Prevalence of sustainable and unsustainable use of wild species inferred from the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species.

Unsustainable exploitation of wild species represents a serious threat to biodiversity and to the livelihoods of local communities and Indigenous peoples. However, managed, sustainable use has the potential to forestall extinctions, aid recovery, and meet human needs. We analyzed species-level data for 30,923 species from 13 taxonomic groups on the International Union for Conservation of Nature Red List of Threatened Species to investigate patterns of intentional biological resource use. Forty percent of species (10,098 of 25,009 species from 10 data-sufficient taxonomic groups) were used. The main purposes of use were pets, display animals, horticulture, and human consumption. Intentional use is currently contributing to elevated extinction risk for 28-29% of threatened or near threatened (NT) species (2752-2848 of 9753 species). Intentional use also affected 16% of all species used (1597-1631 of 10,098). However, 72% of used species (7291 of 10,098) were least concern, of which nearly half (3469) also had stable or improving population trends. The remainder were not documented as threatened by biological resource use, including at least 172 threatened or NT species with stable or improving populations. About one-third of species that had use documented as a threat had no targeted species management actions to directly address this threat. To improve use-related red-list data, we suggest small amendments to the relevant classification schemes and required supporting documentation. Our findings on the prevalence of sustainable and unsustainable use, and variation across taxa, can inform international policy making, including the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services, the Convention on Biological Diversity, and the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species.

Predominio del Uso Sustentable y No Sustentable de Especies Silvestres Inferido a partir de la Lista Roja de Especies Amenazadas de la UICN Resumen La explotación insostenible de especies silvestres representa una verdadera amenaza para la biodiversidad y el sustento de las comunidades locales y los pueblos indígenas. Sin embargo, el uso sostenible gestionado tiene el potencial para prevenir extinciones, auxiliar en la recuperación y satisfacer las necesidades humanas. Analizamos los datos a nivel de especie correspondientes a 30,923 especies de 13 grupos taxonómicos localizados en la Lista Roja de Especies Amenazadas de la Unión Internacional para la Conservación de la Naturaleza (UICN) para investigar los patrones del uso intencional de recursos biológicos. Usamos el 40% de las especies analizadas (10,098 de 25,009 especies pertenecientes a diez grupos taxonómicos con suficiente información). Los principales motivos para el uso de vida silvestre fueron como mascotas, animales de exhibición, horticultura y consumo humano. El uso intencional está actualmente contribuyendo a un riesgo elevado de extinción para 28 - 29% de las especies amenazadas o casi amenazadas (NT) (2,752 - 2,848 de 9,753 especies). El uso intencional también afectó al 16% de todas las especies utilizadas (1,597 - 1,631 de 10,098). Sin embargo, el 72% de las especies utilizadas (7,291 de 10, 098) pertenecen a la categoría de preocupación menor, de las cuales casi la mitad (3,469) también contaban con tendencias poblacionales estables o de mejoría. Las especies restantes no estaban documentadas como amenazadas por el uso de recursos biológicos, incluyendo al menos 172 especies amenazadas o NT con poblaciones estables o en aumento. Casi un tercio de las especies que tienen documentado el uso como una amenaza no cuentan con acciones de manejo para abordar directamente esta amenaza. Para mejorar la información de la lista roja relacionada con el uso, sugerimos pequeñas modificaciones a los esquemas relevantes de clasificación y la documentación de apoyo requerida. Nuestros descubrimientos sobre el predominio del uso sustentable y no sustentable, y la variación entre taxones, puede orientar la formulación de políticas internacionales, incluyendo a la Plataforma Intergubernamental de Políticas Científicas sobre Biodiversidad y Servicios Ecosistémicos, el Convenio sobre la Diversidad Biológica y la Convención sobre el Comercio Internacional de Especies Amenazadas.

Mapping the effectiveness of nature-based solutions for climate change adaptation.

Nature-based solutions (NbS) to climate change currently have considerable political traction. However, national intentions to deploy NbS have yet to be fully translated into evidence-based targets and action on the ground. To enable NbS policy and practice to be better informed by science, we produced the first global systematic map of evidence on the effectiveness of nature-based interventions for addressing the impacts of climate change and hydrometeorological hazards on people. Most of the interventions in natural or semi-natural ecosystems were reported to have ameliorated adverse climate impacts. Conversely, interventions involving created ecosystems (e.g., afforestation) were associated with trade-offs; such studies primarily reported reduced soil erosion or increased vegetation cover but lower water availability, although this evidence was geographically restricted. Overall, studies reported more synergies than trade-offs between reduced climate impacts and broader ecological, social, and climate change mitigation outcomes. In addition, nature-based interventions were most often shown to be as effective or more so than alternative interventions for addressing climate impacts. However, there were substantial gaps in the evidence base. Notably, there were few studies of the cost-effectiveness of interventions compared to alternatives and few integrated assessments considering broader social and ecological outcomes. There was also a bias in evidence toward the Global North, despite communities in the Global South being generally more vulnerable to climate impacts. To build resilience to climate change worldwide, it is imperative that we protect and harness the benefits that nature can provide, which can only be done effectively if informed by a strengthened evidence base.

Beyond banning wildlife trade: COVID-19, conservation and development.

One of the immediate responses to COVID-19 has been a call to ban wildlife trade given the suspected origin of the pandemic in a Chinese market selling and butchering wild animals. There is clearly an urgent need to tackle wildlife trade that is illegal, unsustainable or carries major risks to human health, biodiversity conservation or meeting acceptable animal welfare standards. However, some of the suggested actions in these calls go far beyond tackling these risks and have the potential to undermine human rights, damage conservation incentives and harm sustainable development. There are a number of reasons for this concerns. First calls for bans on wildlife markets often include calls for bans on wet markets, but the two are not the same thing, and wet markets can be a critical underpinning of informal food systems. Second, wildlife trade generates essential resources for the world's most vulnerable people, contributing to food security for millions of people, particularly in developing countries. Third, wildlife trade bans have conservation risks including driving trade underground, making it even harder to regulate, and encouraging further livestock production. Fourth, in many cases, sustainable wildlife trade can provide key incentives for local people to actively protect species and the habitat they depend on, leading to population recoveries. Most importantly, a singular focus on wildlife trade overlooks the key driver of the emergence of infectious diseases: habitat destruction, largely driven by agricultural expansion and deforestation, and industrial livestock production. We suggest that the COVID-19 crisis provides a unique opportunity for a paradigm shift both in our global food system and also in our approach to conservation. We make specific suggestions as to what this entails, but the overriding principle is that local people must be at the heart of such policy shifts.

Understanding complex drivers of wildlife crime to design effective conservation interventions.

In conservation understanding the drivers of behavior and developing robust interventions to promote behavioral change is challenging and requires a multifaceted approach. This is particularly true for efforts to address illegal wildlife use, where pervasive-and sometimes simplistic-narratives often obscure complex realities. We used an indirect questioning approach, the unmatched count technique, to investigate the drivers and prevalence of wildlife crime in communities surrounding 2 national parks in Uganda and combined scenario interviews and a choice experiment to predict the performance of potential interventions designed to tackle these crimes. Although poverty is often assumed to be a key driver of wildlife crime, we found that better-off households and those subject to human-wildlife conflict and those that do not receive any benefits from the parks' tourism revenue sharing were more likely to be involved in certain types of wildlife crime, especially illegal hunting. The interventions predicted to have the greatest impact on reducing local participation in wildlife crime were those that directly addressed the drivers including, mitigating damage caused by wildlife and generating financial benefits for park-adjacent households. Our triangulated approach provided insights into complex and hard-to-access behaviors and highlighted the importance of going beyond single-driver narratives.

Comprensión de los Conductores Complejos de los Delitos con Vida Silvestre para Diseñar Intervenciones Efectivas de Conservación Resumen En la conservación, la comprensión de los conductores del comportamiento y el desarrollo de intervenciones sólidas para promover cambios en el comportamiento es un reto que requiere de una estrategia multifacética. Esto es particularmente cierto para los esfuerzos que se realizan para tratar el uso ilegal de la fauna, en donde las narrativas generalizadas - y en algunas ocasiones simples - comúnmente ocultan las realidades complejas. Usamos una estrategia de cuestionamiento indirecto, la técnica de conteo sin par, para investigar los conductores y la prevalencia de los delitos con fauna en las comunidades que rodean a dos parques naciones en Uganda, así como entrevistas de escenario combinado y un experimento de elección para predecir el desempeño de las intervenciones potenciales diseñadas para acabar con estos delitos. Aunque frecuentemente se asume a la pobreza como un conductor importante de los delitos con fauna, encontramos que los hogares con mayor probabilidad de estar involucrados en ciertos tipos de delitos, especialmente la cacería ilegal, son los que se encuentran en mejores condiciones, están sujetos al conflicto humano-fauna y los que no reciben beneficio alguno de las ganancias del turismo en los parques. Las intervenciones que se pronosticó tendrían el mayor impacto en la reducción de la participación local dentro del delito con fauna fueron aquellas que trataron directamente con los conductores, incluyendo la mitigación del daño causado por la fauna y la generación de beneficios económicos para los hogares circundantes al parque. Nuestra estrategia triangulada proporcionó percepciones hacia los comportamientos complejos y de difícil acceso y resaltó la importancia de ir más allá de las narrativas unifactoriales.

Developing a theory of change for a community-based response to illegal wildlife trade.

The escalating illegal wildlife trade (IWT) is one of the most high-profile conservation challenges today. The crisis has attracted over US$350 million in donor and government funding in recent years, primarily directed at increased enforcement. There is growing recognition among practitioners and policy makers of the need to engage rural communities that neighbor or live with wildlife as key partners in tackling IWT. However, a framework to guide such community engagement is lacking. We developed a theory of change (ToC) to guide policy makers, donors, and practitioners in partnering with communities to combat IWT. We identified 4 pathways for community-level actions: strengthen disincentives for illegal behavior, increase incentives for wildlife stewardship, decrease costs of living with wildlife, and support livelihoods that are not related to wildlife. To succeed the pathways, all require strengthening of enabling conditions, including capacity building, and of governance. Our ToC serves to guide actions to tackle IWT and to inform the evaluation of policies. Moreover, it can be used to foster dialogue among IWT stakeholders, from local communities to governments and international donors, to develop a more effective, holistic, and sustainable community-based response to the IWT crisis.

Reframing the concept of alternative livelihoods.

Alternative livelihood project (ALP) is a widely used term for interventions that aim to reduce the prevalence of activities deemed to be environmentally damaging by substituting them with lower impact livelihood activities that provide at least equivalent benefits. ALPs are widely implemented in conservation, but in 2012, an International Union for Conservation of Nature resolution called for a critical review of such projects based on concern that their effectiveness was unproven. We focused on the conceptual design of ALPs by considering their underlying assumptions. We placed ALPs within a broad category of livelihood-focused interventions to better understand their role in conservation and their intended impacts. We dissected 3 flawed assumptions about ALPs based on the notions of substitution, the homogenous community, and impact scalability. Interventions based on flawed assumptions about people's needs, aspirations, and the factors that influence livelihood choice are unlikely to achieve conservation objectives. We therefore recommend use of a sustainable livelihoods approach to understand the role and function of environmentally damaging behaviors within livelihood strategies; differentiate between households in a community that have the greatest environmental impact and those most vulnerable to resource access restrictions to improve intervention targeting; and learn more about the social-ecological system within which household livelihood strategies are embedded. Rather than using livelihood-focused interventions as a direct behavior-change tool, it may be more appropriate to focus on either enhancing the existing livelihood strategies of those most vulnerable to conservation-imposed resource access restrictions or on use of livelihood-focused interventions that establish a clear link to conservation as a means of building good community relations. However, we recommend that the term ALP be replaced by the broader term livelihood-focused intervention. This avoids the implicit assumption that alternatives can fully substitute for natural resource-based livelihood activities.

What's on the horizon for community-based conservation? Emerging threats and opportunities.

Community-based conservation can support livelihoods and biodiversity, while reinforcing local and Indigenous values, cultures, and institutions. Its delivery can help address cross-cutting global challenges, such as climate change, conservation, poverty, and food security. Therefore, understanding trends in community-based conservation is pertinent to setting and implementing global goals. We undertook a horizon scan to prioritize 15 emerging threats and opportunities expected to impact the future effectiveness of community-based conservation. Topics relate to global biodiversity policy; human rights; shifting human geography; inclusion, diversity, equity, and access; conservation finance and income; and economic reforms. Our findings offer guidance on strengthening community-based conservation to achieve global environmental and development goals.

Impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on livelihoods and wild meat use in communities surrounding the Dja Faunal Reserve, South-East Cameroon.

The COVID-19 outbreak has had considerable negative impacts on the livelihoods and living conditions of communities around the world. Although the source of COVID-19 is still unknown, a widely spread hypothesis is that the virus could be of animal origin. Wild meat is used by rural communities as a source of income and food, and it has been hypothesised that the pandemic might alter their perceptions and use of wild meat. McNamara et al. (2020) developed a causal model hypothesising how the impacts of the pandemic could lead to a change in local incentives for wild meat hunting in sub-Saharan African countries. From February 27 to March 19, 2021, we carried out a survey around the Dja Faunal Reserve, Southeast Cameroon, to test McNamara et al.'s model in practice, using semi-structured questionnaires to investigate the impacts of the COVID-19 outbreak on wild meat hunting and consumption. Our results generally agree with the causal pathways suggested by McNamara et al. However, our study highlights additional impact pathways not identified in the model. We provide revisions to McNamara's model to incorporate these pathways and inform strategies to mitigate the impacts of the pandemic.

L'épidémie de COVID­19 a eu des répercussions négatives considérables sur les moyens de subsistance et les conditions de vie des communautés du monde entier. Bien que l'origine de la COVID­19 soit encore inconnue, une hypothèse largement répandue est que le virus pourrait être d'origine animale. La viande de gibier est utilisée par les communautés rurales comme source de revenus et de nourriture et une hypothèse avance que la pandémie pourrait modifier la perception et l'utilisation de ces dernières à l'égard de cette même viande McNamara et al. (2020) ont élaboré un modèle de causalité en émettant l'hypothèse que les répercussions de la pandémie pourraient entraîner une modification des incitations liées à la chasse de gibier au niveau local dans les pays d'Afrique subsaharienne. Entre le 27 février et le 19 mars 2021, nous avons effectué une étude aux alentours de la réserve de faune du Dja, au sud­est du Cameroun, afin de tester le modèle de McNamara et al. dans la pratique, en nous appuyant sur des questionnaires semi­structurés afin d'étudier les répercussions de l'épidémie de COVID­19 sur la chasse de gibier et la consommation de viande de gibier. Nos résultats correspondent globalement au modèle causal suggéré par McNamara et al. Cependant, notre étude met en évidence d'autres schémas de répercussions non identifiés dans ce modèle. Nous souhaitons apporter des modifications au modèle de McNamara afin d'intégrer ces schémas, ainsi que des stratégies visant à atténuer les impacts de la pandémie.

Conserving Africa's wildlife and wildlands through the COVID-19 crisis and beyond.

The SARS-CoV-2 virus and COVID-19 illness are driving a global crisis. Governments have responded by restricting human movement, which has reduced economic activity. These changes may benefit biodiversity conservation in some ways, but in Africa, we contend that the net conservation impacts of COVID-19 will be strongly negative. Here, we describe how the crisis creates a perfect storm of reduced funding, restrictions on the operations of conservation agencies, and elevated human threats to nature. We identify the immediate steps necessary to address these challenges and support ongoing conservation efforts. We then highlight systemic flaws in contemporary conservation and identify opportunities to restructure for greater resilience. Finally, we emphasize the critical importance of conserving habitat and regulating unsafe wildlife trade practices to reduce the risk of future pandemics.

Local conditions and policy design determine whether ecological compensation can achieve No Net Loss goals.

Many nations use ecological compensation policies to address negative impacts of development projects and achieve No Net Loss (NNL) of biodiversity and ecosystem services. Yet, failures are widely reported. We use spatial simulation models to quantify potential net impacts of alternative compensation policies on biodiversity (indicated by native vegetation) and two ecosystem services (carbon storage, sediment retention) across four case studies (in Australia, Brazil, Indonesia, Mozambique). No policy achieves NNL of biodiversity in any case study. Two factors limit their potential success: the land available for compensation (existing vegetation to protect or cleared land to restore), and expected counterfactual biodiversity losses (unregulated vegetation clearing). Compensation also fails to slow regional biodiversity declines because policies regulate only a subset of sectors, and expanding policy scope requires more land than is available for compensation activities. Avoidance of impacts remains essential in achieving NNL goals, particularly once opportunities for compensation are exhausted.

Biodiversity conservation and the eradication of poverty.

It is widely accepted that biodiversity loss and poverty are linked problems and that conservation and poverty reduction should be tackled together. However, success with integrated strategies is elusive. There is sharp debate about the social impacts of conservation programs and the success of community-based approaches to conservation. Clear conceptual frameworks are needed if policies in these two areas are to be combined. We review the links between poverty alleviation and biodiversity conservation and present a conceptual typology of these relationships.