A standard lexicon of terms for area-based conservation version 1.0.

Target 3 in the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF) calls for protecting at least 30% of the world's lands and waters in area-based conservation approaches by 2030. This ambitious 30×30 target has spurred great interest among policy makers, practitioners, and researchers in defining and measuring the effectiveness of these types of approaches. But along with this broad interest, there has also been a proliferation of terms and their accompanying abbreviations used to describe different types of conservation areas and their governance, planning, management, and monitoring. The lack of standard terms is hindering the use and assessment of area-based approaches to conserve the world's biodiversity. It is difficult to track progress toward GBF Target 3 or to share learning with other practitioners if different groups of people are using different words to describe the same concept or similar words to talk about different concepts. To address this problem, the International Union for Conservation of Nature's World Commission on Protected Areas commissioned a task force to review existing terms and recommend a standard English-language lexicon for this field based on key criteria. The results were definitions of 37 terms across 6 categories, including types of protected and additional conservation areas (e.g., protected area, additional conservation area), sets of these areas (protected area network, protected area system), their governance and management (governance, rightsholders), assessment (effectiveness, equitability), spatial planning (key biodiversity area), and action planning (value, outcome, objective). Our standard lexicon can provide a common language for people who want to use it and a shared reference point that can be used to translate various terms used by different groups. The common understanding provided by the lexicon can serve as a foundation for collaborative efforts to improve the policies, implementation, assessments, research, and learning about this important set of conservation approaches.

Un léxico estandarizado de términos para la conservación basada en áreas versión 10 Resumen El objetivo 3 del Marco Global para la Biodiversidad de Kunming­Montreal (GBF) establece la protección de al menos el 30% de los suelos y aguas del planeta con estrategias de conservación basada en áreas para el 2030. Este objetivo ambicioso de 30x30 ha provocado un gran interés por definir y medir la eficiencia de este tipo de estrategias entre quienes hacen las políticas, los practicantes y los investigadores. Junto con este interés generalizado también ha habido una proliferación de términos y abreviaciones usados para describir los diferentes tipos de áreas de conservación y su gestión, planeación, manejo y monitoreo. La falta de términos estandarizados dificulta el uso y la evaluación de las estrategias basadas en áreas para conservar la biodiversidad mundial. Es difícil registrar los avances hacia el Objetivo 3 del GBF o compartir el aprendizaje con otros practicantes si diferentes grupos de personas usan diferentes palabras para describir el mismo concepto o palabras similares para hablar de conceptos distintos. Para abordar este problema, la Comisión Mundial de Áreas Protegidas de la Unión Internacional para la Conservación de la Naturaleza comisionó un grupo de trabajo para que revise los términos existentes y recomiende un léxico estandarizado en inglés para este campo con base en criterios clave. Como resultado obtuvieron la definición para 37 términos de seis categorías, incluyendo los tipos de área protegida y las áreas adicionales de conservación (p. ej.: área protegida, área adicional de conservación), los conjuntos de estas áreas (p. ej.: red de áreas protegidas, sistema de áreas protegidas), su gestión y manejo (gobernanza, derechohabientes), evaluación (efectividad, equidad), planeación espacial (área clave de biodiversidad) y plan de acción (valor, resultado, objetivo). Nuestro léxico estandarizado puede proporcionar un lenguaje común para la gente que quiera usarlo y una referencia compartida que puede usarse para traducir varios términos que usan los diferentes grupos. El conocimiento común proporcionado por el léxico puede fungir como una base para que los esfuerzos colaborativos mejoren las políticas, implementación, evaluación, investigación y aprendizaje sobre este conjunto importante de estrategias de conservación.

Voluntary consensus based geospatial data standards for the global illegal trade in wild fauna and flora.

We have more data about wildlife trafficking than ever before, but it remains underutilized for decision-making. Central to effective wildlife trafficking interventions is collection, aggregation, and analysis of data across a range of source, transit, and destination geographies. Many data are geospatial, but these data cannot be effectively accessed or aggregated without appropriate geospatial data standards. Our goal was to create geospatial data standards to help advance efforts to combat wildlife trafficking. We achieved our goal using voluntary, participatory, and engagement-based workshops with diverse and multisectoral stakeholders, online portals, and electronic communication with more than 100 participants on three continents. The standards support data-to-decision efforts in the field, for example indictments of key figures within wildlife trafficking, and disruption of their networks. Geospatial data standards help enable broader utilization of wildlife trafficking data across disciplines and sectors, accelerate aggregation and analysis of data across space and time, advance evidence-based decision making, and reduce wildlife trafficking.

Classification of climate-change-induced stresses on biological diversity.

Conservation actions need to account for and be adapted to address changes that will occur under global climate change. The identification of stresses on biological diversity (as defined in the Convention on Biological Diversity) is key in the process of adaptive conservation management. We considered any impact of climate change on biological diversity a stress because such an effect represents a change (negative or positive) in key ecological attributes of an ecosystem or parts of it. We applied a systemic approach and a hierarchical framework in a comprehensive classification of stresses to biological diversity that are caused directly by global climate change. Through analyses of 20 conservation sites in 7 countries and a review of the literature, we identified climate-change-induced stresses. We grouped the identified stresses according to 3 levels of biological diversity: stresses that affect individuals and populations, stresses that affect biological communities, and stresses that affect ecosystem structure and function. For each stress category, we differentiated 3 hierarchical levels of stress: stress class (thematic grouping with the coarsest resolution, 8); general stresses (thematic groups of specific stresses, 21); and specific stresses (most detailed definition of stresses, 90). We also compiled an overview of effects of climate change on ecosystem services using the categories of the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment and 2 additional categories. Our classification may be used to identify key climate-change-related stresses to biological diversity and may assist in the development of appropriate conservation strategies. The classification is in list format, but it accounts for relations among climate-change-induced stresses.

Using conceptual models as a planning and evaluation tool in conservation.

Conservation projects are dynamic interventions that occur in complex contexts involving intricate interactions of social, political, economic, cultural, and environmental factors. These factors are constantly changing over time and space as managers learn more about the context within which they work. This complex context poses challenges for planning and evaluating conservation project. In order for conservation managers and evaluation professionals to design good interventions and measure project success, they simultaneously need to embrace and deconstruct contextual complexity. In this article, we describe conceptual models--a tool that helps articulate and make explicit assumptions about a project's context and what a project team hopes to achieve. We provide real-world examples of conceptual models, discuss the relationship between conceptual models and other evaluation tools, and describe various ways that conceptual models serve as a key planning and evaluation tool. These include, for example, that they document assumptions about a project site and they provide a basis for analyzing theories of change. It is impractical to believe that we can completely eliminate detail or dynamic complexity in projects. Nevertheless, conceptual models can help reduce the effects of this complexity by helping us understand it.

Enhancing the engagement of U.S. private foundations with conservation science.

Funding for conservation is limited, and its investment for maximum conservation gain can likely be enhanced through the application of relevant science. Many donor institutions support and use science to pursue conservation goals, but their activities remain relatively unfamiliar to the conservation-science community. We examined the priorities and practices of U.S.-based private foundations that support biodiversity conservation. We surveyed 50 donor members of the Consultative Group on Biological Diversity (CGBD) to address three questions: (1) What support do CGBD members provide for conservation science? (2) How do CGBD members use conservation science in their grant making and strategic thinking? (3) How do CGBD members obtain information about conservation science? The 38 donor institutions that responded to the survey made $340 million in grants for conservation in 2005, including $62 million for conservation science. Individual foundations varied substantially in the proportion of conservation funds allocated to science. Foundations also varied in the ways and degree to which they used conservation science to guide their grant making. Respondents found it "somewhat difficult" to stay informed about conservation science relevant to their work, reporting that they accessed conservation science information mainly through their grantees. Many funders reported concerns about the strategic utility of funding conservation science to achieve conservation gains. To increase investment by private foundations in conservation science, funders, researchers, and conservation practitioners need to jointly identify when and how new scientific knowledge will lower barriers to conservation gains. We envision an evolving relationship between funders and conservation scientists that emphasizes primary research and synthesis motivated by (1) applicability, (2) human-ecosystem interactions, (3) active engagement among scientists and decision makers, and (4) broader communication of relevant scientific information.

A standard lexicon for biodiversity conservation: unified classifications of threats and actions.

An essential foundation of any science is a standard lexicon. Any given conservation project can be described in terms of the biodiversity targets, direct threats, contributing factors at the project site, and the conservation actions that the project team is employing to change the situation. These common elements can be linked in a causal chain, which represents a theory of change about how the conservation actions are intended to bring about desired project outcomes. If project teams want to describe and share their work and learn from one another, they need a standard and precise lexicon to specifically describe each node along this chain. To date, there have been several independent efforts to develop standard classifications for the direct threats that affect biodiversity and the conservation actions required to counteract these threats. Recognizing that it is far more effective to have only one accepted global scheme, we merged these separate efforts into unified classifications of threats and actions, which we present here. Each classification is a hierarchical listing of terms and associated definitions. The classifications are comprehensive and exclusive at the upper levels of the hierarchy, expandable at the lower levels, and simple, consistent, and scalable at all levels. We tested these classifications by applying them post hoc to 1191 threatened bird species and 737 conservation projects. Almost all threats and actions could be assigned to the new classification systems, save for some cases lacking detailed information. Furthermore, the new classification systems provided an improved way of analyzing and comparing information across projects when compared with earlier systems. We believe that widespread adoption of these classifications will help practitioners more systematically identify threats and appropriate actions, managers to more efficiently set priorities and allocate resources, and most important, facilitate cross-project learning and the development of a systematic science of conservation.

Territorial behavior in Southeast Asian langurs: Resource defense or mate defense?

Between-group antagonism or territoriality in primates may serve two different but compatible functions: resource defense or mate defense. Females are expected to be involved more strongly in the first, males in the second. The resource defense hypothesis predicts that home range overlap should decrease as defensibility and population density increase, and that females should be involved in hostile between-group interactions. The mate defense hypothesis predicts that between-group relations should be hostile and that males should take the primary role in antagonistic encounters. In a comparative study of 12 populations of 6 Presbytis species in Southeast Asia, we found support for the mate defense hypothesis; only males produce loud calls, between-group antagonism is entirely a male affair, and neither defensibility nor population density determine spatial exclusivity or the level of antagonism. We discuss the differences between our findings and traditional interpretations of territorial behavior.