Peer-reviewed publications

The global recognition of modern agricultural practices' impact on the environment has fuelled policy responses to ameliorate environmental degradation in agricultural landscapes. In the US and the EU, agri-environmental subsidies (AES) promote widespread adoption of sustainable practices by compensating farmers who voluntarily implement them on working farmland. Previous studies, however, have suggested limitations of their spatial targeting, with funds not allocated towards areas of the greatest environmental need. We analysed AES in the US and EU –specifically through the Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP) and selected measures of the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD)– to identify if AES are going where they are most needed to achieve environmental goals, using a set of environmental need indicators, socio-economic variables moderating allocation patterns, and contextual variables describing agricultural systems. Using linear mixed models and linear models we explored the associations among AES allocation and these predictors at different scales. We found that higher AES spending was associated with areas of low soil organic carbon and high greenhouse gas emissions both in the US and EU, and nitrogen surplus in the EU. More so than successes, however, clear mismatches of funding and environmental need emerged – AES allocation did not successfully target areas of highest water stress, biodiversity loss, soil erosion, and nutrient runoff. Socio-economic and agricultural context variables may explain some of these mismatches; we show that AES were allocated to areas with higher proportions of female producers in the EU but not in the US, where funds were directed towards areas with less tenant farmers. Moreover, we suggest that the potential for AES to remediate environmental issues may be curtailed by limited participation in intensive agricultural landscapes. These findings can help inform refinements to EQIP and EAFRD allocation mechanisms and identify opportunities for improving future targeting of AES spending.

In 2018, the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) adopted a decision on protected areas and other effective area-based conservation measures (OECMs). It contains the definition of an OECM and related scientific and technical advice that has broadened the scope of governance authorities and areas that can be engaged and recognised in global conservation efforts. The voluntary guidance on OECMs and protected areas, also included in the decision, promotes the use of diverse, effective and equitable governance models, the integration of protected areas and OECMs into wider landscapes and seascapes, and mainstreaming of biodiversity conservation across sectors. Taken as a whole, the advice and voluntary guidance provides further clarity about the CBD Parties’ understanding of what constitutes equitable and effective area-based conservation measures within and beyond protected areas and provides standardised criteria with which to measure and report areas’ attributes and performance. This policy perspective suggests that this CBD decision represents further evidence of the evolution from the ‘new paradigm for protected areas’ to a broader ‘conserved areas paradigm’ that embodies good governance, equity and effective conservation outcomes and is inclusive of a diversity of contributions to conservation within and beyond protected areas.

Migration of ungulates (hooved mammals) is a fundamental ecological process that promotes abundant herds, whose effects cascade up and down terrestrial food webs. Migratory ungulates provide the prey base that maintains large carnivore and scavenger populations and underpins terrestrial biodiversity (fig. S1). When ungulates move in large aggregations, their hooves, feces, and urine create conditions that facilitate distinct biotic communities. The migrations of ungulates have sustained humans for thousands of years, forming tight cultural links among Indigenous people and local communities. Yet ungulate migrations are disappearing at an alarming rate (1). Efforts by wildlife managers and conservationists are thwarted by a singular challenge: Most ungulate migrations have never been mapped in sufficient detail to guide effective conservation. Without a strategic and collaborative effort, many of the world's great migrations will continue to be truncated, severed, or lost in the coming decades. Fortunately, a combination of animal tracking datasets, historical records, and local and Indigenous knowledge can form the basis for a global atlas of migrations, designed to support conservation action and policy at local, national, and international levels.

Although the network of national parks in Zambia offers a degree of protection for freshwater diversity, the protection status of numerous systems outside of these parks requires further action. The biodiversity associated with its freshwater systems, both lotic and lentic, is unique, covering a climatic gradient from tropical to subtropical across the Zambezi and Congo basins. Recent Zambian legislation allows for the delineation of water resource protection areas (WRPAs), with one of the criteria being that they include aquatic areas of ecological importance (AEIs).In this study, a systematic conservation planning approach was used to identify aquatic AEIs objectively. Importantly, the approach included a rigorous and iterative stakeholder engagement and review process.The conservation planning software marxan was chosen because of its ability to integrate upstream–downstream connectivity. In total, 5,671 planning units (sub-catchments with an average area of approx. 14,000 ha) were populated with 77 biodiversity features: data were drawn from a wide range of sources, and included fishes, semi-aquatic mammals, molluscs, amphibians, and ecotonal physiographic features, such as waterfalls. Sub-catchments were preferentially chosen using a combination of area- and distance-weighted boundary costs.The final solution highlights critical clusters in each of the major freshwater ecoregions in Zambia, with all conservation targets being met. Results show that although the existing protected area network also coincides with identified aquatic AEIs, approximately 80% of all aquatic AEIs fall outside of formally protected areas.The outcomes of this process serve as one of three prioritization layers (the other two being water provision and sensitivity to human impacts) that are integrated in a larger study to select and prioritize WRPAs.

Human activity and land use change impact every landscape on Earth, driving declines in many animal species while benefiting others. Species ecological and life history traits may predict success in human-dominated landscapes such that only species with “winning” combinations of traits will persist in disturbed environments. However, this link between species traits and successful coexistence with humans remains obscured by the complexity of anthropogenic disturbances and variability among study systems. We compiled detection data for 24 mammal species from 61 populations across North America to quantify the effects of (1) the direct presence of people and (2) the human footprint (landscape modification) on mammal occurrence and activity levels. Thirty-three percent of mammal species exhibited a net negative response (i.e., reduced occurrence or activity) to increasing human presence and/or footprint across populations, whereas 58% of species were positively associated with increasing disturbance. However, apparent benefits of human presence and footprint tended to decrease or disappear at higher disturbance levels, indicative of thresholds in mammal species’ capacity to tolerate disturbance or exploit human-dominated landscapes. Species ecological and life history traits were strong predictors of their responses to human footprint, with increasing footprint favoring smaller, less carnivorous, faster-reproducing species. The positive and negative effects of human presence were distributed more randomly with respect to species trait values, with apparent winners and losers across a range of body sizes and dietary guilds. Differential responses by some species to human presence and human footprint highlight the importance of considering these two forms of human disturbance separately when estimating anthropogenic impacts on wildlife. Our approach provides insights into the complex mechanisms through which human activities shape mammal communities globally, revealing the drivers of the loss of larger predators in human-modified landscapes.

Archaeological and paleoecological evidence shows that by 10,000 BCE, all human societies employed varying degrees of ecologically transformative land use practices, including burning, hunting, species propagation, domestication, cultivation, and others that have left long-term legacies across the terrestrial biosphere. Yet, a lingering paradigm among natural scientists, conservationists, and policymakers is that human transformation of terrestrial nature is mostly recent and inherently destructive. Here, we use the most up-to-date, spatially explicit global reconstruction of historical human populations and land use to show that this paradigm is likely wrong. Even 12,000 y ago, nearly three quarters of Earth’s land was inhabited and therefore shaped by human societies, including more than 95% of temperate and 90% of tropical woodlands. Lands now characterized as “natural,” “intact,” and “wild” generally exhibit long histories of use, as do protected areas and Indigenous lands, and current global patterns of vertebrate species richness and key biodiversity areas are more strongly associated with past patterns of land use than with present ones in regional landscapes now characterized as natural. The current biodiversity crisis can seldom be explained by the loss of uninhabited wildlands, resulting instead from the appropriation, colonization, and intensifying use of the biodiverse cultural landscapes long shaped and sustained by prior societies. Recognizing this deep cultural connection with biodiversity will therefore be essential to resolve the crisis.

The Convention on Biological Diversity’s post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework will probably include a goal to stabilize and restore the status of species. Its delivery would be facilitated by making the actions required to halt and reverse species loss spatially explicit. Here, we develop a species threat abatement and restoration (STAR) metric that is scalable across species, threats and geographies. STAR quantifies the contributions that abating threats and restoring habitats in specific places offer towards reducing extinction risk. While every nation can contribute towards halting biodiversity loss, Indonesia, Colombia, Mexico, Madagascar and Brazil combined have stewardship over 31% of total STAR values for terrestrial amphibians, birds and mammals. Among actions, sustainable crop production and forestry dominate, contributing 41% of total STAR values for these taxonomic groups. Key Biodiversity Areas cover 9% of the terrestrial surface but capture 47% of STAR values. STAR could support governmental and non-state actors in quantifying their contributions to meeting science-based species targets within the framework.

Relatively few studies have examined how the degree of involvement of local communities in nature‐based tourism, and the benefits that are generated for them, impact the choices that tourists make when visiting developing countries. We surveyed over 400 visitors in multiple locations in Namibia, using a discrete choice experiment to elicit preferences for attributes reflecting tracking safaris of the critically endangered, desert‐adapted black rhinoceros (Diceros bicornis bicornis) in the northwest of the country. Attributes included those related to local community involvement and the benefits they receive from tourism, as well as the reinvestment of tourism profits back into rhino conservation, and the wildlife likely to be seen on safari. Using a latent class model that assigned tourists to market segments based on the observed pattern of responses in the choice experiment, we find that respondents can be divided into four classes that reflect differences in tourism preferences and their own demographics and experiences. While responses to attributes varied across classes, respondents were consistent in demonstrating a strong preference for the largest share of profits being returned to the local community, and were willing to pay an additional $43–670 to ensure this happens. Respondents in the four classes differed in their views toward the financing of rhino conservation and the participation of community trackers in rhino safaris, although those respondents in the class most interested in rhino tracking safaris were willing to pay an additional $34 per trip for tracker involvement. Our results demonstrate the value of assessing heterogeneity in tourists' preferences for wildlife experiences, and suggest that appropriate pricing and marketing may result in “triple bottom line” gains for nature‐based tourism.

Multiuse marine protected areas (MPAs) that utilize a mosaic of no-take and sustainable use zones are an increasingly common tool for promoting fish population recovery while minimizing socioeconomic conflict. However, significant gaps remain in our understanding of the effects of multiuse MPAs on reef-fish populations, and how protection from fishing may interact with biophysical gradients to drive ecological outcomes. Here, we examine changes in fish assemblages inside and outside of two multiuse MPAs in Raja Ampat, Indonesia, over the first four to five years after their implementation. We use linear models to assess the impact of protection status, anthropogenic pressure, and biophysical gradients on changes in four biological metrics: abundance, biomass, mean size, and size-spectra. In addition, we use multivariate analyses to assess whether fish assemblages in protected and unprotected reefs diverged after MPA establishment. We find that both fish abundance and biomass were driven equally or more by benthic characteristics than protection status and that these environmental impacts were decoupled from the effects of MPAs. Contrary to expectations, increases in abundance were more pronounced in unprotected reefs, where fish assemblages diverged from protected reefs through an increase of herbivorous parrotfishes (Subfamily Scarinae) likely driven by increased algal production on hard-bottom reef areas. However, mean size and size-spectra improved in sustainable use zones compared to unprotected reefs, demonstrating that non-exclusionary management can provide ecological benefits, especially when combined with nearby no-take areas. Increased mean size was also associated with lower human population sizes, suggesting a strong influence of fishing pressure, which is mediated by MPAs. Our findings suggest that multiuse MPAs can quickly achieve some fisheries management objectives and that these effects are likely to increase over longer timescales. However, biophysical context can have significant impacts on reef-fish assemblages that are distinct from the effects of overlying fisheries management.

Conservation of predators – especially large carnivores and those that potentially pose threats to humans – can be controversial among stakeholders who must coexist with them. What is often overlooked, however, are the direct and indirect ecosystem services and disservices predators provide as a result of consumption of herbivores (“predation services”). We used a theoretical predator–prey–economic model to examine when predators are likely to provide a net service to society, by comparing services/disservices to a predator‐free counterfactual scenario. We found that net predator services were strongly dependent on how per‐capita services and disservices of predators and prey changed with abundance (ie assumed marginal value [MV] functions of service/disservice). We suggest that further empirical research is needed into MVs of services/disservices of wildlife, because transferring net services among locations – a common practice – is problematic unless MV functions are known. Rigorously quantifying services/disservices of predators could improve conservation and management outcomes by increasing effective communication to diverse stakeholders.