Introducing a common taxonomy to support learning from failure in conservation.

Although some sectors have made significant progress in learning from failure, there is currently limited consensus on how a similar transition could best be achieved in conservation and what is required to facilitate this. One of the key enabling conditions for other sectors is a widely accepted and standardized classification system for identifying and analyzing root causes of failure. We devised a comprehensive taxonomy of root causes of failure affecting conservation projects. To develop this, we solicited examples of real-life conservation efforts that were deemed to have failed in some way, identified their underlying root causes of failure, and used these to develop a generic, 3-tier taxonomy of the ways in which projects fail, at the top of which are 6 overarching cause categories that are further divided into midlevel cause categories and specific root causes. We tested the taxonomy by asking conservation practitioners to use it to classify the causes of failure for conservation efforts they had been involved in. No significant gaps or redundancies were identified during this testing phase. We then analyzed the frequency that particular root causes were encountered by projects within this test sample, which suggested that some root causes were more likely to be encountered than others and that a small number of root causes were more likely to be encountered by projects implementing particular types of conservation action. Our taxonomy could be used to improve identification, analysis, and subsequent learning from failed conservation efforts, address some of the barriers that currently limit the ability of conservation practitioners to learn from failure, and contribute to establishing an effective culture of learning from failure within conservation.

Introducción de una taxonomía común como apoyo al aprendizaje a partir del fracaso en la conservación Resumen Mientras que algunos sectores han progresado significativamente en el aprendizaje a partir del fracaso, actualmente hay un consenso limitado sobre cómo podría lograrse una transición similar en la conservación y qué se requiere para facilitarla. Una de las condiciones habilitantes más importantes en otros sectores es un sistema de clasificación estandarizado y aceptado por la mayoría para la identificación y análisis de las causas fundamentales del fracaso. Diseñamos una taxonomía completa de las causas fundamentales del fracaso que afecta a los proyectos de conservación. Para desarrollarla, solicitamos ejemplos de esfuerzos de conservación reales que de alguna manera se consideraron como fracasos, identificamos las causas fundamentales no aparentes de su fracaso y luego las usamos para desarrollar una taxonomía genérica de tres niveles de las maneras en las que fracasan los proyectos, en cuyo nivel superior están seis categorías de causas generales que después se dividen en categorías de nivel medio de categorías de causas y causas fundamentales específicas. Pusimos a prueba la taxonomía al pedirle a los practicantes de la conservación que la usaran para clasificar las causas del fracaso de los esfuerzos de conservación en los que han participado. No identificamos vacíos o redundancias importantes durante esta fase de prueba. Después, analizamos la frecuencia con la que los proyectos de esta muestra se enfrentaron a causas fundamentales particulares, lo que sugirió que algunas causas fundamentales tienen mayor probabilidad de ocurrir y que un número reducido de causas fundamentales tiene mayor probabilidad de ocurrir en proyectos que implementan ciertos tipos de acciones de conservación. Nuestra taxonomía podría usarse para mejorar el análisis, identificación y aprendizaje subsecuente a partir del fracaso de los esfuerzos de conservación; tratar algunas de las barreras que en la actualidad limitan a los practicantes de la conservación a aprender del fracaso; y contribuir al establecimiento de una cultura efectiva del aprendizaje a partir del fracaso dentro de la conservación.

Protected areas have a mixed impact on waterbirds, but management helps.

International policy is focused on increasing the proportion of the Earth's surface that is protected for nature1,2. Although studies show that protected areas prevent habitat loss3-6, there is a lack of evidence for their effect on species' populations: existing studies are at local scale or use simple designs that lack appropriate controls7-13. Here we explore how 1,506 protected areas have affected the trajectories of 27,055 waterbird populations across the globe using a robust before-after control-intervention study design, which compares protected and unprotected populations in the years before and after protection. We show that the simpler study designs typically used to assess protected area effectiveness (before-after or control-intervention) incorrectly estimate effects for 37-50% of populations-for instance misclassifying positively impacted populations as negatively impacted, and vice versa. Using our robust study design, we find that protected areas have a mixed impact on waterbirds, with a strong signal that areas managed for waterbirds or their habitat are more likely to benefit populations, and a weak signal that larger areas are more beneficial than smaller ones. Calls to conserve 30% of the Earth's surface by 2030 are gathering pace14, but we show that protection alone does not guarantee good biodiversity outcomes. As countries gather to agree the new Global Biodiversity Framework, targets must focus on creating and supporting well-managed protected and conserved areas that measurably benefit populations.

Evaluating Impact Using Time-Series Data.

Humanity's impact on the environment is increasing, as are strategies to conserve biodiversity, but a lack of understanding about how interventions affect ecological and conservation outcomes hampers decision-making. Time series are often used to assess impacts, but ecologists tend to compare average values from before to after an impact; overlooking the potential for the intervention to elicit a change in trend. Without methods that allow for a range of responses, erroneous conclusions can be drawn, especially for large, multi-time-series datasets, which are increasingly available. Drawing on literature in other disciplines and pioneering work in ecology, we present a standardised framework to robustly assesses how interventions, like natural disasters or conservation policies, affect ecological time series.

Estimating the risk of species interaction loss in mutualistic communities.

Interactions between species generate the functions on which ecosystems and humans depend. However, we lack an understanding of the risk that interaction loss poses to ecological communities. Here, we quantify the risk of interaction loss for 4,330 species interactions from 41 empirical pollination and seed dispersal networks across 6 continents. We estimate risk as a function of interaction vulnerability to extinction (likelihood of loss) and contribution to network feasibility, a measure of how much an interaction helps a community tolerate environmental perturbations. Remarkably, we find that more vulnerable interactions have higher contributions to network feasibility. Furthermore, interactions tend to have more similar vulnerability and contribution to feasibility across networks than expected by chance, suggesting that vulnerability and feasibility contribution may be intrinsic properties of interactions, rather than only a function of ecological context. These results may provide a starting point for prioritising interactions for conservation in species interaction networks in the future.

Worldwide insect declines: An important message, but interpret with caution.

A recent paper claiming evidence of global insect declines achieved huge media attention, including claims of "insectaggedon" and a "collapse of nature." Here, we argue that while many insects are declining in many places around the world, the study has important limitations that should be highlighted. We emphasise the robust evidence of large and rapid insect declines present in the literature, while also highlighting the limitations of the original study.

A snapshot of biodiversity protection in Antarctica.

Threats to Antarctic biodiversity are escalating, despite its remoteness and protection under the Antarctic Treaty. Increasing human activity, pollution, biological invasions and the omnipresent impacts of climate change all contribute, and often combine, to exert pressure on Antarctic ecosystems and environments. Here we present a continent-wide assessment of terrestrial biodiversity protection in Antarctica. Despite Antarctic Specially Protected Areas covering less than 2% of Antarctica, 44% of species (including seabirds, plants, lichens and invertebrates) are found in one or more protected areas. However, protection is regionally uneven and biased towards easily detectable and charismatic species like seabirds. Systematic processes to prioritize area protection using the best available data will maximize the likelihood of ensuring long-term protection and conservation of Antarctic biodiversity.

Restoring islands and identifying source populations for introductions.

Article impact statement: Structured decision making can be used to identify an optimal source population for conservation introductions.

The major barriers to evidence-informed conservation policy and possible solutions.

Conservation policy decisions can suffer from a lack of evidence, hindering effective decision-making. In nature conservation, studies investigating why policy is often not evidence-informed have tended to focus on Western democracies, with relatively small samples. To understand global variation and challenges better, we established a global survey aimed at identifying top barriers and solutions to the use of conservation science in policy. This obtained the views of 758 people in policy, practice, and research positions from 68 countries across six languages. Here we show that, contrary to popular belief, there is agreement between groups about how to incorporate conservation science into policy, and there is thus room for optimism. Barriers related to the low priority of conservation were considered to be important, while mainstreaming conservation was proposed as a key solution. Therefore, priorities should focus on convincing the public of the importance of conservation as an issue, which will then influence policy-makers to adopt pro-environmental long-term policies.

Rapid climate-driven loss of breeding habitat for Arctic migratory birds.

Millions of birds migrate to and from the Arctic each year, but rapid climate change in the High North could strongly affect where species are able to breed, disrupting migratory connections globally. We modelled the climatically suitable breeding conditions of 24 Arctic specialist shorebirds and projected them to 2070 and to the mid-Holocene climatic optimum, the world's last major warming event ~6000 years ago. We show that climatically suitable breeding conditions could shift, contract and decline over the next 70 years, with 66-83% of species losing the majority of currently suitable area. This exceeds, in rate and magnitude, the impact of the mid-Holocene climatic optimum. Suitable climatic conditions are predicted to decline acutely in the most species rich region, Beringia (western Alaska and eastern Russia), and become concentrated in the Eurasian and Canadian Arctic islands. These predicted spatial shifts of breeding grounds could affect the species composition of the world's major flyways. Encouragingly, protected area coverage of current and future climatically suitable breeding conditions generally meets target levels; however, there is a lack of protected areas within the Canadian Arctic where resource exploitation is a growing threat. Given that already there are rapid declines of many populations of Arctic migratory birds, our results emphasize the urgency of mitigating climate change and protecting Arctic biodiversity.