Society for Conservation Biology
16th Annual Meeting July 14-July 19 2002
co-hosted by DICE and the British Ecological Society


Abstracts for Conservation Biology in the Real World

Thursday 18th July, 15.30 - 17.30, Grimond Lecture Theatre 1

Co-chairs: Kathy MacKinnon and Tony Whitten



Conference Home Page | Session timetable


(BLOCK CAPITALS indicate the presenting author)


15.30 - 15.45
WHITTEN, TONY. The World Bank, Washington DC 20433, USA, <twhitten@worldbank.org>.

IN SEARCH OF THE HOLY GRAIL OF CONSERVATION SUCCESS

Never has biodiversity been under greater threat and never has there been more money available for conservation. These two factors have generated an enormous amount of conservation activity. Yet executing lastingly successful biodiversity conservation projects seems as elusive as ever, despite the various approaches on the conservation menu. Examination of this activity leads the author to conclude that a great deal of ‘displacement behaviour’ is being exhibited - behaviours which appear relevant but fail to address the problem - by both practitioners and donors. The author searches for the Holy Grail of Conservation Success and suggests steps necessary to reach it.


15.45 - 16.00
BRANDON, KATRINA. Center for Applied Biodiversity Science, Conservation International, 1919 M Street NW, Suite 600, Washington DC 20036, USA, <k.brandon@conservation.org>.

PARKS AS ISLANDS: ECOLOGICAL AND SOCIAL IMPLICATIONS OF EDGES

Current ecological advice, supported by ecological research, is to minimise edge effects at protected area boundaries. At the site level, this has led to the promotion of buffer zone approaches and activities where the emphasis is to minimise disturbance to create a "soft edge" so that the area outside a park boundary is as similar to what is inside the boundary as possible. In contrast, social wisdom highlights the need for social assessments to determine the appropriate type of boundary, level of needed demarcation and intensity of management activities adjacent to protected areas. This paper reviews the applied issues related to edges and parks for wildlife, people, and park management, and highlights the nature of trade-offs in Neotropical moist forest settings, based on findings in Peru. Rather than current approaches of always following ecological wisdom at all sites, the paper proposes analysis of site-specific conditions that help to define the appropriate edge that is most likely to be succeed from a management perspective, and in the long-run, lead to improved biodiversity conservation.




16.00 - 16.15
DAVIES Glyn, Zoological Society of London, Regents Park, London NW1 4RY
(glyn.davies@zsl.org)


SPANNING THE CHASM: CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT

Many conservation reports from tropical countries lack insights about the underlying causes of biodiversity loss - little if anything is said on the policy, legal and institutional solutions that are needed for biological conservation problems. To what extent does this narrowly-focused data gathering (often on rare or flagship species) limit the likelihood of finding sustainable conservation solutions? Addressing this short-coming, to gain a broader perspective so that a combined set of actions are taken at policy and practical levels, opens opportunities for closer dialogue between conservation and development agencies. Failing to make this linkage risks local-level proposals being undermined by unsupportive regional / national policies, economies and institutional frameworks.




16.15 - 16.30
MACKINNON, JOHN. ASEAN Regional Centre for Biodiversity Conservation, P.O. Box 35015 College, Laguna 4031, Philippines, <jrm@laguna.net>.

AVENUES OF FUTILITY IN CONSERVATION

The author looks at the continuing decline in conservation status of habitats and species in Asia and asks ‘Where are we going wrong?’. He identifies a number of ways in which theories and plans fail to be translated into practice; areas where current theory usually fails anyway; areas where efforts and investments are being wasted; and limiting factors that are often neglected. The paper offers no magic formula for success but could lead practitioners to avoid some common mistakes in the planning and execution of conservation projects and tries to put the chances of success into a more realistic perspective.




16.30 - 16.45
JEPSON, PAUL. School of Geography and the Environment, Mansfield Road,
Oxford OX1 3TB, UK, <paul.jepson@geog.ox.ac.uk>.

GLOBAL BIODIVERSITY STRATEGIES AND FOUNDATIONAL VALUES OF CONSERVATION: DO THEY MATCH?

Conservation biologists have developed high profile strategies, such as ‘Biodiversity Hotspots’, ‘Ecoregions’ and ‘Endemic Bird Areas’ to address the problem of biodiversity loss. In complex areas of international policy, such as biodiversity, there is a risk that well-promoted strategies will be received as a cure-all. Conservation is a social movement working to develop and maintain values in society concerning the human-nature relationship. Eight social values are identified that characterise the conservation movement since its emergence in the late 19th century. The three frameworks are assessed against their ability to deliver these social values. All are found lacking in important respects. I conclude that conservation biology should be combined with a more explicit recognition of conservation values when formulating biodiversity conservation strategies.




16.45 - 17.00
MCGOWAN, PHILIP J.K., Richard A. Fuller, Peter J. Garson, John P. Carroll, and René W. R. J. Dekker. World Pheasant Association, P.O. Box 5, Lower Basildon, Reading, Berkshire RG8 9PF, UK, <conservation@pheasant.org.uk> (PM); School of Biological and Biomedical Sciences, University of Durham, Science Laboratories, South Road, Durham, DH1 3LE, UK (RF), Department of Agricultural and Environmental Science, University of Newcastle, Newcastle upon Tyne NE1 7RU, UK (PG), Daniel B. Warnell School of Forest Resources, University of Georgia, Athens, GA 30602, USA (JC), National Museum of Natural History, P.O. Box 9517, 2300 RA Leiden, The Netherlands (RD).

WHERE DOES SPECIES ACTION PLANNING FIT INTO THE CONSERVATION PROCESS?

IUCN action plans are designed to assess the status of threatened species and their habitats, and provide prioritised recommendations for action, but there is debate about the effectiveness of such plans in stimulating conservation action and research. We evaluated three Action Plans covering a group of large terrestrial birds, published in 1995. Of 54 projects suggested in the plans, 33 had been initiated in the five years since publication, and 35 specific conservation actions were identified. Forty-five peer-reviewed papers were published, and at least 88 other outputs in the form of talks, articles, and posters were produced. Although demonstrating the effectiveness of species action planning through controlled scientific method is impossible, these results indicate a substantial amount of conservation-relevant activity attributable to the process, including the production of Action Plans. They also highlight the need to ensure we have a clear definition of the role of Action Plans; we perceive a danger of defining their role far too widely, and present a new model describing their niche within the wider context of conservation biology and policy. We suggest that many of the criticisms directed toward species action plans result from an over-optimistic view of their power to catalyse action.




17.00 - 17.15
CRAIG, JOHN, and Ian Swingland. Environmental Science, University of Auckland, Private Bag 92019, Auckland, New Zealand, <j.craig@auckland.ac.nz> (JC), Herons Hall, Nash, Kent CT3 2JX, UK (IS).

MAKING BIODIVERSITY PAY: SAVING ECOSYSTEMS, SPECIES AND LOCAL COMMUNITIES

Conservation in many countries is run predominantly as a government funded form of welfare for nature. Private conservation run as a business with returns to local communities is less common but increasing. The former approach produces a number of unfortunate consequences that frustrate conservation efforts even though biology may be well understood. Government monopolistic supply not only reinforces the impression that conservation is the "government's" role and hence business and others do not need to participate, it also affirms that conservation occurs in reserves rather than across the whole land- and seascape. Furthermore, government programmes are rarely accountable and distort the economics of conservation provision, hindering provision by others. Finally, government bureaucracy is large and, in conservation, usually disenfranchises local people turning them against conservation rather than into its strongest supporters. Conservation biologists value diversity in nature and should similarly value diversity of supply and management of conservation services. Ecotourism, carbon credits and payment for biodiversity services offer opportunities for wider participation. We introduce these issues and report on a study that has evaluated biological, social and economic attributes of different biodiversity programmes in various parts of the world. We recommend features necessary to enhance the success of biodiversity programmes.




17.15 - 17.30
MACKINNON, KATHY. The World Bank, Washington DC 20433, USA, <kmackinnon@worldbank.org>.

HAS THE PERFECT BECOME THE ENEMY OF THE GOOD

Has conservation biology lost its way? How relevant are academic debates on critical ecosystems, hotspots, and ecoregional approaches to conservation in the real world? Tropical forests and other major ecosystems are under unprecedented threat, yet the conservation community seems caught up in round after round of refinement on methodologies for perfect priority-setting, strategies and plans with very little effective action on the ground. How much scientific knowledge is needed and how does one channel good science into development? Case studies from Indonesia and Papua New Guinea are used to challenge the conservation community to focus less on perfect planning and more on biodiversity outcomes and impact.

The SCB2002 pages are maintained by Christine Eagle
email: C.M.Eagle@ukc.ac.uk
Conference email: scb2002@ukc.ac.uk
Last updated: 30.06.02