Expert judgment and uncertainty regarding the protection of imperiled species

Prioritizing resource allocation to reduce adverse effects of pesticide risk for endangered species

The use of pesticides promotes food security because of the multiple benefits it brings to agriculture, such as reduction in crop losses. However, the use of pesticides can be potentially harmful to non-target species. In the U.S., the Environmental Protection Agency regulates the use of pesticides to manage the risks associated with these agents and to protect species under the Endangered Species Act. As part of these regulations, pesticides must be registered and then reviewed every 15 years to ensure the use conditions are updated with the best available data. The registration and review process can invoke corrective measures to ensure protection of endangered species. However, the registration review process is highly resource and time consuming. There is currently a backlog of unreviewed pesticides, leaving a large quantity of pesticides without updated use conditions to protect species. Identifying ways to streamline this process is urgently needed. We develop a sequencing approach to address the risk assessment bottleneck in the pesticide registration and review process and identify species that would benefit most from detailed assessments. We then demonstrate the magnitude of potential efficiencies using this sequencing process for 61 terrestrial listed species in the state of California. Our results show a consistent ranking of listed species according to their relative benefits from assessment, with 90 % of the species being robustly classified across scenarios in the sensitivity analysis. We found that prioritizing the assessment of a small group of species could potentially result in high conservation benefits, and identify species in need of more detailed data for a robust sequencing. We examine how a sequencing approach can guide decisions about what species might benefit most from different levels of assessment. Our results demonstrate the conservation benefits of employing a sequencing approach to prioritize the allocation of limited resources for endangered species.

On the Multiple Identities of Stakeholders in Wolf Management in Minnesota, United States

Social identity theory offers a means to understand attitudes about wolves, with consequences for management support. Using data from a mail survey about wolves, we explored relationships among seven identities (i.e., wolf advocate, hunter, environmentalist, nature enthusiast, farmer, trapper, conservationist) using multidimensional scaling (MDS) and principal components analysis (PCA). We examined how identities correlated with political ideology, trust in a wildlife management agency, wildlife value orientations (WVOs) and attitudes about wolves, and we evaluated whether WVOs mediated the relationship between identities and attitudes. PCA suggested two factors in identifying relationships among stakeholders, while MDS and correlations found diversity among stakeholders beyond these factors. Hunter identity was most strongly associated with a domination WVO and conservative political ideology. Farmer identity was most strongly associated with agency distrust and negative wolf attitudes. Wolf advocate was most strongly associated with a mutualism WVO (i.e., beliefs that humans are meant to coexist in harmonious relationships with wildlife), agency trust, and positive wolf attitudes. Conservationist identity was positively correlated with all other identities. WVOs partially mediated the relationship between identities and attitudes.

Ten bridges on the road to recovering Canada’s endangered species

Wildlife is declining around the world. Many developed nations have enacted legislation on endangered species protection and provide funding for wildlife recovery. Protecting endangered species is also supported by the public and judiciary. Yet, despite what appear as enabling conditions, wild species continue to decline. Our paper explores pathways to endangered species recovery by analyzing the barriers that have been identified in Canada, the United States, and Australia. We summarize these findings based on Canada’s Species at Risk Conservation Cycle (assessment, protection, recovery planning, implementation, and monitoring and evaluation) and then identify 10 “bridges” that could help overcome these barriers and bend our current trajectory of wildlife loss to recovery. These bridges include ecosystem approaches to recovery, building capacity for community co-governance, linking wildlife recovery to ecosystem services, and improving our storytelling about the loss and recovery of wildlife. The focus of our conclusions is the Canadian setting, but our findings can be applied in other national and subnational settings to reverse the decline of wildlife and halt extinction.

Compassionate Conservation Clashes With Conservation Biology: Should Empathy, Compassion, and Deontological Moral Principles Drive Conservation Practice?

“Compassionate Conservation” is an emerging movement within conservation science that is gaining attention through its promotion of “ethical” conservation practices that place empathy and compassion and the moral principles of “first, do no harm” and “individuals matter” at the forefront of conservation practice. We have articulated elsewhere how Compassionate Conservation, if adopted, could be more harmful for native biodiversity than any other conservation action implemented thus far, while also causing more net harm to individuals than it aims to stop. Here, we examine whether empathy, compassion and inflexible adherence to moral principles form a solid basis upon which to meet the goals of conservation biology as specified by pioneers in the discipline. Specifically, we examine a large empirical literature demonstrating that empathy is subject to significant biases and that inflexible adherence to moral rules can result in a “do nothing” approach. In light of this literature, we argue that our emotional systems have not evolved to provide a reliable basis for making decisions as to how best to ensure the long-term persistence of our planet. Consequently, in its most radical form, the Compassionate Conservation philosophy should not be enshrined as a legalized guiding principle for conservation action.

Cautioning against overemphasis of normative constructs in conservation decision making

Questions around how to conserve nature are increasingly leading to dissonance in conservation planning and action. While science can assist in unraveling the nature of conservation challenges, conservation responses rely heavily on normative positions and constructs to order actions, aid interpretations, and provide motivation. However, problems can arise when norms are mistaken for science or when they stymy scientific rigor. To highlight these potential pitfalls, we used the ethics-based tool of argument analysis to assess a controversial conservation intervention, the Pelorus Island Goat Control Program. The program proponents' argument for restorative justice was unsound because it relied on weak logical construction overly entrenched in normative assumptions. Overreliance on normative constructs, particularly the invocation of tragedy, creates a sense of urgency that can subvert scientific and ethical integrity, obscure values and assumptions, and increase the propensity for flawed logic. This example demonstrates how the same constructs that drive biodiversity conservation can also drive poor decision making, spur public backlash, and justify poor animal welfare outcomes. To provide clarity, a decision-making flowchart we devised demonstrates how values, norms, and ethics influence one another. We recommend practitioners follow 3 key points to improve decision making: be aware of values, as well as normative constructs and ethical theories that those values inform; be mindful of overreliance on either normative constructs or ethics when deciding action is justified; and be logically sound and transparent when building justifications. We also recommend 5 key attributes that practitioners should be attentive to when making conservation decisions: clarity, transparency, scientific integrity, adaptiveness, and compassion. Greater attention to the role of norms in decision making will improve conservation outcomes and garner greater public support for actions.

Deep Uncertainty, Public Reason, the Conservation of Biodiversity and the Regulation of Markets for Lion Skeletons

Public reason is a formal concept in political theory. There is a need to better understand how public reason might be elicited in making public decisions that involve deep uncertainty, which arises from pernicious and gross ignorance about how a system works, the boundaries of a system, and the relative value (or disvalue) of various possible outcomes. This article is the third in a series to demonstrate how ethical argument analysis—a qualitative decision-making aid—may be used to elicit public reason in the presence of deep uncertainty. The first article demonstrated how argument analysis is capable of probing deep into a single argument. The second article demonstrated how argument analysis can analyze a broad set of arguments and how argument analysis can be operationalized for use as a decision-making aid. This article demonstrates (i) the relevance of argument analysis to public reasoning, (ii) the relevance of argument analysis for decision-making under deep uncertainty, an emerging direction in decision theory, and (iii) how deep uncertainty can arise when the boundary between facts and values is inescapably entangled. This article and the previous two make these demonstrations using, as an example, the conservation and sustainable use of lions.

Estimating the acute impacts of Arctic marine oil spills using expert elicitation

Increasing maritime traffic in the Arctic has heightened the oil spill-related risks in this highly sensitive environment. To quantitatively assess these risks, we need knowledge about both the vulnerability and sensitivity of the key Arctic functional groups that may be affected by spilled oil. However, in the Arctic these data are typically scarce or lacking altogether. To compensate for this limited data availability, we propose the use of a probabilistic expert elicitation methodology, which we apply to seals, anatids, and seabirds. Our results suggest that the impacts of oil vary between functional groups, seasons, and oil types. Overall, the impacts are least for seals and greatest for anatids. Offspring seem to be more sensitive than adults, the impact is greatest in spring, and medium and heavy oils are the most harmful oil types. The elicitation process worked well, yet finding enough skilled and motivated experts proved to be difficult.