In Southeast Asia, large-scale conversion of rainforest to oil palm plantations is one of the major causes of biodiversity declines. Recommendations for reducing species losses and increasing the sustainability of palm oil production advocate the retention of natural forest patches within plantations, but there is little evidence for the effectiveness of this strategy. Here, we examine to what extent rainforest remnants with different characteristics contribute to biodiversity within surrounding plantations. We sampled ground-dwelling ants in Sabah (Malaysian Borneo) using unbaited pit-fall traps along 1.km transects spanning forest-plantation ecotones of 10 forest fragments (area 5. ha-500. ha) and two continuous forest sites which bordered plantations. Ant species richness in plantations varied according to richness in adjacent forest fragments, which increased with fragment size. A trend of declining species richness in plantations with distance from the forest ecotone was consistent with spillover of forest species into plantations adjacent to forest remnants. Ant assemblages in plantations also contained more carnivorous species adjacent to large forest fragments, suggesting large fragments may have benefits for pest control in plantations, as well as benefits for local biodiversity. Our results indicate that large forest fragments support distinctive ant assemblages and increase diversity within the planted area, but small fragments (<~200. ha) contribute little to plantation diversity. Thus retaining large fragments of forest may help mitigate the loss of species within oil palm plantations.
Land-use change is a major driver of tropical biodiversity declines. The "High Conservation Value" (HCV) approach aims to protect critical environmental and social values in production landscapes, and is a common feature of many voluntary certification schemes (e.g., Forest Stewardship Council, Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil). Despite the popularity of the HCV approach within forestry and agriculture production systems, it is little known in academia and the scientific evidence base supporting it is not well developed. By raising the profile of the HCV approach, we hope to instigate new research to examine the impact of the HCV approach on biodiversity conservation. We argue for better knowledge exchange between scientists, policy makers, and HCV users, sharing of information, and consideration of the practical constraints within which HCV users and commodity producers operate. Given the continuing loss and degradation of tropical rainforests, such strategies are required urgently to reduce biodiversity losses in production landscapes.
Summary
It is necessary to improve knowledge exchange between scientists and decision‐makers so that scientific evidence can be readily accessed to inform policy.
To maximise impact of scientific evidence in policy development, the scientific community should engage more fully with decision‐makers, building long‐term working relationships in order to identify and respond to ‘policy windows’ with science that is reframed for policy‐relevance.
We illustrate the process and challenges using a case study in which we synthesised evidence from studies of habitat fragmentation to provide information for improved biodiversity conservation in the oil palm sector, resulting in the uptake of this research into new industry guidelines.
Policy implications. The case study demonstrates how having an in‐depth understanding of the ‘policy arena’ (the state of policy and the actors and influencing factors that affect policy) and responding with relevant and specific information, enabled effective uptake of science to inform the design of conservation set‐asides in the oil palm industry.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.