Search

There are growing calls for businesses to implement ‘nature-positive’ strategies. Convergence around a precise definition is now needed. We review definitions of ‘nature-positive’, highlight differences between ‘nature-positive’ and previous iterations of organizational biodiversity strategies (e.g. net positive impact) and propose four key elements for ‘nature-positive’ strategies: 1) demonstrating positive biodiversity outcomes across the entire value chain (“scope”); 2) buy-in throughout the entire organization (“mainstreaming”); 3) integrated consideration of different components of nature (e.g. both biodiversity and climate; “integration”); and 4) measurable outcomes against a fixed baseline aligned with overall societal goals (e.g. post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework; “ambition”). We analyze trends in biodiversity commitments of the Global Fortune 100 companies and firms that have made recent ‘net impact’ commitments, evaluating alignment with these elements and where possible assessing their evolution since 2016. Uptake of biodiversity commitments has increased since 2016, but with limited progress towards adopting measurable, time-bound commitments (an increase from 5-10/100 Fortune 100 firms from 2016-2021). We review barriers to business implementation of strategies that can deliver socially equitable and ‘nature-positive’ outcomes. Major improvements are needed in data availability and transparency, regulation and sector-wide coordination that creates level playing fields and prevents impact leakage. Transformative action is required to create production and consumption systems that actively enhance nature.

There is an increasing expectation on the private sector to address biodiversity impacts and contribute towards global conservation goals. Appropriate evidence use can help businesses avoid biodiversity losses and realise gains, reduce resources wasted on ineffective or suboptimal action, whilst minimising biodiversity-related risks and securing opportunities from engaging with biodiversity. We review the status of evidence-based action in the private sector, where previous studies have identified concerning trends, and explore the barriers that may currently be hindering evidence use. To learn from this, and improve evidence use, we propose a set of principles for evidence-based biodiversity impact mitigation. We outline tools and resources that can help businesses move towards evidence-based practice and achieve each of these principles. Meeting these principles would improve the biodiversity outcomes from business’ biodiversity related actions. However, for business action to contribute more fully to global conservation goals, broader political and socio-economic issues also need addressing.

Funder: The research was funded through a long‐term collaboration between Conservational International and Chevron., The mitigation hierarchy (MH) is a prominent tool to help businesses achieve no net loss or net gain outcomes for biodiversity. Technological innovations offer benefits for business biodiversity management, yet the range and continued evolution of technologies creates a complex landscape that can be difficult to navigate. Using literature review, online surveys, and semi‐structured interviews, we assess technologies that can improve application of the MH. We identify six categories (mobile survey, fixed survey, remote sensing, blockchain, data analysis, and enabling technologies) with high feasibility and/or relevance to (i) aid direct implementation of mitigation measures and (ii) enhance biodiversity surveys and monitoring, which feed into the design of interventions including avoidance and minimization measures. At the interface between development and biodiversity impacts, opportunities lie in businesses investing in technologies, capitalizing on synergies between technology groups, collaborating with conservation organizations to enhance institutional capacity, and developing practical solutions suited for widespread use.

International audience; The Convention on Biological Diversity’s post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework will probably include a goal to stabilize and restore the status of species. Its delivery would be facilitated by making the actions required to halt and reverse species loss spatially explicit. Here, we develop a species threat abatement and restoration (STAR) metric that is scalable across species, threats and geographies. STAR quantifies the contributions that abating threats and restoring habitats in specific places offer towards reducing extinction risk. While every nation can contribute towards halting biodiversity loss, Indonesia, Colombia, Mexico, Madagascar and Brazil combined have stewardship over 31% of total STAR values for terrestrial amphibians, birds and mammals. Among actions, sustainable crop production and forestry dominate, contributing 41% of total STAR values for these taxonomic groups. Key Biodiversity Areas cover 9% of the terrestrial surface but capture 47% of STAR values. STAR could support governmental and non-state actors in quantifying their contributions to meeting science-based species targets within the framework.

Loss of habitats or ecosystems arising from development projects (e.g., infrastructure, resource extraction, urban expansion) are frequently addressed through biodiversity offsetting. As currently implemented, offsetting typically requires an outcome of “no net loss” of biodiversity, but only relative to a baseline trajectory of biodiversity decline. This type of “relative” no net loss entrenches ongoing biodiversity loss, and is misaligned with biodiversity targets that require “absolute” no net loss or “net gain.” Here, we review the limitations of biodiversity offsetting, and in response, propose a new framework for compensating for biodiversity losses from development in a way that is aligned explicitly with jurisdictional biodiversity targets. In the framework, targets for particular biodiversity features are achieved via one of three pathways: Net Gain, No Net Loss, or (rarely) Managed Net Loss. We outline how to set the type (“Maintenance” or “Improvement”) and amount of ecological compensation that is appropriate for proportionately contributing to the achievement of different targets. This framework advances ecological compensation beyond a reactive, ad‐hoc response, to ensuring alignment between actions addressing residual biodiversity losses and achievement of overarching targets for biodiversity conservation.

A global goal of no net loss of natural ecosystems or better has recently been proposed, but such a goal would require equitable translation to country-level contributions. Given the wide variation in ecosystem depletion, these could vary from net gain (for countries where restoration is needed), to managed net loss (in rare circumstances where natural ecosystems remain extensive and human development imperative is greatest). National contributions and international support for implementation also must consider non-area targets (for example, for threatened species) and socioeconomic factors such as the capacity to conserve and the imperative for human development.

SummaryImportant Bird and Biodiversity Areas (IBAs) are sites identified as being globally important for the conservation of bird populations on the basis of an internationally agreed set of criteria. We present the first review of the development and spread of the IBA concept since it was launched by BirdLife International (then ICBP) in 1979 and examine some of the characteristics of the resulting inventory. Over 13,000 global and regional IBAs have so far been identified and documented in terrestrial, freshwater and marine ecosystems in almost all of the world’s countries and territories, making this the largest global network of sites of significance for biodiversity. IBAs have been identified using standardised, data-driven criteria that have been developed and applied at global and regional levels. These criteria capture multiple dimensions of a site’s significance for avian biodiversity and relate to populations of globally threatened species (68.6% of the 10,746 IBAs that meet global criteria), restricted-range species (25.4%), biome-restricted species (27.5%) and congregatory species (50.3%); many global IBAs (52.7%) trigger two or more of these criteria. IBAs range in size from < 1 km2 to over 300,000 km2 and have an approximately log-normal size distribution (median = 125.0 km2, mean = 1,202.6 km2). They cover approximately 6.7% of the terrestrial, 1.6% of the marine and 3.1% of the total surface area of the Earth. The launch in 2016 of the KBA Global Standard, which aims to identify, document and conserve sites that contribute to the global persistence of wider biodiversity, and whose criteria for site identification build on those developed for IBAs, is a logical evolution of the IBA concept. The role of IBAs in conservation planning, policy and practice is reviewed elsewhere. Future technical priorities for the IBA initiative include completion of the global inventory, particularly in the marine environment, keeping the dataset up to date, and improving the systematic monitoring of these sites.

Over US$60 trillion is predicted to be spent on new infrastructure globally by 2040. Is it possible to meet UN Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 9 (develop infrastructure networks) without sacrificing goals 14 and 15 (ending biodiversity loss)? We explore the potential role of "no net loss" (NNL) policies in reconciling these SDGs. We assess country-level overlaps between planned infrastructure expansion, infrastructure-threatened biodiversity, and national biodiversity compensation policies and find that around half of predicted infrastructure and infrastructure-threatened biodiversity falls within countries with some form of mandatory compensation policy. However, these policies currently have shortcomings, are unlikely to achieve NNL in biodiversity, and could risk doing more harm than good. We summarize policy transformations required for NNL policies to mitigate all infrastructure impacts on biodiversity. To achieve SDGs 9 alongside 14 and 15, capitalizing on the global coverage of mandatory compensation policies and rapidly transforming them into robust NNL policies (emphasizing impact avoidance) should be an urgent priority.

A global goal of no net loss of natural ecosystems or better has recently been proposed, but such a goal would require equitable translation to country-level contributions. Given the wide variation in ecosystem depletion, these could vary from net gain (for countries where restoration is needed), to managed net loss (in rare circumstances where natural ecosystems remain extensive and human development imperative is greatest). National contributions and international support for implementation also must consider non-area targets (for example, for threatened species) and socioeconomic factors such as the capacity to conserve and the imperative for human development.

Systematic conservation planning and Key Biodiversity Areas (KBAs) are the two most widely used approaches for identifying important sites for biodiversity. However, there is limited advice for conservation policy makers and practitioners on when and how they should be combined. Here we provide such guidance, using insights from the recently developed Global Standard for the Identification of KBAs and the language of decision science to review and clarify their similarities and differences. We argue the two approaches are broadly similar, with both setting transparent environmental objectives and specifying actions. There is however greater contrast in the data used and actions involved, as the KBA approach uses biodiversity data alone and identifies sites for monitoring and vigilance actions at a minimum, whereas systematic conservation planning combines biodiversity and implementation-relevant data to guide management actions. This difference means there is much scope for combining approaches, so conservation planners should use KBA data in their analyses, setting context-specific targets for each KBA type, and planners and donors should use systematic conservation planning techniques when prioritizing between KBAs for management action. In doing so, they will benefit conservation policy, practice and research by building on the collaborations formed through the KBA Standard's development.

World governments have committed to increase the global protected areas coverage by 2020, but the effectiveness of this commitment for protecting biodiversity depends on where new protected areas are located. Threshold- and complementarity-based approaches have been independently used to identify important sites for biodiversity. We brought together these approaches by performing a complementarity-based analysis of irreplaceability in important bird and biodiversity areas (IBAs), which are sites identified using a threshold-based approach. We determined whether irreplaceability values are higher inside than outside IBAs and whether any observed difference depends on known characteristics of the IBAs. We focused on 3 regions with comprehensive IBA inventories and bird distribution atlases: Australia, southern Africa, and Europe. Irreplaceability values were significantly higher inside than outside IBAs, although differences were much smaller in Europe than elsewhere. Higher irreplaceability values in IBAs were associated with the presence and number of restricted-range species; number of criteria under which the site was identified; and mean geographic range size of the species for which the site was identified (trigger species). In addition, IBAs were characterized by higher irreplaceability values when using proportional species representation targets, rather than fixed targets. There were broadly comparable results when measuring irreplaceability for trigger species and when considering all bird species, which indicates a good surrogacy effect of the former. Recently, the International Union for Conservation of Nature has convened a consultation to consolidate global standards for the identification of key biodiversity areas (KBAs), building from existing approaches such as IBAs. Our results informed this consultation, and in particular a proposed irreplaceability criterion that will allow the new KBA standard to draw on the strengths of both threshold- and complementarity-based approaches.

Increasingly, development projects are managing biodiversity and ecosystem service risk through the application of IFC's Performance Standard 6. Central to PS6 is the identification of Critical Habitat, which in turn requires the definition of one or more Discrete Management Units. Guidance for this is limited, and DMU delineation can be especially challenging for linear infrastructure, which may have a small direct footprint but can run for long distances across many ecological zones. Options for DMU definition for linear infrastructure include A single large DMU including contiguous habitat or the administrative unit fully including the pipeline. This simple approach may be appropriate when infrastructure runs across a single landscape containing migratory or nomadic wildlife. Elsewhere, the resulting DMU may be unfeasibly large (including an entire country/province or several ecoregions and thus not helpful for mitigation planning.Defining a buffer of fixed or variable width around linear infrastructure. This is also a simple approach but usually lacks the ecological and/or management rationale required by PS6. However, this may be the only feasible approach in some circumstances, e.g. the open ocean. Buffer size should consider the infrastructure's likely area of influence, including indirect and cumulative impacts. This will be larger than the simple footprint.Defining multiple DMUs, where a buffer around the linear infrastructure intersects with coherent ecological or management units of recognised high biodiversity value. This approach allows some degree of spatial differentiation of areas that are or are not Critical Habitat, assuming that ecological or management units at a suitable spatial scale can be identified. Multiple DMUs can be combined with a ‘simple buffer’ approach for a more comprehensive area of assessment. DMUs specific to one or more biodiversity features are a cross-cutting approach that can be used with any of the above. This may be effective if features can easily be grouped at different spatial scales (e.g. wide-ranging mammals vs. plants confined to a particular geology). Greater complexity and possible difficulty of communication needs to be weighed against the greater specificity that can be achieved. These approaches are illustrated with an example from Simandou, Guinea, for a 640 km long rail corridor. This uses a simple buffer (20 km each side) to identify multiple intersecting DMUs for Critical Habitat determination. There is no one right way to define DMUs for linear infrastructure. Methods should apply ‘common sense’ taking into account the project context and bear in mind the overall aim, to allow Critical Habitat determination at an appropriate ecological/management scale. A precautionary approach is preferable, for instance to ensure buffers are wide enough to encompass potential impacts and through collective rather than individual assessment of DMUs against PS6 threshold.

Engaging constructively with stakeholders is vital to managing Biodiversity and Ecosytem Services (BES) risks successfully. Understanding and engaging with stakeholders is relevant at both corporate and operational levels and is necessary throughout the project life cycle. We have identified a wide range of potential stakeholders who have BES interests and how these interests can provide opportunities for risk management at a corporate or asset level. Stakeholder engagement, especially regarding relationships with local communities around assets, is often a key part of a company's activities to manage social risk, but has been underlooked as part of managing environmental riks. Stakeholders with an interest in BES are both internal and external to the company, and exist at a global, national and local level. They can be from groups ranging from company staff, or local communities near an asset, to scientists and non-governmental organisations national and internationally. Engaging with different stakeholder groups can help: comply with regulators, meet the expectations of lenders, and thus enable financing;enhance transparency and improve reputation, and thus the social licence to operate;identify important biodiversity features (for example during an impact assessment screening process);understand the status of important biodiversty features, how relevant stakeholders value them (for example as part of baseline studies);help determine Priority ES that could be impacted by the project, that are important components of livelihood and that are irreplaceable (for example as part of an ecosystem services review), and thus avoid social conflict, and potential project delays;identify actions to mitigate impacts on BES;build partnerships with parties who will implement long-term elements of the mitigation hierarchy (for example for restoration programs and biodiversity offsets). Many of the issues which may arise regarding stakeholder expectations on BES are partly or predominantly cultural, socio-economic or political, rather than ecological. It is crucial therefore to coordinate the different components of engagement (environmental, social and public relations) and that the relevant company/project teams collaborate so that they understand how stakeholders value and use BES and their expectations concerning BES management.

Costs of Conservation In 2010, world governments agreed to a strategic plan for biodiversity conservation, including 20 targets to be met by 2020, through the Convention on Biological Diversity. Discussions on financing the plan have still not been resolved, partly because there is little information on the likely costs of meeting the targets. McCarthy et al. (p. 946 , published online 11 October) estimate the financial costs for two of the targets relating to protected areas and preventing extinctions. Using data from birds, they develop models that can be extrapolated to the costs for biodiversity more broadly. Reducing extinction risk for all species is estimated to require in the region of U.S. $4 billion annually, while the projected costs of establishing and maintaining protected areas may be as much as U.S. $58 billion—although both sums are small, relative to the economic costs of ecosystem losses.

There is an increased appreciation of the need for horizon scanning: the identification and assessment of issues that could be serious in the future but have currently attracted little attention. However, a process is lacking to identify appropriate responses by policy makers and practitioners. We thus suggest a process and trial its applicability. Twelve environmental conservation organizations assessed each of 15 previously identified horizon scanning issues for their impact upon their organization and the urgency with which they should consider the issue. They also identified triggers that would result in changes in their scoring of the likely urgency and impact of the issues. This process enables organizations to identify priority issues, identify issues they can ignore until there are further developments, benchmark priorities across organizations and identify cross-organizational priorities that warrant further attention, so providing an agenda for collation of evidence, research and policy development. In this trial the review of responses by other organizations resulted in the upgrading of response by a substantial proportion of organizations for eight of the 15 issues examined. We suggest this approach, with the novel components of collaborative assessment and identification of triggers, could be adopted widely, both within conservation organizations and across a wider range of policy issues.

The target adopted by world leaders of significantly reducing the rate of biodiversity loss by 2010 was not met but this stimulated a new suite of biodiversity targets for 2020 adopted by the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) in October 2010. Indicators will be essential for monitoring progress towards these targets and the CBD will be defining a suite of relevant indicators, building on those developed for the 2010 target. Here we argue that explicitly linked sets of indicators offer a more useful framework than do individual indicators because the former are easier to understand, communicate and interpret to guide policy. A Response-Pressure-State-Benefit framework for structuring and linking indicators facilitates an understanding of the relationships between policy actions, anthropogenic threats, the status of biodiversity and the benefits that people derive from it. Such an approach is appropriate at global, regional, national and local scales but for many systems it is easier to demonstrate causal linkages and use them to aid decision making at national and local scales. We outline examples of linked indicator sets for humid tropical forests and marine fisheries as illustrations of the concept and conclude that much work remains to be done in developing both the indicators and the causal links between them.

SummaryImportant Bird Areas (IBAs) form a network of priority sites that are critical for the conservation of birds and biodiversity. A standard framework for monitoring IBAs is being implemented by the BirdLife Partnership globally. Scores are assigned on a simple ranked scale for state (condition), pressure (threats) and response (conservation action) at each site, from which IBA indices can be calculated. In Kenya, this scoring system was applied retrospectively using information in the national IBA directory (1999) and subsequent status reports (2004 and 2005). IBA indices for 36 IBAs show that their average condition deteriorated between 1999 and 2005, with the mean state score being between ‘unfavourable’ and ‘near favourable’. Pressures on IBAs showed a slight decline in intensity, especially from 2004 to 2005, coincident with an improvement in management that was reflected in increasing response scores. Compared to unprotected IBAs, officially protected sites had substantially greater conservation responses underway, were subject to marginally lower pressures and tended to be in slightly better condition. Other disaggregations of the data allow comparisons to be made for sites in different habitats, of different size, and managed by different agencies. This national example for Kenya suggests that the BirdLife IBA monitoring framework provides a simple but effective way of tracking trends in the state of IBAs, the pressures upon them, and the responses in place. The system is sensitive enough to detect differences between sites and over time, but simple enough to be implemented with little training and without sophisticated technology. The results provide vital information for managers of individual protected areas, management agencies responsible for suites of sites, and national governments, and can be used to track progress in tackling the global biodiversity crisis.

SummaryThe Taita Apalis Apalis fuscigularis (IUCN category: Critically Endangered) is a species endemic to south-eastern Kenya. We assessed population size and habitat use in the three forest sites in which it is known to occur (Ngangao, Chawia and Vuria, totalling 257 ha). The estimate of total population size, derived from distance sampling at 412 sample points, ranged from 310 to 654 individuals, with the northern section of Ngangao fragment having 10-fold higher densities than Chawia (2.47–4.93 versus 0.22–0.41 birds ha−1). Ngangao north alone hosted 50% of the global population of the species. The highly degraded Vuria fragment also had moderately high densities (1.63–3.72 birds ha−1) suggesting that the species tolerates some human disturbance. Taita Apalis prefers vegetation with abundant climbers, but the predictive power of habitat use models was low, suggesting that habitat structure is not a primary cause for the low density of the species in Chawia. Protecting the subpopulation in the northern section of Ngangao is a priority, as is identifying factors responsible of the low abundance in Chawia, because ameliorating conditions in this large fragment could substantially increase the population of Taita Apalis.

Critical Habitat has become an increasingly important concept used by the finance sector and businesses to identify areas of high biodiversity value. The International Finance Corporation (IFC) defines Critical Habitat in their highly influential Performance Standard 6 (PS6), requiring projects in Critical Habitat to achieve a net gain of biodiversity. Here we present a global screening layer of Critical Habitat in the terrestrial realm, derived from global spatial datasets covering the distributions of 12 biodiversity features aligned with guidance provided by the IFC. Each biodiversity feature is categorised as ‘likely’ or ‘potential’ Critical Habitat based on: 1. Alignment between the biodiversity feature and the IFC Critical Habitat definition; and 2. Suitability of the spatial resolution for indicating a feature’s presence on the ground. Following the initial screening process, Critical Habitat must then be assessed in-situ by a qualified assessor. This analysis indicates that a total of 10% and 5% of the global terrestrial environment can be considered as likely and potential Critical Habitat, respectively, while the remaining 85% did not overlap with any of the biodiversity features assessed and was classified as ‘unknown’. Likely Critical Habitat was determined principally by the occurrence of Key Biodiversity Areas and Protected Areas. Potential Critical Habitat was predominantly characterised by data representing highly threatened and unique ecosystems such as ever-wet tropical forests and tropical dry forests. The areas we identified as likely or potential Critical Habitat are based on the best available global-scale data for the terrestrial realm that is aligned with IFC’s Critical Habitat definition. Our results can help businesses screen potential development sites at the early project stage based on a range of biodiversity features. However, the study also demonstrates several important data gaps and highlights the need to incorporate new and improved global spatial datasets as they become available.

Our study focused on the Taita White-eye Zosterops silvanus, one of three bird species endemic to the Taita Hill forests, south-east Kenya. Formerly considered Critically Endangered, Taita White-eye has been down-listed to Endangered following the findings of this study. Between November 1998 and September 1999 we counted this species along line transects to establish their current population status and distribution in its entire range. White-eye censuses were conducted in nine forest fragments of the Taita Hills and the virtually undisturbed Mt Kasigau forest. The total global population of Taita White-eyes was estimated to be c. 7,100 birds. Mt Kasigau was shown to be the species' main stronghold, maintaining a very high density (26 birds ha−1) and holding 80% (5,600 individuals) of the entire population. In the Taita Hills forests, densities were consistently higher in the small isolated fragments than in the large ones, though the former held only a small population (3% of total). At Mt Sagala, a large isolated block where indigenous trees have been largely replaced with exotic plantation, this species was not encountered. We found no evidence of interchange between the White-eye populations on Mt Kasigau and the Taita Hills forests, probably because of the separation by a low-altitude, dry woodland habitat barrier. While prioritization for conservation action should focus more on the Taita Hills forest fragments, Mt Kasigau should be treated as fragile ecosystem which holds a huge, apparently insular population of Taita White-eyes.

Sound knowledge of underlying mechanisms is essential for understanding how species respond to habitat fragmentation. Because most threatened species are typically the first ones to suffer local extinctions with forest fragmentation, studying why they fare poorly at the broader landscape scale is difficult. Related, sympatric but common species may be useful surrogates if they can provide insights germane for the conservation of rarer species. We illustrate this using a case study from the highly fragmented Taita Hills forests, south-eastern Kenya, of the Critically Endangered Taita thrush Turdus helleri and the more common white-starred robin Pogonocichla stellata as the surrogate. The responses of the thrush to habitat disturbance were in the same direction as the surrogate robin (e.g. higher fluctuating asymmetry, lower effective population densities and male-biased sex ratios), albeit they were detected sooner and were more severe because of its lower dispersal capacity. The key conservation measures proposed from the surrogate study largely matched those based on an independent evaluation of the thrush data. Additionally, the surrogate provided extra insights into the potential solutions for problems facing the thrush, and provided a base that could be used as a template for restoring the thrush populations in this area. Thus, our findings support the use of surrogate species in the conservation of sympatric related species in fragmented landscapes. We contend that this approach is also applicable for allopatric related species where landscapes are similar, provided that detailed data on population patterns and processes for the surrogate are available.

World governments have committed to increase the global protected areas coverage by 2020, but the effectiveness of this commitment for protecting biodiversity depends on where new protected areas are located. Threshold- and complementarity-based approaches have been independently used to identify important sites for biodiversity. We brought together these approaches by performing a complementarity-based analysis of irreplaceability in important bird and biodiversity areas (IBAs), which are sites identified using a threshold-based approach. We determined whether irreplaceability values are higher inside than outside IBAs and whether any observed difference depends on known characteristics of the IBAs. We focused on 3 regions with comprehensive IBA inventories and bird distribution atlases: Australia, southern Africa, and Europe. Irreplaceability values were significantly higher inside than outside IBAs, although differences were much smaller in Europe than elsewhere. Higher irreplaceability values in IBAs were associated with the presence and number of restricted-range species; number of criteria under which the site was identified; and mean geographic range size of the species for which the site was identified (trigger species). In addition, IBAs were characterized by higher irreplaceability values when using proportional species representation targets, rather than fixed targets. There were broadly comparable results when measuring irreplaceability for trigger species and when considering all bird species, which indicates a good surrogacy effect of the former. Recently, the International Union for Conservation of Nature has convened a consultation to consolidate global standards for the identification of key biodiversity areas (KBAs), building from existing approaches such as IBAs. Our results informed this consultation, and in particular a proposed irreplaceability criterion that will allow the new KBA standard to draw on the strengths of both threshold- and complementarity-based approaches.

The need for effective global monitoring of biodiversity is clearer than ever, but our measurements remain patchy and inadequate. In the biodiversity-rich tropics, a central problem is the sustainability of monitoring schemes. Locally-based, participatory approaches show promise in overcoming this problem, but may not contribute effectively to monitoring at larger scales. BirdLife International’s framework for monitoring Important Bird Areas (IBAs) in Africa is designed to be simple, robust and locally-grounded, but to produce scaleable results that can be compiled into national or regional indices. Focusing on key sites for bird conservation, identified according to standard criteria, the framework institutionalises monitoring in site management authorities and Site Support Groups (community-based organisations of local people working for conservation and sustainable development). A small, central monitoring unit co-ordinates the programme nationally, compiles, analyses and manages data, and provides feedback. ‘Basic’ monitoring (taking place at all sites) involves scoring of state, pressure and response trends using site information submitted on simple forms. ‘Detailed’ monitoring (taking place at a selected sub-set of sites) involves more intensive measurement of particular variables that relate to site management targets. IBA monitoring is now underway in at least 10 African countries, with implementation of the framework most advanced (thanks to a pilot project) in Kenya. The 2004 IBA monitoring report for Kenya provides extensive information on individual IBAs, plus indices for national trends in state, pressure and response, based on data from 49 out of 60 sites. The experience in Kenya shows that institutionalisation is vital, but takes considerable time and effort; that adequate co-ordination (including timely feedback) is key; and that participatory monitoring has many valuable benefits beyond the data collected. Further work is being undertaken to refine the process, improve its scientific underpinning, and strengthen the feedback loop from data and analysis to action on the ground.

White-breasted Cormorant ( Phalacrocorax carbo ) breeding timing and reproductive success were documented in 1995 and 1996 at Lake Naivasha, Kenya (0°49'S), considered to be seasonally constant. In both years, pairs breeding earlier fledged significantly more chicks per breeding attempt than pairs breeding later. Smaller brood sizes later in the season were responsible for 81% of the difference; nestling loss represented 19%. Sixty-three percent of the total nestlings lost were from the nests of pairs breeding late in the season. Starvation appeared to be the primary cause of nestling loss, but there was no evidence of a consistent seasonal decline in prey availability. Neither predation nor sibling aggression appeared to be a major factor, although the reproductive success of late-breeders was almost certainly reduced by conspecific interference from fledglings of early-breeding pairs. The likeliest explanation for the seasonal decline is that older, more experienced (and therefore more successful) birds tend to breed early in the season. (Ostrich: 2003 74(1&2): 102–109)

Montane grassland is a severely threatened habitat in Kenya. Despite a high level of faunal endemism, it has received very little conservation attention. We investigated habitat selection in a threatened grassland endemic bird species, Sharpe's longclaw (Macronyx sharpei) (family Motacillidae), in order to understand its likely response to land-use changes. Between November 1995 and May 1996, we studied 41 territories of this species on the Kinangop Plateau in central Kenya. With an overall density of 0.4 birds ha(-1), longclaws lived in permanent groups of two to seven individuals. They were sedentary and territorial, with a mean home range size of 0.5 ha. The species avoided non-grassland areas entirely, and within grassland showed a strong preference for short grass with tussocks. Territory sizes and foraging ranges were smaller, and rates of pecking for food higher, in this grassland type than in open short grass or long grass. Land use changes, in particular conversion to cultivation or woodlots and ploughing up of grassland to remove tussocks, pose a serious and immediate threat to this species. Dairy farming is potentially compatible with grassland conservation, and conservation-friendly livestock rearing needs to be promoted through economic incentives, awareness-raising and technical advice. (C) 2002 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.

A workshop held at the University of Cambridge in May 2017 brought developers, researchers, knowledge brokers, and users together to discuss user-centred design of decision support tools. Decision support tools are designed to take users through logical decision steps towards an evidence-informed final decision. Although they may exist in different forms, including on paper, decision support tools are generally considered to be computer- (online, software) or app-based. Studies have illustrated the potential value of decision support tools for conservation, and there are several papers describing the design of individual tools. Rather less attention, however, has been placed on the desirable characteristics for use, and even less on whether tools are actually being used in practice. This is concerning because if tools are not used by their intended end user, for example a policy-maker or practitioner, then its design will have wasted resources. Based on an analysis of papers on tool use in conservation, there is a lack of social science research on improving design, and relatively few examples where users have been incorporated into the design process. Evidence from other disciplines, particularly human-computer interaction research, illustrates that involving users throughout the design of decision support tools increases the relevance, usability, and impact of systems. User-centred design of tools is, however, seldom mentioned in the conservation literature. The workshop started the necessary process of bringing together developers and users to share knowledge about how to conduct good user-centred design of decision support tools. This will help to ensure that tools are usable and make an impact in conservation policy and practice.

The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species provides assessments of extinction risk for over 80,000 species. It has become an important tool for conservation and for informing natural resource policy and management more broadly. Over the last 10–15 years, the role of the Red List in business decision-making has become increasingly significant. We describe the key business uses of the Red List and their benefits to conservation, focusing on industrial-scale development and supply chains. The Red List is used by business throughout the process of planning and implementing projects, in order to understand and manage potential impacts on biodiversity. It informs screening and impact avoidance, baseline survey design, impact assessment and mitigation, biodiversity action plan development, and offset design and implementation. Business use could be strengthened by recognising business needs when prioritising improvements, so as to address specific aspects of consistency and coverage, access, information relevance and assessment transparency. Finding effective ways to feed relevant business-generated data back into the Red List process would, in turn, strengthen the assessments. The crucial role that the Red List has assumed in good-practice business decision-making represents both a success and an opportunity for the Red List community. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved

Environmental factors and breeding activity of the White-breasted Cormorant were documented over two breeding seasons (1995/96) at a new 900-nest colony near Lake Naivasha, Kenya (00° 46′S, 36° 22′E), a non-seasonal lake. Breeding of this species has been reported to occur year-round near the equator in East Africa. Other studies suggest that the White-breasted Cormorant breeds mainly during April–June throughout sub-Saharan Africa, irrespective of the local climatic regime or differences in photoperiod trend. At Lake Naivasha, breeding also occurred primarily during April–June. There was no evidence of a consistent seasonal increase in prey abundance during this period, and the timing was not linked consistently to any other environmental changes, such as amount of rainfall, lake water level or transparency, daily photoperiod, or ambient air temperature. Onset of the main rains, however, appeared to be a possible stimulant to breeding readiness in the population as a whole. It is suggested that breeding ...

The highland grasslands of central Kenya hold a suite of restricted-range bird species, including several of global conservation concern. These grasslands occur almost entirely on private land with no formal protection, and have received little conservation attention. This paper describes land-use change on the Kinangop Plateau, Kenya, and considers the implications for grassland bird species, especially Sharpe's Longclaw Macronyx sharpei . The Kinangop Plateau is an area of montane grassland east of the Rift Valley, used primarily for dairy farming since human settlement in 1964. However, dairy farming (which retains grassland as pasture) has given way to other forms of land-use, especially cultivation of crops. In March 1996, a questionnaire was administered to 50 landowners to investigate community attitudes towards birds and their conser vation, the extent of present land-use changes and likely future land-use patterns. The mean acreage of landholding was decreasing, and more grassland was rapidly being converted into cultivated land, with 3.2% being ploughed up during the six months from November 1995 to May 1996. Farmers expressed a preference for crop farming (66%) over livestock farming (26%) or other land uses. Thirty-two per cent expressed a positive attitude, and 60% were indifferent, towards birds. Most (76%) were not aware of biodiversity values or conservation. Though 64% were aware of declining bird populations around them, 82% of this group did not realize that their activities might be contributing to this decline. Sixty-eight per cent of landowners planned to convert all or part of their grassland holdings. Although landowners' interests seemed generally incompatible with grassland conservation, a substantial proportion (44%) were prepared to consider opportunities to enhance the area's conservation value. An informal follow-up survey in March 1999 concluded that prospects for the dairy industry and for grassland habitats on Kinangop were not as bleak as the initial survey suggested, but confirmed the delicate conservation status of Sharpe's Longclaw and its habitat. We suggest a variety of actions that might help to secure the future of Sharpe's Longclaw while promoting sustainable agricultural development on Kinangop, and propose several topics where further research is needed. Species such as Sharpe's Longclaw will only survive if we can develop ways of managing their habitats in a manner that is consistent, rather than in conflict, with the needs of the agricultural community.

Waterbird populations were censused each January from 1991 to 1999 at Lakes Naivasha, Elmenteita and Nakuru and from 1992 at Lake Bogoria. These shallow lakes in the Kenyan Rift Valley fluctuate greatly in water level and alkalinity. All but Naivasha are usually saline; Nakuru and Elmenteita at times support fish, while Bogoria is fishless. A standardized logarithmic index of relative abundance (value 1.0 for the mean) was calculated for each major waterbird group at each lake, and for Naivasha, Elmenteita and Nakuru combined (‘combined lakes’). Its variance was used to compare levels of variation within and across lakes. For the combined lakes, there was high variance in large piscivores (whether combined or separated into groups), grebes, rallids and flamingos. There was low variance in Palaearctic waders (combined or separated into groups), ibises and spoonbills and birds of prey. However, the lakes generally showed idiosyncratic patterns of variation across the different groups. Variance in the indices for birds of prey and kingfishers were consistently low (max. 0.036 and 0.042, respectively), but no group had consistently high variance across all sites. The variance for all birds (other than flamingos) combined was low (0.018 – 0.085) and similar across all lakes and for combined lakes (0.018). For the combined lakes, the variance for flamingos was five times higher than for all other birds (p

Long-term monitoring of wetlands is an essential element of management for ‘wise use’. Indeed, the Ramsar Convention requires regular monitoring in order to detect changes in ecological character at listed sites. However, there are few examples of successful long-term monitoring in tropical wetlands. Monitoring schemes run into three kinds of difficulties: conceptual, logistical and political. To be effective, monitoring schemes must be carefully planned and designed. In practice, the questions to be addressed are rarely made explicit. Strictly defined, monitoring should assess deviations from a pre-set level so that appropriate corrective action can be taken. This assumes that good baseline information exists, and that we have sufficient knowledge of the system to set sensible signal levels. Neither is usually the case in tropical wetlands. This means that carefully focused surveillance (a time-series of systematic observations) is an essential first step. Providing resources and co-ordination for surveillance or monitoring is challenging over the long term, especially if the variables being measured require expensive analyses and highly trained staff. I suggest that surveillance or monitoring programmes should focus on likely threats, and ecological or economic concerns, should be as simple, robust and inexpensive as possible, should be sustained and consistent, and should involve local people and volunteers. If it is to be effective, monitoring must have a clear linkage to wetland management. Ideally, it should form part of each country's wetland policy. I suggest some variables that could be incorporated in sustainable long-term monitoring programmes. Two examples of successful surveillance work at Kenyan wetlands illustrate that the challenges involved in long-term programmes can, at least in part, be overcome.

This study investigated the distribution and habitat selection of the globally threatened East Coast Akalat Sheppardia gunningi sokokensis in Arabuko-Sokoke Forest, the Shimba Hills (both Kenya) and the lowland East Usambara Mountains (Tanzania). The species is more abundant than originally thought. In Arabuko-Sokoke Forest, akalats occur in two of the main vegetation types, and an estimated 7,500–9,000 territories represent one of the largest populations of this species in the world. Akalats occurred at similar densities to those in Arabuko-Sokoke (c. 0.5 pairs/ha) in parts of Shimba Hills and East Usambaras, but were more patchily distributed. This akalat prefers areas where the undergrowth is partially open with large amounts of dead wood. It forages on or near the ground. In Arabuko-Sokoke Forest, areas where akalats were present had a higher abundance of ground-dwelling arthropods than areas where they were not. The akalat inhabits both primary forest and regenerated areas that have been selectively logged probably more than 20 years ago. Despite its relatively high densities where it occurs, this species (like other threatened birds in the East African coastal forests) is very patchily distributed and dependent on a habitat that is now highly fragmented and under considerable human pressure. The conservation situation in Arabuko-Sokoke gives cause for concern, and the destructive effects of a large elephant population threaten the forests of the Shimba Hills. The conservation status of the lowland Usambara Mountains is probably better and more stable.

Njoroge, P. & Bennun, L. A. 2000. Status and conservation of Hinde's Babbler Turdoides hindei, a threatened species in an agricultural landscape. Ostrich 71 (1 & 2): 69–72. Hinde's Babbler is a restricted-range species endemic to Central Kenya. In recent years it appears to have suffered a marked reduction of population within its range. Using active searching and playback of vocalisations, we assessed the species' status in three study areas (Kianyaga, Mukurweini and Machakos) between July 1993 and May 1994. Distribution of the babbler was closely linked to river valleys and swamps, and to the presence of dense thicket vegetation. In Kianyaga and Mukurweini, clearance for intensive cultivation has removed most natural vegetation. Here the babblers rely on small (ranging from 5 m2 to 0.81 ha) patches of the exotic weed Lantana camara for shelter and nest sites. In Machakos (a lower altitude site with less rainfall) the birds occurred in riverine thicket that has not yet been cleared. Densities in Machakos...

Bennun, L. & Fishpool, L. 2000. The Important Bird Areas Programme in Africa: an outline. Ostrich 71 (1 & 2): 150–153. BirdLife International works to conserve the world's birds at the levels of species, sites and habitats. The Important Bird Areas (IBA) programme is a process of setting site-based priorities for birds based on information about species' distribution and numbers. The African IBA programme started in 1993, building on similar successful programmes in Europe and the Middle East. Important Bird Areas are selected according to internationally agreed criteria based upon the presence of globally threatened species, species of restricted range, biome-restricted species assemblages and concentrations of numbers. In Africa, a continental directory of sites is scheduled for publication in 2000, and work is underway to identify and document IBAs across the continent and its associated islands. In 18 countries so far, the process of compiling information is being combined at a national level with str...

Bennun, L. & Nasirwa, O. 2000. Trends in waterbird numbers in the southern Rift Valley of Kenya. Ostrich 71 (1 & 2): 220–226. Each January since 1991, volunteer teams have counted waterbirds at major wetlands in the southern Kenyan Rift Valley. There has been consistent coverage at Lakes Naivasha, Elmenteita, Nakuru and (since 1992) Bogoria. These lakes are shallow and, except for Bogoria, fluctuate greatly in extent; all but Naivasha are saline. Lake levels were moderately high in 1991–1993 but have been generally low since. Flamingo totals for the three saline lakes combined were more than one million from 1992–1994, but roughly halved each year since then. Greater Flamingos Phoenicopterus ruber made up between 0.7 and 4.1% of total flamingo numbers; other waterbirds made up between 2.7 and 10.2% of the overall total. Lakes Naivasha, Elmenteita and Nakuru together hold most of the non-flamingo waterbirds in the southern Rift; to compare trends for other species, we pooled totals for these sites. Signifi...

Waiyaki, E. & Bennun, L.A. 2000. The avifauna of coastal forests in southern Kenya: status and conservation. Ostrich 71 (1 & 2): 247–256. The biological importance and uniqueness of East African coastal forests is widely recognised; they form an Endemic Bird Area. Important remnants of this fragmented habitat OCCUT on the southern Kenyan coast, but their avifauna has been little studied. In October 1992, September 1993 and May-August 1994, we systematically assessed the avifauna of fifteen South Coast forest fragments (and the threats facing them) using mist-netting, timed species counts and direct observations. Sixty forest-dependent bird species were recorded, amongst them three that are globally threatened (Sokoke Pipit Anthus sokolcensis, Spotted Ground Thrush Turdus fischeri, East Coast Akalat Sheppardia gunningi) three that are near-threatened (Southern Banded Snake Eagle Circaetus fasciolatus, Fischer's Turaco Tauraco fischeri, Plain-backed Sunbird Anthrepres reichenowi) and four that are ‘restrict...

Bennun, L.A., Njoroge, P. & Pomeroy, D. 2000. Birds to watch: a Red Data List for East Africa. Ostrich 71 (1 & 2): 310–314. The value of Red Data books and lists is well established; there has been much recent work on improving the criteria for listing species of conservation concern. So far these have been applied mainly at the global level. Regional lists can be useful, however, in improving the resolution of conservation priorities and setting an agenda for research, monitoring and conservation, especially where data are collected by amateur naturalists. A Red Data list for East African birds has been drawn up following an eight-month process that involved wide consultation within the region, defined as Uganda, Rwanda, Tanzania, Kenya and Burundi. The criteria for listing were based on those defined by IUCN, and summarised in a single, simple table that could be used for screening large numbers of species. A criterion based on geographic range eliminated from consideration vagrant species or those on t...

Matiku, P.M., Bennun, L.A. & Nemeth, E. 2000. Distribution and population size of the threatened East Coast Akalat in Arabuko-Sokoke Forest, Kenya. Ostrich 71 (1 & 2): 282–285. The East Coast Akalat Sheppardia gunningi sokokensis is one of six globally threatened bird species that occur in the Arabuko-Sokoke Forest, the largest remnant of forest on the East African coast. The akalat has been little studied but appears to have a patchy distribution both between and within forests. From October 1995 to February 1996 we studied the akalat's status in Arabuko-Sokoke, carrying out transect counts and plot-based surveys to determine its distribution and population size. Playback of calls was used to stimulate the bird to reveal its presence. The akalat was present in two of the forest's main vegetation types, Cynometm woodland and Mixed forest. It was absent from the more open Brachystegia woodland, and from low-canopied intermediate Cynometra and Cynometra thicket. In Cynometra woodland, the akalats were evenl...

Patterns and environmental correlates of species distributions and richness are identified for Kenyan birds at a quarter degree-square scale. This information is used together with iterative complementarity analyses, which employ species richness, taxonomic dispersion and range-restrictedness, to identify priority areas for possible conservation attention. Bird species apparently not conserved by existing protected areas in Kenya are identified. Six avifaunal zones (and one transitional zone) are distinguished based on distributions of suites of bird species. Variation in biotope diversity (the number of forest and aquatic systems) accounts for 79% of the observed variation in Kenyan bird species richness. Although both rainfall and altitudinal range are significantly correlated with species richness, they only explain an additional 3% of the observed variation. The priority areas identified are situated mainly within highlands and coastal lowlands. Although few priority areas are identified in northern Kenya, this region also constitutes a priority, as it contains a suite of xeric species with habitats that are not represented elsewhere in Kenya. The papyrus yellow warbler, Chloropeta gracilirostris, William's bush lark, Mirafra williamsi, white-winged dove, Streptopelia reichenowi, and Jubaland weaver, Ploceus dichrocephalus, are identified as endemics or near-endemics that are probably not adequately conserved in Kenya at present.