Suchergebnisse

Saving species from extinction is a central tenet of conservation, yet success in this endeavour remains unpredictable and elusive, especially where wildlife trade is involved. Influential conservation policy actors operating internationally advocate strong regulatory and enforcement approaches to governance of wildlife trade. However, a broad body of evidence suggests that in some situations positive incentives for sustainable use may achieve better conservation outcomes. This analysis of efforts over 3 decades to avoid the extinction of the Bali starling Leucopsar rothschildi draws on network perspectives from environmental governance and geography, and shows how an international project adopting traditional enforcement approaches generated a 'prestige of ownership' dynamic among local elites. This placed trade in Bali starlings above the enforcement competencies of the relevant government authority, leading to the demise of the species. Subsequently, two separate Indonesian initiatives created spaces of regulatory flexibility and embraced traits of the starling's phenotype to construct identities for the species suited to the local context. This enrolled a wider range of stakeholders in the conservation of the species, including bird-keeping elites, and led to significant successes in restoring captive and free-flying populations. This case study highlights the potential of conservation networks that involve non-establishment personnel and, while recognizing the appeal of generic enforcement approaches to politicians, funders and the urban public, it adds to an increasing body of evidence that suggests top-down prescriptive conservation frameworks may undermine the ability of situated conservationists to develop interventions appropriate to their political and cultural realities.

Saving species from extinction is a central tenet of conservation, yet success in this endeavour remains unpredictable and elusive especially where wildlife trade is involved. Influential conservation actors operating internationally favour and advocate strong regulatory and enforcement approaches to wildlife trade governance. However a broad body of evidence suggests that in some situations positive incentives for sustainable use may achieve better conservation outcomes. This contribution presents an analysis of efforts to avoid the extinction of the Bali starling – an iconic Indonesian species – over three decades. Drawing on network perspectives from environmental governance and geography it shows how an international project adopting traditional enforcement approaches generated a 'prestige of ownership' dynamic among local elites. This placed trade in the species 'above' the enforcement competencies of the relevant government authority leading to the species demise. Subsequently, two separate Indonesian initiatives created spaces of regulatory flexibility and embraced traits of the starling's phenotype to construct identities for the species suited to the local context. This enrolled a wider range of actors into the species' conservation, including bird-keeping elites, and led to significant successes in restoring captive and free flying populations. This case study highlights the potential of conservation networks that involve non-establishment actors. Further, whilst recognizing the appeal of generic enforcement approaches to politicians, funders and urban supporter publics, it adds to a growing body of evidence that suggests top-down prescriptive conservation frameworks may undermine the ability of situated conservationists to develop interventions appropriate to their political and cultural realities.

The UK needs to develop effective policy responses to the spread of tree pathogens and pests. This has been given the political urgency following the media and other commentary associated with the arrival of a disease that causes 'dieback' of European Ash (Fraxinus excelsior) - a tree species with deep cultural associations. In 2014 the UK government published a plant biosecurity strategy and linked to this invested in research to inform policy. This paper reports the findings of a survey of informed UK publics on the acceptability of various potential strategies to deal with ash dieback, including "no action". During the summer of 2015, we conducted a face-to-face survey of 1152 respondents attending three major countryside events that attract distinct publics interested in the countryside: landowners & land managers; naturalists and gardeners. We found that UK publics who are likely to engage discursively and politically (through letter writing, petitions etc.) with the issue of ash dieback a) care about the issue, b) want an active response, c) do not really distinguish between ash trees in forestry or ecological settings, and d) prefer traditional breeding solutions. Further that e) younger people and gardeners are open to GM breeding techniques, but f) the more policy-empowered naturalists are more likely to be anti-GM. We suggest that these findings provide three 'steers' for science and policy: 1) policy needs to include an active intervention component involving the breeding of disease-tolerant trees, 2) that the development of disease tolerance using GM-technologies could be part of a tree-breeding policy, and 3) there is a need for an active dialogue with publics to manage expectations on the extent to which science and policy can control tree disease or, put another way, to build acceptability for the prospect that tree diseases may have to run their course.

In response to a declaration in 2004 from a coalition of conservation and animal welfare organizations to ban imports of wild birds into the European Union, we propose that such blanket bans or indiscriminate bans are unlikely to be effective as a generic conservation approach to the wild bird trade. We further argue that such trade bans, particularly when imposed by Northern constituencies on Southern countries and communities, can act counter to broader values of equity and sustainable development. Here we draw attention to a range of problems and unforseen consequences of trade bans and highlight the conservation potential of market-led mechanisms that seek to reform trade chains to make them more ethical and sustainable. We contend that it is time for conservation scientists to critically examine the evidence concerning the efficacy of these two strategies as they relate to the trade in wild birds.

In response to a declaration in 2004 from a coalition of conservation and animal welfare organizations to ban imports of wild birds into the European Union, we propose that such blanket bans or indiscriminate bans are unlikely to be effective as a generic conservation approach to the wild bird trade. We further argue that such trade bans, particularly when imposed by Northern constituencies on Southern countries and communities, can act counter to broader values of equity and sustainable development. Here we draw attention to a range of problems and unforseen consequences of trade bans and highlight the conservation potential of market-led mechanisms that seek to reform trade chains to make them more ethical and sustainable. We contend that it is time for conservation scientists to critically examine the evidence concerning the efficacy of these two strategies as they relate to the trade in wild birds.

Rewilding has caught the scientific and public imagination but needs a more supportive policy environment to achieve its conservation impact. Rewilding is a logical next step in an on-going process of EU nature policy development and the 'Policy Brief' identifies areas where rewilding principles can extend and reinvigorate European nature policy. Rewilding is a powerful new term in conservation. This may be because it combines a sense of passion and feeling for nature with advances in ecological science. The term resonates with diverse publics and seems to have a particular feel to a younger urban generation and among those who want a voice in shaping a new rural environment. It has attained a significant scientific, practical and media presence during the last few years. In late 2o15 and 2016, the authors of the 'Policy Brief' conducted interviews with experts in EU nature policy and legislation, in rewilding science and practice to explore opportunities to create a policy environment that would support fuller expression of emerging rewilding visions and examples. The result is a paper that describes rewilding and its key principles in the perspective of current and possible future relationships with EU politics, the Nature Directives, wilderness and ecosystem restoration. It also identifies existing and new policy frames and how rewilding can contribute to these, such as the Water Framework Directive, and a Trans-European Green Network (TEN-G). The Policy Brief presents the latest thinking on how rewilding is unfolding in a European context, and how it can contribute to the 15% restoration target that the EU committed to in the EU 2020 Biodiversity Strategy. The rise of the rewilding visions and practice across Europe coincides with the Fitness Check of the EU nature legislation. There is a strong and agreed view that the Nature Directives must be kept intact and that the focus should be on better implementation, where rewilding can play a significant role. The Policy Brief includes a request to policy makers ...

Protected areas (PAs) are the main strategy to conserve natural values and reduce biodiversity loss. However, with increasing global food requirements, using land for protecting landscapes and species is becoming increasingly difficult to justify. Here, we argue that framing PAs as spatial assets provides an ideal platform for generating investment and increasing their political/cultural resilience. Specifically, we define and characterize PAs in terms of their biophysical, human, infrastructure, institutional and cultural assets, making explicit the forms of value they create and for whom, and identifying types of investment needed to generate value in the medium and long term. These assets can be protected, managed and/or invested in to generate (monetizable and non-monetizable) forms of value. They can also be at risk from a variety of factors. Building on contemporary conservation policy, our asset framework provides an innovative approach to the development and management of PAs in the 21st Century.