Funding evidence‐based conservation

Parks, Danni; Al-Fulaij, Nida; Brook, Clare; Butchart, Stuart H. M.; Collomb, Jean‐Gaël; Cope, David; Dowell, Simon D.; Falkingham, Becky; Frick, Winifred F.; Gibbs, Douglas F.; Gray, Emily E.; Heard, Nicolas; Leventis, Anastasios; Mastro, Kate; Meredith, Helen; Mickleburgh, Simon; Miller, Florence; Muir, Matthew J.; Nuijten, Rascha J.M.; Ockendon, Nancy; Owen, Nisha; Owens, Jacob R.; Rodrı́guez, Jon Paul; Roy, Sugoto; Tully, Elizabeth; Vié, Jean‐Christophe

doi:10.1111/cobi.13991

Cited by 11 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Box 9.3 shows different ways that funders can ask grantees to provide evidence during their projects at various different stages. These were developed by a group of conservation funders (Parks et al 2022).…”

Section: Evidence-based Fundingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Transforming Conservation

2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There are severe problems with the decision-making processes currently widely used, leading to ineffective use of evidence, faulty decisions, wasting of resources and the erosion of public and political support. In this book an international team of experts provide solutions. The transformation suggested includes rethinking how evidence is assessed, combined, communicated and used in decision-making; using effective methods when asking experts to make judgements (i.e. avoiding just asking an expert or a group of experts!); using a structured process for making decisions that incorporate the evidence and having effective processes for learning from actions. In each case, the specific problem with decision making is described with a range of practical solutions. Adopting this approach to decision-making requires societal change so detailed suggestions are made for transforming organisations, governments, businesses, funders and philanthropists. The practical suggestions include twelve downloadable checklists. The vision of the authors is to transform conservation so it is more effective, more cost-efficient, learns from practice and is more attractive to funders. However, the lessons of this important book go well beyond conservation to decision-makers in any field.

show abstract

Section: Evidence-based Fundingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Transforming Conservation

2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The global biodiversity crisis is intensifying ( Singh 2002 , Shivanna 2020 ), with critical species loss and subsequent erosion of vital ecosystem services. This trend has triggered the launch and implementation of conservation projects on a global scale ( Mammola et al 2020 , Parks et al 2022 ). In response to the need to protect biodiversity, these projects aim to mitigate the loss of biodiversity and the associated services delivered by these diverse ecosystems.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Monitoring arthropods under the scope of the LIFE-BEETLES project: I - Baseline data with implementation of the Index of Biotic Integrity

Lhoumeau,

Tsafack,

Manso

et al. 2024

BDJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The urgent need for conservation efforts in response to the global biodiversity crisis is exemplified by initiatives, such as the EU LIFE BEETLES project. This project aims to preserve endangered arthropod species that are crucial for ecosystem functionality, with a focus on endemic beetle species in Flores, Pico and Terceira Islands (Azores, Portugal): Tarphius floresensis Borges & Serrano, 2017, Pseudanchomenus aptinoides (Tarnier, 1860) and Trechus terrabravensis Borges, Serrano & Amorim, 2004. These species are single island endemics respectively from Flores, Pico and Terceira. They are threatened by environmental degradation, facing the dual challenge of restricted distribution and habitat degradation due to the spread of invasive plants. The project aims to enhance habitat quality and biodiversity conservation through habitat restoration and plant invasive species control measures. These measures are funded by the European Commission and coordinated by the Azorean Environment Directorate-General. The current Data Paper evaluates the effectiveness of the LIFE BEETLES project in improving habitat quality and offers insights into the balance between habitat restoration efforts and endangered species conservation in island ecosystems, utilising as ecological indicator the Index of Biotic Integrity (IBI) framework. This study establishes a comprehensive database derived from a long-term arthropod monitoring survey that used SLAM (Sea, Land and Air Malaise) traps and pitfall traps. Our findings present a proxy for assessing the overall habitat quality for endemic invertebrates, using arthropods as main indicators. From September 2020 to June 2023, a total of 31 SLAM traps were monitored. The traps were set up as follows: seven in Flores (three in mixed forest and four in native forest), 10 in Pico (four in mixed forest and six in native forest) and 14 in Terceira (three in mixed forest and 11 in native forest). Traps were monitored every three months. In addition, we surveyed the epigean fauna in 19 transects with 15 non-attractive pitfall traps per transect. The transects were set up during two weeks at the end of August every year between 2020 and 2023. Eight transects were established in Flores, consisting of one in pasture, four in mixed forest and three in native forest. Six transects were established in Pico, consisting of two in pastures and four in native forest. Five transects were established in Terceira, consisting of two in mixed forest and three in native forest. A total of 243 arthropod taxa were recorded, with 207 identified at the species or subspecies level. These taxa belonged to four classes, 24 orders and 101 families. Out of the 207 identified taxa, 46 were endemic, 60 were native non-endemic, 80 were introduced and 21 were of indeterminate status. Habitat information is also provided, including general habitat and dominant species composition. This publication contributes to the conservation of highly threatened endemic beetles by assessing habitat quality, based on arthropod communities and habitat description (e.g. native or exotic vegetation). Using the Index of Biotic Integrity (IBI) to comparing pre- and post-intervention data, we found no significant change within the epigean community. In contrast, the understorey community sampled with SLAM traps experienced a slight global decrease in biotic integrity over the study period. These findings suggest that the short duration of the study may not be sufficient to detect significant changes, as ecosystem recovery often requires long-term monitoring. The observed changes in the understorey community may be attributed to disturbances from intervention activities, highlighting the need for ongoing monitoring to assess long-term ecological resilience and recovery.

show abstract