Perceived barriers to integrating social science and conservation

Importance of methodological pluralism in deriving counterfactuals for evidence-based conservation

Most protected area impact research that uses counterfactuals draws heavily on quantitative methods, data, and knowledge types, making it valuable in producing generalizations but limited in temporal scope, historical detail, and habitat diversity and coverage of ecosystem services. We devised a methodological pluralistic approach, which supports social science qualitative methods, narratives, mixed methods, and interdisciplinarity, to fully unlock the potential of counterfactuals in ensuring a place-based and detailed understanding of the socioecological context and impacts of protected areas. We applied this approach to derive possible counterfactual conditions for the impact of a montane protected area on 40 years of vegetation change in the Cape Floristic Region-a global biodiversity hotspot and UNESCO World Heritage Site in South Africa. We incorporated diverse methods, knowledge, and information sources, drawing on before-after protected area comparisons for inside and outside the protected area. A significant increase in shrubland vegetation (17-30%) was observed and attributed primarily to a decline in frequent burning for grazing. This also occurred outside the protected area and was driven by socioeconomic drivers and not by concerns over biodiversity conservation or land degradation. Had the protected area not been established the area would have seen intensification of cultivation and increased road networks, buildings, and water storage in dams. Our approach increased historical temporal coverage of socioecological change and contextualized assumptions around causality. Protected area impact evaluation should reengage in place-based research that fully incorporates pluralism in methodologies for constructing counterfactuals in a way that builds regional and global understanding from the local level upward. We devised 10 key principles for deriving counterfactuals grounded in methodological pluralism, covering aspects of collaboration, cocreation, inter- and transdisciplinarity, diverse values and lived experiences, multiple knowledge types, multiple possible causal mechanisms, social science qualitative methods, perceptions, perspectives, and narratives.

Incorporating human dimensions is associated with better wildlife translocation outcomes

Wildlife translocations are increasingly used to combat declining biodiversity worldwide. Successful translocation often hinges on coexistence between humans and wildlife, yet not all translocation efforts explicitly include human dimensions (e.g., economic incentives, education programs, and conflict reduction assistance). To evaluate the prevalence and associated outcomes of including human dimensions as objectives when planning translocations, we analyze 305 case studies from the IUCN's Global Re-Introduction Perspectives Series. We find that fewer than half of all projects included human dimension objectives (42%), but that projects including human dimension objectives were associated with improved wildlife population outcomes (i.e., higher probability of survival, reproduction, or population growth). Translocation efforts were more likely to include human dimension objectives if they involved mammals, species with a history of local human conflict, and local stakeholders. Our findings underscore the importance of incorporating objectives related to human dimensions in translocation planning efforts to improve conservation success.

Towards vibrant fish populations and sustainable fisheries that benefit all: learning from the last 30 years to inform the next 30 years

A common goal among fisheries science professionals, stakeholders, and rights holders is to ensure the persistence and resilience of vibrant fish populations and sustainable, equitable fisheries in diverse aquatic ecosystems, from small headwater streams to offshore pelagic waters. Achieving this goal requires a complex intersection of science and management, and a recognition of the interconnections among people, place, and fish that govern these tightly coupled socioecological and sociotechnical systems. The World Fisheries Congress (WFC) convenes every four years and provides a unique global forum to debate and discuss threats, issues, and opportunities facing fish populations and fisheries. The 2021 WFC meeting, hosted remotely in Adelaide, Australia, marked the 30th year since the first meeting was held in Athens, Greece, and provided an opportunity to reflect on progress made in the past 30 years and provide guidance for the future. We assembled a diverse team of individuals involved with the Adelaide WFC and reflected on the major challenges that faced fish and fisheries over the past 30 years, discussed progress toward overcoming those challenges, and then used themes that emerged during the Congress to identify issues and opportunities to improve sustainability in the world's fisheries for the next 30 years. Key future needs and opportunities identified include: rethinking fisheries management systems and modelling approaches, modernizing and integrating assessment and information systems, being responsive and flexible in addressing persistent and emerging threats to fish and fisheries, mainstreaming the human dimension of fisheries, rethinking governance, policy and compliance, and achieving equity and inclusion in fisheries. We also identified a number of cross-cutting themes including better understanding the role of fish as nutrition in a hungry world, adapting to climate change, embracing transdisciplinarity, respecting Indigenous knowledge systems, thinking ahead with foresight science, and working together across scales. By reflecting on the past and thinking about the future, we aim to provide guidance for achieving our mutual goal of sustaining vibrant fish populations and sustainable fisheries that benefit all. We hope that this prospective thinking can serve as a guide to (i) assess progress towards achieving this lofty goal and (ii) refine our path with input from new and emerging voices and approaches in fisheries science, management, and stewardship.

Social feasibility assessments in conservation translocations

Improving the effectiveness of conservation translocations could contribute to reversing global biodiversity loss. Although evaluations of ecological factors affecting translocation outcomes are commonplace, consideration of human social factors remains rare, hindering improvements to this conservation practice. We analysed 550 translocation case studies to explore the inclusion of social factors in project feasibility assessments. Reviewed projects often failed to assess social feasibility, and assessments, where attempted, tended to be narrow in scope. Consequently, challenges such as proactively addressing conflict often remained unaddressed. Insufficient knowledge sharing and prioritisation of ecological feasibility, to the detriment of social feasibility, remain barriers to effective planning. Successful outcomes of translocations are linked to early assessment of social feasibility and to the establishment of long-term commitments between people, places, and partners.

Working from the Inside Out: Fostering Intrinsic Motivation and Expanding Our Criteria for Conservation Success

Primatological research is often associated with understanding animals and their habitats, yet practical conservation depends entirely on human actions. This encompasses the activities of Indigenous and local people, conservationists, and NGOs working on the ground, as well as more remote funders and policymakers. In this paper we explore what it means to be a conservationist in the 2020s. While many primatologists accept the benefits of more socially inclusive dimensions of research and conservation practice, in reality there remain many challenges. We discuss the role primatologists can play to enhance interdisciplinary working and their relationships with communities living in and around their study sites, and examine how increased reflexivity and consideration of one’s positionality can improve primatological practice. Emphasis on education and stakeholder consultation may still echo colonial, top-down dialogues, and the need for greater emphasis on genuine knowledge-sharing among all stakeholders should be recognised. If we are sincere about this approach, we might need to redefine how we see, consider, and define conservation success. We may also have to embrace more compromises. By evaluating success in conservation we explore how reflexive engagements with our positionality and equitable knowledge-sharing contribute to fostering intrinsic motivation and building resilience.

Applying a values-based decision process to facilitate comanagement of threatened species in Aotearoa New Zealand

Ko koe ki tēnā, ko ahau ki tēnai kīwai o te kete (you at that, and I at this handle of the basket). This Māori (New Zealanders of indigenous descent) saying conveys the principle of cooperation-we achieve more through working together, rather than separately. Despite decades of calls to rectify cultural imbalance in conservation, threatened species management still relies overwhelmingly on ideas from Western science and on top-down implementation. Values-based approaches to decision making can be used to integrate indigenous peoples' values into species conservation in a more meaningful way. We used such a values-based method, structured decision making, to develop comanagement of pekapeka (Mystacina tuberculata) (short-tailed bat) and tara iti (Sternula nereis davisae) (Fairy Tern) between Māori and Pākehā (New Zealanders of European descent). We implemented this framework in a series of workshops in which facilitated discussions were used to gather expert knowledge to predict outcomes and make management recommendations. For both species, stakeholders clearly stated their values as fundamental objectives from the start, which allowed alternative strategies to be devised that naturally addressed their diverse values, including mātauranga Māori (Māori knowledge and perspectives). On this shared basis, all partners willingly engaged in the process, and decisions were largely agreed to by all. Most expectations of conflicts between values of Western science and Māori culture were unfounded. Where required, positive compromises were made by jointly developing alternative strategies. The values-based process successfully taha wairua taha tangata (brought both worlds together to achieve the objective) through codeveloped recovery strategies. This approach challenges the traditional model of scientists first preparing management plans focused on biological objectives, then consulting indigenous groups for approval. We recommend values-based approaches, such as structured decision making, as powerful methods for development of comanagement conservation plans between different peoples.

"Same same but different"? On the questionable but crucial differentiation between ethical and social aspects in health technology assessment

INTRODUCTION

Within health technology assessment (HTA), the demarcation of ethical and social aspects in two separate domains is a given fact. While an overlapping of ethical and social aspects is possible, this also raises theoretical and methodological questions, such as why overlaps happen (on the basis of which understanding of ethical and social aspects), or whether they are legitimate from a methodological point of view.

METHODS

We analyzed, on a basis of purposive sampling, a) two well-known HTA frameworks (HTA Core Model, INTEGRATE-HTA), b) methodological literature about ethical and/or social aspects in HTA, and c) published HTA reports from the German DAHTA database and the international CRD database regarding statements on the understanding (definition/characterization) and relationship between ethical and social aspects.

RESULTS

The frameworks used identical definitions for ethical aspects but deviated when it comes to social aspects. Methodological papers do not always provide a definition of social and ethical aspects. In the context of ethical aspects, they often refer back to ethics as a base discipline that deals with the motives and consequences of good and bad actions for ethical aspects, while for social aspects, there is orientation towards already existing checklists and methods, without reference to a base discipline such as sociology. The analyzed HTA reports barely offered details on their understanding of ethical or social aspects (7% of n = 33).

DISCUSSION

The problem of defining/characterizing and differentiating ethical and social aspects exists in both theory and practice. The impression is that little attention is paid to demarcations and overlaps, and that also the methodological literature has not yet thoroughly addressed the issue. While there are also pragmatic reasons for the possible ambiguity between the ethical and the social domains, deeper epistemological issues related to the multi-/interdisciplinarity nature of HTA will have to be considered, too, such as the danger of "disciplinary capture" (pressure on some domains and their basic disciplines, e.g., ethics, to adopt the concepts and standards of other domains that are more dominant in HTA, e.g., efficacy assessment/evidenced-based medicine).

CONCLUSION

The domains in HTA reports should be better described epistemologically and brought into a coherent relationship with each other. This is important to avoid unreasonable overlapping and possible problematic redundancy. Further, this could help with questions of adequate expertise and methods for the processing of all relevant information for solid technology assessment.

Unpacking the perceived benefits and costs of integrating gender into conservation projects: voices of conservation field practitioners

Many in the conservation sphere have noted that robust and gender-equitable stakeholder engagement is crucial in achieving conservation outcomes, ensuring project sustainability and supporting human well-being. However, despite policies, international agreements and increasing requirements of donors, gender is still often viewed as an add-on rather than as a fundamental element of effective conservation. In an effort to overcome this, Conservation International has invested in nearly 20 project sites since 2014 to support targeted gender integration into existing conservation projects. We conducted a survey with practitioners across these sites to examine the barriers to and enablers of gender integration, and practitioners’ perceptions of the benefits and challenges involved in this. Our findings demonstrate the importance of both external drivers (funding requirements) and a supportive environment (capacity building, technical and financial support) in incentivising a focus on gender. Respondents also reported a suite of benefits (e.g. increased participation, higher quality of the project) and costs (mainly financial) related to gender integration. In documenting these efforts to build gender-related capacity, and the associated benefits and challenges, we highlight the importance of gender-responsive conservation initiatives, and evaluate a method of achieving this. As conservation practitioners may be more inclined to listen to each other (given their shared objectives) rather than to gender specialists, this research can help to shift practitioner dialogue and conservation practice to be more open and responsive to gender.

Cultural keystone species revisited: are we asking the right questions?

The cultural keystone species theory predicts plant species that are culturally important, play a role in resource acquisition, fulfil a psycho-socio-cultural function within a given culture, have high use-value, have an associated naming and terminology in a native language, and a high level of species irreplaceability qualify for cultural keystone species designation. This theory was proposed as a framework for understanding relationships between human societies and species that are integral to their culture. A greater understanding of the dynamic roles of cultural keystones in both ecosystem processes and cultural societies is a foundation for facilitating biocultural conservation. Given such important direct conservation implications of the cultural keystone species theory, we reviewed the use of this theoretical framework across the literature to identify new directions for research. Most studies often emphasized the role of cultural keystones species in human societies but failed to provide a robust and reproducible measure of cultural keystone species status or direct test of the predictions of the theory and underemphasized their potential roles in ecosystem processes. To date, no studies that mentioned cultural keystone species tested the predictions of the theory. Only 4.4% provided a measure for cultural keystone status and 47.4% have cited or applied keystone designation to a given species without providing a reproducible measure for cultural keystone species. Studies that provided a measure for cultural keystone species primarily occurred in North America while few of these studies occurred in Australia and Europe with none occurring in Africa. As such, most cultural keystone species have been designated as such qualitatively based on researcher subjectivity while other studies have designated keystone species with quantitative indices of cultural importance, often incorporating researcher biases or measuring a few of the cultural keystone status predictors rather than all of them, indicating a lack of consensus in identifying cultural keystone species. Thus, we pose the need for a paradigm shift toward the development of serious and systematic approaches for keystone designation.

Accessing Local Tacit Knowledge as a Means of Knowledge Co-Production for Effective Wildlife Corridor Planning in the Chignecto Isthmus, Canada

Inclusive knowledge systems that engage local perspectives and social and natural sciences are difficult to generate and infuse into decision-making processes but are critical for conservation planning. This paper explores local tacit knowledge application to identify wildlife locations, movement patterns and heightened opportunities and barriers for connectivity conservation planning in a critical linkage area known as the Chignecto Isthmus in the eastern Canadian provinces of Nova Scotia and New Brunswick. Thirty-four local hunters, loggers, farmers and others with strong tacit knowledge of wildlife and the land participated in individual interviews and group workshops, both of which engaged participatory mapping. Individuals’ data were digitised, analysed and compiled into thematic series of maps, which were refined through participatory, consensus-based workshops. Locations of key populations and movement patterns for several species were delineated, predominantly for terrestrial mammals and migratory birds. When comparing local tacit-knowledge-based maps with those derived from formal-natural-science models, key differences and strong overlap were apparent. Local participants provided rich explanatory and complementary data. Their engagement in the process fostered knowledge transfer within the group and increased confidence in their experiential knowledge and its value for decision making. Benefits derived from our study for conservation planning in the region include enhanced spatial data on key locations of wildlife populations and movement pathways and local insights into wildlife changes over time. Identified contributing factors primarily relate to habitat degradation and fragmentation from human activities (i.e., land use and cover changes caused by roads and forestry practices), thereby supporting the need for conservation measures. The generated knowledge is important for consideration in local planning initiatives; it addresses gaps in existing formal-science data and validates or ground truths the outputs of existing computer-based models of wildlife habitat and movement pathways within the context of the complex social-ecological systems of the place and local people. Critically, awareness of the need for conservation and the value of the participants’ shared knowledge has been enhanced, with potential influence in fostering local engagement in wildlife conservation and other planning initiatives. Consistent with other studies, engagement of local people and their tacit knowledge was found to (i) provide important insights, knowledge translation, and dissemination to complement formal, natural science, (ii) help build a more inclusive knowledge system grounded in the people and place, and (iii) lend support to conservation action for connectivity planning and human-wildlife co-existence. More broadly, our methods demonstrate an effective approach for representing differences and consensus among participants’ spatial indications of wildlife and habitat as a means of co-producing knowledge in participatory mapping for conservation planning.

Ethical considerations when conservation research involves people

Social science is becoming increasingly important in conservation, with more studies involving methodologies that collect data from and about people. Conservation science is a normative and applied discipline designed to support and inform management and practice. Poor research practice risks harming participants and, researchers, and can leave negative legacies. Often, those at the forefront of field-based research are early-career researchers, many of whom enter their first research experience ill-prepared for the ethical conundrums they may face. We draw on our own experiences as early-career researchers to illuminate how ethical challenges arise during conservation research that involves human participants. Specifically, we considered ethical review procedures, conflicts of values, and power relations, and devised broad recommendations on how to navigate ethical challenges when they arise during research. In particular, we recommend researchers apply reflexivity (i.e., thinking that allows researchers to recognize the effect researchers have on the research) to help navigate ethical challenges and encourage greater engagement with ethical review processes and the development of ethical guidelines for conservation research that involves human participants. Such guidelines must be accompanied by the integration of rigorous ethical training into conservation education. We believe our experiences are not uncommon and can be avoided and hope to spark discussion to contribute to a more socially just conservation.

Conservation publications and their provisions to protect research participants

Social science methods are increasingly applied in conservation research. However, the conservation sector has received criticism for inadequate ethical rigor when research involves people, particularly when investigating socially sensitive or illegal behaviors. We conducted a systematic review to investigate conservation journals' ethical policies when research involves human participants, and to assess the types of ethical safeguards documented in conservation articles. We restricted our review to articles that used social science methods to gather data from local people about a potentially sensitive behavior: hunting. Searches were conducted in the Web of Science, Scopus, and Google Scholar for research articles in English published from January 2000 to May 2018. Only studies conducted in countries in south and Southeast Asia, Africa, and Central and South America were considered. In total, 4456 titles and 626 abstracts were scanned, with 185 studies published in 57 journals accepted for full review. For each article, any information regarding ethical safeguards implemented to protect human participants was extracted. We identified an upward trend in the documentation of provisions to protect human participants. Overall, 55% of articles documented at least one ethical safeguard. However, often safeguards were poorly described. In total, 37% of journals provided ethics guidelines and required authors to report ethical safeguards in manuscripts, but a significant mismatch between journal policies and publication practice was identified. Nearly, half the articles published in journals that should have included ethics information did not. We encourage authors to rigorously report ethical safeguards in publications and urge journal editors to make ethics statements mandatory, to provide explicit guidelines to authors that outline journal ethical reporting standards, and to ensure compliance throughout the peer-review process.

Meta-analysis of human connection to nature and proenvironmental behavior

Understanding what drives environmentally protective or destructive behavior is important to the design and implementation of effective public policies to encourage people's engagement in proenvironmental behavior (PEB). Research shows that a connection to nature is associated with greater engagement in PEB. However, the variety of instruments and methods used in these studies poses a major barrier to integrating research findings. We conducted a meta-analysis of the relationship between connection to nature and PEB. We identified studies through a systematic review of the literature and used Comprehensive Meta-Analysis software to analyze the results from 37 samples (n = 13,237) and to test for moderators. A random-effects model demonstrated a positive and significant association between connection to nature and PEB (r = 0.42, 95% CI 0.36, 0.47, p < 0.001). People who are more connected to nature reported greater engagement in PEB. Standard tests indicated little effect of publication bias in the sample. There was significant heterogeneity among the samples. Univariate categorical analyses showed that the scales used to measure connection to nature and PEB were significant moderators and explained the majority of the between-study variance. The geographic location of a study, age of participants, and the percentage of females in a study were not significant moderators. We found that a deeper connection to nature may partially explain why some people behave more proenvironmentally than others and that the relationship is ubiquitous. Facilitating a stronger connection to nature may result in greater engagement in PEB and conservation, although more longitudinal studies with randomized experiments are required to demonstrate causation.

Diverse perspectives on interdisciplinarity from Members of the College of the Royal Society of Canada

Various multiple-disciplinary terms and concepts (although most commonly “interdisciplinarity,” which is used herein) are used to frame education, scholarship, research, and interactions within and outside academia. In principle, the premise of interdisciplinarity may appear to have many strengths; yet, the extent to which interdisciplinarity is embraced by the current generation of academics, the benefits and risks for doing so, and the barriers and facilitators to achieving interdisciplinarity, represent inherent challenges. Much has been written on the topic of interdisciplinarity, but to our knowledge there have been few attempts to consider and present diverse perspectives from scholars, artists, and scientists in a cohesive manner. As a team of 57 members from the Canadian College of New Scholars, Artists, and Scientists of the Royal Society of Canada (the College) who self-identify as being engaged or interested in interdisciplinarity, we provide diverse intellectual, cultural, and social perspectives. The goal of this paper is to share our collective wisdom on this topic with the broader community and to stimulate discourse and debate on the merits and challenges associated with interdisciplinarity. Perhaps the clearest message emerging from this exercise is that working across established boundaries of scholarly communities is rewarding, necessary, and is more likely to result in impact. However, there are barriers that limit the ease with which this can occur (e.g., lack of institutional structures and funding to facilitate cross-disciplinary exploration). Occasionally, there can be significant risk associated with doing interdisciplinary work (e.g., lack of adequate measurement or recognition of work by disciplinary peers). Solving many of the world’s complex and pressing problems (e.g., climate change, sustainable agriculture, the burden of chronic disease, and aging populations) demands thinking and working across long-standing, but in some ways restrictive, academic boundaries. Academic institutions and key support structures, especially funding bodies, will play an important role in helping to realize what is readily apparent to all who contributed to this paper—that interdisciplinarity is essential for solving complex problems; it is the new norm. Failure to empower and encourage those doing this research will serve as a great impediment to training, knowledge, and addressing societal issues.

Terms of empowerment: of conservation or communities?

In this era of socially-oriented biodiversity conservation and resource management, practitioners and scholars all too often invoke unclear and imprecise claims of empowerment to describe changing relations between people and resources. Empowerment is an important indicator of conservation success and social transformation. Yet, when scholars and practitioners fail to adequately conceptualize empowerment, they run the risk of undermining the importance of local involvement and capacity building to achieve biodiversity conservation. Here we explore the many ways empowerment has been conceptualized in conservation. We root our commentary in the history of the use of empowerment in conservation from these diverse perspectives. We then present examples of different meanings, measurements and outcomes ascribed to empowerment. We conclude with suggestions for harnessing empowerment for the benefit of conservationists and communities alike. Because empowerment has the potential to improve resource management outcomes and local livelihoods, we recommend building an adaptive empowerment assessment framework to assist with its deployment where it is most needed. Although empowerment goals in conservation can guide practitioners and scholars to engage with communities in transparent, meaningful and lasting ways, conservation needs a critical approach that builds from an appreciation of the nuances underlying the purpose and power of empowerment for conservation.

Revealing research preferences in conservation science

Conservation researchers are increasingly drawing on a wide range of philosophies, methods and values to examine conservation problems. Here we adopt methods from social psychology to develop a questionnaire with the dual purpose of illuminating diversity within conservation research communities and providing a tool for use in cross-disciplinary dialogue workshops. The questionnaire probes the preferences that different researchers have with regards to conservation science. It elicits insight into their motivations for carrying out research, the scales at which they tackle problems, the subjects they focus on, their beliefs about the connections between nature and society, their sense of reality as absolute or socially constituted, and their propensity for collaboration. Testing the questionnaire with a group of 204 conservation scientists at a student conference on conservation science, we illustrate the latent and multidimensional diversity in the research preferences held by conservation scientists. We suggest that creating opportunities to further explore these differences and similarities using facilitated dialogue could enrich the mutual understanding of the diverse research community in the conservation field.

Integration of social and ecological sciences for natural resource decision making: challenges and opportunities

The last 25 years have witnessed growing recognition that natural resource management decisions depend as much on understanding humans and their social interactions as on understanding the interactions between non-human organisms and their environment. Decision science provides a framework for integrating ecological and social factors into a decision, but challenges to integration remain. The decision-analytic framework elicits values and preferences to help articulate objectives, and then evaluates the outcomes of alternative management actions to achieve these objectives. Integrating social science into these steps can be hindered by failing to include social scientists as more than stakeholder-process facilitators, assuming that specific decision-analytic skills are commonplace for social scientists, misperceptions of social data as inherently qualitative, timescale mismatches for iterating through decision analysis and collecting relevant social data, difficulties in predicting human behavior, and failures of institutions to recognize the importance of this integration. We engage these challenges, and suggest solutions to them, helping move forward the integration of social and biological/ecological knowledge and considerations in decision-making.

Enhancing fisheries education and research through the Canadian Fisheries Research Network: A student perspective on interdisciplinarity, collaboration and inclusivity

Fisheries involve complex problems not easily addressed by a single discipline, methodology, or set of stakeholders. In 2010, the Canadian Fisheries Research Network (CFRN) was initiated to increase fisheries research capacity in Canada through interdisciplinary and inclusive research collaborations. As post-graduate students in the network, we reflected on the type of training necessary to tackle fisheries problems and reviewed opportunities available at Canadian universities to receive such training. This paper presents an overview of fisheries education currently available in Canada, reflects on our training within the CFRN, and proposes improvements to fisheries education and research. Our review of the subject revealed few dedicated fisheries programs, limited interdisciplinary programs, few specialized fisheries training programs, and a heavy reliance on academic supervisors to secure research opportunities in fisheries. In contrast, the CFRN enhanced our training by deliberately focusing on tools and techniques to address fisheries issues, providing venues to foster interdisciplinary and inclusive research collaborations, and exposing the realities of stakeholder collaborations. We call for post-graduate-level fisheries education and research that is interdisciplinary, collaborative, and inclusive to produce well-rounded scientists and managers, and we suggest ways that universities, researchers, and funding agencies can incorporate these themes into fisheries education and research.

Breaking Through Disciplinary Barriers: Human-Wildlife Interactions and Multispecies Ethnography

One of the main challenges when integrating biological and social perspectives in primatology is overcoming interdisciplinary barriers. Unfamiliarity with subject-specific theory and language, distinct disciplinary-bound approaches to research, and academic boundaries aimed at "preserving the integrity" of subject disciplines can hinder developments in interdisciplinary research. With growing interest in how humans and other primates share landscapes, and recognition of the importance of combining biological and social information to do this effectively, the disparate use of terminology is becoming more evident. To tackle this problem, we dissect the meaning of what the biological sciences term studies in "human-wildlife conflict" or more recently "human-wildlife interactions" and compare it to what anthropology terms "multispecies ethnography." In the biological sciences, human-wildlife interactions are the actions resulting from people and wild animals sharing landscapes and resources, with outcomes ranging from being beneficial or harmful to one or both species. In the social sciences, human-nonhuman relationships have been explored on a philosophical, analytical, and empirical level. Building on previous work, we advocate viewing landscapes through an interdisciplinary "multispecies lens" in which humans are observed as one of multiple organisms that interact with other species to shape and create environments. To illustrate these interconnections we use the case study of coexistence between people of the Nalu ethnic group and Critically Endangered western chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes verus) at Cantanhez National Park in Guinea-Bissau, to demonstrate how biological and social research approaches can be complementary and can inform conservation initiatives at the human-primate interface. Finally, we discuss how combining perspectives from ethnoprimatology with those from multispecies ethnography can advance the study of ethnoprimatology to aid productive discourse and enhance future interdisciplinary research.

Why are social sciences and humanities needed in the works of IPBES? A systematic review of the literature

Despite the increased attention, which has been given to the issue of involving knowledge and experts from the social sciences and humanities (SSH) into the products and works of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES), little is known on what the expectations towards the involvement of SSH in IPBES actually are. The aim of this paper is to close this gap by identifying the range of possible SSH contributions to IPBES that are expected in the literature, and discuss the inherent challenges of and concrete ways to realize these contributions in the particular institutional setting of IPBES. We address these two points by: firstly, assessing the literature dealing with IPBES and building a typology describing the main ways in which contributions from SSH to IPBES have been conceived between 2006 and 2017. We discuss these expected contributions in light of broader debates on the role of SSH in nature conservation and analyse some of the blind spots and selectivities in the perception of how SSH could substantially contribute to the works of IPBES. Then, secondly, by looking at one particular example, economics and its use in the first thematic assessment on pollinators, pollination and food production, we will concretely illustrate how works in a given discipline could contribute in many different and unprecedented ways to the works of IPBES and help identify paths for enhancing the conservation of biodiversity. Finally, we propose a range of practical recommendations as to how to increase the contribution of SSH in the works of IPBES.

Evidence-Based Causal Chains for Linking Health, Development, and Conservation Actions

Sustainability challenges for nature and people are complex and interconnected, such that effective solutions require approaches and a common theory of change that bridge disparate disciplines and sectors. Causal chains offer promising approaches to achieving an integrated understanding of how actions affect ecosystems, the goods and services they provide, and ultimately, human well-being. Although causal chains and their variants are common tools across disciplines, their use remains highly inconsistent, limiting their ability to support and create a shared evidence base for joint actions. In this article, we present the foundational concepts and guidance of causal chains linking disciplines and sectors that do not often intersect to elucidate the effects of actions on ecosystems and society. We further discuss considerations for establishing and implementing causal chains, including nonlinearity, trade-offs and synergies, heterogeneity, scale, and confounding factors. Finally, we highlight the science, practice, and policy implications of causal chains to address real-world linked human-nature challenges.

What does interdisciplinarity look like in practice: Mapping interdisciplinarity and its limits in the environmental sciences

In this paper we take a close look at current interdisciplinary modeling practices in the environmental sciences, and suggest that closer attention needs to be paid to the nature of scientific practices when investigating and planning interdisciplinarity. While interdisciplinarity is often portrayed as a medium of novel and transformative methodological work, current modeling strategies in the environmental sciences are conservative, avoiding methodological conflict, while confining interdisciplinary interactions to a relatively small set of pre-existing modeling frameworks and strategies (a process we call crystallization). We argue that such practices can be rationalized as responses in part to cognitive constraints which restrict interdisciplinary work. We identify four salient integrative modeling strategies in environmental sciences, and argue that this crystallization, while contradicting somewhat the novel goals many have for interdisciplinarity, makes sense when considered in the light of common disciplinary practices and cognitive constraints. These results provide cause to rethink in more concrete methodological terms what interdisciplinarity amounts to, and what kinds of interdisciplinarity are obtainable in the environmental sciences and elsewhere.

The return of the Iberian lynx to Portugal: local voices

BACKGROUND

Ethnographic research can help to establish dialog between conservationists and local people in reintroduction areas. Considering that predator reintroductions may cause local resistance, we assessed attitudes of different key actor profiles to the return of the Iberian lynx (Lynx pardinus) to Portugal before reintroduction started in 2015. We aimed to characterize a social context from an ethnoecological perspective, including factors such as local knowledge, perceptions, emotions, and opinions.

METHODS

We conducted semi-structured interviews (n = 131) in three different protected areas and observed practices and public meetings in order to describe reintroduction contestation, emotional involvement with the species, and local perceptions about conservation. Detailed content data analysis was undertaken and an open-ended codification of citations was performed with the support of ATLAS.ti. Besides the qualitative analyses, we further explored statistic associations between knowledge and opinions and compared different geographical areas and hunters with non-hunters among key actors.

RESULTS

Local ecological knowledge encompassed the lynx but was not shared by the whole community. Both similarities and differences between local and scientific knowledge about the lynx were found. The discrepancies with scientific findings were not necessarily a predictor of negative attitudes towards reintroduction. Contestation issues around reintroduction differ between geographical areas but did not hinder an emotional attachment to the species and its identification as a territory emblem. Among local voices, financial compensation was significantly associated to hunters and nature tourism was cited the most frequent advantage of lynx presence. Materialistic discourses existed in parallel with non-economic factors and the existence of moral agreement with its protection. The considerable criticism and reference to restrictions by local actors concerning protected areas and conservation projects indicated the experience of an imposed model of nature conservation. Opinions about participation in the reintroduction process highlighted the need for a closer dialog between all actors and administration.

CONCLUSIONS

Local voices analyzed through an ethnoecological perspective provide several views on reintroduction and nature conservation. They follow two main global trends of environmental discourse: (1) nature becomes a commodified object to exploit while contestation about wildlife is centered on financial return and (2) emblematic wild species create an emotional attachment, become symbolic, and gather moral agreement for nature protection. Lynx reintroduction has been not only just a nature protection theme but also a negotiation process with administration. Western rural communities are not the "noble savages" and nature protectors as are other traditional groups, and actors tend to claim for benefits in a situation of reintroduction. Both parties comprehend a similar version of appropriated nature. Understanding complexity and diverse interests in local communities are useful in not oversimplifying local positions towards predator conservation. We recommend that professional conservation teams rethink their image among local populations and increase proximity with different types of key actors.

Necessary but challenging: Multiple disciplinary approaches to solving conservation problems

Contemporary conservation problems are typically positioned at the interface of complex ecological and human systems. Traditional approaches aiming to compartmentalize a phenomenon within the confines of a single discipline and failing to engage non-science partners are outmoded and cannot identify solutions that have traction in the social, economic, and political arenas in which conservation actions must operate. As a result, conservation science teams must adopt multiple disciplinary approaches that bridge not only academic disciplines but also the political and social realms and engage relevant partners. Five reasons are presented that outline why conservation problems demand multiple disciplinary approaches in order to move forward because: (i) socio-ecological systems are complex, (ii) multiple perspectives are better than one, (iii) the results of research must influence practice, (iv) the heterogeneity of scale necessitates it, and (v) conservation involves compromise. Presenting reasons that support multiple disciplinarity demands a review of the barriers that impede this process, as we are far from attaining a model or framework that is applicable in all contexts. Two challenges that impede multiple disciplinarity are discussed, in addition to pragmatic solutions that conservation scientists and practitioners can adopt in their work. Overall, conservation researchers and practitioners are encouraged to explore the multiple disciplinary dimensions of their respective realms to more effectively solve problems in biodiversity and sustainability.

Mainstreaming the social sciences in conservation

Despite broad recognition of the value of social sciences and increasingly vocal calls for better engagement with the human element of conservation, the conservation social sciences remain misunderstood and underutilized in practice. The conservation social sciences can provide unique and important contributions to society's understanding of the relationships between humans and nature and to improving conservation practice and outcomes. There are 4 barriers-ideological, institutional, knowledge, and capacity-to meaningful integration of the social sciences into conservation. We provide practical guidance on overcoming these barriers to mainstream the social sciences in conservation science, practice, and policy. Broadly, we recommend fostering knowledge on the scope and contributions of the social sciences to conservation, including social scientists from the inception of interdisciplinary research projects, incorporating social science research and insights during all stages of conservation planning and implementation, building social science capacity at all scales in conservation organizations and agencies, and promoting engagement with the social sciences in and through global conservation policy-influencing organizations. Conservation social scientists, too, need to be willing to engage with natural science knowledge and to communicate insights and recommendations clearly. We urge the conservation community to move beyond superficial engagement with the conservation social sciences. A more inclusive and integrative conservation science-one that includes the natural and social sciences-will enable more ecologically effective and socially just conservation. Better collaboration among social scientists, natural scientists, practitioners, and policy makers will facilitate a renewed and more robust conservation. Mainstreaming the conservation social sciences will facilitate the uptake of the full range of insights and contributions from these fields into conservation policy and practice.

Biosocial Conservation: Integrating Biological and Ethnographic Methods to Study Human-Primate Interactions

Biodiversity conservation is one of the grand challenges facing society. Many people interested in biodiversity conservation have a background in wildlife biology. However, the diverse social, cultural, political, and historical factors that influence the lives of people and wildlife can be investigated fully only by incorporating social science methods, ideally within an interdisciplinary framework. Cultural hierarchies of knowledge and the hegemony of the natural sciences create a barrier to interdisciplinary understandings. Here, we review three different projects that confront this difficulty, integrating biological and ethnographic methods to study conservation problems. The first project involved wildlife foraging on crops around a newly established national park in Gabon. Biological methods revealed the extent of crop loss, the species responsible, and an effect of field isolation, while ethnography revealed institutional and social vulnerability to foraging wildlife. The second project concerned great ape tourism in the Central African Republic. Biological methods revealed that gorilla tourism poses risks to gorillas, while ethnography revealed why people seek close proximity to gorillas. The third project focused on humans and other primates living alongside one another in Morocco. Incorporating shepherds in the coproduction of ecological knowledge about primates built trust and altered attitudes to the primates. These three case studies demonstrate how the integration of biological and social methods can help us to understand the sustainability of human–wildlife interactions, and thus promote coexistence. In each case, an integrated biosocial approach incorporating ethnographic data produced results that would not otherwise have come to light. Research that transcends conventional academic boundaries requires the openness and flexibility to move beyond one’s comfort zone to understand and acknowledge the legitimacy of “other” kinds of knowledge. It is challenging but crucial if we are to address conservation problems effectively.

Disciplinary capture and epistemological obstacles to interdisciplinary research: Lessons from central African conservation disputes

Complex environmental problems require well-researched policies that integrate knowledge from both the natural and social sciences. Epistemic differences can impede interdisciplinary collaboration, as shown by debates between conservation biologists and anthropologists who are working to preserve biological diversity and support economic development in central Africa. Disciplinary differences with regard to 1) facts, 2) rigor, 3) causal explanation, and 4) research goals reinforce each other, such that early decisions about how to define concepts or which methods to adopt may tilt research design and data interpretation toward one discipline's epistemological framework. If one of the contributing fields imposes a solution to an epistemic problem, this sets the stage for what I call disciplinary capture. Avoiding disciplinary capture requires clear communication between collaborators, but beyond this it also requires that collaborators craft research questions and innovate research designs which are different from the inherited epistemological frameworks of contributing disciplines.

Ways forward for aquatic conservation: Applications of environmental psychology to support management objectives

The success or failure of environmental management goals can be partially attributed to the support for such goals from the public. Despite this, environmental management is still dominated by a natural science approach with little input from disciplines that are concerned with the relationship between humans and the natural environment such as environmental psychology. Within the marine and freshwater environments, this is particularly concerning given the cultural and aesthetic significance of these environments to the public, coupled with the services delivered by freshwater and marine ecosystems, and the vulnerability of aquatic ecosystems to human-driven environmental perturbations. This paper documents nine case studies which use environmental psychology methods to support a range of aquatic management goals. Examples include understanding the drivers of public attitudes towards ecologically important but uncharismatic river species, impacts of marine litter on human well-being, efficacy of small-scale governance of tropical marine fisheries and the role of media in shaping attitudes towards. These case studies illustrate how environmental psychology and natural sciences can be used together to apply an interdisciplinary approach to the management of aquatic environments. Such an approach that actively takes into account the range of issues surrounding aquatic environment management is more likely to result in successful outcomes, from both human and environmental perspectives. Furthermore, the results illustrate that better understanding the societal importance of aquatic ecosystems can reduce conflict between social needs and ecological objectives, and help improve the governance of aquatic ecosystems. Thus, this paper concludes that an effective relationship between academics and practitioners requires fully utilising the skills, knowledge and experience from both sectors.

Monitoring local well-being in environmental interventions: a consideration of practical trade-offs

Within the field of environmental management and conservation, the concept of well-being is starting to gain traction in monitoring the socio-economic and cultural impact of interventions on local people. Here we consider the practical trade-offs policy makers and practitioners must navigate when utilizing the concept of well-being in environmental interventions. We first review current concepts of well-being before considering the need to balance the complexity and practical applicability of the definition used and to consider both positive and negative components of well-being. A key determinant of how well-being is operationalized is the identity of the organization wishing to monitor it. We describe the trade-offs around the external and internal validity of different approaches to measuring well-being and the relative contributions of qualitative and quantitative information to understanding well-being. We explore how these trade-offs may be decided as a result of a power struggle between stakeholders. Well-being is a complex, multi-dimensional, dynamic concept that cannot be easily defined and measured. Local perspectives are often missed during the project design process as a result of the more powerful voices of national governments and international NGOs, so for equity and local relevance it is important to ensure these perspectives are represented at a high level in project design and implementation.

Declining Use of Wild Resources by Indigenous Peoples of the Ecuadorian Amazon

Wild product harvesting by forest-dwelling peoples, including hunting, fishing, forest product collection and timber harvesting, is believed to be a major threat to the biodiversity of tropical forests worldwide. Despite this threat, few studies have attempted to quantify these activities across time or across large spatial scales. We use a unique longitudinal household survey (n = 480) to describe changes in these activities over time in 32 indigenous communities from five ethnicities in the northern Ecuadorian Amazon. To provide insight into the drivers of these changes, we also estimate multilevel statistical models of these activities as a function of household and community characteristics. These analyses reveal that participation in hunting, fishing, and forest product collection is high but declining across time and across ethnicities, with no evidence for a parallel decline in resource quality. However, participation in timber harvesting did not significantly decline and there is evidence of a decline in resource quality. Multilevel statistical models additionally reveal that household and community characteristics such as ethnicity, demographic characteristics, wealth, livelihood diversification, access to forest, participation in conservation programs and exposure to external markets are significant predictors of wild product harvesting. These characteristics have changed over time but cannot account for declining participation in resource harvesting. This finding suggests that participation is declining due to changes in the regional-scale social and economic context, including urbanization and the expansion of government infrastructure and services. The lesson for conservationists is that macro-scale social and economic conditions can drive reductions in wild product harvesting even in the absence of successful conservation interventions.

Species, habitats, society: an evaluation of research supporting EU's Natura 2000 network

The Natura 2000 network is regarded as one of the conservation success stories in the global effort to protect biodiversity. However, significant challenges remain in Natura 2000 implementation, owing to its rapid expansion, and lack of a coherent vision for its future. Scientific research is critical for identifying conservation priorities, setting management goals, and reconciling biodiversity protection and society in the complex political European landscape. Thus, there is an urgent need for a comprehensive evaluation of published Natura 2000 research to highlight prevalent research themes, disciplinary approaches, and spatial entities. We conducted a systematic review of 572 scientific articles and conference proceedings focused on Natura 2000 research, published between 1996 and 2014. We grouped these articles into ‘ecological’ and ‘social and policy’ categories. Using a novel application of network analysis of article keywords, we found that Natura 2000 research forms a cohesive small-world network, owing to the emphasis on ecological research (79% of studies, with a strong focus on spatial conservation planning), and the underrepresentation of studies addressing ‘social and policy’ issues (typically focused on environmental impact assessment, multi-level governance, agri-environment policy, and ecosystem services valuation). ‘Ecological’ and ‘social and policy’ research shared only general concepts (e.g., Natura 2000, Habitats Directive) suggesting a disconnection between these disciplines. The UK and the Mediterranean basin countries dominated Natura 2000 research, and there was a weak correlation between number of studies and proportion of national territory protected. Approximately 40% of ‘social and policy’ research and 26% of ‘ecological’ studies highlighted negative implications of Natura 2000, while 21% of studies found positive social and biodiversity effects. We emphasize the need for designing inter- and transdisciplinary research in order to promote a social-ecological understanding of Natura 2000, and advance EU conservation policies.

Paying for nature: what every conservationist should know about political economy

Global conservation policy and global capitalism have become increasingly intertwined over the last decade. The move towards ‘green capitalism’ has manifested itself in diverse ways, most notably in the expansion of payments for environmental services and attempts to commodify nature. However, there are concerns that prioritizing the financial value of nature could undermine efforts to conserve biodiversity. One particularly strong set of critiques has emerged from political economy. While providing rich theoretical and empirical insights into the potential downsides of green capitalism, the literature is often dense and difficult for non-specialists to navigate. Here I review and translate its main concepts and critiques for a conservation audience. I begin by exploring the basic process of commodity exchange. I then consider nature as a reluctant and uncooperative commodity that often requires new institutions and technologies to be commodified. This means conservation organizations play a key role in green capitalism's political economy. These developments are likely to have considerable social and environmental impacts, with a highly uneven distribution of costs and benefits.

Hunting down the chimera of multiple disciplinarity in conservation science

The consensus is that both ecological and social factors are essential dimensions of conservation research and practice. However, much of the literature on multiple disciplinary collaboration focuses on the difficulties of undertaking it. This review of the challenges of conducting multiple disciplinary collaboration offers a framework for thinking about the diversity and complexity of this endeavor. We focused on conceptual challenges, of which 5 main categories emerged: methodological challenges, value judgments, theories of knowledge, disciplinary prejudices, and interdisciplinary communication. The major problems identified in these areas have proved remarkably persistent in the literature surveyed (c.1960-2012). Reasons for these failures to learn from past experience include the pressure to produce positive outcomes and gloss over disagreements, the ephemeral nature of many such projects and resulting lack of institutional memory, and the apparent complexity and incoherence of the endeavor. We suggest that multiple disciplinary collaboration requires conceptual integration among carefully selected multiple disciplinary team members united in investigating a shared problem or question. We outline a 9-point sequence of steps for setting up a successful multiple disciplinary project. This encompasses points on recruitment, involving stakeholders, developing research questions, negotiating power dynamics and hidden values and conceptual differences, explaining and choosing appropriate methods, developing a shared language, facilitating on-going communications, and discussing data integration and project outcomes. Although numerous solutions to the challenges of multiple disciplinary research have been proposed, lessons learned are often lost when projects end or experienced individuals move on. We urge multiple disciplinary teams to capture the challenges recognized, and solutions proposed, by their researchers while projects are in process. A database of well-documented case studies would showcase theories and methods from a variety of disciplines and their interactions, enable better comparative study and evaluation, and provide a useful resource for developing future projects and training multiple disciplinary researchers.

Bycatch mortality of endangered coho salmon: impacts, solutions, and aboriginal perspectives

We used biotelemetry and human dimensions surveys to explore potential solutions to migration mortality of an endangered population of coho salmon caught as bycatch in an aboriginal beach seine fishery. From 2009 to 2011, 182 wild coho salmon caught as bycatch in the lower Fraser River (Canada) were radio-tagged and tracked as they attempted to complete their migrations to natal spawning areas over 300 km upstream. Failure to survive to reach terminal radio receiving stations averaged 39% over three years. This mortality estimate is low compared to those obtained from telemetry studies on other salmon fisheries in the Fraser River. However, this value is markedly higher than the mortality estimate currently used to manage the fishery's impact. It is also in contrast to the perceptions of the majority of aboriginal fishers, who did not think survival of coho salmon is affected by capture and release from their fishery. Increased probability of survival was associated with lower reflex impairment, which is consistent with previous findings. Reflex impairment was positively correlated with entanglement time, suggesting that greater efforts by the fishers to release bycatch from their nets quickly would minimize post-release mortality. Survey responses by aboriginal fishers also suggested that they are receptive to employing new bycatch handling methods if they are shown to increase post-release survival. However, attempts to facilitate revival of a subset of captured fish using cylindrical in-river recovery bags did not improve migration success. Fisheries managers could use the new information from this study to better quantify impacts and evaluate different harvest options. Since aboriginal fishers were receptive to using alternate handling methods, efforts to improve knowledge on minimizing reflex impairment through reductions in handling time could help increase bycatch survival. Such a direct integration of social science and applied ecology is a novel approach to understanding conservation issues that can better inform meaningful actions to promote species recovery.

The Maine Vernal Pool Mapping and Assessment Program: engaging municipal officials and private landowners in community-based citizen science

The Vernal Pool Mapping and Assessment Program (VPMAP) was initiated in 2007 to create a vernal pool database as a planning tool to foster local compliance with new state vernal pool regulations. In the northeastern United States, vernal pools are seasonal wetlands that provide critical breeding habitat for a number of amphibians and invertebrates and provide important resting and foraging habitat for some rare and endangered state-listed species. Using participant observation, interviews, and focus groups, we examined the engagement of municipal officials and private landowners in VPMAP. Important outcomes of municipal and landowner engagement included mobilization of town support for proactive planning, improved awareness and understanding of vernal pools, and increased interactions between program coordinators, municipal officials, and private landowners. Challenges to municipal and landowner engagement included an inconsistency in expectations between coordinators and municipal officials and a lack of time and sufficient information for follow-up with landowners participating in VPMAP. Our study highlights the importance of developing relationships among coordinators, municipal officials, and private landowners in facilitating positive outcomes for all stakeholders and for effective resource management. We suggest an expanded citizen science model that focuses on improving two-way communication among project coordinators, municipal officials, and local citizens and places communication with private landowners on par with volunteer citizen scientist recruitment and field training. Lessons learned from this research can inform the design and implementation of citizen science projects on private land.

Reviewing Biosphere Reserves globally: effective conservation action or bureaucratic label?

The Biosphere Reserve (BR) model of UNESCO's Man and the Biosphere Programme reflects a shift towards more accountable conservation. Biosphere Reserves attempt to reconcile environmental protection with sustainable development; they explicitly acknowledge humans, and human interests in the conservation landscape while still maintaining the ecological values of existing protected areas. Conceptually, this model is attractive, with 610 sites currently designated globally. Yet the practical reality of implementing dual 'conservation' and 'development' goals is challenging, with few examples successfully conforming to the model's full criteria. Here, we review the history of Biosphere Reserves from first inception in 1974 to the current status quo, and examine the suitability of the designation as an effective conservation model. We track the spatial expansion of Biosphere Reserves globally, assessing the influence of the Statutory Framework of the World Network of Biosphere Reserves and Seville strategy in 1995, when the BR concept refocused its core objectives on sustainable development. We use a comprehensive range of case studies to discuss conformity to the Programme, the social and ecological consequences associated with implementation of the designation, and challenges in aligning conservation and development. Given that the 'Biosphere Reserve' label is a relatively unknown designation in the public arena, this review also provides details on popularising the Biosphere Reserve brand, as well as prospects for further research, currently unexploited, but implicit in the designation.