Explore the vast range of titles available.

Artificial Intelligence (AI)-driven language models (chatbots) progressively accelerate the collection and translation of environmental evidence that could be used to inform planetary conservation plans and strategies. Yet, the consequences of chatbot-generated conservation content have never been globally assessed. Drawing on distributive, recognition, procedural, and epistemic dimensions of environmental justice, we interviewed and analysed 30,000 responses from ChatGPT on ecological restoration expertise, stakeholder engagements, and techniques. Our results show that more than two-thirds of the chatbot’s answers rely on the expertise of male academics working at universities in the United States, while largely ignoring evidence from low- and lower-middle-income countries (7%) and Indigenous and community restoration experiences (2%). A focus on planting and reforestation techniques (69%) underpins optimistic environmental outcomes (60%), neglecting holistic technical approaches that consider non-forest ecosystems (25%) and non-tree species (8%). This analysis highlights how biases in AI-driven knowledge production can reinforce Western science, overlooking diverse sources of expertise and perspectives regarding conservation research and practices. In the fast-paced domain of generative AI, safeguard mechanisms are needed to ensure that these expanding chatbot developments can incorporate just principles in addressing the pace and scale of the worldwide environmental crisis.

Sustainability science research conducted with Indigenous collaborators must be Indigenous-led and achieve impacts that are grounded in local values and priorities, both for ethical reasons and to achieve more robust outcomes. However, there has been limited focus on determining how best to evaluate the way research is used, shared and created to adaptively solve complex sustainable issues facing Indigenous lands. In this paper, we outline a collaborative and adaptive approach for conducting Indigenous-led evaluations of sustainability research and show how this approach was applied to evaluate cross-cultural knowledge co-production practice and impact in Australia’s jointly managed and World Heritage-listed Kakadu National Park. As part of an Indigenous-led research project, indicators were co-developed by Indigenous and non-Indigenous research team members to monitor the health of the knowledge-sharing and co-production practices that underpinned the design, management and success of the project’s research activities. The evaluations focused on determining whether research activities were providing negotiated benefits for local Indigenous people; helping to restore and protect agreed values in priority areas; and supporting Indigenous-led collaborative knowledge sharing and research practices. In Kakadu, we show how the Indigenous-led design of the research evaluation empowered the usability and benefits of knowledge which was negotiated, shared and co-created. The approach shows how sustainability science can be evaluated by Indigenous leaders to test if and how research practice and impact is responding to their priorities for their traditional estates.

The planet is facing climate and biodiversity loss crises that impact all of humanity and yet globally, women remain underrepresented in leading solutions to these urgent conservation challenges. As one of the world’s largest conservation non-profit organizations, The Nature Conservancy (TNC) provided a large case-study for understanding inequity for women in the conservation sector. In 2018, all 1,789 conservation and science staff at TNC were surveyed to understand how they are able to develop their careers and contribute to conservation research and decision making. Of the 904 responses (490 men and 414 women), results show that men influence conservation and science decisions more than women; women face multiple barriers across their conservation careers due to gender bias; women experience sexual harassment and discrimination, as well as fear retaliation more than men; and men reported the sector as a more equitable and favorable place for women than women themselves experienced. Our data demonstrates that gender equality (equal representation of men and women) does not automatically mean that women no longer face systemic inequity and that intersectional issues such as race, location and caring responsibilities can all make it even more difficult for women to excel. Respondents drew from experiences across their conservation careers, to suggest how the conservation sector could address these issues. Based on our findings, we recommend practical ways the conservation sector can improve gender equity, including via workplace and cultural change measures, as well as changes to recruitment, pay transparency, and career development policies.

Intact Forest Landscapes (IFLs) are critical strongholds for the environmental services that they provide, not least for their role in climate protection. On the basis of information about the distributions of IFLs and Indigenous Peoples’ lands, we examined the importance of these areas for conserving the world’s remaining intact forests. We determined that at least 36% of IFLs are within Indigenous Peoples’ lands, making these areas crucial to the mitigation action needed to avoid catastrophic climate change. We also provide evidence that IFL loss rates have been considerably lower on Indigenous Peoples’ lands than on other lands, although these forests are still vulnerable to clearing and other threats. World governments must recognize Indigenous Peoples’ rights, including land tenure rights, to ensure that Indigenous Peoples play active roles in decision-making processes that affect IFLs on their lands. Such recognition is critical given the urgent need to reduce deforestation rates in the face of escalating climate change and global biodiversity loss.

Advances in open data, big data and data linkage allow us to analyse more data and on a larger scale than ever before. However, this brings with it the challenge of ensuring that Indigenous data sets are used in a way that protects Indigenous rights to that data and maximises benefits for Indigenous peoples. The CARE principles for Indigenous data governance—Collective Benefit, Authority to Control, Responsibility and Ethics—were developed to protect Indigenous data sovereignty, but there are few examples of how to translate these principles into practice. In this paper, we show how these CARE principles can be applied to data collection, integration, analysis and translation practices. Our case study is a project that used data reported by Indigenous ranger groups to capture the multiple benefits of Indigenous land and water management activities. Through this case study, we offer a framework for the design and use of CARE-informed data practices, which can be embedded into project design to enable the ethical and responsible use of Indigenous data to improve Indigenous policies and services. Such practices are critical in the context of ongoing demand for Indigenous data for bureaucratic purposes, and Indigenous interest in using that data to influence management and policy decisions affecting their estates and resources.

Formal engagement of indigenous peoples in conservation is increasing globally and leads to multiple benefits to communities while contributing to national and international biodiversity goals and obligations. This and ongoing declines in biodiversity have led to calls to increase opportunities for indigenous people to engage in managing their estates. However, there is no overarching understanding of indigenous peoples' involvement in conservation, which limits the identification of new opportunities. We amalgamated information across governments and large nongovernmental organizations in the megadiverse country of Australia to quantify the involvement of indigenous people in management of threatened species. We identified 153 Australian-based projects undertaken by different indigenous groups around the nation in 2015 and 2016 that included explicit funds for management of threatened species or threatened ecosystems. Most were in remote parts of western and northern Australia. Almost one-quarter of all threatened animals and 2% of threatened plants were the subject of some formal conservation action by indigenous people. Occurrence records for 1574 threatened species showed that 823 (89.2%) of 923 species recorded on indigenous peoples' lands were not listed in management projects. This gap may represent new opportunities for conservation initiatives. Because at least 59.5% of Australia's threatened species occur on indigenous peoples' lands, efforts to build appropriate and effective indigenous conservation alliances are vital. However, it is also important to recognize that threatened species are part of complex social, ecological, economic and cultural systems, and to achieve successful outcomes requires consideration of indigenous peoples'priorities, rights, and obligations and relationships with their traditionally owned land and sea. La participación formal de los pueblos nativos en la conservación está creciendo a nivel global, resultando en beneficios múltiples para las comunidades mientras contribuye a las obligaciones y objetivos nacionales e internacionales de biodiversidad. Esto y las continuas declinaciones en la biodiversidad han llevado a llamadas por el incremento de oportunidades para que los pueblos nativos participen en el manejo de sus tierras. Sin embargo, no existe un entendimiento dominante de la intervención de los pueblos nativos en la conservación, lo que limita la identificación de nuevas oportunidades. Amalgamamos la información de gobiernos y organizaciones no-gubernamentales en el país megadiverso de Australia para cuantificar la intervención de los pueblos nativos en el manejo de especies amenazadas. Identificamos 153 proyectos basados en Australia emprendidos por diferentes grupos indígenas en el país entre 2015 y 2016 que incluían un financiamiento explícito para el manejo de especies o ecosistemas amenazados. La mayoría ocurrieron en las partes remotas del norte y oeste de Australia. Casi un cuarto de todos los animales amenazados y el 2% de las plantas amenazadas eran el objetivo de alguna acción formal de conservación realizada por grupos indígenas. Los registros de ocurrencia para 1574 especies amenazadas mostraron que 823 (89.2%) de las 923 especies registradas en tierras pertenecientes a grupos indígenas no aparecían en las listas de los proyectos de manejo. Este vacío puede representar nuevas oportunidades para las iniciativas de conservación. Ya que al menos el 59.5% de las especies amenazadas de Australia están presentes en tierras de grupos indígenas, son vitales los esfuerzos para construir alianzas de conservación efectivas y apropiadas con los pueblos nativos. Sin embargo, también es importante reconocer que las especies amenazadas son parte de complejos sistemas sociales, ecológicos, económicos y culturales, y para obtener resultados exitosos se requiere la consideración de las prioridades, derechos, y obligaciones de los pueblos nativos y sus relaciones con las tierras y mar de propiedad tradicional. 全球范围内, 原住民正越来越多地正式参与到保护当中，这给社区带来许多好处，还有助于达成国 家及全球生物多祥性保护目标和义务。随着生物多祥性不断下降，人们呼吁増加原住民参与管理其居住地的机 会。然而, 目前对原住民参与保护的了解不够全面, 限制了新机会的发现。我们整合了澳大利亚政府和大型非政 府组织的信息, 定量分析了这个生物多祥性大国的原住民在瀕危物种管理中的参与情况。我们确定了 2015 年 和 2016 年全国各地不同的原住民群体在澳大利亚开展的 153个的项目，它们都明确地为濒危物种或瀕危生态 系统管理设立了基金。这些项目大多建立在澳大利亚偏远的西部和北部。原住民正式保护行动的対象包含了澳 大利亚近四分之一的瀕危动物和百分之ニ的濒危植 物。1574 个瀕危物种的出现记录表明，在原住民的土地上 记录到的 923 个物种中有 823 种(89.2%)未被列入管理项目。这ー差距可能也意味着保护计划有新的机会。 由于澳大利亚瀕危物种中至少 59.5% 在原住民的土地有分布，努力建立合适并有效的原住民保护联盟十分重 要。同时还需要认识到，濒危物种是社会、生态、经济和文化的复杂系统中的一部分，要取得保护成果需要考虑 原住民的优先性、权ヵ和义务，以及与他们向来拥有的土地和海洋的关系。

In this book, leading researchers in planning, geography, environmental studies and public policy critically review Australia's environmental management under the auspices of the Natural Heritage Trust over the past decade, and identify the challenges that must be met in the national quest for sustainability. It is the first comprehensive, critical examination of the local and regional natural resources management undertaken in Australia, using research sourced from all states as well as the Northern Territory. It addresses questions such as: How is accountability to be maintained? Who is included and who is excluded in decentralized environmental governance? Does the scale of bottom-up management efforts match the scale of environmental problems? How is scientific and technical fidelity in environmental management to be maintained when significant activities are devolved to and controlled by local communities? The book challenges some of the accepted benefits, assumptions and ideologies underpinning regional scaled environmental management, and is a must-read for anyone interested in this field.

Government agencies responsible for pest animal management often assume that their views and assumptions about the benefits of control are widely shared, especially if these pests are exotics. This was certainly the case when tens of thousands of feral Asian water buffalo (Bubalus bubalis) were to be culled in Australia's Kakadu National Park as part of a national Brucellosis and Tuberculosis Eradication Campaign (BTEC). Implementation of the campaign sparked considerable dispute between officials and aboriginal and non-aboriginal interests about the risks posed by buffalo relative to their value as a potential resource. Drawing upon a variety of written and oral sources relating to the era of buffalo control in Kakadu, this paper critically analyzes the way in which detriment caused by buffalo was appraised and managed under the BTEC program. In particular, the paper focuses the ways in which the BTEC program affected aboriginal people in Kakadu, who view buffalo as a source of customary and economic benefit as well as a source of change on their lands. The paper then considers what lessons can be learned from the BTEC for the development of sensible feral management objectives and strategies. It is argued that effective management of feral animals such as buffalo will require environmental managers to engage with local people and involve them in the definition and management of pest animal damage and methods of control.