Purpose, process, knowledge, and dignity in interdisciplinary projects

A systems framework for planning and evaluating capacity development in conservation: recommendations for practitioners

Capacity development is increasingly recognized as central to conservation goals. Efforts to develop individual, organizational and societal capacity underpin direct investments in biodiversity conservation and natural resource management, and sustain their impact over time. In the face of urgent needs and increasingly complex contexts for conservation the sector not only needs more capacity development, it needs new approaches to capacity development. The sector is embracing the dynamic relationships between the ecological, political, social and economic dimensions of conservation. Capacity development practitioners should ensure that individuals, organizations and communities are prepared to work effectively in these complex environments of constant change to transform the systems that drive biodiversity loss and unsustainable, unequitable resource use. Here we advocate for a systems view of capacity development. We propose a conceptual framework that aligns capacity development components with all stages of conservation efforts, fosters attention to context, and coordinates with parallel efforts to engage across practitioners and sectors for more systemic impact. Furthermore, we highlight a need for practitioners to target, measure and support vital elements of capacity that have traditionally received less attention, such as values and motivation, leadership and organizational culture, and governance and participation by using approaches from psychology, the social sciences and systems thinking. Drawing from conservation and other sectors, we highlight examples of approaches that can support reflective practice, so capacity development practitioners can better understand the factors that favour or hinder effectiveness of interventions and influence system-wide change.

Social-Ecological Interactions Influencing Primate Harvest: Insights From Madagascar

Globally, non-human primates face mounting threats due to unsustainable harvest by humans. There is a need to better understand the diverse drivers of primate harvest and the complex social-ecological interactions influencing harvest in shared human-primate systems. Here, we take an interdisciplinary, systems approach to assess how complex interactions among primate biological and ecological characteristics and human social factors affect primate harvest. We apply our approach through a review and synthesis of the literature on lemur harvest in Madagascar, a country with one of the highest primate species richness in the world coupled with high rates of threatened primate species and populations in decline. We identify social and ecological factors affecting primate harvest, including the characteristics of lemurs that may make them vulnerable to harvest by humans; factors describing human motivations for (or deterrents to) harvest; and political and governance factors related to power and accessibility. We then discuss social-ecological interactions that emerge from: (1) the prevalence of informal institutions (e.g., cultural taboos), (2) adoption of human predatory strategies, (3) synergies with habitat use and habitat loss, and (4) interactions among regional- and local-scale factors (multi-level interactions). Our results illustrate that social-ecological interactions influencing lemur harvest in Madagascar are complex and context-specific, while influenced by a combination of interactions between species-specific characteristics and human social factors. These context-specific interactions may be also influenced by local-level cultural practices, land use change, and effects from regional-level social complexities such as political upheaval and food insecurity. We conclude by discussing the importance of identifying and explicitly accounting for nuances in underlying social-ecological systems and putting forth ideas for future research on primate harvest in shared human-primate systems, including research on social-ecological feedbacks and the application of Routine Activities Theory.

Practitioner insights as a means of setting a context for conservation

A key obstacle to conservation success is the tendency of conservation professionals to tackle each challenge individually rather than collectively and in context. We sought to prioritize barriers to conservation previously described in the conservation literature. We undertook an online survey of 154 practitioners from over 70 countries to ascertain the most important barriers to conservation they faced. We used statistical analyses to identify the key impediments to conservation success and to examine whether these were affected by organizational attributes. Twenty-one barriers were identified. The importance ascribed to those was influenced by continent of operation and organization size, but not by organization age or autonomy (from larger parent organizations). We found the most important barriers to consider when undertaking conservation action were wider issues (e.g., population growth, consumerism, favoring development, and industrial-scale activity), operating environment (e.g., lack of political will, ineffective law enforcement, weak governments, corruption, safety and security), community attributes (e.g., dynamics, conflicts, and education levels), and the way conservation is undertaken (overconfidence, lack of funding, and externally set agendas). However, we advise against applying a one-size-fits-all approach. We propose that conservationists account for the complex socioecological systems they operate in if they are to achieve success.

John FA, Collen B, Black SA, Griffiths RA. Practitioner and scientist perceptions of successful amphibian conservation

Conservation requires successful outcomes. However, success is perceived in many different ways depending on the desired outcome. Through a questionnaire survey, we examined perceptions of success among 355 scientists and practitioners working on amphibian conservation from over 150 organizations in more than 50 countries. We also sought to identify how different types of conservation actions and respondent experience and background influenced perceptions. Respondents identified 4 types of success: species and habitat improvements (84% of respondents); effective program management (36%); outreach initiatives such as education and public engagement (25%); and the application of science-based conservation (15%). The most significant factor influencing overall perceived success was reducing threats. Capacity building was rated least important. Perceptions were influenced by experience, professional affiliation, involvement in conservation practice, and country of residence. More experienced practitioners associated success with improvements to species and habitats and less so with education and engagement initiatives. Although science-based conservation was rated as important, this factor declined in importance as the number of programs a respondent participated in increased, particularly among those from less economically developed countries. The ultimate measure of conservation success-population recovery-may be difficult to measure in many amphibians; difficult to relate to the conservation actions intended to drive it; and difficult to achieve within conventional funding time frames. The relaunched Amphibian Conservation Action Plan provides a framework for capturing lower level processes and outcomes, identifying gaps, and measuring progress.

Multidisciplinary studies of wildlife trade in primates: Challenges and priorities

Wildlife trade is increasingly recognized as an unsustainable threat to primate populations and informing its management is a growing focus and application of primatological research. However, management policies based on ecological research alone cannot address complex socioeconomic or cultural contexts as drivers of wildlife trade. Multidisciplinary research is required to understand trade complexity and identify sustainable management strategies. Here, we define multidisciplinary research as research that combines more than one academic discipline, and highlight how the articles in this issue combine methods and approaches to fill key gaps and offer a more comprehensive understanding of underlying drivers of wildlife trade including consumer demand, enforcement patterns, source population status, and accessibility of targeted species. These articles also focus on how these drivers interact at different scales, how trade patterns relate to ethics, and the potential effectiveness of different policy interventions in reducing wildlife trade. We propose priorities for future research on primate trade including expanding from multidisciplinary to interdisciplinary research questions and approaches co-created by research teams that integrate across different disciplines such as cultural anthropology, ecology, economics, and public policy. We also discuss challenges that limit the integration of information across disciplines to meet these priorities.

Honest advocacy for nature: presenting a persuasive narrative for conservation

Conservation scientists are increasingly recognising the value of communicating policy-relevant knowledge to policy-makers. Whilst considerable progress has been made in offering practical advice for scientists seeking to engage more closely with decision-makers, researchers have provided few tangible examples to learn from. This paper uses an English case study, but draws out important high-level messages relevant to conservation scientists worldwide. The case study looks at how the Lawton Review presented knowledge persuasively about the suitability of England's ecological network to deal with future pressures. Through skilful framing of rigorous scientific knowledge it was able to make a significant impact on government policy. Impact was achieved through: (1) selecting politically salient frames through which to communicate; (2) using clear, accessible language, and; (3) conducting rigorous science using an authoritative team of experts. Although its publication coincided with a favourable policy window, the Lawton Review seized on this opportunity to communicate a rigorously argued, persuasive and practical conservation message; in other words, it performed 'honest advocacy'. Thus, whilst it remains important to conduct scientific research with technical rigour, conservation scientists could also benefit from identifying salient frames for conservation and communicating clearly.