1
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Setting conservation priorities in multi-actor systems

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Nature conservation is underresourced, requiring managers to prioritize where, when, and how to spend limited funds. Prioritization methods identify the subset of actions that provide the most benefit to an actor's objective. However, spending decisions by conservation actors are often misaligned with their objectives. Although this misalignment is frequently attributed to poor choices by the actors, we argue that it can also be a byproduct of working alongside other organizations. Using strategic analyses of multi-actor systems in conservation, we show how interactions among multiple conservation actors can create misalignment between the spending and objectives of individual actors and why current uncoordinated prioritizations lead to fewer conservation objectives achieved for individual actors. We draw three conclusions from our results. First, that misalignment is an unsuitable metric for evaluating spending, because it may be necessary to achieve actors’ objectives. Second, that current prioritization methods cannot identify optimal decisions (as they purport to do), because they do not incorporate other actors’ decisions. Third, that practical steps can be taken to move actors in the direction of coordination and thereby better achieve their conservation objectives.

          Related collections

          Most cited references70

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Ten principles for a landscape approach to reconciling agriculture, conservation, and other competing land uses.

          "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.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Knowing but not doing: selecting priority conservation areas and the research-implementation gap.

            Conservation assessment is a rapidly evolving discipline whose stated goal is the design of networks of protected areas that represent and ensure the persistence of nature (i.e., species, habitats, and environmental processes) by separating priority areas from the activities that degrade or destroy them. Nevertheless, despite a burgeoning scientific literature that ever refines these techniques for allocating conservation resources, it is widely believed that conservation assessments are rarely translated into actions that actually conserve nature. We reviewed the conservation assessment literature in peer-reviewed journals and conducted survey questionnaires of the authors of these studies. Two-thirds of conservation assessments published in the peer-reviewed scientific literature do not deliver conservation action, primarily because most researchers never plan for implementation. This research-implementation gap between conservation science and real-world action is a genuine phenomenon and is a specific example of the "knowing-doing gap" that is widely recognized in management science. Given the woefully inadequate resources allocated for conservation, our findings raise questions over the utility of conservation assessment science, as currently practiced, to provide useful, pragmatic solutions to conservation planning problems. A reevaluation of the conceptual and operational basis of conservation planning research is urgently required. We recommend the following actions for beginning a process for bridging the research-implementation gap in conservation planning: (1) acknowledge the research-implementation gap is real, (2) source research questions from practitioners, (3) situate research within a broader conservation planning model, (4) expand the social dimension of conservation assessments, (5) support conservation plans with transdisciplinary social learning institutions, (6) reward academics for societal engagement and implementation, and (7) train students in skills for "doing" conservation.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Community-based conservation in a globalized world.

              Communities have an important role to play in biodiversity conservation. However, community-based conservation as a panacea, like government-based conservation as a panacea, ignores the necessity of managing commons at multiple levels, with vertical and horizontal interplay among institutions. The study of conservation in a multilevel world can serve to inform an interdisciplinary science of conservation, consistent with the Convention on Biological Diversity, to establish partnerships and link biological conservation objectives with local development objectives. Improving the integration of conservation and development requires rethinking conservation by using a complexity perspective and the ability to deal with multiple objectives, use of partnerships and deliberative processes, and learning from commons research to develop diagnostic tools. Perceived this way, community-based conservation has a role to play in a broad pluralistic approach to biodiversity protection: it is governance that starts from the ground up and involves networks and linkages across various levels of organization. The shift of attention to processes at multiple levels fundamentally alters the way in which the governance of conservation development may be conceived and developed, using diagnostics within a pluralistic framework rather than a blueprint approach.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                (View ORCID Profile)
                (View ORCID Profile)
                (View ORCID Profile)
                Journal
                BioScience
                Oxford University Press (OUP)
                0006-3568
                1525-3244
                July 2023
                August 08 2023
                July 19 2023
                July 2023
                August 08 2023
                July 19 2023
                : 73
                : 7
                : 522-532
                Article
                10.1093/biosci/biad046
                4c40916d-6926-48f1-b90e-8d9666d81eff
                © 2023

                https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article