The importance of tangible and intangible factors in human-carnivore coexistence.

Conflict with humans is one of the major threats facing the world's remaining large carnivore populations, and understanding human attitudes is key to improving coexistence. We surveyed people living near Hwange National Park about their attitudes toward coexisting with lions. We used ordinal regression models with the results of the survey to investigate the importance of a range of tangible and intangible factors on attitudes. The variables investigated included the costs and benefits of wildlife presence, emotion, culture, religion, vulnerability, risk perception, notions of responsibility, and personal value orientations. This was for the purpose of effectively tailoring conservation efforts but also for ethical policy making. Intangible factors (e.g., fear and ecocentric values) were as important as, if not more important than, tangible factors (such as livestock losses) for understanding attitudes, based on the effect sizes of these variables. The degree to which participants' fear of lions interfered with their daily activities was the most influential variable. The degree to which benefits accrue to households from the nearby protected area was also highly influential, as was number of livestock lost, number of dependents, ecocentric value orientation, and participation in conflict mitigation programs. Contrary to what is often assumed, metrics of livestock loss did not dominate attitudes to coexistence with lions. Furthermore, we found that socioeconomic variables may appear important when studied in isolation, but their effect may disappear when controlling for variables related to beliefs, perceptions, and past experiences. This raises questions about the widespread reliance on socioeconomic variables in the field of human-wildlife conflict and coexistence. To facilitate coexistence with large carnivores, we recommend measures that reduce fear (through education and through protective measures that reduce the need to be fearful), reduction of livestock losses, and ensuring local communities benefit from conservation. Ecocentric values also emerged as influential, highlighting the need to develop conservation initiatives tailored to local values.

Importancia de los Factores Tangibles e Intangibles en la Coexistencia Humanos-Carnívoros Resumen Los conflictos con humanos son una de las principales amenazas que enfrentan las poblaciones permanentes de grandes carnívoros del planeta y el entendimiento de las actitudes humanas es importante para mejorar la coexistencia. Preguntamos a las personas que viven cerca del Parque Nacional Hwange sobre su postura hacia la coexistencia con leones. Usamos modelos de regresión ordinal en los resultados del cuestionario para investigar la importancia de una gama de factores tangibles e intangibles para estas posturas. Las variables investigadas incluyeron el costo y beneficio de la presencia de fauna, emociones, cultura, religión, vulnerabilidad, percepción de riesgos, nociones de la responsabilidad y orientaciones de valor personal. Realizamos esto con el propósito de diseñar efectivamente los esfuerzos de conservación pero también para la generación de políticas éticas. Los factores intangibles (p. ej.: el miedo y los valores ecocéntricos) fueron tan importantes, si no es que más importantes, como los factores tangibles (como la pérdida de cabezas de ganado) para el entendimiento de las actitudes, con base en los tamaños del efecto de estas variables. El grado al que el miedo que los participantes sienten por los leones interfiere con sus actividades diarias fue la variable con mayor influencia. El grado al que los hogares del área protegida cercana devengan beneficios también tuvo una influencia alta, como lo tuvo el número de cabezas de ganado perdidas, el número de dependientes, la orientación de los valores ecocéntricos y la participación en programas de mitigación del conflicto. Contrario a lo que frecuentemente se asume, las medidas de la pérdida de cabezas de ganado no dominó sobre las actitudes por la coexistencia con leones. Más allá, encontramos que las variables socioeconómicas pueden parecer importantes cuando se estudian de manera aislada pero su efecto puede desaparecer cuando se controlan las variables relacionadas con las creencias, percepciones y experiencias pasadas. Esto genera preguntas sobre la dependencia hacia las variables socioeconómicas en el área de estudios de conflictos y coexistencia entre humanos y fauna. Para facilitar la coexistencia con carnívoros mayores recomendamos tomar medidas que reduzcan el miedo (por medio de la educación y medidas de protección que reduzcan la necesidad de vivir con miedo), la disminución de la pérdida de cabezas de ganado y garantizarles a las comunidades locales los beneficios que proporciona la conservación. Los valores ecocéntricos también surgieron como influyentes, lo que resalta la necesidad de desarrollar iniciativas de conservación adaptadas a los valores locales.

Linking Human Destruction of Nature to COVID-19 Increases Support for Wildlife Conservation Policies.

This paper investigates if narratives varying the cause of the COVID-19 pandemic affects pro-wildlife conservation outcomes. In a pre-registered online experiment (N = 1081), we randomly allocated subjects to either a control group or to one of three narrative treatment groups, each presenting a different likely cause of the COVID-19 outbreak: an animal cause; an animal and human cause (AHC); and an animal, human or lab cause. We found that the AHC narrative elicited significantly greater pro-conservation policy support, especially for bans in the commercial trade of wildlife, when compared to the control group. Possible mechanisms driving this effect are that AHC narratives were less familiar, elicited higher mental and emotional engagement, and induced feelings that firms and governments are responsible for mitigating wildlife extinction.

Drivers of coral reef marine protected area performance.

Coral reefs are severely threatened and a principal strategy for their conservation is marine protected areas (MPAs). However the drivers of MPA performance are complex and there are likely to be trade-offs between different types of performance (e.g. conservation or welfare related outcomes). We compiled a global dataset from expert knowledge for 76 coral reef MPAs in 33 countries and identified a set of performance measures reflecting ecological and socio-economic outcomes, achievement of aims and reduction of threats, using spatial or temporal comparisons wherever possible. We wanted to test the extent to which distinct types of performance occurred simultaneously, understood as win-win outcomes. Although certain performance measures were correlated, most were not, suggesting trade-offs that limit the usefulness of composite performance scores. Hypotheses were generated as to the impact of MPA features, aims, location, management and contextual variables on MPA performance from the literature. A multivariate analysis was used to test hypotheses as to the relative importance of these "drivers" on eight uncorrelated performance measures. The analysis supported some hypotheses (e.g. benefit provision for the local community improved performance), but not others (e.g. higher overall budget and more research activity did not). Factors endogenous to the MPA (such as size of the no-take area) were generally more significant drivers of performance than exogenous ones (such as national GDP). Different types of performance were associated with different drivers, exposing the trade-offs inherent in management decisions. The study suggests that managers are able to influence MPA performance in spite of external threats and could inform adaptive management by providing an approach to test for the effects of MPA features and management actions in different contexts and so to inform decisions for allocation of effort or funds to achieve specific goals.

A global evaluation of coral reef management performance: are MPAs producing conservation and socio-economic improvements?

There is a consensus that Marine Protected Area (MPA) performance needs regular evaluation against clear criteria, incorporating counterfactual comparisons of ecological and socio-economic performance. However, these evaluations are scarce at the global level. We compiled self-reports from managers and researchers of 78 coral reef-based MPAs world-wide, on the conservation and welfare improvements that their MPAs provide. We developed a suite of performance measures including fulfilment of design and management criteria, achievement of aims, the cessation of banned or destructive activities, change in threats, and measurable ecological and socio-economic changes in outcomes, which we evaluated with respect to the MPA's age, geographical location and main aims. The sample was found to be broadly representative of MPAs generally, and suggests that many MPAs do not achieve certain fundamental aims including improvements in coral cover over time (in 25% of MPAs), and conflict reduction (in 25%). However, the large majority demonstrated improvements in terms of slowing coral loss, reducing destructive uses and increasing tourism and local employment, despite many being small, underfunded and facing multiple large scale threats beyond the control of managers. However spatial comparisons suggest that in some regions MPAs are simply mirroring outside changes, with demonstrates the importance of testing for additionality. MPA benefits do not appear to increase linearly over time. In combination with other management efforts and regulations, especially those relating to large scale threat reduction and targeted fisheries and conflict resolution instruments, MPAs are an important tool to achieve coral reef conservation globally. Given greater resources and changes which incorporate best available science, such as larger MPAs and no-take areas, networks and reduced user pressure, it is likely that performance could further be enhanced. Performance evaluation should test for the generation of additional ecological and socio-economic improvements over time and compared to unmanaged areas as part of an adaptive management regime.

Evaluating the multiple benefits of marine water quality improvements: how important are health risk reductions?

Marine water pollution affects many recreational sites around the world. It has impacts not only on recreational activities but also on health risks for those who come into direct contact with the water. Few economic studies have explicitly considered the health risks of bathing in polluted marine waters and none have attempted to separate health benefits from other benefits of marine water quality improvements. This paper uses stated preference techniques to separately evaluate the multiple benefits of improving the quality of marine recreational waters at the Estoril Coast in Portugal. The results indicate that health risk reductions are only a small fraction of the total social benefits of water quality improvements.