FAR‐sighted conservation
Abstract Conservation targets that reference historical expectations, such as maintaining specified areas of intact ecosystems, restoring degraded ones or maintaining the historic distributions of species, may not be realistic in the context of ongoing environmental change, whereas targets that aspi...
| Main Authors: | , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Wiley
2022-10-01
|
| Series: | Ecological Solutions and Evidence |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1002/2688-8319.12188 |
| _version_ | 1797976252153331712 |
|---|---|
| author | Chris D. Thomas Jane K. Hill Caroline Ward Jack H. Hatfield |
| author_facet | Chris D. Thomas Jane K. Hill Caroline Ward Jack H. Hatfield |
| author_sort | Chris D. Thomas |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Abstract Conservation targets that reference historical expectations, such as maintaining specified areas of intact ecosystems, restoring degraded ones or maintaining the historic distributions of species, may not be realistic in the context of ongoing environmental change, whereas targets that aspire to accommodate the complex realities of the human‐altered and changing world tend to be too vague to implement. Using the first three recently proposed Convention on Biological Diversity post‐2020 global biodiversity Action Targets as context, we suggest a policy framework that evaluates how we might shift from an emphasis on resisting sometimes inevitable change to the development of positive directions of change for people and biodiversity. Our Anthropocene approach builds on the fact that all ecosystems have already been shaped by interactions with people and that ongoing change is inevitable. We outline a Facilitate–Accept–Resist (FAR) framework for all levels of conservation decision‐making and actions, ranging from overall conservation strategies (planning, setting targets, monitoring change, selecting indicators) to the conservation of places (sites, ecosystems, landscapes) and species, and to the provision of ecosystem services and human well‐being. For each potential decision, the approach evaluates whether, for whom and how one might facilitate, accept or resist particular changes. We highlight the value of inclusive engagement in the process to ensure that benefits from biodiversity are equitably shared. The CBD Action targets reflect tensions between maintaining historic states of nature and the Anthropocene reality of integrating people with nature and accepting change. The challenge is to operationalize the inclusivity, integration and change elements of the targets whilst not ‘abandoning’ locations that many conservationists consider to be key places for wildlife. The FAR framework represents a way to operationalize decision‐making in the face of this tension, so that the facilitation and acceptance of positive biodiversity change is adopted at least as frequently as change is resisted. |
| first_indexed | 2024-04-11T04:49:06Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-b221385fade64f95a19a6d5656114b2a |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 2688-8319 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-04-11T04:49:06Z |
| publishDate | 2022-10-01 |
| publisher | Wiley |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Ecological Solutions and Evidence |
| spelling | doaj.art-b221385fade64f95a19a6d5656114b2a2022-12-27T06:06:38ZengWileyEcological Solutions and Evidence2688-83192022-10-0134n/an/a10.1002/2688-8319.12188FAR‐sighted conservationChris D. Thomas0Jane K. Hill1Caroline Ward2Jack H. Hatfield3Leverhulme Centre for Anthropocene Biodiversity University of York York UKLeverhulme Centre for Anthropocene Biodiversity University of York York UKLeverhulme Centre for Anthropocene Biodiversity University of York York UKLeverhulme Centre for Anthropocene Biodiversity University of York York UKAbstract Conservation targets that reference historical expectations, such as maintaining specified areas of intact ecosystems, restoring degraded ones or maintaining the historic distributions of species, may not be realistic in the context of ongoing environmental change, whereas targets that aspire to accommodate the complex realities of the human‐altered and changing world tend to be too vague to implement. Using the first three recently proposed Convention on Biological Diversity post‐2020 global biodiversity Action Targets as context, we suggest a policy framework that evaluates how we might shift from an emphasis on resisting sometimes inevitable change to the development of positive directions of change for people and biodiversity. Our Anthropocene approach builds on the fact that all ecosystems have already been shaped by interactions with people and that ongoing change is inevitable. We outline a Facilitate–Accept–Resist (FAR) framework for all levels of conservation decision‐making and actions, ranging from overall conservation strategies (planning, setting targets, monitoring change, selecting indicators) to the conservation of places (sites, ecosystems, landscapes) and species, and to the provision of ecosystem services and human well‐being. For each potential decision, the approach evaluates whether, for whom and how one might facilitate, accept or resist particular changes. We highlight the value of inclusive engagement in the process to ensure that benefits from biodiversity are equitably shared. The CBD Action targets reflect tensions between maintaining historic states of nature and the Anthropocene reality of integrating people with nature and accepting change. The challenge is to operationalize the inclusivity, integration and change elements of the targets whilst not ‘abandoning’ locations that many conservationists consider to be key places for wildlife. The FAR framework represents a way to operationalize decision‐making in the face of this tension, so that the facilitation and acceptance of positive biodiversity change is adopted at least as frequently as change is resisted.https://doi.org/10.1002/2688-8319.12188AnthropocenebiodiversityCBDclimate changecolonizationconservation |
| spellingShingle | Chris D. Thomas Jane K. Hill Caroline Ward Jack H. Hatfield FAR‐sighted conservation Ecological Solutions and Evidence Anthropocene biodiversity CBD climate change colonization conservation |
| title | FAR‐sighted conservation |
| title_full | FAR‐sighted conservation |
| title_fullStr | FAR‐sighted conservation |
| title_full_unstemmed | FAR‐sighted conservation |
| title_short | FAR‐sighted conservation |
| title_sort | far sighted conservation |
| topic | Anthropocene biodiversity CBD climate change colonization conservation |
| url | https://doi.org/10.1002/2688-8319.12188 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT chrisdthomas farsightedconservation AT janekhill farsightedconservation AT carolineward farsightedconservation AT jackhhatfield farsightedconservation |