Search

Participatory scenario planning (PSP) has mainly concerned scenario development and outreach, with less emphasis on scenario assessment. However, eliciting stakeholder responses to scenarios, focusing on subjective wellbeing, can increase the legitimacy, relevance, and applicability of PSP. We developed a PSP exercise with a multi-stakeholder, cross-cultural group in the Fitzroy River (Martuwarra) basin in Western Australia. Four scenarios were developed collaboratively, each describing alternative development pathways in the basin by 2050. We held two scenario assessment workshops: a multi-stakeholder workshop and a workshop with Traditional Owners (Aboriginal Australians) only. We first asked participants to consider and discuss the current situation in the basin regarding how well nine categories of wellbeing were satisfied. Then, for each scenario, participants assessed and scored the change in each wellbeing category relative to the current situation. Participants’ ratings followed a similar pattern in both workshops, except for the scenario with strong policy and increased large-scale irrigation, which was scored mostly positively by the multi-stakeholder group, and mostly negatively by Traditional Owners. We identified different discourses that help to explain these results: (a) scenarios with large-scale agriculture, or with poorly regulated development, would increase the money circulating in the region, and benefits would trickle down to local communities through employment, enhancing most wellbeing categories; and (b) such modes of development might create jobs but could negatively impact other areas of wellbeing, potentially affecting culturally or environmentally significant places and increasing social inequities. We discuss how these results can support planning in the region, and how trade-offs were approached.

Matching methods encompass non-parametric approaches to estimating counterfactual states through a rigorous selection of control units with similar characteristics to units submitted to an intervention. These methods enable comparisons between treated and control units in a way that facilitates understanding of causal relationships between interventions and outcomes. Matching methods have been used only recently in ecology and conservation biology, where such applications changed the way the field investigates causal questions, for example, in impact-evaluation studies. However, the strengths and limitations of matching methods are not well understood by most ecologists and environmental scientists. Herein, we review state-of-the-art matching methods aiming to help fill this gap in understanding. First, we present relevant theoretical concepts related to matching methods and related subjects such as counterfactual states and causation. Next, we propose guidelines and strategies for the application of matching methods in ecology and conservation biology. Finally, we discuss the possibilities for future applications of matching methods in the environmental sciences.

Small-scale fisheries account for 90% of global fishers and 40% of the global catch. Effectively managing small-scale fisheries is, therefore, crucial to progressing the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Co-management and community-based fisheries management are widely considered the most appropriate forms of governance for many small-scale fisheries. We outlined relationships between small-scale fisheries co-management and attainment of the SDGs, including evidence for impacts and gaps in dominant logic. We identified 11 targets across five SDGs to which small-scale fisheries co-management (including community-based fisheries management) can contribute; the theory of change by which these contributions could be achieved; and the strength of evidence for progress toward SDG targets related to various co-management strategies. Our theory of change links the 11 SDG targets by qualifying that progress toward some targets is contingent on others being achieved first. We then reviewed 58 case studies of co-management impacts from the Pacific Islands--a region rich in local marine governance--to evaluate evidence of where, to what degree, and with how much certainty different co-management strategies conferred positive impacts to each SDG target. These strategies included access restrictions, permanent area closures, periodic closures, and gear and species restrictions. Although many studies provide evidence linking multiple co-management strategies to improvements in resource status (SDG 14.4), there was limited evidence of follow-on effects, such as improvements in catch (SDG 2.3, 2.4), livelihoods (SDG 1.2), consumption (SDG 2.1), and nutrition (SDG 2.2). Our findings suggest that leaps of logic and assumptions are prevalent in co-management planning and evaluation. Hence, when evaluating co-management impacts against the SDGs, consideration of ultimate goals is required, otherwise, there is a risk of shortfalls between aspirations and impact.Las pequeñas pesquerías representan el 90% de los pescadores y el 40% de la pesca a nivel mundial. Por lo tanto, su manejo efectivo es crucial para el avance de los Objetivos de Desarrollo Sustentable de las Naciones Unidas (ODS). Generalmente se considera a la coadministración y la administración comunitaria de las pesquerías como las maneras más apropiadas para gestionar las pequeñas pesquerías. Perfilamos las relaciones entre la coadministración de estas pesquerías y la obtención de los ODS, incluida la evidencia de impactos y vacíos en la lógica dominante. Identificamos once metas en cinco ODS a las cuales puede contribuir la coadministración de las pequeñas pesquerías (incluyendo la administración comunitaria de las pesquerías); la teoría de cambio mediante la cual pueden lograrse estas contribuciones; y la solidez de la evidencia relacionada con varias estrategias de coadministración para el progreso hacia las metas de los ODS. Nuestra teoría de cambio conecta a las once metas de los ODS al calificar que el progreso hacia algunas metas está supeditado a que primero se logren otras metas. Después revisamos 58 estudios de caso del impacto de la coadministración en las islas del Pacífico - una región rica en gestión marina local - para evaluar la evidencia de dónde, a cuál grado y con cuánta certeza las diferentes estrategias de coadministración otorgaron impactos positivos a cada meta de los ODS. Estas estrategias incluyen restricciones de acceso, cierres permanentes del área, cierres periódicos y restricciones de equipamiento y especies. Mientras que muchos estudios proporcionaron evidencia que conecta a varias estrategias de coadministración con mejoras en el estado de los recursos (ODS 14.4), hubo pruebas limitadas de los efectos de seguimiento, como mejoras en la captura (ODS 2.3, 2.4), la subsistencia (ODS 1.2), el consumo (ODS 2.1) y la nutrición (ODS 2.2). Nuestros descubrimientos sugieren que los saltos de lógica y de suposición prevalecen en la planeación y evaluación de la coadministración.小型渔业在全球渔民中占比90%, 而在全球渔获量中占比40%。因此, 有效管理小型渔业对实现联合国可持续发展目标 (SDG) 至关重要。共同管理和基于社区的渔业管理被广泛认为是最适合小型渔业的管理方式。本研究概述了小型渔业共同管理和实现SDG之间的关系, 包括影响的证据和主导逻辑中的空缺。我们提出小型渔业共同管理 (包括基于社区的渔业管理) 可以为5个SDG目标和11个具体目标做出贡献, 确定了实现这些贡献的变革理论, 并确定了在实现与各种共同管理策略有关的SDG目标中取得进展的证据水平。我们的变革理论通过分析目标进展是否取决于其他目标的实现, 从而将11个SDG具体目标建立了联系。接下来, 我们回顾了拥有丰富的地方海洋管理经验的太平洋岛屿的58个共同管理影响的案例研究, 以评估不同的共同管理策略对每个SDG目标产生积极影响的地点、程度和确定性的证据。这些策略包括准入限制、永久禁渔、定期禁渔以及渔具和物种限制。虽然许多研究提供了将多种共同管理策略与资源状态的改善 (SDG 14.4) 联系起来的证据, 但后续效应的证据有限, 如渔获量的增加 (SDG 2.3、2.4)、生计 (SDG 1.2) 、消费 (SDG 2.1) 和营养 (SDG 2.2) 的改善。我们的研究结果表明, 在共同管理的规划和评估中普遍存在着逻辑和假设的跳跃。因此, 在根据SDG目标评估共同管理的影响时, 需要考虑最终目标, 否则就有可能在预期和实际影响之间出现差距。【翻译: 胡怡思; 审校: 聂永刚】.

Aim: Traditional approaches for including species' distributions in conservation planning have presented them as long-term averages of variation. Like these approaches, the main waterfowl conservation targeting tool in the United States Prairie Pothole Region (US PPR) is based primarily on long-term averaged distributions of breeding pairs. While this tool has supported valuable conservation, it does not explicitly consider spatiotemporal changes in spring wetland availability and does not assess wetland availability during the brood rearing period. We sought to develop a modelling approach and targeting tool that incorporated these types of dynamics for breeding waterfowl pairs and broods. This goal also presented an opportunity for us to compare predictions from a traditional targeting tool based on long-term averages to predictions from spatiotemporal models. Such a comparison facilitated tests of the underlying assumption that this traditional targeting tool could provide an effective surrogate measure for conservation objectives such as brood abundance and climate refugia. Location: US PPR. Methods: We developed spatiotemporal models of waterfowl pair and brood abundance within the US PPR. We compared the distributions predicted by these models and assessed similarity with the averaged pair data that is used to develop the current waterfowl targeting tool. Results: Results demonstrated low similarity and correlation between the averaged pair data and spatiotemporal brood and pair models. The spatiotemporal pair model distributions did not serve as better surrogates for brood abundance than the averaged pair data. Main conclusions: Our study underscored the contributions that the current targeting tool has made to waterfowl conservation but also suggested that conservation plans in the region would benefit from the consideration of inter- and intra-annual dynamics. We suggested that using only the averaged pair data and derived products might result in the omission of 58% - 88% of important pair and brood habitat from conservation plans. [Correction added on 5 February 2021, after first online publication: 'Results' text has been modified and the 'Main conclusions' omission percentages have been corrected.].

One of the basic purposes of protected areas and other effective area-based conservation interventions is to achieve conservation impact, the sum of avoided biodiversity loss and promoted recovery relative to outcomes without protection. In the context of the Convention on Biological Diversity's negotiations on the post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework, we find that targets for area-based interventions are framed overwhelmingly with measures that fail to inform decision-makers about impact and that risk diverting limited resources away from achieving it. We show that predicting impact in space and time is feasible and can provide the basis for global guidance for jurisdictions to develop targets for conservation impact and shift investment priorities to areas where impact can be most effectively achieved.

Marine protected areas (MPAs) in the South Pacific have a unique history that calls for a regional-scale synthesis of MPA impacts and the factors related to positive ecological and socioeconomic change. However, recommendations of best approaches to MPA implementation can be made only when evaluation techniques are sound. Impact evaluation involves quantifying the effects of an intervention over and above the counterfactual of no intervention or a different intervention. Determining the true impact of an MPA can be challenging because additional factors beyond the presence of an MPA can confound the observed results (e.g. differences in ecological or socioeconomic conditions between MPA and control sites). While impact evaluation techniques employing counterfactual thinking have been well developed in other fields, they have been embraced only slowly in the MPA evaluation literature. We conducted a structured literature search and synthesis of MPA evaluation studies from the South Pacific to determine: (i) the overall ecological and socioeconomic impacts of MPAs in the region, (ii) what factors were associated with positive, neutral, or negative impacts, and (iii) to what extent the MPA evaluation literature from the region has incorporated counterfactual thinking and robust impact evaluation techniques. Based on 52 identified studies, 42% of measured ecological impacts were positive. While 72% of socioeconomic impacts were positive, these were from only eight studies. The proportion of positive impacts was comparable between community-based and centrally governed MPAs, suggesting that both governance approaches are viable options in the region. No-take MPAs had a greater number of positive ecological impacts than periodic closures and there was little evidence of any long-term ecological recovery within periodic closures following harvesting. Importantly, more than half of the studies examined (59%) did not provide any clear consideration of factors beyond the presence of the MPA that might have confounded their results. We conclude that counterfactual thinking has yet to be fully embraced in impact evaluation studies in the region and recommend pathways by which progress can be made.

Conservation of biodiversity and ecosystem services in natural environments requires careful management choices. However, common methods of evaluating the impact of conservation interventions can have contextual shortcomings. Here, we make a call for counterfactual thinking - asking the question "what would have happened in the absence of an intervention?" - with the support of rigorous evaluation approaches and more thoughtful consideration of human dimensions and behavior. We review and contrast different evaluation approaches and highlight the advantages of counterfactual approaches over alternative methods. We also illustrate how even robust estimates of ecological impact can fail to estimate the impact of specific policy interventions. The latter depend importantly on human preferences and responses to regulations and incentives that cannot be captured by studies of ecological impact. We propose specific and practical steps that all evaluations can implement now to immediately improve their credibility and accountability.

Legislation to ban the targeted fishing of sharks is frequently employed within developing coastal nations. These Shark Large Marine Protected Areas (SLMPAs) are established primarily to alleviate the direct threats that humans pose to sharks through activities such as overfishing and destructive fishing practices. However, despite the anthropogenic nature of these threats, socioeconomic factors are often given less consideration than their ecological counterparts when designating SLMPAs. In this paper, we identified and examined relevant national-level socioeconomic data to determine the challenges and opportunities associated with implementing SLMPAs, focussing on least developed and low income countries. We aimed to use these socioeconomic data to identify nations where SLMPAs are more likely to be successful in providing conservation benefits to sharks. We used principal component analysis to develop two national-level indices that represent these anticipated opportunities and challenges for implementing SLMPAs across 87 coastal nations. The Opportunity Index identifies those nations in which socioeconomic conditions such as adaptive capacity, and strong and fair governance, are favourable for SLMPAs to provide conservation benefits to sharks. The Challenge Index identifies those nations that may not yet be in a position developmentally to support communities to adapt to a loss of access to resources associated with SLMPAs, or to manage and enforce broad scale restrictive legislation. In combination with biophysical considerations, the Challenge and Opportunity indices presented here can support policy makers in deciding whether, and in what cases, SLMPAs are the most appropriate measure to provide conservation benefits to sharks.

In recent decades, the number and extent of protected areas (PAs) have increased, covering >10% of the Earth. However, protection tends to be residual because PAs have been consistently established on marginal lands that minimize costs and conflicts with extractive uses instead of focusing on places important to biodiversity. Here, we provide a panorama of the current network of PAs in Brazil, examine the biases of protection in relation to slope and land use intensity, and determine whether biases vary between biomes. We measured protection bias by accounting for differences between PAs and the municipalities in which they were established, indicating the direction and strength of bias. Brazil has 18% of its land under protection, but 70% of this is in the Amazon. Brazil's other biomes hardly reach 10% of their territories under protection and have strong protection bias. Generally, PAs are strongly biased towards lands with low intensity of use before they were established compared to their background landscapes. There was a small bias towards high slope, but most PAs had the same slope profile as their background landscapes. Trusting percentages of area under protection as a measure of conservation success risks misdirecting conservation actions to areas of lower biological importance and lower threat. To promote effective conservation actions more evidence-informed strategies should be used, based on appropriate ecological criteria and explicit objectives that allow us to measure the likely conservation impacts.

Perpetual conservation easements are a popular method in some countries for addressing conservation goals. Landowner participation plays a key role in the development of these agreements. Despite the importance of involvement by landowners, no recent efforts have been made to synthesize information about the motivations for participation in perpetual easement programs. As a result, the literature lacks a framework to guide future case studies that would facilitate comparisons and generalizations. To this end, we reviewed 43 studies that investigated individual motivations to participate in perpetual conservation easements, and categorized motivations using Ostrom's social–ecological framework. We identified a strong tendency among studies to focus only on local‐scale processes involving landowners, with little consideration of broader‐scale influences. We also highlight several cross‐study trends and gaps in the literature where future research would prove valuable.

© 2020 Elsevier Ltd In 2012, Australia proclaimed a national marine protected area (MPA) system - the National Representative System of MPAs (NRSMPA). Following a change in federal government, the system underwent two major revisions: an independent review released in 2015, and a final plan designed by the Director of National Parks implemented in 2018. We used all three iterations of the NRSMPA, from 2012 to 2018, to compare: 1. the MPA zoning composition, using IUCN protected area categories; 2. the achievement of goals for representing biophysical features; and 3. the potential to mitigate threats to biodiversity from commercial fishing and offshore petroleum extraction. We found that protection levels in the NRSMPA were downgraded in 2018, compared to 2012 and 2015 iterations. Although each iteration met its qualitative goals, the lack of quantitative goals meant that representation of biophysical features was highly uneven and dominated by MPAs offering little protection against the impacts of extractive uses. Moreover, existing areas with value for pelagic longlining, demersal trawling, and offshore petroleum extraction were largely avoided by MPAs, irrespective of their biophysical features. MPAs, especially those with high protection, resulted in little forgone fisheries catch and revenue, likely providing few safeguards for species threatened by fishing. Changes in the NRSMPA over time have left more areas open to fishing, particularly pelagic fishing and notably in the Coral Sea. By focusing on meeting poorly defined representation goals instead of threat reduction, changes to the NRSMPA over time have increased the exposure of Australia's marine biodiversity to known threats.

Stakeholder engagement is essential to conserve ecosystems and associated biodiversity. Outdoor recreation specialists represent stakeholder groups that often rely on specific healthy ecosystems and have unique incentives to contribute to conservation and stewardship. We introduce the concept of habitat-dependent outdoor recreation conservation organizations (HDORCOs) and their potential to harness outdoor recreation enthusiasm to achieve ecosystem-scale conservation objectives. We identify potential roles for HDORCOs in nurturing pro-environmental attitudes and facilitating stewardship behavior among recreationists, focusing on examples from recreational fishing specialists and coastal marine ecosystems. While HDORCOs have achieved conservation outcomes in a range of settings, transferability across recreational specializations and ecological, cultural, socioeconomic, and governance contexts could remain challenging and potentially requires further development of the HDORCO concept. Communication with HDORCOs is one strategy to enhance engagement of recreationists, stakeholder groups not traditionally associated with pro-environmental behavior, in ecosystem-scale conservation efforts.

Suppressing expert knowledge can hide environmentally damaging practices and policies from public scrutiny. We surveyed ecologists and conservation scientists from universities, government, and industry across Australia to understand the prevalence and consequences of suppressing science communication. Government (34%) and industry (30%) respondents reported higher rates of undue interference by employers than did university respondents (5%). Internal communications (29%) and media (28%) were curtailed most, followed by journal articles (11%), and presentations (12%). When university and industry researchers avoided public commentary, this was mainly for fear of media misrepresentation, while government employees were most often constrained by senior management and workplace policy. One third of respondents reported personal suffering related to suppression, including job losses and deteriorating mental health. Substantial reforms are needed, including to codes of practice, and governance of environmental assessments and research, so that scientific advice can be reported openly, in a timely manner and free from interference.

Combining no-take marine reserves with exclusive access by communities to unreserved waters could provide the required incentives for community management to achieve positive impacts. However, few protected areas have been critically evaluated for their impact, which involves applying counterfactual thinking to predict conditions within protected areas if management had never occurred. Here, we use statistical matching to conduct a rigorous impact evaluation of dual management systems on coral reef fishes in Tonga, with communities having both full no-take areas and areas of exclusive fishing rights. No-take areas generally had positive impacts on the species richness, biomass, density, and size of target reef fish, while exclusive access areas were similar to predicted counterfactual conditions. The latter is likely because overall fishing pressure in exclusive access areas might not actually change, although more fish could be exploited by communities with access rights. Our findings suggest that dual management is effective at incentivizing effective community-based no-take areas for biodiversity conservation and resource management.

© 2020 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. 1.Marine protected areas (MPAs) are today's cornerstone of many marine conservation strategies. Our 2015 study (Devillers et al., 2015) and others have shown, however, that the placement of MPAs is ‘residual’ to commercial uses and biased towards areas of lower economic value or interest. 2.In this paper, we explored the impact of our study on marine science, policy and management practice. 3.We reviewed the papers citing our work and compiled expert opinions on some of the impacts of our study. 4.Results indicate a strong general uptake in the scientific community but more uneven impacts on policy and management in different contexts, with a likely smaller impact of the research on conservation practice.

The expansion of coastal marine protected areas can suffer from two key drawbacks: (a) the difficulty of incentivizing local communities to manage areas for conservation when their livelihoods also depend on resource use; and (b) that many protected areas get situated residually, or in locations with limited value for either biodiversity conservation or livelihoods. Here, we discuss and analyze key characteristics of Tonga's Special Management Area (SMA) program, including both the mechanisms that have motivated its successful national expansion and its ability to configure no-take reserves in areas that are considered to have high value to resource users. Granting communities exclusive access zones in exchange for implementing no-take reserves has encouraged conservation actions while fostering long-term relationships with resources. Ensuring no-take reserves occurred within the boundaries of exclusive access zones enabled communities to protect areas of greater extractive values than they would have otherwise. We conclude that the success of this program offers a way forward for achieving targets in the global expansion marine protected areas.

Despite exponential increases in the coverage of protected areas (PAs) over recent decades, global biodiversity continues to decline. One explanation for this lack of success is that the efficacy of conservation prioritization strategies is rarely measured in terms of conservation “impact,” which requires comparing proposed PA networks to a counterfactual scenario in which no intervention is applied. This approach contrasts with measuring efficacy using surrogates for conservation impact, such as the extent, total biodiversity value, or representativeness of a proposed PA network. However, implementing an experimental counterfactual scenario is difficult because of time, funding, and ethical constraints. Here, we use an alternative and complementary approach: an ex‐post analysis with counterfactual outcomes measured using historical empirical data on changes in biodiversity in unprotected landscapes. This approach allows for the comparison of different retrospectively implemented prioritization strategies to a real counterfactual outcome. In our analysis, we predict the impact of several alternative PA prioritization strategies in Queensland, Australia, using high‐resolution datasets of vegetation clearing, habitat type, and land acquisition cost. Our results show that achieving conventional conservation targets does not equate to achieving impact, and that alternative, and relatively simple, prioritization strategies can achieve far greater impacts.

Resources for biodiversity conservation are limited and it is therefore imperative that management actions that have the best chance of success are prioritized. Non‐native species (NNS) are one of the key problems facing biodiversity conservation, so understanding how NNS disperse and establish can inform more effective conservation planning and management. Using a novel Bayesian belief network model, we investigated non‐native plant dispersal on the approximately 550 islands along the Pilbara coast, Western Australia, and identified priority species and locations for targeted management. Of a total of around 9,000 weed arrivals onto the islands, 1,661 arrivals across 14 weed species had some probability of establishment. Suggested management actions in these cases would be education campaigns to inform visitors about the risk of accidental transport of propagules, quarantine programs, and eradication. For the seven weed species that arrived only via human dispersal and had a >10% chance of establishment on five islands, surveillance, and control of new arrivals would be the recommended management actions. Removal of propagule source populations would not be a cost‐effective management strategy. The inherent flexibility of our model means that different objectives can be analyzed in a transparent way, making it a powerful tool for guiding effective targeted action, derived from an explicit decision‐making framework.

Effectively controlling invasive species on islands is a critical aspect of global conservation. Having the potential to outcompete or consume native species, it is particularly important to remove them from islands harbouring unique flora and fauna. Lord Howe Island, a World Heritage listed area to the east of the Australian mainland, is in the midst of a long-term weed management project, where the most prolific invasive species is cherry guava, with over 700,000 plants removed so far. In such projects, it is critical to have a good understanding of the invasion dynamics and removal process to have reliable estimates of project timeline and success, and to ensure the best removal strategies are being utilised. In this paper we model cherry guava growth, spread and removal on Lord Howe Island, fitting our model to 12 years of removal data. Our mean estimate is that there are 102,091 plants remaining on the island, which will take approximately 25 years to remove at current levels of eradication effort. Altering the strategy to search every year, rather than biennially, reduces the eradication time to 20 years, which falls within the project target, while also decreasing the total search effort. However, simply increasing search effort to finish faster actually increases the total eradication effort. This shows that the benefits of making careful adjustments to a strategy can far out-weight the benefit of simply investing more money into control. This project exemplifies how high-quality removal record-keeping can be used to generate models that provide important long-term forecasts of project success and suggest effective strategic improvements.

Made available in DSpace on 2020-12-10T19:53:29Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 0 Previous issue date: 2020-04-01 The global network of protected areas (PAs) is systematically biased towards remote and unproductive places. Consequently, the processes threatening biodiversity are not halted and conservation impact-defined as the beneficial environmental outcomes arising from protection relative to the counterfactual of no intervention-is smaller than previously thought. Yet, many conservation plans still target species' representation, which can fail to lead to impact by not considering the threats they face, such as land conversion and climate change. Here we aimed to identify spatial conservation priorities that minimize the risk of land conversion, while retaining sites with high value for threatened plants at risk from climate change in the Brazilian Cerrado. We compared a method of sequential implementation of conservation actions to a static strategy applied at one time-step. For both schedules of conservation actions, we applied two methods for setting priorities: (i) minimizing expected habitat conversion and prioritizing valuable sites for threatened plants (therefore maximizing conservation impact), and (ii) prioritizing sites based only on their value for threatened plants, regardless of their vulnerability to land conversion (therefore maximizing representation). We found that scenarios aimed at maximizing conservation impact reduced total vegetation loss, while still covering large proportions of species' ranges inside PAs and priority sites. Given that planning to avoid vegetation loss provided these benefits, vegetation information could represent a reliable surrogate for overall biodiversity. Besides allowing for the achievement of two distinct goals (representation and impact), the impact strategies also present great potential for implementation, especially under current conservation policies. Univ Fed Goias, Dept Ecol, Lab Biogeog Conservacao, Ave Esperanca S-N,Campus Samambaia, BR-74690900 Goiania, Go, Brazil Univ Fed Goias, Programa Posgrad Ecol & Evolucao, Goiania, Go, Brazil Int Inst Sustainabil, BR-22460320 Rio De Janeiro, Brazil Univ Fed Parana, Programa Posgrad Ecol & Conservacao, Curitiba, Parana, Brazil James Cook Univ, Ctr Excellence Coral Reef Studies, Australian Res Council, Townsville, Qld 4811, Australia Univ Estadual Paulista, Inst Biociencias, Dept Bot, Lab Fenol, Rio Claro, SP, Brazil Univ Fed Minas Gerais, Ctr Sensoriamento Remoto, Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil Univ Fed Goias, Lab Macroecol, BR-75801615 Jatai, Go, Brazil Inst Nacl Pesquisas Espaciais, Brazilian Res Network Climate Change Rede Clima, Sao Jose Dos Campos, SP, Brazil Univ Estadual Paulista, Inst Biociencias, Dept Bot, Lab Fenol, Rio Claro, SP, Brazil

A principal role of marine protected areas (MPAs) is to mitigate the decline of biodiversity. A key part of this role is to reduce the effects of fisheries on bycatch of vulnerable species. Bycatch can have an impact on species by reducing population sizes, and an ecosystem-level impact through the significant removal of biomass and subsequent trophic changes. In this regard, it is crucial to refine methods for quantifying interactions between fisheries and bycatch species, and to manage these interactions spatially. A new method is presented for quantifying interactions between fisheries and bycatch species at high spatial and temporal resolutions. Temporally explicit species distribution models are used to examine temporal dynamics of fisheries and bycatch. This method is applied to Australia's Eastern Tuna and Billfish Fishery to estimate interactions with seven principal bycatch species. The ability of MPAs to reduce bycatch is evaluated, and considerations are outlined for the spatial management of fishery-bycatch species interactions. Australia's Commonwealth Marine Reserve Network had a minimal impact on bycatch reduction under both the 2012 proclaimed and the 2015 panel-recommended zonings. These results highlight the need for threats to marine biodiversity to be incorporated directly into design of MPAs, and for close scrutiny of assumptions that threats will be incidentally abated after MPAs have been proclaimed, or that off-reserve mechanisms will compensate for inadequacies of MPAs.

Protected area coverage is expanding rapidly in response to threats such as habitat degradation, resource overexploitation, and climate change. Given limited resources, conservation scientists have developed systematic methods for identifying where it is most efficient to protect biodiversity. To improve the outcomes of protected areas, planners have also sought to incorporate non-ecological data into protected area design, including data on conservation opportunity. Our study expands this literature using expert elicitation, participatory mapping, and a case study of the Southern Ocean to identify areas of conservation need and opportunity. We consider the spatial variation between need and opportunity, examine how socioeconomic and political factors influence the selection of areas, and investigate barriers to reaching consensus and establishing marine protected areas along the Western Antarctic Peninsula. We found that, while experts readily identified areas of conservation need and opportunity, most did not easily distinguish between the different types of opportunity proposed in the literature (existing, potential, and fleeting). Geographically, there were significant areas of overlap between need and opportunity, but areas of need were more restricted and specific, whereas areas of opportunity were more expansive and general. Biophysical and socioeconomic factors were most important in motivating the selection of areas of opportunity, followed by geopolitical and then scientific factors. Our approach to data collection and planning can provide insights into tradeoffs between ecological needs and opportunities for taking action, and therefore aid in identifying and reducing barriers to designating effective marine protected areas.

Environmental managers regularly face decisions about how to counteract threats. These decisions require an understanding of both the conservation benefits and economic costs of candidate actions. However, transparent frameworks for how to accurately calculate costs for management are rare. We worked with island managers in Australia to develop eradication protocols for six invasive species- four mammals and two weeds. We used the protocols to create an accounting framework for invasive species eradications to produce realistic cost estimates for eradications across multiple locations. We also used our models to test common cost assumptions: (1) that costs scale linearly with area, (2) that terrain does not influence costs, and (3) that eradication costs stay constant through time. By explicating testing assumptions, we found that costs largely scaled linearly with area, that terrain influences costs, and that costs decline as populations decline in response to ongoing management. Estimated mammal eradication costs were driven in large part by the area of an island and the cost of transport. However, when area alone was used as a proxy for costs, the calculated costs deviated from our modelled costs by 40–56%. Weed eradication cost estimates were driven by the size and density of an infestation as well as the terrain of the island, with the effect of terrain becoming more pronounced as area to be treated increased. We provide a method to calculate realistic costs across several sites, which can be used to guide strategic management decision-making, including prioritisation, and on-ground management actions.

Systematic conservation planning (SCP) is a rapidly advancing discipline aimed at providing decision support for choices between alternate conservation actions. SCP is often used to inform choices about areas to protect, in order to optimize outcomes for biodiversity while minimizing societal costs. Despite the widespread application of SCP approaches, there is limited understanding of the types of impacts resulting from related projects, and when and where it is most effective. This is compounded by the absence of a standardized approach to evaluating and reporting on the outcomes of SCP projects. We highlight the challenges of undertaking evaluations of complex planning processes, the current state of knowledge about the outcomes of SCP projects, and emerging opportunities to improve evaluation. There is a need for clarity around theories of change, definitions of SCP and impact, and standardized reporting and information sharing across the discipline.

Aim Regional-scale assessments are frequently conceived to guide the strategic application of conservation actions. Although changes to priority areas from initial assessments are inevitable, the transition from regional-scale assessment to implementing local actions is poorly understood. An outstanding question concerns the frequency with which regionally assessed priorities should be updated as actions are implemented. We address this gap by simulating the incremental implementation of local actions guided by regional conservation assessments, exploring how update frequency can influence aspects of translating regional assessments to local actions. Location Fiji coral reefs. Methods Our simulations were designed within the framework of systematic conservation planning, with implemented actions simulated based on conservation value in achieving objectives and feature rarity. Other decision rule-sets were put in place to simulate on-the-ground negotiations that are often necessary when transitioning from regional-scale conservation assessments to local actions. We use our simulations to evaluate how the frequency of updating regional priorities influences (1) total time taken to achieve objectives represented by numbers of planning units investigated, (2) total extent of final reserve systems and (3) spatial overlap between initial regional priorities and final implemented reserves. Results Changes in the frequencies of updating did not influence the time taken to achieve conservation objectives, nor the total extent of final reserve systems. However, there was a significant difference in the number of times planning units were re-investigated for implementing actions within in scenarios that involved more frequent updates. Spatial overlap between initial regional priorities and final implemented reserves increased with decreases in update frequency. Main conclusions We find two potential benefits to updating priorities more frequently: (1) faster achievement of objectives for high-priority features and (2) greater potential to capitalize on areas previously investigated. Our findings provide insights into trade-offs to consider regarding the frequency of updating regional assessments, which varies depending on the planning context.