Relative efforts of countries to conserve world’s megafauna
Surprisingly little attention has been paid to variation among countries in contributions to conservation. As a first step, we developed a Megafauna Conservation Index (MCI) that assesses the spatial, ecological and financial contributions of 152 nations towards conservation of the world’s terrestri...
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Elsevier
2017-04-01
|
| Series: | Global Ecology and Conservation |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2351989416300804 |
| _version_ | 1828256692129759232 |
|---|---|
| author | Peter A. Lindsey Guillaume Chapron Lisanne S. Petracca Dawn Burnham Matthew W. Hayward Philipp Henschel Amy E. Hinks Stephen T. Garnett David W. Macdonald Ewan A. Macdonald William J. Ripple Kerstin Zander Amy Dickman |
| author_facet | Peter A. Lindsey Guillaume Chapron Lisanne S. Petracca Dawn Burnham Matthew W. Hayward Philipp Henschel Amy E. Hinks Stephen T. Garnett David W. Macdonald Ewan A. Macdonald William J. Ripple Kerstin Zander Amy Dickman |
| author_sort | Peter A. Lindsey |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Surprisingly little attention has been paid to variation among countries in contributions to conservation. As a first step, we developed a Megafauna Conservation Index (MCI) that assesses the spatial, ecological and financial contributions of 152 nations towards conservation of the world’s terrestrial megafauna. We chose megafauna because they are particularly valuable in economic, ecological and societal terms, and are challenging and expensive to conserve. We categorised these 152 countries as being above- or below-average performers based on whether their contribution to megafauna conservation was higher or lower than the global mean; ‘major’ performers or underperformers were those whose contribution exceeded 1 SD over or under the mean, respectively. Ninety percent of countries in North/Central America and 70% of countries in Africa were classified as major or above-average performers, while approximately one-quarter of countries in Asia (25%) and Europe (21%) were identified as major underperformers. We present our index to emphasise the need for measuring conservation performance, to help nations identify how best they could improve their efforts, and to present a starting point for the development of more robust and inclusive measures (noting how the IUCN Red List evolved over time). Our analysis points to three approaches that countries could adopt to improve their contribution to global megafauna conservation, depending on their circumstances: (1) upgrading or expanding their domestic protected area networks, with a particular emphasis on conserving large carnivore and herbivore habitat, (2) increase funding for conservation at home or abroad, or (3) ‘rewilding’ their landscapes. Once revised and perfected, we recommend publishing regular conservation rankings in the popular media to recognise major-performers, foster healthy pride and competition among nations, and identify ways for governments to improve their performance. |
| first_indexed | 2024-04-13T02:31:57Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-4109d4dcde624336b3b578e92f40df4a |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 2351-9894 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-04-13T02:31:57Z |
| publishDate | 2017-04-01 |
| publisher | Elsevier |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Global Ecology and Conservation |
| spelling | doaj.art-4109d4dcde624336b3b578e92f40df4a2022-12-22T03:06:32ZengElsevierGlobal Ecology and Conservation2351-98942017-04-0110C24325210.1016/j.gecco.2017.03.003Relative efforts of countries to conserve world’s megafaunaPeter A. Lindsey0Guillaume Chapron1Lisanne S. Petracca2Dawn Burnham3Matthew W. Hayward4Philipp Henschel5Amy E. Hinks6Stephen T. Garnett7David W. Macdonald8Ewan A. Macdonald9William J. Ripple10Kerstin Zander11Amy Dickman12Panthera, New York, NY, USAGrimsö Wildlife Research Station, Department of Ecology, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, SE - 73091 Riddarhyttan, SwedenPanthera, New York, NY, USAWildlife Conservation Research Unit, Department of Zoology, University of Oxford, The Recanati-Kaplan Centre, Tubney House, Tubney, OX13 5QL, UKCollege of Natural Sciences, Bangor University, LL572UW, Gwynedd, UKPanthera, New York, NY, USAWildlife Conservation Research Unit, Department of Zoology, University of Oxford, The Recanati-Kaplan Centre, Tubney House, Tubney, OX13 5QL, UKCharles Darwin University, NT 0909, AustraliaWildlife Conservation Research Unit, Department of Zoology, University of Oxford, The Recanati-Kaplan Centre, Tubney House, Tubney, OX13 5QL, UKWildlife Conservation Research Unit, Department of Zoology, University of Oxford, The Recanati-Kaplan Centre, Tubney House, Tubney, OX13 5QL, UKGlobal Trophic Cascades Program, Department of Forest Ecosystems and Society, Oregon State University, Corvallis, 97331, USACharles Darwin University, NT 0909, AustraliaWildlife Conservation Research Unit, Department of Zoology, University of Oxford, The Recanati-Kaplan Centre, Tubney House, Tubney, OX13 5QL, UKSurprisingly little attention has been paid to variation among countries in contributions to conservation. As a first step, we developed a Megafauna Conservation Index (MCI) that assesses the spatial, ecological and financial contributions of 152 nations towards conservation of the world’s terrestrial megafauna. We chose megafauna because they are particularly valuable in economic, ecological and societal terms, and are challenging and expensive to conserve. We categorised these 152 countries as being above- or below-average performers based on whether their contribution to megafauna conservation was higher or lower than the global mean; ‘major’ performers or underperformers were those whose contribution exceeded 1 SD over or under the mean, respectively. Ninety percent of countries in North/Central America and 70% of countries in Africa were classified as major or above-average performers, while approximately one-quarter of countries in Asia (25%) and Europe (21%) were identified as major underperformers. We present our index to emphasise the need for measuring conservation performance, to help nations identify how best they could improve their efforts, and to present a starting point for the development of more robust and inclusive measures (noting how the IUCN Red List evolved over time). Our analysis points to three approaches that countries could adopt to improve their contribution to global megafauna conservation, depending on their circumstances: (1) upgrading or expanding their domestic protected area networks, with a particular emphasis on conserving large carnivore and herbivore habitat, (2) increase funding for conservation at home or abroad, or (3) ‘rewilding’ their landscapes. Once revised and perfected, we recommend publishing regular conservation rankings in the popular media to recognise major-performers, foster healthy pride and competition among nations, and identify ways for governments to improve their performance.http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2351989416300804CarnivoreHerbivoreIndexGlobalDonorFundingProtected areaTerrestrialRe-wilding |
| spellingShingle | Peter A. Lindsey Guillaume Chapron Lisanne S. Petracca Dawn Burnham Matthew W. Hayward Philipp Henschel Amy E. Hinks Stephen T. Garnett David W. Macdonald Ewan A. Macdonald William J. Ripple Kerstin Zander Amy Dickman Relative efforts of countries to conserve world’s megafauna Global Ecology and Conservation Carnivore Herbivore Index Global Donor Funding Protected area Terrestrial Re-wilding |
| title | Relative efforts of countries to conserve world’s megafauna |
| title_full | Relative efforts of countries to conserve world’s megafauna |
| title_fullStr | Relative efforts of countries to conserve world’s megafauna |
| title_full_unstemmed | Relative efforts of countries to conserve world’s megafauna |
| title_short | Relative efforts of countries to conserve world’s megafauna |
| title_sort | relative efforts of countries to conserve world s megafauna |
| topic | Carnivore Herbivore Index Global Donor Funding Protected area Terrestrial Re-wilding |
| url | http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2351989416300804 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT peteralindsey relativeeffortsofcountriestoconserveworldsmegafauna AT guillaumechapron relativeeffortsofcountriestoconserveworldsmegafauna AT lisannespetracca relativeeffortsofcountriestoconserveworldsmegafauna AT dawnburnham relativeeffortsofcountriestoconserveworldsmegafauna AT matthewwhayward relativeeffortsofcountriestoconserveworldsmegafauna AT philipphenschel relativeeffortsofcountriestoconserveworldsmegafauna AT amyehinks relativeeffortsofcountriestoconserveworldsmegafauna AT stephentgarnett relativeeffortsofcountriestoconserveworldsmegafauna AT davidwmacdonald relativeeffortsofcountriestoconserveworldsmegafauna AT ewanamacdonald relativeeffortsofcountriestoconserveworldsmegafauna AT williamjripple relativeeffortsofcountriestoconserveworldsmegafauna AT kerstinzander relativeeffortsofcountriestoconserveworldsmegafauna AT amydickman relativeeffortsofcountriestoconserveworldsmegafauna |