Evaluating institutional fit for the conservation of threatened species

Abstract

Recovery and conservation of threatened species require adequate institutional responses. We tested an approach to systematically identify and measure how an institutional framework acknowledges threats and required responses for the recovery of endangered species. We measured institutional functional fit with a driverspressure-state-impacts-response (DPSIR) model integrated with a quantitative text mining method and qualitative analysis of statutory instruments to examine regulatory responses that support the recovery of 2 endangered species native to Australia, the bridled nailtail wallaby (Onychogalea fraenata) and the Eastern Bristlebird (Dasyornis brachypterus). The key components of the DPSIR model were present in the institutional framework at statutory and operational levels, but some institutional gaps remained in the protection and recovery of the Eastern Bristlebird, including feral predator control, weed control, and grazing management in some locations. However, regulatory frameworks varied in their geographic scope and the application and implementation of many instruments remained optional. Quantitative text mining can be used to quickly navigate a large volume of regulatory documents, but challenges remain in selection of terms, queries of co-occurrence, and interpretation of word frequency counts. To inform policy, we recommend that quantitative assessments of institutional fit be complemented with qualitative analysis and interpreted in light of the sociopolitical and institutional context.

Regulation, the hybrid market, and species conservation: The case of conservation banking in California

“…Problems of t occur when institutions fail to adequately address components or links of the ecological systems they govern (e.g., stressors affecting species survival) (Ekstrom and Young 2009). Fit can refer to political, economic and ecological dimensions (Guerrero et al 2021). Fit is discussed often in the context of social-ecological systems (Folke et al 2007;Ekstrom and Young 2009;Epstein et al 2015) and conservation approaches (Guerrero and Wilson 2017;Guerrero et al 2021).…”

“…Fit can refer to political, economic and ecological dimensions (Guerrero et al 2021). Fit is discussed often in the context of social-ecological systems (Folke et al 2007;Ekstrom and Young 2009;Epstein et al 2015) and conservation approaches (Guerrero and Wilson 2017;Guerrero et al 2021).…”

Assessing social-ecological fit of flood planning governance

“…As Guerrin et al (2014) illuminated, governance outcomes can be impacted by the interests and willing participation of involved actors. Consequently, there is a need to substantially investigate how organizational attributes may impact operational abilities and subsequently functional fit (Alexander et al 2017, Guerrero et al 2021.…”