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 the impact of biodiversity offsetting on native vegetation.

Biodiversity offsetting is a globally influential policy mechanism for reconciling trade-offs between development and biodiversity loss. However, there is little robust evidence of its effectiveness. We evaluated the outcomes of a jurisdictional offsetting policy (Victoria, Australia). Offsets under Victoria's Native Vegetation Framework (2002-2013) aimed to prevent loss and degradation of remnant vegetation, and generate gains in vegetation extent and quality. We categorised offsets into those with near-complete baseline woody vegetation cover ("avoided loss", 2702 ha) and with incomplete cover ("regeneration", 501 ha), and evaluated impacts on woody vegetation extent from 2008 to 2018. We used two approaches to estimate the counterfactual. First, we used statistical matching on biophysical covariates: a common approach in conservation impact evaluation, but which risks ignoring potentially important psychosocial confounders. Second, we compared changes in offsets with changes in sites that were not offsets for the study duration but were later enrolled as offsets, to partially account for self-selection bias (where landholders enrolling land may have shared characteristics affecting how they manage land). Matching on biophysical covariates, we estimated that regeneration offsets increased woody vegetation extent by 1.9%-3.6%/year more than non-offset sites (138-180 ha from 2008 to 2018) but this effect weakened with the second approach (0.3%-1.9%/year more than non-offset sites; 19-97 ha from 2008 to 2018) and disappeared when a single outlier land parcel was removed. Neither approach detected any impact of avoided loss offsets. We cannot conclusively demonstrate whether the policy goal of 'net gain' (NG) was achieved because of data limitations. However, given our evidence that the majority of increases in woody vegetation extent were not additional (would have happened without the scheme), a NG outcome seems unlikely. The results highlight the importance of considering self-selection bias in the design and evaluation of regulatory biodiversity offsetting policy, and the challenges of conducting robust impact evaluations of jurisdictional biodiversity offsetting policies.

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.

A global evaluation of the effectiveness of voluntary REDD+ projects at reducing deforestation and degradation in the moist tropics.

Reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation (REDD+) projects aim to contribute to climate change mitigation by protecting and enhancing carbon stocks in tropical forests, but there have been no systematic global evaluations of their impact. We used a new data set for tropical humid forests and a standardized evaluation approach (based on pixel matching) to quantify the performance of a representative sample of 40 voluntary REDD+ projects in 9 countries certified under the Verified Carbon Standard (VCS). In the first 5 years of implementation, deforestation within project areas was reduced by 47% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 24-68) compared with matched counterfactual pixels, and degradation rates were 58% lower (95% CI: 49-63). Reductions were small in absolute terms but greater in sites located in high-deforestation settings and did not appear to be substantially undermined by leakage activities in forested areas within 10 km of project boundaries. At the 26th Conference of the Parties of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, the international community renewed its commitment to tackling tropical deforestation as a nature-based solution to climate change. Our results indicate that incentivizing forest conservation through voluntary site-based projects can slow tropical deforestation and highlight the particular importance of prioritizing financing for areas at greater risk of deforestation.

Evaluación Global de la Efectividad de proyectos REDD+ en la Reducción de la Deforestación y Degradación en el Trópico Húmedo Resumen Los proyectos para la reducción de emisiones derivados de la deforestación y degradación de bosques (REDD+) tienen como meta contribuir a la mitigación del cambio climático al protejer y  fomentar la disponibilidad de carbono en bosques tropicales, pero a la fecha no se han realizado evaluaciones globales sistemáticas sobre su impacto. Utilizamos bases de datos recientes sobre bosques tropicales húmedos y un método estandarizado de evaluación (basado en 'emparejamiento' [matching] de pixeles) para cuantificar el desempeño de una muestra representativa de 40 proyectos voluntarios REDD+ , localizados en 9 países y certificados bajo el estándar Verified Carbon Standard (VCS). En los primeros 5 años de implementación, la deforestación en las áreas de los proyectos disminuyó en 47% (IC 95% 24-68) en comparación con los pixeles contrafactuales correspondientes, y las tasas de degradación fueron 58% menos (IC 95% 49-63). Las reducciones fueron pequeñas en términos absolutos pero mayores en sitios con tasas de deforestación elevadas, y no parecieron ser afectadas sustancialmente por efectos de fuga (leakage) en áreas boscosas en un radio de 10 km de los límites del proyecto. En la COP26, la comunidad internacional renovó su compromiso de afrontar la deforestación tropical como una solución al cambio climático basada en la naturaleza. Nuestros resultados indican que incentivar la conservación de bosques mediante proyectos locales voluntarios puede disminuir la deforestación tropical, y resaltan la importancia de priorizar financiamiento en áreas con un mayor riesgo de deforestación.

Experimental validation of specialized questioning techniques in conservation.

Conservation increasingly relies on social science tools to understand human behavior. Specialized questioning techniques (SQTs) are a suite of methods designed to reduce bias in social surveys and are widely used to collect data on sensitive topics, including compliance with conservation rules. Most SQTs have been developed in Western, industrialized, educated, rich, and democratic countries, meaning their suitability in other contexts may be limited. Whether these techniques perform better than conventional direct questioning is important for those considering their use. We designed an experiment to validate the performance of four SQTs (unmatched count technique, randomized response technique, crosswise model, and bean method) against direct questions when asking about a commonly researched sensitive behavior in conservation, wildlife hunting. We developed fictional characters, and for each method asked respondents to report the answers that each fictional character should give when asked if they hunt wildlife. We collected data from 609 individuals living close to protected areas in two different cultural and socioeconomic contexts (Indonesia and Tanzania) to quantify the extent to which respondents understood and followed SQT instructions and to explore the sociodemographic factors that influenced a correct response. Data were modeled using binomial general linear mixed models. Participants were more likely to refuse to answer questions asked using SQTs compared with direct questions. Model results suggested that SQTs were harder for participants to understand. Demographic factors (e.g., age and education level) significantly influenced response accuracy. When sensitive responses to sensitive questions were required, all SQTs (excluding the bean method) outperformed direct questions, demonstrating that SQTs can successfully reduce sensitivity bias. However, when reviewing each method, most respondents (59-89%) reported they would feel uncomfortable using them to provide information on their own hunting behavior, highlighting the considerable challenge of encouraging truthful reporting on sensitive topics. Our results demonstrate the importance of assessing the suitability of social science methods prior to their implementation in conservation contexts.

Validación Experimental de las Técnicas de Cuestionamiento Especializado en la Conservación Resumen La conservación depende cada vez más de herramientas de las ciencias sociales para entender el comportamiento humano. Las técnicas de cuestionamiento especializado (TCE) son un conjunto de métodos diseñados para reducir el sesgo en los censos sociales y y se usan ampliamente para recolectar datos sobre temas sensibles, incluyendo el cumplimiento de las normas de conservación. La mayoría de las TCE se desarrollaron en el hemisferio occidental, en países industrializados, educados, ricos y democráticos, lo que significa que su que su idoneidad en otros contextos puede ser limitada. Quienes piensan en usar estas técnicas consideran importante saber si tienen un mejor desempeño que el cuestionamiento directo convencional. Diseñamos un experimento para validar el desempeño de cuatro TCE (técnica de conteo sin par, técnica de respuesta aleatoria, modelo transversal, método bean) frente a las preguntas directas cuando se cuestiona sobre un comportamiento sensible de interés recurrente en la conservación: la cacería de fauna. Desarrollamos personajes ficticios y para cada método le pedimos a los respondientes que reportaran las respuestas que cada personaje ficticio debería dar al cuestionársele si cazan fauna silvestre. Recolectamos datos de 609 individuos con residencia cercana a áreas protegidas en dos contextos cultural y socioeconómicamente diferentes (Indonesia y Tanzanía) para cuantificar el grado al que los respondientes entendieron y siguieron las instrucciones de las TCE y para explorar los factores sociodemográficos que influyeron sobre las respuestas correctas. Modelamos los datos mediante modelos lineales mixtos binomiales y generales. Fue más probable que los participantes se rehusaran a responder las preguntas realizadas con las TCE en comparación con las preguntas directas. Los resultados del modelo sugirieron que las TCE eran más difíciles de entender para los participantes. Los factores demográficos (p. ej.: edad y nivel educativo) influyeron significativamente la certeza de las respuestas. Cuando se requirieron respuestas sensibles a preguntas sensibles, todas las TCE (excepto el método bean) tuvieron un mejor desempeño que las preguntas directas, lo que demuestra que las TCE pueden reducir exitosamente el sesgo por sensibilidad. Sin embargo, cuando se les preguntó sobre cada método, la mayoría de los respondientes (59-89%) reportó que se sentirían incómodos si tuvieran que usarlas para proporcionar información sobre sus propios comportamientos de cacería, lo que destaca el reto considerable que es reportar honestamente los temas sensibles. Nuestros resultados demuestran la importancia de de evaluar la idoneidad de los métodos de las ciencias sociales previo a su implementación en contextos de conservación.

Asking sensitive questions in conservation using Randomised Response Techniques.

Conservation increasingly seeks knowledge of human behaviour. However, securing reliable data can be challenging, particularly if the behaviour is illegal or otherwise sensitive. Specialised questioning methods such as Randomised Response Techniques (RRTs) are increasingly used in conservation to provide greater anonymity, increase response rates, and reduce bias. A rich RRT literature exists, but successfully navigating it can be challenging. To help conservationists access this literature, we summarise the various RRT designs available and conduct a systematic review of empirical applications of RRTs within (n = 32), and beyond conservation (n = 66). Our results show increased application of RRTs in conservation since 2000. We compare the performance of RRTs against known prevalence of the sensitive behaviour and relative to other questioning techniques to assess how successful RRTs are at reducing bias (indicated by securing higher estimates). Findings suggest that RRT applications in conservation were less likely than those in other disciplines to provide prevalence estimates equal to, or higher than those derived from direct questions. Across all disciplines, we found reports of non-compliance with RRT instructions were common, but rarely accounted for in study design or analysis. For the first time, we provide conservationists considering RRTs with evidence on what works, and provide guidance on how to develop robust designs suitable for conservation research contexts. We highlight when alternate methods should be used, how to increase design efficiency and improve compliance with RRT instructions. We conclude RRTs are a useful tool, but their performance depends on careful design and implementation.

Mechanisms and impacts of an incentive-based conservation program with evidence from a randomized control trial.

Conservation science needs more high-quality impact evaluations, especially ones that explore mechanisms of success or failure. Randomized control trials (RCTs) provide particularly robust evidence of the effectiveness of interventions (although they have been criticized as reductionist and unable to provide insights into mechanisms), but there have been few such experiments investigating conservation at the landscape scale. We explored the impact of Watershared, an incentive-based conservation program in the Bolivian Andes, with one of the few RCTs of landscape-scale conservation in existence. There is strong interest in such incentive-based conservation approaches as some argue they can avoid negative social impacts sometimes associated with protected areas. We focused on social and environmental outcomes based on responses from a household survey in 129 communities randomly allocated to control or treatment (conducted both at the baseline in 2010 and repeated in 2015-2016). We controlled for incomplete program uptake by combining standard RCT analysis with matching methods and investigated mechanisms by exploring intermediate and ultimate outcomes according to the underlying theory of change. Previous analyses, focused on single biophysical outcomes, showed that over its first 5 years Watershared did not slow deforestation or improve water quality at the landscape scale. We found that Watershared influenced some outcomes measured using the survey, but the effects were complex, and some were unexpected. We thus demonstrated how RCTs can provide insights into the pathways of impact, as well as whether an intervention has impact. This paper, one of the first registered reports in conservation science, demonstrates how preregistration can help make complex research designs more transparent, avoid cherry picking, and reduce publication bias.

Mecanismos e Impactos de un Programa de Conservación Basada en Incentivos con Evidencias de un Ensayo Aleatorio de Control Resumen Las ciencias de la conservación necesitan evaluaciones de impacto de mayor calidad, especialmente aquellas que exploran los mecanismos del éxito o del fracaso. Los ensayos aleatorios de control (RCTs) proporcionan evidencias particularmente sólidas de la efectividad de las intervenciones (aunque han recibido críticas por considerarlas reduccionistas e incapaces de proporcionar conocimiento sobre los mecanismos) pero ha habido pocos experimentos de ese tipo que investiguen los efectos de la conservación a escala del paisaje. Exploramos el impacto de Watershared, un programa de conservación basada en incentivos en marcha en los Andes bolivianos, con uno de los pocos RCTs existentes de conservación a escala de paisaje. Existe un gran interés por dichas estrategias de conservación basada en incentivos pues hay quienes argumentan que pueden evitar los impactos sociales negativos que a veces se asocian con las áreas protegidas. Nos enfocamos en los resultados sociales y ambientales con base en las respuestas de una encuesta a hogares en 129 comunidades asignadas al azar para controlar o tratar (ambas encuestas realizadas en la línea base en 2010 y repetidas en 2015/16). Impusimos un control para la aceptación incompleta del programa al combinar el análisis estandarizado de RCTs con métodos de emparejamiento e investigamos los mecanismos mediante la exploración de resultados intermedios y finales de acuerdo con la teoría subyacente del cambio. Los análisis previos, enfocados en resultados biofísicos únicos, mostraron que durante los primeros cinco años del programa Watershared, la deforestación no experimentó una desaceleración y tampoco hubo mejoras en la calidad del agua a escala de paisaje. Descubrimos que Watershared influyó sobre algunos resultados medidos con la encuesta, pero sus efectos fueron complejos y algunos fueron inesperados. De este modo demostramos como los RCTs pueden proporcionar conocimiento sobre las vías de impacto, así como también si una intervención genera un impacto. Este artículo, uno de los primeros reportes registrados en las ciencias de la conservación, demuestra cómo el prerregistro puede ayudar a hacer más transparentes los diseños complejos de investigación, evitar la selección subjetiva de datos y reducir el sesgo de publicación.

Statistical matching for conservation science.

The awareness of the need for robust impact evaluations in conservation is growing and statistical matching techniques are increasingly being used to assess the impacts of conservation interventions. Used appropriately matching approaches are powerful tools, but they also pose potential pitfalls. We outlined important considerations and best practice when using matching in conservation science. We identified 3 steps in a matching analysis. First, develop a clear theory of change to inform selection of treatment and controls and that accounts for real-world complexities and potential spillover effects. Second, select the appropriate covariates and matching approach. Third, assess the quality of the matching by carrying out a series of checks. The second and third steps can be repeated and should be finalized before outcomes are explored. Future conservation impact evaluations could be improved by increased planning of evaluations alongside the intervention, better integration of qualitative methods, considering spillover effects at larger spatial scales, and more publication of preanalysis plans. Implementing these improvements will require more serious engagement of conservation scientists, practitioners, and funders to mainstream robust impact evaluations into conservation. We hope this article will improve the quality of evaluations and help direct future research to continue to improve the approaches on offer.

Emparejamiento Estadístico para la Ciencia de la Conservación Resumen Hay más conciencia sobre la necesidad de evaluaciones de impacto más rigurosas y las técnicas de emparejamiento estadístico se están usan con más frecuencia para evaluar los impactos de intervenciones de conservación. Las técnicas de emparejamiento pueden ser herramientas poderosas si son utilizadas correctamente, pero también pueden llevar a conclusiones erróneas. En este artículo describimos consideraciones importantes para realizar estudios de conservación que utilizan técnicas de emparejamiento estadístico. Identificamos tres pasos dentro de un análisis de emparejamiento. Primero, es importante desarrollar una teoría del cambio que considere las complejidades del mundo real y las posibles consecuencias indirectas para poder seleccionar unidades de tratamiento y controles. Segundo, es clave seleccionar las covarianzas y la estrategia de emparejamiento apropiadas. Tercero, evaluar la calidad del emparejamiento a través de una serie de revisiones. El segundo y el tercer paso pueden ser repetidos y deben concluirse antes de que se exploren los resultados. Evaluaciones de impacto de intervenciones de conservación podrían mejorarse con una mejor planeación de las evaluaciones junto con la intervención, una mejor integración de los métodos cualitativos, mejor consideración de consecuencias indirectas a grandes escalas espaciales y un incremento en la publicación de planes pre-analíticos. La implementación de estas mejoras requerirá de un compromiso más serio por parte de científicos de la conservación, y de practicantes y financiadores. Esperamos que este artículo mejore la calidad de evaluaciones y ayude a guiar futuras investigaciones e intervenciones de conservación.

Detection of new genetic variants of Betacoronaviruses in Endemic Frugivorous Bats of Madagascar.

BACKGROUND: Bats are amongst the natural reservoirs of many coronaviruses (CoVs) of which some can lead to severe infection in human. African bats are known to harbor a range of pathogens (e.g., Ebola and Marburg viruses) that can infect humans and cause disease outbreaks. A recent study in South Africa isolated a genetic variant closely related to MERS-CoV from an insectivorous bat. Though Madagascar is home to 44 bat species (41 insectivorous and 3 frugivorous) of which 34 are endemic, no data exists concerning the circulation of CoVs in the island's chiropteran fauna. Certain Malagasy bats can be frequently found in close contact with humans and frugivorous bats feed in the same trees where people collect and consume fruits and are hunted and consumed as bush meat. The purpose of our study is to detect and identify CoVs from frugivorous bats in Madagascar to evaluate the risk of human infection from infected bats. METHODS: Frugivorous bats belonging to three species were captured in four different regions of Madagascar. We analyzed fecal and throat swabs to detect the presence of virus through amplification of the RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp) gene, which is highly conserved in all known coronaviruses. Phylogenetic analyses were performed from positive specimens. RESULTS: From 351 frugivorous bats, we detected 14 coronaviruses from two endemic bats species, of which 13 viruses were identified from Pteropus rufus and one from Eidolon dupreanum, giving an overall prevalence of 4.5%. Phylogenetic analysis revealed that the Malagasy strains belong to the genus Betacoronavirus but form three distinct clusters, which seem to represent previously undescribed genetic lineages. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that CoVs circulate in frugivorous bats of Madagascar, demonstrating the needs to evaluate spillover risk to human populations especially for individuals that hunt and consume infected bats. Possible dispersal mechanisms as to how coronaviruses arrived on Madagascar are discussed.

Spatial patterns of carbon, biodiversity, deforestation threat, and REDD+ projects in Indonesia.

There are concerns that Reduced Emissions from Deforestation and forest Degradation (REDD+) may fail to deliver potential biodiversity cobenefits if it is focused on high carbon areas. We explored the spatial overlaps between carbon stocks, biodiversity, projected deforestation threats, and the location of REDD+ projects in Indonesia, a tropical country at the forefront of REDD+ development. For biodiversity, we assembled data on the distribution of terrestrial vertebrates (ranges of amphibians, mammals, birds, reptiles) and plants (species distribution models for 8 families). We then investigated congruence between different measures of biodiversity richness and carbon stocks at the national and subnational scales. Finally, we mapped active REDD+ projects and investigated the carbon density and potential biodiversity richness and modeled deforestation pressures within these forests relative to protected areas and unprotected forests. There was little internal overlap among the different hotspots (richest 10% of cells) of species richness. There was also no consistent spatial congruence between carbon stocks and the biodiversity measures: a weak negative correlation at the national scale masked highly variable and nonlinear relationships island by island. Current REDD+ projects were preferentially located in areas with higher total species richness and threatened species richness but lower carbon densities than protected areas and unprotected forests. Although a quarter of the total area of these REDD+ projects is under relatively high deforestation pressure, the majority of the REDD+ area is not. In Indonesia at least, first-generation REDD+ projects are located where they are likely to deliver biodiversity benefits. However, if REDD+ is to deliver additional gains for climate and biodiversity, projects will need to focus on forests with the highest threat to deforestation, which will have cost implications for future REDD+ implementation.

Nature's contribution to poverty alleviation, human wellbeing and the SDGs.

Millions of households globally rely on uncultivated ecosystems for their livelihoods. However, much of the understanding about the broader contribution of uncultivated ecosystems to human wellbeing is still based on a series of small-scale studies due to limited availability of large-scale datasets. We pooled together 11 comparable datasets comprising 232 settlements and 10,971 households in ten low-and middle-income countries, representing forest, savanna and coastal ecosystems to analyse how uncultivated nature contributes to multi-dimensional wellbeing and how benefits from nature are distributed between households. The resulting dataset integrates secondary data on rural livelihoods, multidimensional human wellbeing, household demographics, resource tenure and social-ecological context, primarily drawing on nine existing household surveys and their associated contextual information together with selected variables, such as travel time to cities, population density, local area GDP and land use and land cover from existing global datasets. This integrated dataset has been archived with ReShare (UK Data Service) and will be useful for further analyses on nature-wellbeing relationships on its own or in combination with similar datasets.

Forest carbon offsets are failing.

Analysis reveals emission reductions from forest conservation have been overestimated.

Topic sensitivity still affects honest responding, even when specialized questioning techniques are used.

To develop more effective interventions, conservationists require robust information about the proportion of people who break conservation rules (such as those relating to protected species, or protected area legislation). Developed to obtain more accurate estimates of sensitive behaviors, including rule-breaking, specialized questioning techniques such as Randomized Response Techniques (RRTs) are increasingly applied in conservation, but with mixed evidence of their effectiveness. We use a forced-response RRT to estimate the prevalence of five rule-breaking behaviors in communities living around the Ruaha-Rungwa ecosystem in Tanzania. Prevalence estimates obtained for all behaviors were negative or did not differ significantly from zero, suggesting the RRT did not work as expected and that respondents felt inadequately protected. To investigate, we carried out a second study to explore how topic sensitivity influenced respondents' propensity to follow RRT instructions. Results from this experimental study revealed respondents understood instructions well (~88% of responses were correct) but that propensity to follow RRT instructions was significantly influenced by the behavior asked about, and the type of answer they were required to provide. Our two studies highlight that even if RRTs are well understood by respondents, where topics are sensitive and respondents are wary of researchers, their use does not necessarily encourage more honest responding.

A mixed methods approach for measuring topic sensitivity in conservation.

Conservationists increasingly aim to understand human behaviour to inform intervention design. However, obtaining information from people about their behaviour can be challenging, particularly if the research topic is considered sensitive. Topic sensitivity may raise methodological, ethical, political and legal concerns which, if poorly addressed, can have significant impacts on research participants, the research process, data quality and the success of conservation outcomes that are informed by research findings. While considerable effort has been invested in developing techniques for reducing bias when collecting data on sensitive topics, less attention has been focused on identifying if, and why, a topic is sensitive.We use a mixed methods approach to explore how willing people are to discuss topics that could be considered sensitive (e.g. illegal wildlife hunting). Collecting data from people living near protected areas in Indonesia (n = 362) and Tanzania (n = 345), we developed and tested a psychometric scale to measure topic sensitivity at the respondent level and conducted group exercises (free-lists and pile sorts) to gain a deeper understanding of peoples' willingness to discuss different topics.The perceived sensitivity of topics varied both within and between the two focal contexts, with more topics being perceived as sensitive in Tanzania than Indonesia. Participants' knowledge of rules, and their experiences of living alongside protected areas affected how sensitive they considered topics to be.Mixed methods approaches can provide holistic and nuanced understanding of topic sensitivity. However, recognising that in-depth studies are not always feasible to implement, we demonstrate that methods, such as our Sensitivity Index, can easily be adapted for different contexts and deployed to rapidly obtain valuable insights on topic sensitivity, to help inform conservation research and practice.

Identifying indicators of illegal behaviour: carnivore killing in human-managed landscapes.

Managing natural resources often depends on influencing people's behaviour, however effectively targeting interventions to discourage environmentally harmful behaviours is challenging because those involved may be unwilling to identify themselves. Non-sensitive indicators of sensitive behaviours are therefore needed. Previous studies have investigated people's attitudes, assuming attitudes reflect behaviour. There has also been interest in using people's estimates of the proportion of their peers involved in sensitive behaviours to identify those involved, since people tend to assume that others behave like themselves. However, there has been little attempt to test the potential of such indicators. We use the randomized response technique (RRT), designed for investigating sensitive behaviours, to estimate the proportion of farmers in north-eastern South Africa killing carnivores, and use a modified logistic regression model to explore relationships between our best estimates of true behaviour (from RRT) and our proposed non-sensitive indicators (including farmers' attitudes, and estimates of peer-behaviour). Farmers' attitudes towards carnivores, question sensitivity and estimates of peers' behaviour, predict the likelihood of farmers killing carnivores. Attitude and estimates of peer-behaviour are useful indicators of involvement in illicit behaviours and may be used to identify groups of people to engage in interventions aimed at changing behaviour.

Rethinking entrenched narratives about protected areas and human wellbeing in the Global South.

Attempts to link human development and biodiversity conservation goals remain a constant feature of policy and practice related to protected areas (PAs). Underlying these approaches are narratives that simplify assumptions, shaping how interventions are designed and implemented. We examine evidence for five key narratives: 1) conservation is pro-poor; 2) poverty reduction benefits conservation; 3) compensation neutralises costs of conservation; 4) local participation is good for conservation; 5) secure tenure rights for local communities support effective conservation. Through a mixed-method synthesis combining a review of 100 peer-reviewed papers and 25 expert interviews, we examined if and how each narrative is supported or countered by the evidence. The first three narratives are particularly problematic. PAs can reduce material poverty, but exclusion brings substantial local costs to wellbeing, often felt by the poorest. Poverty reduction will not inevitably deliver on conservation goals and trade-offs are common. Compensation (for damage due to human wildlife conflict, or for opportunity costs), is rarely sufficient or commensurate with costs to wellbeing and experienced injustices. There is more support for narratives 4 and 5 on participation and secure tenure rights, highlighting the importance of redistributing power towards Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities in successful conservation. In light of the proposed expansion of PAs under the post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework, we outline implications of our review for the enhancement and implementation of global targets in order to proactively integrate social equity into conservation and the accountability of conservation actors.

The why, what, and how of global biodiversity indicators beyond the 2010 target.

The 2010 biodiversity target agreed by signatories to the Convention on Biological Diversity directed the attention of conservation professionals toward the development of indicators with which to measure changes in biological diversity at the global scale. We considered why global biodiversity indicators are needed, what characteristics successful global indicators have, and how existing indicators perform. Because monitoring could absorb a large proportion of funds available for conservation, we believe indicators should be linked explicitly to monitoring objectives and decisions about which monitoring schemes deserve funding should be informed by predictions of the value of such schemes to decision making. We suggest that raising awareness among the public and policy makers, auditing management actions, and informing policy choices are the most important global monitoring objectives. Using four well-developed indicators of biological diversity (extent of forests, coverage of protected areas, Living Planet Index, Red List Index) as examples, we analyzed the characteristics needed for indicators to meet these objectives. We recommend that conservation professionals improve on existing indicators by eliminating spatial biases in data availability, fill gaps in information about ecosystems other than forests, and improve understanding of the way indicators respond to policy changes. Monitoring is not an end in itself, and we believe it is vital that the ultimate objectives of global monitoring of biological diversity inform development of new indicators.

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.