Conservation genetics: Linking science with practice

Conservation genetics is a well‐established scientific field. However, limited information transfer between science and practice continues to hamper successful implementation of scientific knowledge in conservation practice and management. To mitigate this challenge, we have established a conservation genetics community, which entails an international exchange‐and‐skills platform related to genetic methods and approaches in conservation management. First, it allows for scientific exchange between researchers during annual conferences. Second, personal contact between conservation professionals and scientists is fostered by organising workshops and by popularising knowledge on conservation genetics methods and approaches in professional journals in national languages. Third, basic information on conservation genetics has been made accessible by publishing an easy‐to‐read handbook on conservation genetics for practitioners. Fourth, joint projects enabled practitioners and scientists to work closely together from the start of a project in order to establish a tight link between applied questions and scientific background. Fifth, standardised workflows simplifying the implementation of genetic tools in conservation management have been developed. By establishing common language and trust between scientists and practitioners, all these measures help conservation genetics to play a more prominent role in future conservation planning and management.     

Biodiversity and ecosystem services: a multilayered relationship

The relationship between biodiversity and the rapidly expanding research and policy field of ecosystem services is confused and is damaging efforts to create coherent policy. Using the widely accepted Convention on Biological Diversity definition of biodiversity and work for the U.K. National Ecosystem Assessment we show that biodiversity has key roles at all levels of the ecosystem service hierarchy: as a regulator of underpinning ecosystem processes, as a final ecosystem service and as a good that is subject to valuation, whether economic or otherwise. Ecosystem science and practice has not yet absorbed the lessons of this complex relationship, which suggests an urgent need to develop the interdisciplinary science of ecosystem management bringing together ecologists, conservation biologists, resource economists and others.     

The changing landscape of ecological networks

Ecological networks provide an operational methodology for the implementation of regional conservation strategy and planning that goes beyond protected area designation to integrate the spatial scale of ecological processes and social issues. However, the pertinence of ecological networks as a conservation strategy has recently provoked debate. In this paper we present a discussion of the conceptual limits of ecological network implementation in order to identify the issues which underlie the transition of models and knowledge from science to action. Our examination illustrates how a more collective and explicit management of complexity and uncertainty concerning the ecological processes which such networks supposedly integrate could greatly strengthen the links between science and policy and thereby provide for more effective spatial landscape planning. In this way, the ecological action network could be reframed not as a simple objective but rather as a means for integrated conservation policy.     

A conceptual framework for understanding the perspectives on the causes of the science–practice gap in ecology and conservation

Applying scientific knowledge to confront societal challenges is a difficult task, an issue known as the science–practice gap. In Ecology and Conservation, scientific evidence has been seldom used directly to support decision‐making, despite calls for an increasing role of ecological science in developing solutions for a sustainable future. To date, multiple causes of the science–practice gap and diverse approaches to link science and practice in Ecology and Conservation have been proposed. To foster a transparent debate and broaden our understanding of the difficulties of using scientific knowledge, we reviewed the perceived causes of the science–practice gap, aiming to: (i) identify the perspectives of ecologists and conservation scientists on this problem, (ii) evaluate the predominance of these perspectives over time and across journals, and (iii) assess them in light of disciplines studying the role of science in decision‐making. We based our review on 1563 sentences describing causes of the science–practice gap extracted from 122 articles and on discussions with eight scientists on how to classify these sentences. The resulting process‐based framework describes three distinct perspectives on the relevant processes, knowledge and actors in the science–practice interface. The most common perspective assumes only scientific knowledge should support practice, perceiving a one‐way knowledge flow from science to practice and recognizing flaws in knowledge generation, communication, and/or use. The second assumes that both scientists and decision‐makers should contribute to support practice, perceiving a two‐way knowledge flow between science and practice through joint knowledge‐production/integration processes, which, for several reasons, are perceived to occur infrequently. The last perspective was very rare, and assumes scientists should put their results into practice, but they rarely do. Some causes (e.g. cultural differences between scientists and decision‐makers) are shared with other disciplines, while others seem specific to Ecology and Conservation (e.g. inadequate research scales). All identified causes require one of three general types of solutions, depending on whether the causal factor can (e.g. inadequate research questions) or cannot (e.g. scientific uncertainty) be changed, or if misconceptions (e.g. undervaluing abstract knowledge) should be solved. The unchanged predominance of the one‐way perspective over time may be associated with the prestige of evidence‐based conservation and suggests that debates in Ecology and Conservation lag behind trends in other disciplines towards bidirectional views ascribing larger roles to decision‐makers. In turn, the two‐way perspective seems primarily restricted to research traditions historically isolated from mainstream conservation biology. All perspectives represented superficial views of decision‐making by not accounting for limits to human rationality, complexity of decision‐making contexts, fuzzy science–practice boundaries, ambiguity brought about by science, and different types of knowledge use. However, joint knowledge‐production processes from the two‐way perspective can potentially allow for democratic decision‐making processes, explicit discussions of values and multiple types of science use. To broaden our understanding of the interface and foster productive science–practice linkages, we argue for dialogue among different research traditions within Ecology and Conservation, joint knowledge‐production processes between scientists and decision‐makers and interdisciplinarity across Ecology, Conservation and Political Science in both research and education.     

Bridging the Gap: How Can Information Access and Exchange Between Conservation Biologists and Field Practitioners be Improved for Better Conservation Outcomes?

It is widely accepted that there is a considerable gap between the science of conservation biology and the design and execution of biodiversity conservation projects in the field and science is failing to inform the practice of conservation. There are many reasons why this implementation gap exists. A high proportion of papers published in scientific journals by conservation biologists are seldom read outside of the academic world and there are few incentives for academics to convert their science into practice. In turn, field practitioners rarely document their field experiences and experiments in a manner that can meaningfully inform conservation scientists. Issues related to access to scientific literature, scientific relevance in multidisciplinary environments, donor expectations and a lack of critical analysis at all levels of conservation theory and practice are factors that exacerbate the divide. The contexts in which conservation biologists and field practitioners operate are also often highly dissimilar, and each has differing professional responsibilities and expectations that compromise the ability to learn from each other's expertise. Building on recent debate in the literature, and using case studies to illustrate the issues that characterize the divide, this paper draws on the authors' experiences of project management as well as academic research. We identify five key issues related to information exchange: access to scientific literature, levels of scientific literacy, lack of interdisciplinarity, questions of relevance and lack of sharing of conservation-related experiences and suggest new ways of working that could assist in bridging the gap between conservation scientists and field practitioners.     

Co-existence between the traditional societies and wildlife in western Serengeti, Tanzania: its relevancy in contemporary wildlife conservation efforts

This paper seeks to show how the traditional societies in western Serengeti have coexisted and continue to coexist with wildlife. It also recognizes the relevancy of this coexistence in furthering contemporary conservation efforts although there are practical constraints to putting this into practice. The following questions are examined: (1) How did/do traditional societies in Serengeti interact with their nature? (2) Which traditional management institutions governed/govern interaction between people and wildlife species, resources and ecosystems and, how do they operate? (3) Which factors were (or are) responsible for erosion of traditional management institutions? (4) What can the traditional practices offer to contemporary conservation efforts and what are the limitations? The paper identifies four ways in which traditional institutions and practices can contribute to current conservation efforts: regulating the overexploitation of resources; complementing the current incentives aiming at diffusing prevailing conflicts between conservation authorities and communities; minimising the costs of law enforcement and; complementing the modern scientific knowledge in monitoring and responding to ecosystem processes and functions. The practical constraints likely to limit adoption of these practices are presented as: methodological complications of acquiring indigenous knowledge; prevailing historical conflicts; human population growth; poverty and lack of appreciation among the conservation planners and managers. In conclusion the need to address the current constraints in order to achieve effective taping of the existing potentials is emphasized.     

Biodiversity hotspots through time: an introduction

International targets set for reducing the rate of biodiversity loss--the 2010 target--and ensuring environmental stability (Millennium Development Goals) have helped to focus the efforts of the scientific community on providing the data necessary for their implementation. The urgency of these goals, coupled with the increased rate of habitat alteration worldwide, has meant that actions have largely not taken into account the increasing body of data about the biodiversity change in the past. We know a lot about how our planet has been altered and recovered in the past, both in deep time and through prehistory. Linking this knowledge to conservation action has not been widely practised, by either the palaeoecology or the conservation communities. Long-term data, however, have much to offer current conservation practice, and in the papers for this volume we have tried to bring together a variety of different perspectives as to how this might happen in the most effective way. We also identify areas for productive collaboration and some key synergies for work in the near future to enable our knowledge of the past to be used for conservation action in the here and now. Lateral thinking, across knowledge systems and with open-mindness about bridging data gaps, will be necessary for our accumulating knowledge about our planet's past to be brought to bear on our attempts to conserve it in the future.     

我国生物多样性保护自然-社会科学交叉融合与发展

保护科学前沿研究重视克服单一学科的局限而向超越自然科学和社会科学跨学科交叉融合转型。基于世界自然保护联盟-世界保护区委员会(IUCN-WCPA)自然保护地管理有效性框架,从规划制定、执行和评估三个方面系统梳理了我国保护科学的研究进展,分析了保护自然科学和社会科学在研究内容、方法和视角等方面的差异,识别出潜在的跨学科综合研究领域。结果表明,我国保护自然科学与社会科学研究大多相互独立、缺乏融合协作,少有的跨学科研究在整体性、系统性、兼容性、深入性和规范性上有待提高。自然科学家在介入社会科学研究时缺乏对现实制度的科学理解,所提出的保护政策和行动建议偏向理想主义,阻碍保护科学跨学科知识生产;社会科学家则缺乏自然科学方法和数据的知识积累,所提出的政策和行动建议脱离事实和证据,偏向主观主义,不利于保护科学知识进步。为此,构建了基于自然保护地适应性管理逻辑下的保护科学跨学科整合框架,以推动保护科学共同话语的形成,实现社会与生态的耦合协调发展。     

A framework for the practical science necessary to restore sustainable,resilient, and biodiverse ecosystems

Demand for restoration of resilient, self‐sustaining, and biodiverse natural ecosystems as a conservation measure is increasing globally; however, restoration efforts frequently fail to meet standards appropriate for this objective. Achieving these standards requires management underpinned by input from diverse scientific disciplines including ecology, biotechnology, engineering, soil science, ecophysiology, and genetics. Despite increasing restoration research activity, a gap between the immediate needs of restoration practitioners and the outputs of restoration science often limits the effectiveness of restoration programs. Regrettably, studies often fail to identify the practical issues most critical for restoration success. We propose that part of this oversight may result from the absence of a considered statement of the necessary practical restoration science questions. Here we develop a comprehensive framework of the research required to bridge this gap and guide effective restoration. We structure questions in five themes: (1) setting targets and planning for success, (2) sourcing biological material, (3) optimizing establishment, (4) facilitating growth and survival, and (5) restoring resilience, sustainability, and landscape integration. This framework will assist restoration practitioners and scientists to identify knowledge gaps and develop strategic research focused on applied outcomes. The breadth of questions highlights the importance of cross‐discipline collaboration among restoration scientists, and while the program is broad, successful restoration projects have typically invested in many or most of these themes. Achieving restoration ecology's goal of averting biodiversity losses is a vast challenge: investment in appropriate science is urgently needed for ecological restoration to fulfill its potential and meet demand as a conservation tool.     

South–south cooperation for large‐scale ecological restoration

Natural capital degradation worldwide signals the growing need for larger investments in both nature conservation and ecosystem services provision and management. The role of large‐scale ecological restoration is a vital part of the work that is needed. One important way to advance the science, practice, and policy on ecological restoration is to develop and promote bilateral and multilateral cooperation among and within countries. In this article, we explore prospects for south–south cooperation for large‐scale ecological restoration. Emphasis is given to experience and expertise sharing, cofinancing, and codevelopment of new knowledge and know‐how for more effective policy and practice worldwide, especially in developing and newly industrialized countries.     

The power of data synthesis to shape the future of the restoration community and capacity

Restoration efforts will be taking place over the next decade(s) in the largest scope and capacity ever seen. Immense commitments, goals, and budgets are set, with impactful wide‐reaching potential benefits for people and the environment. These are ambitious aims for a relatively new branch of science and practice. It is time for restoration action to scale up, the legacy of which could impact over 350 million hectares targeted for the U.N. Decade on Ecosystem Restoration. However, restoration still proceeds on a case‐by‐case, trial by error basis and restoration outcomes can be variable even under similar conditions. The ability to put each case into context—what about it worked, what did not, and why—is something that the synthesis of data across studies can facilitate. The link between data synthesis and predictive capacity is strong. There are examples of extremely ambitious and successful efforts to compile data in structured, standardized databases which have led to valuable insights across regional and global scales in other branches of science. There is opportunity and challenge in compiling, standardizing, and synthesizing restoration monitoring data to inform the future of restoration practice and science. Through global collation of restoration data, knowledge gaps can be addressed and data synthesized to advance toward a more predictive science to inform more consistent success. The interdisciplinary potential of restoration ecology sits just over the horizon of this decade. Through truly collaborative synthesis across foci within the restoration community, we have the opportunity to rapidly reach that potential and achieve extraordinary outcomes together.     

Adolescents’ Experience and Knowledge of,and Attitudes toward,Bees: Implications and Recommendations for Conservation

Invertebrates are generally regarded with apathy, distaste, and fear in Western society. These negative sentiments likely contribute to the disparity in wildlife conservation efforts, which largely favor vertebrate organisms. Bees represent one of the most ecologically and economically important invertebrate groups, yet bee diversity and abundance is declining worldwide, mirroring the general decline of invertebrate biodiversity. Developing and implementing successful conservation efforts requires interdisciplinary research that considers the ecological and social realities of today’s world. To better inform conservation efforts related to bees, we examined adolescents’ experiences and knowledge of, and attitudes toward, bees and investigated how these dimensions related to one another. A total of 794 eighth-grade science students from the suburbs of Chicago, USA completed a 48-item, paper questionnaire. The results indicated that adolescents were only somewhat knowledgeable about bee biology and services, and they confused bees with other flying insects, especially those with black-and-yellow coloration. Adolescents regarded bees with a generally neutral attitude; their knowledge and attitudes were correlated in a positive manner. Various bee-related experiences were linked to adolescents’ knowledge and attitudes and may have influenced bee-related behavior. In particular, students who engaged in gardening and lawn-care activities demonstrated higher levels of knowledge and more positive attitudes. This study provides insight into the relationships between experiences and knowledge of, and attitudes toward, invertebrates and suggests that engaging in certain outdoor activities may promote positive attitudes toward bees among adolescents.     

The more things changed,the more they stayed the same: Trends in conservation focus 2010–2019

The conservation literature provides an important resource for conservation practice and reflects key areas of current research interest, but not necessarily those of highest priority, in the field of conservation science. In one of the most comprehensive studies of its kind, this paper evaluates 4388 articles from three leading conservation journals with different impact factors (Biological Conservation, Conservation Letters, and Oryx) for the period 2010–2019. The analysis shows that previously identified trends still hold true in many instances, including a continuing taxonomic bias towards vertebrates and particularly in favour of mammals. Geographical biases also persist, favouring Europe and North America with respect to where research is undertaken, who writes about it, and how it is funded, although publication of research conducted in Africa is increasing. It is difficult to evaluate changes in author gender outside the decade studied as this topic has not been widely considered in previous studies, but parity in authorship has not yet been achieved in any of the journals examined. To overcome the biases identified, researchers, editors, and funding organisations collectively still need to do more to redirect conservation efforts where they are most urgently needed and encourage more women and more researchers from lower income countries to participate in research by helping to remove the barriers that currently limit them.     

Examining the evidence for chytridiomycosis in threatened amphibian species

Extinction risks are increasing for amphibians due to rising threats and minimal conservation efforts. Nearly one quarter of all threatened/extinct amphibians in the IUCN Red List is purportedly at risk from the disease chytridiomycosis. However, a closer look at the data reveals that Batrachochytrium dendrobatidis (the causal agent) has been identified and confirmed to cause clinical disease in only 14% of these species. Primary literature surveys confirm these findings; ruling out major discrepancies between Red List assessments and real-time science. Despite widespread interest in chytridiomycosis, little progress has been made between assessment years to acquire evidence for the role of chytridiomycosis in species-specific amphibian declines. Instead, assessment teams invoke the precautionary principle when listing chytridiomycosis as a threat. Precaution is valuable when dealing with the world's most threatened taxa, however scientific research is needed to distinguish between real and predicted threats in order to better prioritize conservation efforts. Fast paced, cost effective, in situ research to confirm or rule out chytridiomycosis in species currently hypothesized to be threatened by the disease would be a step in the right direction. Ultimately, determining the manner in which amphibian conservation resources are utilized is a conversation for the greater conservation community that we hope to stimulate here.     

Indigenous Ecological Knowledge as Situated Practices: Understanding Fishers' Knowledge in the Western Solomon Islands

ABSTRACT   In this article, we draw on research among fisherfolk of Roviana Lagoon, Solomon Islands, to examine certain epistemological assumptions of the "indigenous knowledge" concept. We describe how approaches to knowledge in Roviana differ from prevailing models of knowledge that distinguish between cognitive aspects and other modalities of knowing. For many Roviana fishers, ecological knowledge is not analytically separated from the changing contexts of everyday activities such as navigating and fishing. Inspired by Roviana epistemologies, we argue that a practice-oriented approach provides a more sympathetic and informative theoretical framework for understanding knowledge and its role in contemporary marine-resource conservation efforts. The theoretical and methodological implications of the perspective are illustrated with examples from an ongoing marine conservation project in the western Solomon Islands that integrates indigenous knowledge, remote-sensing techniques, and Geographic Information System (GIS) technologies.     

On the gap between science and conservation implementation—A national park perspective

In the conservation of forests and protected areas, a gap lies between scientific knowledge and the management decisions made. From our perspective as scientists studying a national park, who deal daily with both research and administration, we discuss the general reasons for this gap. We provide examples (saproxylic beetles and Norway spruce genetics) to demonstrate the dilemma of practitioners who aim at basing their decisions on evidence. From our experience, the approach of problem solving is crucial, yet in many cases, the bidirectional bridge between science and application is poorly established. We specifically urge governments to organize nation-wide species distribution data; scientists to support the conservation community with new functional approaches, also in combination with Red Lists to identify diversity hotspots and major threats; stakeholders to identify land-use alternatives for scientists to study; state research institutes to increase the proportion of scientists; scientists and governmental authorities to regularly summarize scientific results and conclusions for practitioners; and agencies should foster incentives for scientists to deal with conservation efforts.     

Conservation of oceanic island floras: Present and future global challenges

Current threats to the planet's biodiversity are unprecedented, and they particularly imperil insular floras. In this investigation, we use the threat factors identified by the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment as the main drivers of biodiversity loss on islands to define and rank 13 current, continuing threats to the plant diversity of nine focal archipelagos where volcanic origin (or in the Seychelles a prolonged isolation after a continental origin) has produced a high degree of endemicity and fragility in the face of habitat alteration. We also conduct a global endangerment assessment based on the numbers of insular endemic plants in the endangered (EN) and critically endangered (CR) IUCN categories for 53 island groups with an estimated 9951 endemic plant species, providing a representative sample of the world's insular systems and their floristic richness. Our analyses indicate that isolation does not significantly influence endangerment, but plant endemics from very small islands are more often critically endangered. We estimate that between 3500 and 6800 of the estimated 70,000 insular endemic plant species worldwide might be highly threatened (CR+EN) and between ca. 2000 and 2800 of them in critical danger of extinction (CR). Based on these analyses, and on a worldwide literature review of the biological threat factors considered, we identify challenging questions for conservation research, asking (i) what are the most urgent priorities for the conservation of insular species and floras, and (ii) with the knowledge and assets available, how can we improve the impact of conservation science and practice on the preservation of island biodiversity? Our analysis indicates that the synergistic action of many threat factors can induce major ecological disturbances, leading to multiple extinctions. We review weaknesses and strengths in conservation research and management in the nine focal archipelagos, and highlight the urgent need for conservation scientists to share knowledge and expertise, identify and discuss common challenges, and formulate multi-disciplinary conservation objectives for insular plant endemics worldwide. To our knowledge, this is the most up-to-date and comprehensive survey yet to review the threat factors to native plants on oceanic islands and define priority research questions.     

Beyond Trust: Plagiarism and Truth

Academic misconduct distorts the relationship between scientific practice and the knowledge it produces. The relationship between science and the knowledge it produces is, however, not something universally agreed upon. In this paper I will critically discuss the moral status of an act of research misconduct, namely plagiarism, in the context of different epistemological positions. While from a positivist view of science, plagiarism only influences trust in science but not the content of the scientific corpus, from a constructivist point of view both are at stake. Consequently, I argue that discussions of research misconduct and responsible research ought to be explicitly informed by the authors’ views on the relationship between science and the knowledge it produces.     

Partnering for Greater Success: Local Stakeholders and Research in Tropical Biology and Conservation

Local communities are important stakeholders in resource management and conservation efforts, particularly in the developing world. Although evidence is mixed in suggesting that these resident stakeholders are optimal forest stewards, it is highly unlikely that large tracts of tropical forests will be conserved without engaging local people who depend on them daily for their livelihoods. Stakeholders, who reside in biodiverse ecosystems like tropical forests, are the largest direct users and ultimate decision-makers of forest fate, can be important investors in conservation, harbor local ecological knowledge that complements Western science and frequently have long-term legitimate claims on lands where they reside. Research partnerships with local stakeholders can increase research relevance, enhance knowledge exchange and result in greater conservation success. Different phases of the research cycle present distinct opportunities for partnership, with flexibility in timing, approaches and strategies depending on researcher and local stakeholder needs and interests. Despite being the last step in the research process, dissemination of results can be the best starting point for researchers interested in experimenting with local stakeholder engagement. Still, tropical biologists might not choose to partner with local people because of lack of institutional rewards, insufficient training in stakeholder engagement, insecure research infrastructure in community settings, and time and funding limitations. Although not appropriate in all cases and despite significant challenges, some biological scientists and research institutions have successfully engaged local stakeholders in the research process, proving mutually beneficial for investigators and local people alike and resulting in important innovations in tropical biology and conservation.