Peer-reviewed publications

Tourism and hunting both generate substantial revenues for communities and private operators in Africa, but few studies have quantitatively examined the trade-offs and synergies that may result from these two activities. We evaluated financial and in-kind benefit streams from tourism and hunting on 77 communal conservancies in Namibia from 1998 to 2013, where community-based wildlife conservation has been promoted as a land-use that complements traditional subsistence agriculture. We used data collected annually for all communal conservancies to characterize whether benefits were derived from hunting or tourism. We classified these benefits into 3 broad classes and examined how benefits flowed to stakeholders within communities under the status quo and under a simulated ban on hunting. Across all conservancies, total benefits from hunting and tourism increased at roughly the same rate, although conservancies typically started generating benefits from hunting within 3 years of formation as opposed to after 6 years for tourism. Disaggregation of data revealed that the main benefits from hunting were income for conservancy management and food in the form of meat for the community at large. The majority of tourism benefits were salaried jobs at lodges. A simulated ban on trophy hunting significantly reduced the number of conservancies that could cover their operating costs, whereas eliminating income from tourism did not have as severe an effect. Given that the benefits generated from hunting and tourism typically begin at different times in a conservancy's life-span (earlier vs. later, respectively) and flow to different segments of local communities, these 2 activities together may provide the greatest incentives for conservation on communal lands in Namibia. A singular focus on either hunting or tourism would reduce the value of wildlife as a competitive land-use option and have grave repercussions for the viability of community-based conservation efforts in Namibia, and possibly other parts of Africa.

The Convention on Biological Diversity's Aichi Target 11 mandates that 17% of terrestrial and 10% of marine environments be conserved in protected areas by 2020. Such simple numeric indicators act as motivators and a measure of progress. But striving to meet the stipulated coverage should not compromise the convention's broader goal of maximizing biodiversity. Area coverage is the only element of Target 11 that is on track, at least on land (D. P. Tittensor et al. Science 346, 241–244; 2014). Other crucial elements are effective, equitable biodiversity management; ecological representation of a mix of ecosystems; and connectivity between sites to allow species dispersal. Some species and ecosystems may be lost if implementation of these elements is delayed much longer. Focusing on area coverage alone risks creating perverse outcomes. It encourages the proliferation of large protected areas that are under little threat, and neglects areas where protection is most needed (see go.nature.com/o5ny9j and go.nature.com/hi6qn5). If not considered in the context of other elements of Target 11, maximizing the area under protection increases the financial and political cost of meeting the same biodiversity goals. As with other global policy goals (see S. Fukuda-Parr J. Hum. Dev. Capab. 15, 118–131; 2014), the abstract global target has created unintended consequences for national conservation planning. With negotiations beginning in 2016 for the next tranche of the convention's targets, new incentives are needed to emphasize the pivotal additional elements of Target 11.

Marine protected areas (MPAs) are increasingly employed worldwide to conserve marine resources. However, information on the role of governance mechanisms, in particular those associated with compliance, in shaping ecological condition inside MPAs at the regional scale remains deficient. An exploratory data analysis was conducted to evaluate links between strategies used to promote compliance with MPA regulations (e.g. incentives and penalties) and indicators of ecological condition, including biomass and density of commercial fish species, fish functional groups and coral cover in 21 MPAs across 13 different countries and territories in the greater Caribbean region. The strategies used to promote compliance with MPA regulations were correlated with indicators of ecological condition. For example, MPAs in which a larger number of incentives and penalties are present in the governance system are associated with higher commercial fish biomass and density as compared to those with fewer penalties and incentives available to promote compliance. Although most MPAs in the greater Caribbean use penalties to enforce compliance, these results suggest incentives may also be an important governance strategy for ensuring efficacy of protected areas in conserving key species. Alternatively, the presence of a high number of penalties and incentives in governance systems may also be indicative of greater state capacity and political will in these MPAs resulting in better managed MPAs. Further research is necessary to evaluate results of the exploratory data analysis presented in this study with a more in depth analysis of the de facto use of the regulations evaluated and their efficacy. Multi-country comparisons of MPA governance and ecological indicators can help policy and decision makers maintain MPAs that most effectively achieve MPA conservation objectives.

Ecological resilience assessments are an important part of resilience-based management (RBM) and can help prioritize and target management actions. Use of such assessments has been limited due to a lack of clear guidance on the assessment process. This study builds on the latest scientific advances in RBM to provide that guidance from a resilience assessment undertaken in the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI). We assessed spatial variation in ecological resilience potential at 78 forereef sites near the populated islands of the CNMI: Saipan, Tinian/Aguijan, and Rota. The assessments are based on measuring indicators of resilience processes and are combined with information on anthropogenic stress and larval connectivity. We find great spatial variation in relative resilience potential with many high resilience sites near Saipan (5 of 7) and low resilience sites near Rota (7 of 9). Criteria were developed to identify priority sites for six types of management actions (e.g., conservation, land-based sources of pollution reduction, and fishery management and enforcement) and 51 of the 78 sites met at least one of the sets of criteria. The connectivity simulations developed indicate that Tinian and Aguijan are each roughly 10 × the larvae source that Rota is and twice as frequent a destination. These results may explain the lower relative resilience potential of Rota reefs and indicates that actions in Saipan and Tinian/Aguijan will be important to maintaining supply of larvae. The process we describe for undertaking resilience assessments can be tailored for use in coral reef areas globally and applied to other ecosystems.

Inclusive wealth is a measure designed to address whether society is on a sustainable development trajectory. Inclusive wealth is defined as the aggregate value of all capital assets. Increases in inclusive wealth indicate an improved productive base capable of supporting a higher standard of living in the future. To be truly inclusive, measures of inclusive wealth must include the value of all forms of capital that contribute to human well-being: human capital, manufactured capital, natural capital, and social capital. Sustainability concerns have increased attention on the ways of measuring the value of natural capital. We review various attempts to measure natural capital and to incorporate these into inclusive wealth including estimates using national wealth accounts and integrated ecological and economic models used to estimate ecosystem services. Empirically measuring the value of various types of capital in terms of a common metric is hugely challenging, and no current attempt to date can be said to be fully inclusive. Despite the empirical challenges, inclusive wealth provides a clear, coherent, and systematic framework for addressing sustainable development. Combining measures of semi-inclusive wealth that capture forms of capital that can be relatively easily measured in monetary terms with a set of biophysical metrics capturing important aspects of natural capital that are difficult to measure in monetary terms may provide a good set of signals of whether society is proceeding along a sustainable development trajectory.

Community-based natural resource management (CBNRM) is a major global strategy for enhancing conservation outcomes while also seeking to improve rural livelihoods; however, little evidence of socioeconomic outcomes exists. We present a national-level analysis that empirically estimates socioeconomic impacts of CBNRM across Tanzania, while systematically controlling for potential sources of bias. Specifically, we apply a difference-in-differences model to national-scale, cross-sectional data to estimate the impact of three different CBNRM governance regimes on wealth, food security and child health, considering differential impacts of CBNRM on wealthy and poor populations. We also explore whether or not longer-standing CBNRM efforts provide more benefits than recently-established CBNRM areas. Our results show significant improvements in household food security in CBNRM areas compared with non-CBNRM areas, but household wealth and health outcomes in children are generally not significantly different. No one CBNRM governance regime demonstrates consistently different welfare outcomes than the others. Wealthy households benefit more from CBNRM than poor households and CBNRM benefits appear to increase with longer periods of implementation. Perhaps evidence of CBNRM benefits is limited because CBNRM hasn’t been around long enough to yield demonstrable outcomes. Nonetheless, achieving demonstrable benefits to rural populations will be crucial for CBNRM’s future success in Tanzania.

The US Endangered Species Act (ESA) regulates what landowners and land managers can do on lands occupied by listed species. The act does this in part through the designation of habitat areas considered critical to the recovery of listed species. Critics have argued that the designation of critical habitat (CH) has substantial economic impacts on landowners above and beyond the costs associated with listing in general. Here we examine the effects of CH designation on land cover change from 1992 to 2011 in areas subject to ESA regulations. We find that, on average, the rate of change in developed land (urban and residential) and agricultural land is not significantly affected by CH designation. In addition, our estimate of the effects of CH designation is not strongly correlated with the costs of CH as predicted by economic analyses published in the Federal Register. While CH designation, on average, does not affect the overall rates of land cover change, CH designation does appear to modify the impact of land cover change drivers. Generally, land prices had more impact (statistically) on land cover decisions within CH areas than in areas subject to ESA regulations but with no CH designation. Land cover decisions in these latter areas tended to be driven more by clustering and land availability concerns. These trends suggest that CH designation has increased landowner uncertainty and that conversion to developed and agricultural use in CH areas, on average, requires a return premium. Overall, however, this different reaction to land prices in and outside of CH areas has not been strong enough to differentiate the average rates of developed or agricultural land change in CH areas versus areas subject to ESA regulations but with no CH designation.

The central challenge of the 21st century is to develop economic, social, and governance systems capable of ending poverty and achieving sustainable levels of population and consumption while securing the life-support systems underpinning current and future human well-being. Essential to meeting this challenge is the incorporation of natural capital and the ecosystem services it provides into decision-making. We explore progress and crucial gaps at this frontier, reflecting upon the 10 y since the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. We focus on three key dimensions of progress and ongoing challenges: raising awareness of the interdependence of ecosystems and human well-being, advancing the fundamental interdisciplinary science of ecosystem services, and implementing this science in decisions to restore natural capital and use it sustainably. Awareness of human dependence on nature is at an all-time high, the science of ecosystem services is rapidly advancing, and talk of natural capital is now common from governments to corporate boardrooms. However, successful implementation is still in early stages. We explore why ecosystem service information has yet to fundamentally change decision-making and suggest a path forward that emphasizes: (i) developing solid evidence linking decisions to impacts on natural capital and ecosystem services, and then to human well-being; (ii) working closely with leaders in government, business, and civil society to develop the knowledge, tools, and practices necessary to integrate natural capital and ecosystem services into everyday decision-making; and (iii) reforming institutions to change policy and practices to better align private short-term goals with societal long-term goals.

The recent report from the Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity [(2010) Global Biodiversity Outlook 3] acknowledges that ongoing biodiversity loss necessitates swift, radical action. Protecting undisturbed lands, although vital, is clearly insufficient, and the key role of unprotected, private land owned is being increasingly recognized. Seeking to avoid common assumptions of a social planner backed by government interventions, the present work focuses on the incentives of the individual landowner. We use detailed data to show that successful conservation on private land depends on three factors: conservation effectiveness (impact on target species), private costs (especially reductions in production), and private benefits (the extent to which conservation activities provide compensation, for example, by enhancing the value of remaining production). By examining the high-profile issue of palm-oil production in a major tropical biodiversity hotspot, we show that the levels of both conservation effectiveness and private costs are inherently spatial; varying the location of conservation activities can radically change both their effectiveness and private cost implications. We also use an economic choice experiment to show that consumers' willingness to pay for conservation-grade palm-oil products has the potential to incentivize private producers sufficiently to engage in conservation activities, supporting vulnerable International Union for Conservation of Nature Red Listed species. However, these incentives vary according to the scale and efficiency of production and the extent to which conservation is targeted to optimize its cost-effectiveness. Our integrated, interdisciplinary approach shows how strategies to harness the power of the market can usefully complement existing—and to-date insufficient—approaches to conservation.

Biodiversity conservation, as an environmental goal, is increasingly recognized to be connected to the socioeconomic well-being of local communities. The development of a widespread community-based natural resource management (CBNRM) program in Namibia makes it an ideal location to analyze the connection between conservation and socioeconomic well-being of local communities. Namibia’s CBNRM program involves the formation of communal conservancies within rural communities and previous studies have found it to be successful on both ecological and economic fronts. In order to broaden the understanding of the program’s impact to include social factors, we have conducted a comparative analysis to determine the effects of this program on household welfare outcomes. Data from two rounds of the Namibia Demographic and Health Surveys (2000 and 2006/07) and quasi-experimental statistical methods were used to evaluate changes in various health, education and wealth outcomes of those living in conservancies, relative to non-conservancy comparison groups. Regression results indicate mixed effects of the conservancy program at the household level. The program had positive effects on some health outcome variables, including bednet ownership, which was twice as likely to increase over time in conservancy compared to non-conservancy households. Program impacts were negative for education outcomes, with the proportion of school attendance of conservancy children being 45% less likely to increase over time than non-conservancy children. Wealth outcome results were inconclusive. Our findings highlight the importance of analyzing community conservation programs at a variety of scales when evaluating overall impact, as community-level benefits may not necessarily extend down to the household level (and vice versa).