How expert insight into alpine peatland conservation complements global scientific evidence

Experts can provide valuable information to fill knowledge gaps in published research on management effectiveness, particularly for threatened ecosystems, for which there is often limited evidence and the need for prompt intervention to ensure their persistence. One such ecosystem, alpine peatland, is threatened by climate change and other pressures, provides vital ecosystem services, and supports unique biodiversity. In a workshop, we gathered and synthesized into an accessible format information from experts on interventions used, threat context, and intervention effectiveness for Australian alpine peatland and used this knowledge to evaluate local relevance of the global literature for this threatened ecosystem. Experts identified 15 interventions used to conserve Australian peatlands, most of which enhanced or restored peatland condition and effectively addressed diverse threats. Experts' perspectives and global studies were strongly aligned, suggesting that research on peatland management may be broadly relevant across contexts, despite the distinct characteristics of Australian systems. Our workshop-based expert elicitation approach provided insights into current management practices unavailable in the literature.

Social science for conservation in working landscapes and seascapes

Biodiversity is in precipitous decline globally across both terrestrial and marine environments. Therefore, conservation actions are needed everywhere on Earth, including in the biodiversity rich landscapes and seascapes where people live and work that cover much of the planet. Integrative landscape and seascape approaches to conservation fill this niche. Making evidence-informed conservation decisions within these populated and working landscapes and seascapes requires an in-depth and nuanced understanding of the human dimensions through application of the conservation social sciences. Yet, there has been no comprehensive exploration of potential conservation social science contributions to working landscape and seascape initiatives. We use the Smithsonian Working Land and Seascapes initiative – an established program with a network of 14 sites around the world – as a case study to examine what human dimensions topics are key to improving our understanding and how this knowledge can inform conservation in working landscapes and seascapes. This exploratory study identifies 38 topics and linked questions related to how insights from place-based and problem-focused social science might inform the planning, doing, and learning phases of conservation decision-making and adaptive management. Results also show how conservation social science might yield synthetic and theoretical insights that are more broadly applicable. We contend that incorporating insights regarding the human dimensions into integrated conservation initiatives across working landscapes and seascapes will produce more effective, equitable, appropriate and robust conservation actions. Thus, we encourage governments and organizations working on conservation initiatives in working landscapes and seascapes to increase engagement with and funding of conservation social science.

Evaluating ecological outcomes from environmental stewardship initiatives: A comparative analysis of approaches

Understanding the extent to which stewardship initiatives achieve objectives of enhanced ecological outcomes is important for enhancing effectiveness and efficiency of environmental management initiatives. Alternative approaches - community science, stakeholder perceptions, and remote sensing - are emerging in lieu of the conventional approach of collecting field data that present different benefits and drawbacks and to date have not been directly compared. This research compared the use of four approaches to evaluating ecological outcomes of a grassland restoration project on a 2 ha Niagara Parks Commission property in Ontario, Canada. We collected three levels of quantitative data, from general site assessments to species-specific data using standardized questionnaires and multi-spectral imagery from a remotely piloted aircraft system. We found that community scientists and stakeholders provided comparable general site assessments to the field data, but that as the assessments became more detailed, differences emerged. Further, remotely sensed data were assessed and provided a more positive site assessment than any other method. Experiences and knowledge of nature did not influence assessments by community scientists or stakeholders. Our findings show that for overall site assessments, community scientists and stakeholders may be able to provide a reasonably accurate assessment. If monitoring and evaluation needs (either research-based or practical) extend beyond a broad assessment, use of a field expert or multiple methods of data collection may be warranted.

The conservation research–practice gap: a case study of a threatened bird

Conservation research is less often applied in practice than is desirable for the optimization of conservation outcomes. We evaluated this conservation research–practice gap for a threatened passerine, Dupont's lark Chersophilus duponti. We reviewed the literature and classified the conservation interventions proposed by scientists as regulation and legislation, monitoring and research, or management. We sent a questionnaire to managers responsible for species conservation, to gather information about the reasons for implementing, or not, each conservation intervention. We found 16 conservation interventions proposed in the literature, of which 13 (81.2%) had been applied by managers at least once. We found a disparity between the frequency of scientific recommendations and the actions implemented by managers: some measures with high scientific consensus were rarely adopted, whereas approaches less frequently proposed by scientists were more often implemented by managers. Regulatory and monitoring/research interventions were applied more often than management interventions, probably because of legal obligations. Management interventions were less frequently implemented, mainly because of time and budget limitations. There was a negative correlation between the number of interventions implemented and the population trend of the species in each region, which suggests that conservation interventions were more commonly implemented when the species was facing local extinction. Our results indicate a mismatch between science and practice for the conservation of Dupont's lark, the reasons for which seem to be diverse and include factors such as financial and time limitations, legal obstacles and managers' perception of extinction risk. An iterative dialogue needs to be initiated between scientists and managers to evaluate the efficacy of interventions implemented, and facilitate evidence-based conservation.

A typology of barriers and enablers of scientific evidence use in conservation practice

Over the last decade, there has been an increased focus (and pressure) in conservation practice globally towards evidence-based or evidence-informed decision making. Despite calls for increased use of scientific evidence, it often remains aspirational for many conservation organizations. Contributing to this is the lack of guidance on how to identify and classify the array of complex reasons limiting research use. In this study, we collated a comprehensive inventory of 230 factors that facilitate or limit the use of scientific evidence in conservation management decisions, through interviews with conservation practitioners in South Africa and UK and a review of the healthcare literature. We used the inventory, combined with concepts from knowledge exchange and research use theories, to construct a taxonomy that categorizes the barriers and enablers. We compared the similarities and differences between the taxonomies from the conservation and the healthcare fields, and highlighted the common barriers and enablers found within conservation organizations in the United Kingdom and South Africa. The most commonly mentioned barriers limiting the use of scientific evidence in our case studies were associated with the day-to-day decision-making processes of practitioners, and the organizational structures, management processes and resource constraints of conservation organizations. The key characteristics that facilitated the use of science in conservation decisions were associated with an organization's structure, decision-making processes and culture, along with practitioners' attitudes and the relationships between scientists and practitioners. This taxonomy and inventory of barriers and enablers can help researchers, practitioners and other conservation actors to identify aspects within their organizations and cross-institutional networks that limit research use - acting as a guide on how to strengthen the science-practice interface.

Evidence-based decision-making in Canada’s protected areas organizations: Implications for management effectiveness

Aichi Biodiversity Target 19 calls on Parties to the United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) to improve, share, transfer, and apply knowledge. In this study, we provide an initial assessment of the state of evidence-based decision-making in Canada’s protected areas organizations by examining (1) the value and use of various forms of evidence by managers and (2) the extent to which institutional conditions enable or inhibit the use of evidence in decision-making. Results revealed that although managers value and use many forms of evidence in their decision-making, information produced by staff and their organizations are given priority. Other forms of evidence, such as Indigenous knowledge and peer-reviewed information, are valued and used less. The most significant barriers to evidence-based decision-making were limited financial resources, lack of staff, inadequate timeframes for decision-making, a lack of monitoring programs, and a disconnect between researchers and decision-makers. Overall, our results suggest that the potential benefits of evidence-based approaches are not being maximized in Canada’s protected areas organizations. We propose several recommendations to introduce or improve the use of diverse forms of evidence to enhance management effectiveness of Canada’s protected areas and by extension conservation outcomes.

Hallmarks of science missing from North American wildlife management

Resource management agencies commonly defend controversial policy by claiming adherence to science-based approaches. For example, proponents and practitioners of the "North American Model of Wildlife Conservation," which guides hunting policy across much of the United States and Canada, assert that science plays a central role in shaping policy. However, what that means is rarely defined. We propose a framework that identifies four fundamental hallmarks of science relevant to natural resource management (measurable objectives, evidence, transparency, and independent review) and test for their presence in hunt management plans created by 62 U.S. state and Canadian provincial and territorial agencies across 667 management systems (species-jurisdictions). We found that most (60%) systems contained fewer than half of the indicator criteria assessed, with more criteria detected in systems that were peer-reviewed, that pertained to "big game," and in jurisdictions at increasing latitudes. These results raise doubt about the purported scientific basis of hunt management across the United States and Canada. Our framework provides guidance for adopting a science-based approach to safeguard not only wildlife but also agencies from potential social, legal, and political conflict.

Conservation physiology and the quest for a 'good' Anthropocene

It has been proposed that we are now living in a new geological epoch known as the Anthropocene, which is specifically defined by the impacts that humans are having on the Earth's biological diversity and geology. Although the proposal of this term was borne out of an acknowledgement of the negative changes we are imparting on the globe (e.g. climate change, pollution, coastal erosion, species extinctions), there has recently been action amongst a variety of disciplines aimed at achieving a 'good Anthropocene' that strives to balance societal needs and the preservation of the natural world. Here, we outline ways that the discipline of conservation physiology can help to delineate a hopeful, progressive and productive path for conservation in the Anthropocene and, specifically, achieve that vision. We focus on four primary ways that conservation physiology can contribute, as follows: (i) building a proactive approach to conservation; (ii) encouraging a pragmatic perspective; (iii) establishing an appreciation for environmental resilience; and (iv) informing and engaging the public and political arenas. As a collection of passionate individuals combining theory, technological advances, public engagement and a dedication to achieving conservation success, conservation physiologists are poised to make meaningful contributions to the productive, motivational and positive way forward that is necessary to curb and reverse negative human impact on the environment.

International funding agencies: potential leaders of impact evaluation in protected areas?

Globally, protected areas are the most commonly used tools to halt biodiversity loss. Yet, some are failing to adequately conserve the biodiversity they contain. There is an urgent need for knowledge on how to make them function more effectively. Impact evaluation methods provide a set of tools that could yield this knowledge. However, rigorous outcome-focused impact evaluation is not yet used as extensively as it could be in protected area management. We examine the role of international protected area funding agencies in facilitating the use of impact evaluation. These agencies are influential stakeholders as they allocate hundreds of millions of dollars annually to support protected areas, creating a unique opportunity to shape how the conservation funds are spent globally. We identify key barriers to the use of impact evaluation, detail how large funders are uniquely placed to overcome many of these, and highlight the potential benefits if impact evaluation is used more extensively.

Using perceptions as evidence to improve conservation and environmental management

The conservation community is increasingly focusing on the monitoring and evaluation of management, governance, ecological, and social considerations as part of a broader move toward adaptive management and evidence-based conservation. Evidence is any information that can be used to come to a conclusion and support a judgment or, in this case, to make decisions that will improve conservation policies, actions, and outcomes. Perceptions are one type of information that is often dismissed as anecdotal by those arguing for evidence-based conservation. In this paper, I clarify the contributions of research on perceptions of conservation to improving adaptive and evidence-based conservation. Studies of the perceptions of local people can provide important insights into observations, understandings and interpretations of the social impacts, and ecological outcomes of conservation; the legitimacy of conservation governance; and the social acceptability of environmental management. Perceptions of these factors contribute to positive or negative local evaluations of conservation initiatives. It is positive perceptions, not just objective scientific evidence of effectiveness, that ultimately ensure the support of local constituents thus enabling the long-term success of conservation. Research on perceptions can inform courses of action to improve conservation and governance at scales ranging from individual initiatives to national and international policies. Better incorporation of evidence from across the social and natural sciences and integration of a plurality of methods into monitoring and evaluation will provide a more complete picture on which to base conservation decisions and environmental management.

A Landscape-Scale, Applied Fire Management Experiment Promotes Recovery of a Population of the Threatened Gouldian Finch, Erythrura gouldiae, in Australia's Tropical Savannas

Fire is an integral part of savanna ecology and changes in fire patterns are linked to biodiversity loss in savannas worldwide. In Australia, changed fire regimes are implicated in the contemporary declines of small mammals, riparian species, obligate-seeding plants and grass seed-eating birds. Translating this knowledge into management to recover threatened species has proved elusive. We report here on a landscape-scale experiment carried out by the Australian Wildlife Conservancy (AWC) on Mornington Wildlife Sanctuary in northwest Australia. The experiment was designed to understand the response of a key savanna bird guild to fire, and to use that information to manage fire with the aim of recovering a threatened species population. We compared condition indices among three seed-eating bird species--one endangered (Gouldian finch) and two non-threatened (long-tailed finch and double-barred finch)--from two large areas (> 2,830 km2) with initial contrasting fire regimes ('extreme': frequent, extensive, intense fire; versus 'benign': less frequent, smaller, lower intensity fires). Populations of all three species living with the extreme fire regime had condition indices that differed from their counterparts living with the benign fire regime, including higher haematocrit levels in some seasons (suggesting higher levels of activity required to find food), different seasonal haematocrit profiles, higher fat scores in the early wet season (suggesting greater food uncertainty), and then lower muscle scores later in the wet season (suggesting prolonged food deprivation). Gouldian finches also showed seasonally increasing stress hormone concentrations with the extreme fire regime. Cumulatively, these patterns indicated greater nutritional stress over many months for seed-eating birds exposed to extreme fire regimes. We tested these relationships by monitoring finch condition over the following years, as AWC implemented fire management to produce the 'benign' fire regime throughout the property. The condition indices of finch populations originally living with the extreme fire regime shifted to resemble those of their counterparts living with the benign fire regime. This research supports the hypothesis that fire regimes affect food resources for savanna seed-eating birds, with this impact mediated through a range of grass species utilised by the birds over different seasons, and that fire management can effectively moderate that impact. This work provides a rare example of applied research supporting the recovery of a population of a threatened species.