			Home About us Contact

Conservation Scientists (conservation + scientists)

Distribution by Scientific Domains

Life Sciences	100%

Selected Abstracts

Leadership: a New Frontier in Conservation Science

CONSERVATION BIOLOGY, Issue 4 2009
JIM C. MANOLIS
estrategia; influencia; liderazgo; manejo; política Abstract:,Leadership is a critical tool for expanding the influence of conservation science, but recent advances in leadership concepts and practice remain underutilized by conservation scientists. Furthermore, an explicit conceptual foundation and definition of leadership in conservation science are not available in the literature. Here we drew on our diverse leadership experiences, our reading of leadership literature, and discussions with selected conservation science leaders to define conservation-science leadership, summarize an exploratory set of leadership principles that are applicable to conservation science, and recommend actions to expand leadership capacity among conservation scientists and practitioners. We define 2 types of conservation-science leadership: shaping conservation science through path-breaking research, and advancing the integration of conservation science into policy, management, and society at large. We focused on the second, integrative type of leadership because we believe it presents the greatest opportunity for improving conservation effectiveness. We identified 8 leadership principles derived mainly from the "adaptive leadership" literature: recognize the social dimension of the problem; cycle frequently through action and reflection; get and maintain attention; combine strengths of multiple leaders; extend your reach through networks of relationships; strategically time your effort; nurture productive conflict; and cultivate diversity. Conservation scientists and practitioners should strive to develop themselves as leaders, and the Society for Conservation Biology, conservation organizations, and academia should support this effort through professional development, mentoring, teaching, and research. Resumen:,El liderazgo es una herramienta crítica para la expansión de la influencia de la ciencia de la conservación, pero los avances recientes en los conceptos y práctica del liderazgo son subutilizados por los científicos de la conservación. Más aun, en la literatura no hay una fundamentación conceptual ni definición de liderazgo en la ciencia de la conservación. Aquí nos basamos en nuestras experiencias de liderazgo, nuestra lectura de literatura sobre liderazgo y discusiones con líderes selectos de la ciencia de conservación para definir liderazgo para la ciencia de la conservación, resumir un conjunto exploratorio de principios de liderazgo aplicables a la ciencia de la conservación y recomendar acciones para expandir la capacidad de liderazgo entre los científicos y los practicantes de la conservación. Definimos dos tipos de liderazgo de la ciencia de la conservación: configuración de la ciencia de la conservación mediante investigación original, y avance hacia la integración del liderazgo en la ciencia de la conservación en la política, el manejo y la sociedad en general. Nos centramos en el segundo tipo de liderazgo porque consideramos que presenta la mejor oportunidad para mejorar la efectividad de la conservación. Identificamos ocho principios de liderazgo derivados principalmente de la literatura sobre "liderazgo adaptativo": reconocer la dimensión social del problema; alternar entre acción y reflexión frecuentemente; obtener y mantener atención; combinar fortalezas de múltiples líderes; extender el alcance mediante redes de relaciones; organizar el esfuerzo estratégicamente; evitar conflictos productivos y desarrollar la biodiversidad. Los científicos y los practicantes de la conservación deberían esforzarse para desarrollarse como líderes y la Sociedad para la Biología de la Conservación, las organizaciones de conservación y la academia deberían respaldar este esfuerzo mediante el desarrollo profesional, la tutoría, la enseñanza y la investigación. [source]

Discrepancies in Reported Levels of International Wildlife Trade

CONSERVATION BIOLOGY, Issue 6 2005
ARTHUR G. BLUNDELL
aduanas; CITES; especies en peligro; programa de aranceles armonizados Abstract:,The international wildlife trade is a principal cause of biodiversity loss, involving hundreds of millions of plants and animals each year, yet wildlife trade records are notoriously unreliable. We assessed the precision of wildlife trade reports for the United States, the world's largest consumer of endangered wildlife, by comparing data from the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) with U.S. Customs data. For both U.S. imports and exports, CITES and Customs reported substantially different trade volumes for all taxa in all years. Discrepancies ranged from a CITES-reported volume 376% greater than that reported by Customs (live coral imports, 2000) to a Customs' report 5202% greater than CITES (conch exports, 2000). These widely divergent data suggest widespread inaccuracies that may distort the perceived risk of targeted wildlife exploitation, leading to misallocation of management resources and less effective conservation strategies. Conservation scientists and practitioners should reexamine assumptions regarding the significance of the international wildlife trade. Resumen:,El comercio internacional de vida silvestre es una causa principal de la pérdida de biodiversidad, ya que involucra a cientos de millones de plantas y animales cada año; no obstante eso, los registros del comercio son notoriamente poco confiables. Evaluamos la precisión de los registros de comercio de vida silvestre de Estados Unidos, el mayor consumidor de vida silvestre en peligro en el mundo, mediante la comparación de datos del Convenio Internacional para el Comercio de Especies de Flora y Fauna Silvestre en Peligro (CITES) con datos de la Aduana de E.U.A. Tanto para importaciones como exportaciones, CITES y Aduana reportaron volúmenes de comercio de todos los taxa sustancialmente diferentes en todos los años. Las discrepancias abarcaron desde un volumen reportado por CITES 376% más grande que el reportado por la Aduana (importaciones de coral vivo, 2000) hasta un reporte de la Aduana 5202% mayor que el de CITES (exportaciones de caracol, 2000). Estos datos ampliamente divergentes sugieren imprecisiones generalizadas que pueden distorsionar el riesgo percibido por la explotación de vida silvestre, lo que conducirá a la incorrecta asignación de recursos para la gestión y a estrategias de conservación menos efectivas. Los científicos y profesionales de la conservación deberían reexaminar sus suposiciones respecto al significado del comercio internacional de vida silvestre. [source]

Leadership: a New Frontier in Conservation Science

Effects of species' ecology on the accuracy of distribution models

ECOGRAPHY, Issue 1 2007
Jana M. McPherson
In the face of accelerating biodiversity loss and limited data, species distribution models , which statistically capture and predict species' occurrences based on environmental correlates , are increasingly used to inform conservation strategies. Additionally, distribution models and their fit provide insights on the broad-scale environmental niche of species. To investigate whether the performance of such models varies with species' ecological characteristics, we examined distribution models for 1329 bird species in southern and eastern Africa. The models were constructed at two spatial resolutions with both logistic and autologistic regression. Satellite-derived environmental indices served as predictors, and model accuracy was assessed with three metrics: sensitivity, specificity and the area under the curve (AUC) of receiver operating characteristics plots. We then determined the relationship between each measure of accuracy and ten ecological species characteristics using generalised linear models. Among the ecological traits tested, species' range size, migratory status, affinity for wetlands and endemism proved most influential on the performance of distribution models. The number of habitat types frequented (habitat tolerance), trophic rank, body mass, preferred habitat structure and association with sub-resolution habitats also showed some effect. In contrast, conservation status made no significant impact. These findings did not differ from one spatial resolution to the next. Our analyses thus provide conservation scientists and resource managers with a rule of thumb that helps distinguish, on the basis of ecological traits, between species whose occurrence is reliably or less reliably predicted by distribution models. Reasonably accurate distribution models should, however, be attainable for most species, because the influence ecological traits bore on model performance was only limited. These results suggest that none of the ecological traits tested provides an obvious correlate for environmental niche breadth or intra-specific niche differentiation. [source]

Bridging the Gap: How Can Information Access and Exchange Between Conservation Biologists and Field Practitioners be Improved for Better Conservation Outcomes?

BIOTROPICA, Issue 5 2009
Terry Sunderland
ABSTRACT It is widely accepted that there is a considerable gap between the science of conservation biology and the design and execution of biodiversity conservation projects in the field and science is failing to inform the practice of conservation. There are many reasons why this implementation gap exists. A high proportion of papers published in scientific journals by conservation biologists are seldom read outside of the academic world and there are few incentives for academics to convert their science into practice. In turn, field practitioners rarely document their field experiences and experiments in a manner that can meaningfully inform conservation scientists. Issues related to access to scientific literature, scientific relevance in multidisciplinary environments, donor expectations and a lack of critical analysis at all levels of conservation theory and practice are factors that exacerbate the divide. The contexts in which conservation biologists and field practitioners operate are also often highly dissimilar, and each has differing professional responsibilities and expectations that compromise the ability to learn from each other's expertise. Building on recent debate in the literature, and using case studies to illustrate the issues that characterize the divide, this paper draws on the authors' experiences of project management as well as academic research. We identify five key issues related to information exchange: access to scientific literature, levels of scientific literacy, lack of interdisciplinarity, questions of relevance and lack of sharing of conservation-related experiences and suggest new ways of working that could assist in bridging the gap between conservation scientists and field practitioners. [source]