Biodiversity Conservation Efforts

Biodiversity Conservation Efforts – Online and Offline Representations of Biocultural Diversity: A Political-Ecological Perspective on Nature Tourism and Indigenous Communities in the Pantanal Region of Brazil.

Sustainable and sustainable design of interdependent water and energy systems: a conceptual modeling framework for addressing the complexity of the infrastructure-human resource nexus.

Table of Contents

Open Access Policy Organization Open Access Program Special Issue Guidelines Editorial Process Research and Publication Ethics Article Processing Fees Reviews for Awards

Biodiversity Conservation: 7 Principles For Matching Goals With Actions

All articles published by are immediately available worldwide under an open access license. No special permission is required to reuse all or part of an article published by , including figures and tables. For articles published under the Creative Commons CC BY open access license, any part of the article may be reused without permission, provided the original article is clearly cited. For more information, see https:///openaccess.

The articles presented represent cutting-edge research with significant potential for high impact in the field. Submitted articles should be substantial original articles that incorporate multiple techniques or approaches, provide perspectives on future research directions, and describe possible research applications.

Submitted articles are submitted upon individual invitation or recommendation by the Scientific Editor and must receive positive feedback from reviewers.

Editor’s Choice articles are based on recommendations from scientific editors of journals around the world. The editors select a small number of articles recently published in journals that they believe will be of particular interest to readers or may be important to the research area. The aim is to provide a snapshot of the most interesting research published in the various research areas of the journal.

Boosting The Tourism Sector And Biodiversity Protection: Creating A Stronger Link Between Travel Experiences And Environmental Outcomes

Author: Michael C. GavinMichael C. Gavin SciProfiles Scilit Preprints.org Google Scholar 1, 2, * , Joe McCarterJoe McCarter SciProfiles Scilit Preprints.org Google Scholar 3, 4, Fikret BerkesFikret Berkes SciProfiles Scilit Preprints.org Google Scholar 5, Aroha Te Pareake MeadAroha Te Pareake Mead SciProfiles Scilit Preprints.org Google Scholar 6, Eleanor J. SterlingEleanor J. Sterling SciProfiles Scilit Preprints.org Google Scholar 3, Ruifei TangRuifei Tang SciProfiles Scilit Preprints.org Google Scholar 7 and Nancy J. TurnerNancy J. SciProfiles es Scilit Preprints.org Google Scholar 8

Committee on Environment, Economic and Social Policy, International Union for Conservation of Nature, Wellington 6035, New Zealand.

Date of submission: 27 April 2018 / Date of revision: 25 May 2018 / Date of approval: 29 May 2018 / Date of publication: 2 June 2018

Biodiversity Conservation Efforts

Biodiversity loss undermines the long-term maintenance of ecosystem function and human well-being. Global policy initiatives, including the Convention on Biological Diversity, have failed to limit biodiversity loss. These failures have given rise to contentious debates about alternative solutions that represent opposing visions of the value orientations and policy instruments underlying conservation action.

We examine these debates and argue that they impede progress in conservation by wasting time and resources, neglecting common goals, failing to recognize the need for different solutions, and ignoring key questions about who should be involved in the conservation process. Breaking with the polarizing debate, we argue that a biocultural approach to conservation can lead to progress towards equitable and sustainable conservation solutions. We provide examples of core principles of bioculture conservation that highlight the need for a pluralistic, partnership-based and dynamic approach to conservation.

Vale’s Biodiversity Conservation Efforts

Adaptive management and control; biocultural approach to conservation; different worldviews and knowledge systems; Guay Hanas; embedded institutional frameworks; different stakeholders and objectives; new conservation science; building partnerships and relationships; rights and responsibilities; Socio-ecological context

The current state and projected trajectory of biodiversity at all levels, from genetic diversity to ecosystems, is dire. An estimated 11,000 to 36,000 species may become extinct each year [ 1 ], and globally, native species richness has fallen below the threshold needed to ensure the long-term maintenance of ecosystem functions and services [ 2 ].

Many conservation efforts have been made to stop the loss of biodiversity and without such measures the biodiversity situation will undoubtedly worsen. There are “bright spots” [3] and much can be learned from these success stories. However, global initiatives such as the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) have failed to reverse or slow down the general trend. Despite extensive approvals and significant funding, including the $16 billion Global Environment Facility,

CBD has consistently failed to meet its goals. A recent assessment found that only 9% of the 55 targets will be achieved [4]. The international conservation community is exploring new ways to integrate the potential roles and rights of local and indigenous peoples into conservation planning through the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) [5].

The slow progress of solutions to biodiversity loss on a global scale has prompted the search for alternatives. Among the various options, two approaches have received much attention: “new conservation science” [6, 7] and “anti-Earth” [8]. Both are described below (Figure 1). The debate between these two perspectives on conservation is far from just an academic debate.

These arguments appear to pit opposing visions of the underlying value orientations, focal positions, and policy instruments underlying conservation action. Here we examine the historical underpinnings of this debate and the constraints placed on the conservation process. We then introduce a biocultural approach to conservation that can move beyond these debates and guide equitable, pluralistic and partnership-based conservation actions that can provide more effective conservation pathways.

Advocates of the New Conservation Science (NCS) emphasize the wide-ranging impact humans have on the natural world. NCS challenges conservation paradigms that focus on notions of pristine and vulnerable nature and strictly protected areas as the primary conservation tool [6].

The NCS views people and nature as inextricably linked and presents an alternative conservation framework that emphasizes ecosystem functions and activities that “enhance natural systems that benefit most people” [6]. NCS also emphasizes the intrinsic value of nature, but this perspective is often associated with a utilitarian valuation of ecosystem services [7].

Proponents of NCS argue that plans that demonstrate value to more people win wider support for conservation [9]. Based on these assumptions, the NCS calls for a focus on human-dominated landscapes and expanding the conservation toolbox to include market-based mechanisms and collaboration with business and industry [6]. This approach now shapes the conservation agenda of the largest conservation NGOs (eg The Nature Conservancy) and has also influenced the environmental plans of government agencies.

Biodiversity: What It Is, Why It Is Important, And How To Preserve It

Critics argue that the NCS overestimates the resilience of natural systems while ignoring the rapid rate of extinction and the dire state of biodiversity [ 8 , 10 , 11 ]. Others argue that NCS overstates the instrumental value of nature and the need for conservation to improve human well-being [ 10 , 12 , 13 ].

Considerable concerns have also been raised about NCS’ support for partnerships with industries with a history of environmentally destructive practices [8, 10, 12]. Additionally, opponents point out that a focus on the instrumental value of ecosystems may fail to conserve many species, especially those of little use to human communities [ 12 , 14 ].

An alternative to NCS conservation, the half-Earth (HE) approach, proposes a significant expansion of protected areas to cover half of the Earth’s surface [ 8 , 15 ]. Proponents of Half Earth (HE) solutions tend to adopt a biocentric approach to conservation, emphasizing the intrinsic value of species and ecosystems (Figure 1).

Proponents of HE argue that protecting areas from human encroachment offers the best hope for reducing human impact on biodiversity. Based on an analysis of species-area relationships, the researchers suggest that protecting 50% of the Earth’s surface could preserve about 85% of all species.

The HE proposal was widely promoted at the World Conservation Forum and supported by the establishment of large, well-known protected areas, including the Papahanomokuakea National Marine Monument in Hawaii and the Ross Sea Marine Reserve in Antarctica.

HE proposals also face questions about how large-scale expansion of strictly protected areas can be reconciled with indigenous and local rights to use land and resources [ 16 , 17 , 18 ]. Others argue that HE proponents place too much blame on human population growth and ignore the inequalities within human societies that lead to dramatic differences in consumption patterns and shape the impacts of different human groups on biodiversity [19].

Biodiversity Conservation Efforts

Although the labels for these efforts (NCS and HE) are new, the debate between them is rooted in the history of conservation for at least 100 years [20]. In the early 20th century, John Muir opposed Gifford Pinchot’s vision of “sustainable use” of resources to support the growing American population by creating protected areas to permanently preserve “natural” landscapes.

Similar debates continued more recently, from the 1980s to the 2000s. “Conservation” advocates have called for more reserves without people, as projects that seek to include local residents and respect indigenous rights grow in popularity. Protection of rights and integration of sustainable development and conservation [21, 22, 23].

Fundamental to the argument is the existence of an opposing ethical framework (Figure 1, [14, 20]). Proponents of NCS argue for the instrumental value of nature, while HE emphasizes the intrinsic value of species and ecosystems [ 7 , 8 , 10 , 14 , 20 ]. The long-standing nature of the debate may reflect the following points:

Effective Conservation Efforts Are Key To Saving Biodiversity

Red panda conservation efforts, animal conservation efforts, biodiversity & conservation, conservation efforts, water conservation efforts, orangutan conservation efforts, biodiversity conservation, cheetah conservation efforts, conservation efforts on biodiversity, coral reef conservation efforts, african elephant conservation efforts, ocean conservation efforts