Peer-reviewed publications

Freshwater biodiversity is declining at an unprecedented rate. Freshwater conservationists and environmental managers have enough evidence to demonstrate that action must not be delayed but have insufficient evidence to identify those actions that will be most effective in reversing the current trend.Here, the focus is on identifying essential research topics that, if addressed, will contribute directly to restoring freshwater biodiversity through supporting ‘bending the curve’ actions (i.e. those actions leading to the recovery of freshwater biodiversity, not simply deceleration of the current downward trend).The global freshwater research and management community was asked to identify unanswered research questions that could address knowledge gaps and barriers associated with ‘bending the curve’ actions. The resulting list was refined into six themes and 25 questions.Although context-dependent and potentially limited in global reach, six overarching themes were identified: (i) learning from successes and failures; (ii) improving current practices; (iii) balancing resource needs; (iv) rethinking built environments; (v) reforming policy and investments; and (vi) enabling transformative change.Bold, efficient, science-based actions are necessary to reverse biodiversity loss. We believe that conservation actions will be most effective when supported by sound evidence, and that research and action must complement one another. These questions are intended to guide global freshwater researchers and conservation practitioners, identify key projects and signal research needs to funders and governments. Our questions can act as springboards for multidisciplinary and multisectoral collaborations that will improve the management and restoration of freshwater biodiversity.

Integrating climate risk information into resilience-building activities in the field is important to ensure that adaptation is based on the best available science. Despite this, many challenges exist when developing, communicating, and incorporating climate risk information. There are limited resources on how stakeholders perceive risks, use risk information, and what barriers exist to limit knowledge integration. This paper seeks to define: 1) What do conservation stakeholders consider to be the most significant climate risks they face now and possibly in the future?; 2) What have been the most significant barriers to their using climate risk information?; and 3) What sources and types of knowledge would be most useful for these managers to overcome these barriers? A survey was conducted amongst stakeholders (n=224) associated with World Wildlife Fund (WWF) projects in tropical and subtropical countries. A very high proportion of stakeholders used climate risk information and yet faced integration-related challenges, which included too much uncertainty and not at a relevant scale for planning. The main factors preventing the use of climate risk information in decision-making were unavailability of climate risk information, no or limited financial or human resources available to respond, lack of organizational mandate or support, and no or limited institutional incentives. Comparing perceived current and future risks revealed a decline in concern for some future climate hazards. Survey respondents identified scientific reports, climate scientists and online sources as the most useful information sources of climate risk information, whilst (i) maps and illustrations, (ii) scenarios format and (iii) data tables, graphs and charts were identified as user-friendly formats.

Spatial prioritization is a critical step in conservation planning, a process designed to ensure that limited resources are applied in ways that deliver the highest possible returns for biodiversity and human wellbeing. In practice, many spatial prioritizations fall short of their potential by focusing on places rather than actions, and by using data of snapshots of assets or threats rather than estimated impacts. We introduce spatial action mapping as an approach that overcomes these shortfalls. This approach produces a spatially explicit view of where and how much a given conservation action is likely to contribute to achieving stated conservation goals. Through seven case examples, we demonstrate simple to complex versions of how this method can be applied across local to global scales to inform decisions about a wide range of conservation actions and benefits. Spatial action mapping can support major improvements in efficient use of conservation resources and will reach its full potential as the quality of environmental, social, and economic datasets converge and conservation impact evaluations improve.

Biodiversity monitoring delivers vital information to those making conservation decisions. Comprehensively measuring terrestrial biodiversity usually requires costly methods that can rarely be deployed at large spatial scales over multiple time periods, limiting conservation efficiency. Here we investigated the capacity of environmental DNA (eDNA) from stream water samples to survey terrestrial mammal diversity at multiple spatial scales within a large catchment. We compared biodiversity information recovered using an eDNA metabarcoding approach with data from a dense camera trap survey, as well as the sampling costs of both methods. Via the sampling of large volumes of water from the two largest streams that drained the study area, eDNA metabarcoding provided information on the presence and detection probabilities of 35 mammal taxa, 25% more than camera traps and for half the cost. While eDNA metabarcoding had limited capacity to detect felid species and provide individual-level demographic information, it is a cost-efficient method for large-scale monitoring of terrestrial mammals that can offer sufficient information to solve many conservation problems.

Tropical forest ecosystems are the most species-rich in the world and face intense pressures from land conversion. If done well, selective logging can be an important way of supporting local economies while minimally impacting wildlife. However, most studies on how selective logging affects wildlife come from sites that have been logged some time ago, often a decade or more. Here we assess how logging affects species assemblages in the very short term, immediately after the cessation of timber operations. We estimated overall mammal species richness in unlogged forest, previously logged forest, and an active logging concession in Indonesian Borneo using rarefaction-extrapolation-based diversity estimators. We found that estimated species richness did not differ significantly between unlogged forest (15.5 ± 2.82 species), previously logged forest (14.5 ± 2.10), or recently logged sites (14.2 ± 1.45) sites. Our findings suggest that the short-term impacts of properly managed selective logging are on par with the longer-term impacts that have been assessed in many prior studies.

This study aimed to develop an integrated analytical framework to identify candidate sites for surface water protection that is applicable at broad scales and in data scarce regions, using Zambia as a case study.In the Zambian Water Resources Management Act of 2011, Water Resource Protection Areas are defined as areas where special measures are necessary for the protection of a catchment, sub-catchment, aquifer, or geographical area. Three specific selection criteria are listed for the definition of Water Resource Protection Areas: (i) areas of high importance in providing water to users in a catchment; (ii) aquatic areas of high ecological importance; and (iii) areas that are particularly sensitive to human impact.In this project, each sub-catchment and river reach of Zambia was characterized for their importance regarding these three criteria. ‘Water provisioning’ was assessed by analysing patterns of runoff generation and human water use; ‘aquatic ecological importance’ was determined by conducting a freshwater biodiversity and ecosystem assessment using a systematic conservation planning approach; and ‘sensitive areas’ were identified by quantifying erosion potential and sediment transport. The work was supported by an assessment of free-flowing rivers in Zambia, i.e., those rivers where aquatic ecosystem functions and services are largely unaffected by changes to fluvial connectivity through dams and other infrastructure.Highly ranked sub-catchments were found in the Liuwa, Barotse, and Bangweulu floodplains and wetlands, and in the headwater regions of the upper Zambezi, Kafue, Chambeshi/Luapula, and Tanganyika catchments. The Luangwa was identified as the highest ranked candidate river for protection within Zambia.The resulting maps, data, and methods are intended to support national-scale efforts to prioritize areas for surface water protection, identify catchments and rivers with high conservation value, optimize decision making for infrastructure development, and inform concerted strategies to maintain and restore freshwater ecosystem services in Zambia.

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.