. These cross-disciplinary conversations provide a case study of how co-reflexivity can enhance the conservation–social science relationship.
Poor mental health is a leading contributor to the global burden of disease but there is poor understanding of how it is influenced by people's interactions with ecological systems. In a theory-generating case study we asked how interactions with ecosystems were perceived to influence stressors associated with psychological distress in a rural setting in Uganda. We conducted and thematically analysed 45 semi-structured interviews with residents of Nyabyeya Parish. Poverty and food insecurity were the primary reported causes of ‘thinking too much’ and related idioms suggesting psychological distress. Households bordering a conservation area reported that crop losses from wildlife contributed to food insecurity. However, forest resources represented important safety nets for those facing poverty and food insecurity. Commercial agricultural expansion also emerged as a salient theme in the lives of residents, reportedly exacerbating poverty and food insecurity amongst poorer households but contributing incomes to wealthier ones. Our exploratory study suggests how two globally prevalent land uses, nature conservation and commercial agriculture, may influence social determinants of psychological distress in the study area. We highlight co-benefits and trade-offs between global sustainability goals that could be managed to improve mental health.
Landscape changes and the intensification of agriculture in recent centuries were largely responsible for the dramatic decline in the biodiversity of farmlands. Rural settlements have also been subject to radical changes due to modernisation, but their impact on bird populations is poorly quantified. The Lesser Grey Shrike Lanius minor is a threatened farmland bird and already extinct in many areas. We monitored a population of this long-distance migrant in a traditional farming area in the Poľana Mountains (central Slovakia) in three breeding seasons (1996, 2016, and 2021). We analysed the impact of the increase in number of modern habitations and the decrease in traditional farmsteads on the population decline. The number of breeding territories decreased from 73 in 1996 to 38 in 2016 and 22 in 2021. As the population has declined, the breeding area has also shrunk significantly. While there were no modern homesteads in the breeding territories in 1996, by 2021 their number had increased to the number of traditional farmsteads. Building a single modern house in a territory reduced the probability of nesting to about 6%, and this effect was also seen when one or two farms were still present (17% and 40%, respectively). An additional modern homestead in the territory reduced the nesting probability to almost zero, even if a farmstead was already present. In this long-term empirical study, we identified these changes as a local threat factor for the species studied. The results presented can help in the design and implementation of conservation measures in traditional farming landscapes.
There is a paradox in global environmental governance that policymaking must ‘follow the science’ while environmental change is itself characterised by scientific uncertainty. This paper addresses this paradox by embracing that uncertainty. We bring International Relations (IR) into conversation with animal studies to further develop conceptual debates on integrating non-human actors. We focus on avian cultures to understand the nexus between bird crime, flyways, and global environmental governance. We analyse how bird migrations along flyways disrupt mainstream systems of knowledge production that global conventions rely on. Zooming in on bird crime along flyways, we demonstrate that crime relies on offenders’ understanding of avian cultures. We synthesise those findings with an analysis of the Convention on Migratory Species, as the only global convention that integrates animal cultures to develop more effective responses to wildlife crime. Our analysis demonstrates that international conservation overlooks the exploitation of avian culture for criminal activity, rendering policy responses less effective, particularly in contexts of scientific uncertainty. Integrating animal cultures can address scientific uncertainty and promote multispecies learning, creating more effective forms of global environmental governance. Ultimately, this renders the non-human visible and makes it possible to explore the implications for multispecies entanglements in IR.
Edited by
Alexandre Caron, Centre de Coopération Internationale en Recherche Agronomique pour le Développement (CIRAD), France,Daniel Cornélis, Centre de Coopération Internationale en Recherche Agronomique pour le Développement (CIRAD) and Foundation François Sommer, France,Philippe Chardonnet, International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) SSC Antelope Specialist Group,Herbert H. T. Prins, Wageningen Universiteit, The Netherlands
Much of the narrative for land clearing of wildlife is historic and frequently blames buffalo for livestock diseases, a dogma perpetrated throughout colonial history and inherited by emerging African states after decolonization. A review of this dogma indicates that the many significant problems for wildlife and cattle are related to introduced exotic livestock breeds that brought their diseases into Africa and the production and trade models that came with them. Reproducing European economic agricultural systems in Africa has failed in most African countries so far, challenging us to reconsider current agricultural economic development models in the context of human-induced global ecological changes, human relations to nature and our planetary limits. The next generation of African farmers, wildlife managers and policymakers have the opportunity to frame new coexistence and productive models between wildlife, including African buffalo, and livestock-based agriculture in the ecosystems in which they have coevolved.
Despite the progress in conservation risk management, conservation organizations are reluctant to interface usable risk-diversification strategies with their decision-making processes. One reason for this reluctance is that the empirical models used to develop risk-diversification strategies need the expected returns on investment (ROIs) of target assets and their variances and covariances, and the probabilities of occurrence of the scenarios needed to calculate those statistics are almost always unknown. We examine how risk diversification for conservation is influenced by the probabilities assigned to uncertainty scenarios using a case study involving the conservation of biodiversity at the county level in the central and southern Appalachian region within the framework of modern portfolio theory. A comparison of risk-mitigating portfolios with bootstrapped and fixed probability distributions shows that introducing the flexibility of an unknown probability distribution of uncertainty scenarios allows conservation organizations to spread bets more than with the inflexibility of the fixed probability distribution, while also achieving higher expected ROIs per unit of risk on average. The improvement becomes more significant when conservation organizations are less risk averse.
As the configuration of global environmental governance has become more complex over the past fifty years, numerous scholars have underscored the importance of understanding the transnational networks of public, private, and nonprofit organizations that comprise it. Collaborative Event Ethnography (CEE) is a relational methodology that aims to capture the dynamics of these constantly shifting networks. CEE draws on multisited, team, and institutional ethnography to assemble teams of researchers to study major international conferences, which offer important political spaces where these networks can be observed. Drawing on more than ten years of experience with CEE, we argue that strong approaches to collaboration offer rich opportunities for analyses of global environmental governance. In CEE, researchers collaborate on all aspects of the research process, from research design to analysis to writing. The aim of this chapter is to introduce CEE, providing a history of its development, reviewing the benefits and challenges of CEE, reflecting on the theoretical insights generated through CEE in relation to understanding environmental agreement-making, and offering practical guidance for researchers interested in using the methodology. Going beyond CEE, the chapter also considers collaboration in the context of the broader scholarly landscape.
Biodiversity laws around the world differ, but, at their core, these laws promote the fundamental objective of preventing environmental decline and species extinctions. A variety of legal mechanisms have been implemented in domestic laws around the world to achieve this objective, including protection for habitat, environmental impact assessments and threatened species recovery plans. In many jurisdictions, if these mechanisms fail to protect a species, it may be legally declared extinct, or added to a formal list of those that have been lost. This article examines the conservation purpose and legal implications for laws about extinction. A legal power to recognise a species as extinct has the potential to foster ambition, transparency and rigorous measurement of progress against conservation goals. However, in practice, efforts to prevent extinction are applied selectively. Without an obligation to learn from extinctions, recognition of species extinctions in law may have perverse effects, or no effect at all. This article proposes a conceptual model for the role of law in relation to extinctions, highlighting opportunities to improve legal frameworks to achieve more productive and positive conservation outcomes, even as climate change and other pressures drive many more species towards extinction.
Social media are being used increasingly by the science community to share research output with a wide audience and to seek feedback. They are also used as alternatives to the traditional citation-based assessment of the impacts of scientific products and even to inform employment decisions in academia. One of these media platforms, ResearchGate, is a popular application with more than 20 million users who share and discuss scientific products. We report on a remarkably high level of interest in one of our publications on ResearchGate about the Eurasian wild pig Sus scrofa in Iran, a poorly studied species in a conservation priority region. The number of reads of our publication was c. 1,500 times higher than the mean per publication for scientists from a range of American and Asian universities. Comparison with other ResearchGate statistics and reader feedback indicates these reads resulted from data-gathering processes unrelated to the details of the research. Although this raises questions regarding the ability of ResearchGate and similar platforms to measure research interest and impacts reliably, we use the popularity of our article as an opportunity to advocate for conservation research in an understudied region and on an understudied species.
The adverse effects that conservation can have on Indigenous Peoples and local communities have been known for decades. In recognition, governments and conservation organizations have adopted joint statements of intent and rolled out various individual measures to safeguard human rights. Nevertheless, a gap remains between policy and practice, as evidenced by numerous recent examples of human rights infringements because of the (in)actions of conservation. We present ethnographic research with people living adjacent to Pegunungan Cyclops, an IUCN category I(a) strict protected area in Papua Province, Indonesia, aiming to understand their experiences of conservation and provide some nuance regarding the gap between policy and practice in human rights and conservation. We uncovered feelings of injustice, discontent, confusion, an overall lack of consultation between local inhabitants and park managers and decades of contradictory policies and projects characterized by implementation problems stemming from scant resources. We also show how national struggles over rights and recognition are conflated and intertwined with local ones and how national and provincial policies can alter governance regimes, tenure arrangements and power relations locally. Despite the issues, our informants also recalled favourably instances in which partnerships between local inhabitants and other actors were well received because they were implemented through detailed consultation, producing management actions that better aligned with traditional practices. For people in the Cyclops Mountains today, the emerging avenues provided by the social forestry programme in Indonesia could be the most beneficial way to secure greater access to their lands, and conservationists can play a role in supporting this process.
In this essay, we explore the philosophical and ethical issues concerning de-extinction. First, we will characterize what de-extinction is. This requires clarification of the process of extinction. Second, we consider whether de-extinction is even possible. There are a variety of arguments involving the nature of species that purport to show that once they have disappeared they cannot be resurrected. Third, we examine whether de-extinction is morally permissible. There are arguments that suggest we are obligated to do it based on restorative justice and biodiversity conservation. There are other arguments that conclude we are not permitted to do so based on considerations of animal welfare, hubris and the allocation of conservation resources.
Prioritisation is about choice, and in the context of species extinction, it is about choosing what investments to make to prevent extinctions as opposed to assessing extinction risk, identifying species that are doomed to extinction, or mapping components of biodiversity. Prioritised investments may focus on conservation activities aimed at species protection or management, but they may also seek to acquire new knowledge to resolve uncertainties. Two core components of prioritisation are a clearly stated objective and knowledge of what activities can be undertaken, acknowledging that there are likely to be dependencies between these activities. As the natural environment and society change, so will the enabling conditions for conservation, hence the need to be adaptable and proactive into the future.
Extinction is a new open-access journal focused on the patterns and processes underlying the loss of biodiversity. It aims to inform conservation efforts, with a broad spatial and temporal scope. Extinction biology – the scientific study of species loss – has a long history and has recently become a more interdisciplinary and integrated field. This journal offers a unique, synthetic forum in which to present cutting-edge research and discuss its implications. This includes ecological, molecular, paleontological, and social perspectives, based on empirical data, theory, and modelling, to understand extinction processes. By tackling the big challenges, the research published in Extinction will be valuable for researchers and practitioners concerned with extinction and its role in shaping the history and future of life on Earth.
The Natura 2000 network, the pillar of biodiversity conservation in Europe, still shows some knowledge gaps after almost 30 years since its implementation. As birds are a taxonomic group that is underrepresented in the literature related to Natura 2000 compared to their importance in the EU Directives, this review investigated the characteristics of the scientific research dedicated to birds in relation to Natura 2000. This review focused on 169 peer-reviewed articles covering a period of 25 years (1995–2019). Most studies were set within single Natura 2000 site or regions within countries, and concerned terrestrial habitats, particularly wetlands. The terrestrial Mediterranean biogeographical region and marine Atlantic region had the greatest number of publications, while Spain, Italy, and France were the countries with the highest number of reviewed articles. The number of publications was correlated to Natura 2000 coverage at both country and biogeographical region level. Bird species were studied mainly at a community or single-species level and most publications studied distribution and occurrence of the bird species of interest, while very few assessed the conservation status of the species. Only a few articles set within Natura 2000 sites addressed the issues of habitat suitability for birds or the effectiveness of conservation efforts. Both Annex I and non-Annex I bird species were examined in the literature, with most species having decreasing population trends at the European scale. Future research on bird conservation and Natura 2000 should focus on marine ecosystems as well as habitats that have received less attention despite their important role in a changing future (alpine and urban types). Moreover, future studies should encompass larger spatial scales and those species for which status and trends are still not thoroughly investigated. Finally, it would be important to enhance research efforts on the conservation status and effectiveness in relation to the network.
China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), designed to build critical infrastructure and coordinate economic growth, is the most significant development initiative in modern history. The BRI has a documented vision for sustainability, including environmental impact assessments and responsibility tenets. Despite this, a growing body of literature has found adverse effects of BRI projects on protected land and species. To understand corporate responsibility and regulations for companies participating in the BRI, we gathered information on 260 BRI companies using the Refinitiv Eikon BRI Connect database and the China Global Investment Tracker. The results revealed a significant gap in corporate responsibility reporting for biodiversity impacts, environmental restoration, environmental project financing and the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) 14 ‘Life below Water’ and 15 ‘Life on Land’. The modest fraction of companies that we found to report biodiversity accountability highlights the need to restructure and incentivize the reporting of environmental and biodiversity risks. The current evidence of limited adherence to responsibility measures highlights a clear opportunity to align BRI development with the BRI’s vision for sustainability, and to strengthen links for policy engagement within Chinese regulatory frameworks and international obligations at the United Nations within its SDG framework.
Capacity development is critical to long-term conservation success, yet we lack a robust and rigorous understanding of how well its effects are being evaluated. A comprehensive summary of who is monitoring and evaluating capacity development interventions, what is being evaluated and how, would help in the development of evidence-based guidance to inform design and implementation decisions for future capacity development interventions and evaluations of their effectiveness. We built an evidence map by reviewing peer-reviewed and grey literature published since 2000, to identify case studies evaluating capacity development interventions in biodiversity conservation and natural resource management. We used inductive and deductive approaches to develop a coding strategy for studies that met our criteria, extracting data on the type of capacity development intervention, evaluation methods, data and analysis types, categories of outputs and outcomes assessed, and whether the study had a clear causal model and/or used a systems approach. We found that almost all studies assessed multiple outcome types: most frequent was change in knowledge, followed by behaviour, then attitude. Few studies evaluated conservation outcomes. Less than half included an explicit causal model linking interventions to expected outcomes. Half of the studies considered external factors that could influence the efficacy of the capacity development intervention, and few used an explicit systems approach. We used framework synthesis to situate our evidence map within the broader literature on capacity development evaluation. Our evidence map (including a visual heat map) highlights areas of low and high representation in investment in research on the evaluation of capacity development.
Conservation lacks sufficient well-trained leaders who are empowered to catalyse positive change for the natural world. Addressing this need, the University of Cambridge launched a Masters in Conservation Leadership in 2010. The degree includes several features designed to enhance its impact. Firstly, it recruits international, gender-balanced cohorts of mid-career professionals, building leadership capacity in the Global South and providing a rich environment for peer learning. Secondly, teaching includes applied leadership training in topics such as fundraising, leading people and networking, as well as interdisciplinary academic topics. Thirdly, the degree is delivered through the Cambridge Conservation Initiative, a partnership of international NGOs and networks, facilitating extensive practitioner-led and experiential learning. We present details of programme design and evaluate the impact of the Masters after 10 years, using data from course records, student and alumni perspectives, and interviews with key stakeholders. The course has broadly succeeded in its design and recruitment objectives. Self-assessed leadership capabilities, career responsibilities and the overall impact of alumni increased significantly 5 years after graduation. However, specific impacts of alumni in certain areas, such as on their professional colleagues, have been less clear. We conclude by outlining future plans for the Masters in light of growing demands on conservation leaders and the changing landscape of leadership capacity development. These include reforms to course structure and assessment, long-term support to the alumni network and developing a conservation leadership community of practice.