C. Josh Donlan

We evaluated the impact of a philanthropic program investing in the conservation of sites along the Pacific Americas Flyway, which spans >16,000 km of coastline and is used by millions of shorebirds. Using a quasi‐experimental, mixed methods approach, we estimated what would have happened to shorebird populations at 17 wintering sites without the sustained and additional investment they received. We modeled shorebird populations across the entire flyway and at sites with and without investment. Combining shorebird abundance estimates with a land‐cover classification model, we used the synthetic control method to create counterfactuals for shorebird trends at the treatment sites. We found no evidence of an overall effect across three outcome variables. Species‐ and site‐level treatment effects were heterogeneous, with a few cases showing evidence of a positive effect, including a site with a high level of overall investment. Results suggest six shorebirds declined across the entire flyway, including at many Latin American sites. However, the percentage of flyway populations present at the sites remained stable, and the percentage at the treatment sites was higher (i.e., investment sites) than at control sites. Multiple mechanisms behind our results are possible, including that investments have yet to mitigate impacts and negative impacts at other sites are driving declines at the treatment sites. A limitation of our evaluation is the sole focus on shorebird abundance and the lack of data that prohibits the inclusion of other outcome variables. Monitoring infrastructure is now in place to design a more robust and a priori shorebird evaluation framework across the entire flyway. With this framework, it will prove easier to prioritize limited dollars to result in the most positive conservation outcomes.

While restauranteurs are important actors in seafood systems, information on their decisions and views on sustainability is lacking. Using mixed methods, we explored Chilean restauranters’ contexts, decisions, and views on seafood sustainability. Menus in Chile are diverse and dominated by domestic and wild-caught sources. Restauranters are willing to participate in traceability programs, especially when it is for both sustainability and health safety reasons. Restauranters believe that seafood is an elite resource and high prices are inhibiting access. They also believe patrons care little about seafood sustainability yet are willing to pay a premium for it. This contradiction suggests a mechanism for activating values via situational factors. While demand and benefits for seafood traceability programs appear present, challenges threaten successful implementation. Complex socio-economic factors, such as affordability, elitism, and inequity, need to be integrated into traceability program design to contribute to the necessary transformation of seafood systems.

(2020). Characteristics and motivations of participants and nonparticipants in an at-risk species conservation program. Human Dimensions of Wildlife. Ahead of Print.

While illegal, unreported, and unregulated (IUU) fishing is a premier issue facing ocean sustainability, characterizing it is challenging due to its clandestine nature. Current approaches can be resource intensive and sometimes controversial. Using Chile as an example, we present a structured process leveraging existing capacity, fisheries officers, that provides a monitoring tool to produce transparent and stand-alone estimates on the level, structure, and characteristics of illegal fishing. We provide a national illegal fishing baseline for Chile, estimating illegal activity for 20 fisheries, representing ~ 70% of annual national landings. For four fisheries, we also estimate the relative importance of illegal activities across sectors, stakeholders, and infrastructure. While providing new information, our results also confirm previous evidence on the general patterns of illegality. Our approach provides an opportunity for government agencies to formalize their institutional knowledge, while accounting for potential biases and reducing fragmentation of knowledge that can prevent effective enforcement. Estimating illegal activity directly from fisheries enforcement officers is complementary to existing approaches, providing a cost-effective, rapid, and rigorous method to measure, monitor, and inform solutions to reduce IUU fishing.

Payments for ecosystem services programs have become common tools but most have failed to achieve wide-ranging conservation outcomes. The capacity for scale and impact increases when PES programs are designed through the lens of the potential participants, yet this has received little attention in research or practice. Our work with small-scale marine fisheries integrates the social science of PES programs and provides a framework for designing programs that focus a priori on scaling. In addition to payments, desirable non-monetary program attributes and ecological feedbacks attract a wider range of potential participants into PES programs, including those who have more negative attitudes and lower trust. Designing programs that draw individuals into participating in PES programs is likely the most strategic path to reaching scale. Research should engage in new models of participatory research to understand these dynamics and to design programs that explicitly integrate a broad range of needs, values, and modes of implementation.

Biodiversity offsets are becoming increasingly common across a portfolio of settings: national policy, voluntary programs, international lending, and corporate business structures. Given the diversity of ecological, political, and socio-economic systems where offsets may be applied, place-based information is likely to be most useful in designing and implementing offset programs, along with guiding principles that assure best practice. We reviewed the research on biodiversity offsets to explore gaps and needs. While the peer-reviewed literature on offsets is growing rapidly, it is heavily dominated by ecological theory, wetland ecosystems, and U.S.-based research. Given that majority of offset policies and programs are occurring in middle- and low-income countries, the research gaps we identified present a number of risks. They also present an opportunity to create regionally based learning platforms focused on pilot projects and institutional capacity building. Scientific research should diversify, both topically and geographically, in order to support the successful design, implementation, and monitoring of biodiversity offset programs.

When I was a young and impressionable scientist, a veteran Kiwi once remarked to me over a beer, “Conservation is by people, about people, and for people.” The statement gave me pause, especially because at the time, both of us spent much of our time doing conservation on uninhabited islands. Almost two decades later, it now seems so obvious: Whether I am advocating for a wilderness area, a clean watershed, or animal welfare, I am doing so because I believe it is the right thing to do. I may believe it is the right thing for people or some other species, but the motivation is mine. Science may support my cause (or not), but it does not determine my beliefs. In my view, scientists should leave the intellectual endeavors around the value of nature to professional philosophers. Dogmatically promoting one value and degrading another smells more of religion than of conservation. The current debate around it is likely to have little real-world utility in the business of environmental protection and sustainability. Nature needs all the values it can muster, not a silver bullet. The same is true for strategies, as long as science can help inform them.

The promise of environmental conservation incentive programs that provide direct payments in exchange for conservation outcomes is that they enhance the value of engaging in stewardship behaviors. An insidious but important concern is that a narrow focus on optimizing payment levels can ultimately suppress program participation and subvert participants’ internal motivation to engage in long-term conservation behaviors. Increasing participation and engendering stewardship can be achieved by recognizing that participation is not simply a function of the payment; it is a function of the overall structure and administration of the program. Key to creating innovative and more sustainable programs is fitting them within the existing needs and values of target participants. By focusing on empathy for participants, co-designing program approaches, and learning from the rapid prototyping of program concepts, a human-centered approach to conservation incentive program design enhances the propensity for discovery of novel and innovative solutions to pressing conservation issues.