Challenges in assessing the effects of environmental governance systems on conservation outcomes.

IF 5.2 1区 环境科学与生态学 Q1 BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION
Raphael A Ayambire, Trina Rytwinski, Jessica J Taylor, Matthew W Luizza, Matthew J Muir, Cynthia Cadet, Derek Armitage, Nathan J Bennett, Jeremy Brooks, Samantha H Cheng, Jenny Martinez, Meenakshi Nagendran, Siri Öckerman, Shannon N Rivera, Anne Savage, David S Wilkie, Steven J Cooke, Joseph R Bennett
{"title":"Challenges in assessing the effects of environmental governance systems on conservation outcomes.","authors":"Raphael A Ayambire, Trina Rytwinski, Jessica J Taylor, Matthew W Luizza, Matthew J Muir, Cynthia Cadet, Derek Armitage, Nathan J Bennett, Jeremy Brooks, Samantha H Cheng, Jenny Martinez, Meenakshi Nagendran, Siri Öckerman, Shannon N Rivera, Anne Savage, David S Wilkie, Steven J Cooke, Joseph R Bennett","doi":"10.1111/cobi.14392","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Effective governance is crucial for the success of conservation projects aimed at protecting wildlife populations and supporting human well-being. However, few large-scale, comprehensive syntheses have been conducted on the effects of different environmental governance types on conservation outcomes (i.e., biological and ecological effectiveness or effects of conservation on human well-being), and clarity on the quantity and quality of evidence remains dispersed and ambiguous. We attempted a systematic map of the evidence on the effectiveness of different governance types to meet desired conservation outcomes in Africa, Asia, and Latin America. However, early in this effort, we observed a general lack of empirical research on the links between governance and conservation outcomes. To fill observed data gaps in the evidence base, we tried triangulating governance data from alternative sources (Protected Planet database) and pooling evidence from research conducted within the same conservation areas. Limited data were contained in the Protected Planet database, and governance types in conservation areas and landscapes were complex, making it difficult to use these approaches to assign governance types to conservation areas. To illustrate our observations from the failed systematic map attempt, we prepared a rapid evidence map that outlines a subset of the evidence base of articles linking governance types and governance principles with conservation outcomes. Only 3.2% (34 of 1067) of the articles we screened directly related conservation outcomes to governance type, and even fewer related governance principles to conservation outcomes. Based on our findings, we recommend improving the evidence base by supporting empirical research and increasing the availability and quality of governance data in freely accessible databases. These recommendations are critical for enhancing understanding of the role of governance in conservation projects and improving conservation outcomes.</p>","PeriodicalId":10689,"journal":{"name":"Conservation Biology","volume":" ","pages":"e14392"},"PeriodicalIF":5.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Conservation Biology","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.14392","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Effective governance is crucial for the success of conservation projects aimed at protecting wildlife populations and supporting human well-being. However, few large-scale, comprehensive syntheses have been conducted on the effects of different environmental governance types on conservation outcomes (i.e., biological and ecological effectiveness or effects of conservation on human well-being), and clarity on the quantity and quality of evidence remains dispersed and ambiguous. We attempted a systematic map of the evidence on the effectiveness of different governance types to meet desired conservation outcomes in Africa, Asia, and Latin America. However, early in this effort, we observed a general lack of empirical research on the links between governance and conservation outcomes. To fill observed data gaps in the evidence base, we tried triangulating governance data from alternative sources (Protected Planet database) and pooling evidence from research conducted within the same conservation areas. Limited data were contained in the Protected Planet database, and governance types in conservation areas and landscapes were complex, making it difficult to use these approaches to assign governance types to conservation areas. To illustrate our observations from the failed systematic map attempt, we prepared a rapid evidence map that outlines a subset of the evidence base of articles linking governance types and governance principles with conservation outcomes. Only 3.2% (34 of 1067) of the articles we screened directly related conservation outcomes to governance type, and even fewer related governance principles to conservation outcomes. Based on our findings, we recommend improving the evidence base by supporting empirical research and increasing the availability and quality of governance data in freely accessible databases. These recommendations are critical for enhancing understanding of the role of governance in conservation projects and improving conservation outcomes.

评估环境治理系统对保护成果的影响所面临的挑战。
有效的治理对于旨在保护野生动物种群和支持人类福祉的保护项目的成功至关重要。然而,关于不同环境治理类型对保护结果(即生物和生态效果或保护对人类福祉的影响)的影响,很少有大规模的综合研究,证据的数量和质量仍然分散且不明确。我们尝试对非洲、亚洲和拉丁美洲不同治理类型在实现预期保护结果方面的有效性证据进行系统性梳理。然而,在这项工作的初期,我们发现普遍缺乏有关治理与保护成果之间联系的实证研究。为了填补证据库中观察到的数据空白,我们尝试对其他来源的治理数据(《受保护的星球》数据库)进行三角测量,并汇集在相同保护区内开展的研究证据。保护地球数据库中包含的数据有限,而且保护区和景观的治理类型也很复杂,因此很难使用这些方法为保护区指定治理类型。为了说明我们从失败的系统地图尝试中观察到的情况,我们编制了一份快速证据地图,概述了将治理类型和治理原则与保护结果联系起来的文章的证据库子集。在我们筛选的文章中,只有 3.2%(1067 篇文章中的 34 篇)将保护结果与治理类型直接联系起来,而将治理原则与保护结果联系起来的文章则更少。根据我们的研究结果,我们建议通过支持实证研究和提高免费数据库中治理数据的可用性和质量来改善证据基础。这些建议对于加强了解治理在保护项目中的作用和改善保护成果至关重要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Conservation Biology
Conservation Biology 环境科学-环境科学
CiteScore
12.70
自引率
3.20%
发文量
175
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: Conservation Biology welcomes submissions that address the science and practice of conserving Earth's biological diversity. We encourage submissions that emphasize issues germane to any of Earth''s ecosystems or geographic regions and that apply diverse approaches to analyses and problem solving. Nevertheless, manuscripts with relevance to conservation that transcend the particular ecosystem, species, or situation described will be prioritized for publication.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信