Explore the vast range of titles available.

The International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Red List of Threatened Species was increasingly used during the 1980s to assess the conservation status of species for policy and planning purposes. This use stimulated the development of a new set of quantitative criteria for listing species in the categories of threat: critically endangered, endangered, and vulnerable. These criteria, which were intended to be applicable to all species except microorganisms, were part of a broader system for classifying threatened species and were fully implemented by IUCN in 2000. The system and the criteria have been widely used by conservation practitioners and scientists and now underpin one indicator being used to assess the Convention on Biological Diversity 2010 biodiversity target. We describe the process and the technical background to the IUCN Red List system. The criteria refer to fundamental biological processes underlying population decline and extinction. But given major differences between species, the threatening processes affecting them, and the paucity of knowledge relating to most species, the IUCN system had to be both broad and flexible to be applicable to the majority of described species. The system was designed to measure the symptoms of extinction risk, and uses 5 independent criteria relating to aspects of population loss and decline of range size. A species is assigned to a threat category if it meets the quantitative threshold for at least one criterion. The criteria and the accompanying rules and guidelines used by IUCN are intended to increase the consistency, transparency, and validity of its categorization system, but it necessitates some compromises that affect the applicability of the system and the species lists that result. In particular, choices were made over the assessment of uncertainty, poorly known species, depleted species, population decline, restricted ranges, and rarity; all of these affect the way red lists should be viewed and used. Processes related to priority setting and the development of national red lists need to take account of some assumptions in the formulation of the criteria. /// La Lista Roja de Especies Amenazadas de la UICN (Unión Internacional para la Conservación de la Naturaleza) fue muy utilizada durante la década de 1980 para evaluar el estatus de conservación de especies para fines políticos y de planificación. Este uso estimuló el desarrollo de un conjunto nuevo de criterios cuantitativos para enlistar especies en las categorías de amenaza: en peligro crítico, en peligro y vulnerable. Estos criterios, que se pretendía fueran aplicables a todas las especies excepto microorganismos, eran parte de un sistema general para clasificar especies amenazadas y fueron implementadas completamente por la UICN en 2000. El sistema y los criterios han sido ampliamente utilizados por practicantes y científicos de la conservación y actualmente apuntalan un indicador utilizado para evaluar el objetivo al 2010 de la Convención de Diversidad Biológica. Describimos el proceso y el respaldo técnico del sistema de la Lista Roja de la IUCN. Los criterios se refieren a los procesos biológicos fundamentales que subyacen en la declinación y extinción de una población. Pero, debido a diferencias mayores entre especies, los procesos de amenaza que los afectan y la escasez de conocimiento sobre la mayoría de las especies, el sistema de la UICN tenía que ser amplio y flexible para ser aplicable a la mayoría de las especies descritas. El sistema fue diseñado para medir los síntomas del riesgo de extinción, y utiliza cinco criterios independientes que relacionan aspectos de la pérdida poblacional y la declinación del rango de distribución. Una especie es asignada a una categoría de amenaza si cumple el umbral cuantitativo por lo menos para un criterio. Los criterios, las reglas acompañantes y las directrices utilizadas por la UICN tienen la intención de incrementar la consistencia, transparencia y validez de su sistema de clasificación, pero requiere algunos compromisos que afectan la aplicabilidad del sistema y las listas de especies que resultan. En particular, se hicieron selecciones por encima de la evaluación de incertidumbre, especies poco conocidas, especies disminuidas, declinación poblacional, rangos restringidos y rareza; todas estas afectan la forma en que las listas rojas deberían ser vistas y usadas. Los procesos relacionados con la definición de prioridades y el desarrollo de las listas rojas nacionales necesitan considerar algunos de los supuestos en la formulación de los criterios.

Unauthorized use of natural resources is a key threat to many protected areas. Approaches to reducing this threat include law enforcement and integrated conservation and development (ICD) projects, but for such ICDs to be targeted effectively, it is important to understand who is illegally using which natural resources and why. The nature of unauthorized behavior makes it difficult to ascertain this information through direct questioning. Bwindi Impenetrable National Park, Uganda, has many ICD projects, including authorizing some local people to use certain nontimber forest resources from the park. However, despite over 25 years of ICD, unauthorized resource use continues. We used household surveys, indirect questioning (unmatched count technique), and focus group discussions to generate profiles of authorized and unauthorized resource users and to explore motivations for unauthorized activity. Overall, unauthorized resource use was most common among people from poor households who lived closest to the park boundary and farthest from roads and trading centers. Other motivations for unauthorized resource use included crop raiding by wild animals, inequity of revenue sharing, and lack of employment, factors that created resentment among the poorest communities. In some communities, benefits obtained from ICD were reported to be the greatest deterrents against unauthorized activity, although law enforcement ranked highest overall. Despite the sensitive nature of exploring unauthorized resource use, management‐relevant insights into the profiles and motivations of unauthorized resource users can be gained from a combination of survey techniques, as adopted here. To reduce unauthorized activity at Bwindi, we suggest ICD benefit the poorest people living in remote areas and near the park boundary by providing affordable alternative sources of forest products and addressing crop raiding. To prevent resentment from driving further unauthorized activity, ICDs should be managed transparently and equitably.

Conservationists are increasingly engaging with the concept of human well‐being to improve the design and evaluation of their interventions. Since the convening of the influential Sarkozy Commission in 2009, development researchers have been refining conceptualizations and frameworks to understand and measure human well‐being and are starting to converge on a common understanding of how best to do this. In conservation, the term human well‐being is in widespread use, but there is a need for guidance on operationalizing it to measure the impacts of conservation interventions on people. We present a framework for understanding human well‐being, which could be particularly useful in conservation. The framework includes 3 conditions; meeting needs, pursuing goals, and experiencing a satisfactory quality of life. We outline some of the complexities involved in evaluating the well‐being effects of conservation interventions, with the understanding that well‐being varies between people and over time and with the priorities of the evaluator. Key challenges for research into the well‐being impacts of conservation interventions include the need to build up a collection of case studies so as to draw out generalizable lessons; harness the potential of modern technology to support well‐being research; and contextualize evaluations of conservation impacts on well‐being spatially and temporally within the wider landscape of social change. Pathways through the smog of confusion around the term well‐being exist, and existing frameworks such as the Well‐being in Developing Countries approach can help conservationists negotiate the challenges of operationalizing the concept. Conservationists have the opportunity to benefit from the recent flurry of research in the development field so as to carry out more nuanced and locally relevant evaluations of the effects of their interventions on human well‐being.

A series of international sustainability policies currently in negotiation will shape biodiversity conservation for decades to come. However, discussions of current sustainability policy have a huge blind spot: the absence of Fungi, one of the eukaryotic Kingdoms. Wild fungi are a key component of natural ecosystems (e.g., through parasitic symbiosis), maintain soil fertility by decomposing organic matter, and facilitate uptake of water and nutrients through mycorrhizal association with plant roots, enhancing carbon sequestration. Moreover, the harvest, use, and trade of wild fungi are essential economic and cultural activities, supporting livelihoods and providing food and medicinal ingredients. Still, the sustainability of wild fungi use is hard to assess because there is a lack of attention from research, legislation, and society at large. Here, we present a way forward for including wild fungi in international sustainability policy. We layout four key steps to foster a much‐needed policy and societal transformation: acknowledge the existence of Fungi as an independent Kingdom; tailor sustainability policy targets to include Fungi; implement comprehensive monitoring of wild fungi status and trends; and promote responsible use of wild fungi as a livelihood opportunity in rural areas. These steps can facilitate a transition toward better recognizing, valuing, and conserving the ecosystem services wild fungi provide.

Growing threats to biodiversity in the tropics mean there is an increasing need for effective monitoring that balances scientific rigor with practical feasibility. Alternatives to professional techniques are emerging that are based on the involvement of local people. Such locally based monitoring methods may be more sustainable over time, allow greater spatial coverage and quicker management decisions, lead to increased compliance, and help encourage attitude shifts toward more environmentally sustainable practices. Nevertheless, few studies have yet compared the findings or cost-effectiveness of locally based methods with professional techniques or investigated the power of locally based methods to detect trends. We gathered data on bushmeat-hunting catch and effort using a professional technique (accompanying hunters on hunting trips) and two locally based methods in which data were collected by hunters (hunting camp diaries and weekly hunter interviews) in a 15-month study in Equatorial Guinea. Catch and effort results from locally based methods were strongly correlated with those of the professional technique and the spatial locations of hunting trips reported in the locally based methods accurately reflected those recorded with the professional technique. We used power simulations of catch and effort data to show that locally based methods can reliably detect meaningful levels of change (20% change with 80% power at significance level [α]= 0.05) in multispecies catch per unit effort. Locally based methods were the most cost-effective for monitoring. Hunter interviews collected catch and effort data on 240% more hunts per person hour and 94% more hunts per unit cost, spent on monitoring, than the professional technique. Our results suggest that locally based monitoring can offer an accurate, cost-effective, and sufficiently powerful method to monitor the status of natural resources. To establish such a system in Equatorial Guinea, the current lack of national and local capacity for monitoring and management must be addressed.

Despite the growing interest in conservation approaches that include payments for environmental services (PES), few evaluations of the influence of such interventions on behaviors of individuals have been conducted. We used self‐reported changes in six legal and illegal forest‐use behaviors to investigate the way in which a PES for biodiversity conservation intervention in Menabe, Madagascar, influenced behavior. Individuals (n =864) from eight intervention communities and five control communities answered questions on their forest‐use behaviors before and after the intervention began, as well as on their reasons for changing and their attitudes to various institutions. The payments had little impact on individuals' reported decisions to change behaviors, but it had a strong impact on individuals' attitudes. Payments appeared to legitimize monitoring of behaviors by the implementing nongovernmental organization (NGO), but did not act as a behavioral driver in their own right. Although there were no clear differences between changes in behaviors in the intervention and control communities, the intervention did influence motivations for change. Fear of local forest associations and the implementing NGO were strong motivators for changing behavior in communities with the PES intervention, whereas fear of the national government was the main reason given for change in control communities. Behavioral changes were most stable where fear of local organizations motivated the change. Our results highlight the interactions between different incentives people face when making behavioral decisions and the importance of considering the full range of incentives when designing community‐based PES interventions.

Animal migration is one of the most fascinating of all behaviors, links ecosystems and has profound ecological consequences over very large scales. Ungulate migration are among the most imperiled ecological phenomena in the world. Substantial populations of migratory ungulates are found in Mongolia's Gobi-Steppe Ecosystem (GSE), which is the largest area of intact steppe in the world and hense is of global importance.

Governments, businesses, and lenders worldwide are adopting an objective of no net loss (NNL) of biodiversity that is often partly achieved through biodiversity offsetting within a hierarchy of mitigation actions. Offsets aim to balance residual losses of biodiversity caused by development in one location with commensurate gains at another. Although ecological challenges to achieve NNL are debated, the associated gains and losses for local stakeholders have received less attention. International best practice calls for offsets to make people no worse off than before implementation of the project, but there is a lack of clarity concerning how to achieve this with regard to people’s use and nonuse values for biodiversity, especially given the inevitable trade-offs when compensating biodiversity losses with gains elsewhere. This is particularly challenging for countries where poor people depend on natural resources. Badly planned offsets can exacerbate poverty, and development and offset impacts can vary across spatial-temporal scales and by location, gender, and livelihood. We conceptualize the no-worse-off principle in the context of NNL of biodiversity, by exploring for whom and how the principle can be achieved. Changes in the spatial and temporal distribution of biodiversity-related social impacts of a development and its associated offset can lead to social inequity and negatively impact people’s well-being. The level of aggregation (regional, village, interest group, household, and individual) at which these social impacts are measured and balanced can again exacerbate inequity in a system. We propose that a determination that people are no worse off, and preferably better off, after a development and biodiversity offset project than they were before the project should be based on the perceptions of project-affected people (assessed at an appropriate level of aggregation); that their well-being associated with biodiversity losses and gains should be at least as good as it was before the project; and that this level of well-being should be maintained throughout the project life cycle. Employing this principle could help ensure people are no worse off as a result of interventions to achieve biodiversity NNL. Los gobiernos, negocios y financiadores están adoptando el objetivo de biodiversidad sin pérdida neta (NNL, en inglés), el cual comúnmente se logra parcialmente por medio de compensaciones por biodiversidad dentro de una jerarquía de acciones de mitigación. Las compensaciones buscan balancear las pérdidas residuales de la biodiversidad causadas por el desarrollo en una localidad con ganancias conmensuradas en otra localidad. Aunque los obstáculos ecológicos para alcanzar la NNL se debaten hoy en día, las ganancias y pérdidas para los accionistas locales han recibido menos atención. La mejor práctica internacional requiere compensaciones para que las personas no estén peor que antes de la implementación del proyecto, pero existe una falta de claridad con respecto a cómo lograr esto considerando el valor de uso o no de la biodiversidad por parte de las personas, especialmente dadas las compensaciones inevitables cuando se resarcen las pérdidas de biodiversidad con ganancias en otros lugares. Esto es un reto particularmente para los países en donde la gente pobre depende de los recursos naturales. Las compensaciones mal planeadas pueden exacerbar la pobreza, y los impactos del desarrollo y las compensaciones puede variar a lo largo de la escala espacio-temporal y por localidad, género, y sustento. Conceptualizamos el principio de no-peor-que en el contexto de la NNL de biodiversidad explorando para quién y cómo se puede lograr este principio. Los cambios en la distribución especial y temporal de los impactos sociales de un proyecto relacionados con la biodiversidad y sus compensaciones asociadas pueden resultar en una inequidad social e impactar negativamente el bienestar de las personas. El nivel de agregación (regional, aldea, grupo de interés. hogar, individual) en el que se miden y balancean estos impactos sociales también puede exacerbar la inequidad en un sistema. Proponemos que la determinación de que las personas no estén peor que antes, y de preferencia mejor que, después de un proyecto de desarrollo y de compensación por la biodiversidad debería basarse en las percepciones de las personas afectadas por el proyecto (evaluadas en un nivel apropiado de agregación); que su bienestar asociado con las pérdidas y ganancias de biodiversidad debería por lo menos ser tan bueno como era antes del proyecto; y que este nivel de bienestar debería mantenerse durante todo el ciclo de vida del proyecto. Si se emplea este principio, se podría ayudar a asegurarle a las personas que no estén peor que antes como resultado de las intervenciones para alcanzar la NNL de biodiversidad. 世界各国的政府、企业和贷款机构都在努力实现生物多样性无净损失(no net loss, NNL)的巨标，这一目 标一定程度上是通过分级减控行动中的生物多样性补偿实现的。补偿旨在平衡一千地区发展导致的生物多祥性 剩余损失与另ー个地区的同等收益。虽然实现无净损失面临的生态挑战仍受到争议，但当地的利益相关者的相 应收益和损失受到的关注甚至更少。目前，国际上的最优做法要求对人们的补偿应能够保i正其生活水平不会比 项目实施前更低，但就人们对生物多祥性的利用及菲利用价值来说如何达到这一要求还不明确，特別是考虑到 用其它地方的收益来补偿生物多祥性损失时所不可避免地产生的利弊权衡。而这ー问题在贫困人ロ依赖自然资 源生活的国家格外具有挑战性。计划不当的补偿可能会加剧贫困，发展和ネト偿的影响还会随时空尺度、地点、 性别和谋生方式而变化。我们在生物多祥性无净损失的背景下，通过分析无恶化原则将为谁实现、如何实现，构 建了该原则的概念。发展及其补偿所引起的生物多祥性相关的社会影响在时间和空间分布上的变化会导致社 会不平等，并对人们的福祉产生负面影响。在何种聚合程度上（地区、村庄、利益集团、家庭、十人）衡量和平 衡这些社会影响，可能会再次加剧系统中的不平等性。我们认为，发展及生物多祥性补偿项目对人们生活水平影 响(不应比项目开展前更差，最好有所改善)的测定应建立在对受项目影响人群的理解和认识上即在ー个合适 的綜合的水平上进行评估;另外，人们与生物多样性收益及损失相关的福祉也至少要与项目实施前一祥好，且项 目全程都保持这ー水平。采用这个原则有助于确保实现生物多祥性无净损失的干预不会导致人们生活水平下 降。

Understanding compliance with conservation rules is key for biodiversity conservation. Here, we assess compliance and its underlying motivations in a small‐scale fishery in Chile. We adapt a framework originally developed for forestry to unpack compliance motivations at within‐individual and between‐individuals levels while accounting for contextual factors. We find that 92–100% fishers comply with temporal or gear rules, while only 3% comply with the quota limit. Legitimacy‐based motivations are more important in explaining why individual fishers comply with temporal/gear rules than they are for compliance with the quota. At the between‐individuals level, we find that normative motivations are significantly related to the degree of non‐compliance with the quota. Contextual factors such as quota levels are key in explaining broader non‐compliance patterns. Our results suggest that considering compliance at appropriate analytical levels is necessary to unpack motivations, guide local and national natural resource management policies, and move toward a better theory of compliance.

In a world of shrinking habitats and increasing competition for natural resources, potentially dangerous predators bring the challenges of coexisting with wildlife sharply into focus. Through interdisciplinary collaboration among authors trained in the humanities, social sciences, and natural sciences, we reviewed current approaches to mitigating adverse human-predator encounters and devised a vision for future approaches to understanding and mitigating such encounters. Limitations to current approaches to mitigation include too much focus on negative impacts; oversimplified equating of levels of damage with levels of conflict; and unsuccessful technical fixes resulting from failure to engage locals, address hidden costs, or understand cultural (nonscientific) explanations of the causality of attacks. An emerging interdisciplinary literature suggests that to better frame and successfully mitigate negative human-predator relations conservation professionals need to consider dispensing with conflict as the dominant framework for thinking about human-predator encounters; work out what conflicts are really about (they may be human-human conflicts); unravel the historical contexts of particular conflicts; and explore different cultural ways of thinking about animals. The idea of cosmopolitan natures may help conservation professionals think more clearly about human-predator relations in both local and global context. These new perspectives for future research practice include a recommendation for focused interdisciplinary research and the use of new approaches, including human-animal geography, multispecies ethnography, and approaches from the environmental humanities notably environmental history. Managers should think carefully about how they engage with local cultural beliefs about wildlife, work with all parties to agree on what constitutes good evidence, develop processes and methods to mitigate conflicts, and decide how to monitor and evaluate these. Demand for immediate solutions that benefit both conservation and development favors dispute resolution and technical fixes, which obscures important underlying drivers of conflicts. If these drivers are not considered, well-intentioned efforts focused on human-wildlife conflicts will fail. En un mundo en el que los hábitats se reducen y la competencia por los recursos naturales incrementa, los depredadores potencialmente peligrosos resaltan pronunciadamente la dificultad de coexistir con la vida silvestre. Por medio de la colaboración interdisciplinaria entre autores preparados en las humanidades, las ciencias sociales y las ciencias naturales revisamos las estrategias actuales para mitigar los encuentros adversos entre depredadores y humanos y diseñamos una visión para estrategias futuras para entender y mitigar dichos encuentros. Las limitaciones de las estrategias actuales para la mitigación incluyen demasiado enfoque sobre los impactos negativos; la equiparación demasiado simplificada de los niveles de daño con los niveles del conflicto; y los arreglos técnicos infructuosos que resultan del fracaso por involucrar a los locales, hablar sobre los costos ocultos o entender las explicaciones culturales (no científicas) de la causalidad de los ataques. La literatura interdisciplinaria emergente sugiere que para enmarcar de mejor manera y mitigar exitosamente las relaciones negativas entre humanos y depredadores, los profesionales de la conservación necesitan considerar dispensar el conflicto como el marco de trabajo dominante para pensar sobre los encuentros entre humanos y depredadores; descifrar de qué se tratan realmente los conflictos (pueden ser conflictos humano - humano); aclarar los contextos históricos de conflictos particulares; y explorar las diferentes formas culturales de pensar sobre los animales. La idea de naturalezas cosmopolitas puede ayudar a los profesionales de la conservación a pensar de manera más clara sobre las relaciones humano - depredador en el contexto global y en el local. Estas nuevas perspectivas para la futura investigación de la práctica incluyen una recomendación para la investigación interdisciplinaria enfocada y el uso de nuevas estrategias, incluidas la geografía humano - animal, la etnografía de varias especies y estrategias de las humanidades ambientales, notablemente la historia ambiental. Los manejadores deberían pensar cuidadosamente sobre cómo se involucran con las creencias de los locales acerca de la vida silvestre, trabajar con todos los actores para acordar qué constituye una buena evidencia, desarrollar procesos y métodos para mitigar los conflictos, y decidir cómo monitorear y evaluarlos. La demanda por soluciones inmediatas que benefician tanto a la conservación como al desarrollo favorece a la resolución de disputas y a los arreglos técnicos, lo que hace a un lado a importantes conductores subyacentes de los conflictos. Si no son considerados estos conductores, los esfuerzos bien intencionados enfocados en los conflictos humano - vida silvestre fracasarán.