Neal Hockley

The Importance of Taboos and Social Norms to Conservation in Madagascar

Informal institutions governing the use of wild species are present in many societies. A system of prohibitions known as fady is central to Malagasy culture. We examined whether fady that relate to the use of natural resources in the eastern rainforests of Madagascar play an important conservation role. Prohibitions ranged from strict taboos in which a species or area was forbidden by the ancestors to social norms that concerned acceptable behavior when harvesting wild species. Strict taboos offered real protection to threatened species, such as the lemur Propithecus edwardsi and the carnivore Cryptoprocta ferox. Taboos also reduced pressure on some economically important endemic species by preventing their sale or limiting the harvest season. Despite their value for conservation, the taboos did not appear to originate from attempts to sustainably manage resources. Nevertheless, social norms, in which the sanction was social disapproval rather than supernatural retribution, encouraged sustainable harvesting practices for tenrecs (Tenrec ecudatus) and pandans (Pandanus spp.). Unfortunately, the social norms concerning methods of harvesting pandans appeared to be breaking down in villages surrounding Ranomafana National Park, and we suggest that the imposition of external conservation rules is weakening traditional management. Informal institutions are important to conservation because they suggest ways of improving cultural understanding and conservation communication. Food taboos influence societal preferences, which affect the wider demand for a species. Most important, where capacity to enforce external conservation rules is limited, informal institutions may provide the only effective regulations. Informal institutions should receive greater attention from conservation biologists so that local peoples conservation roles can be acknowledged fairly and so that potential synergies with conservation objectives can be realized.

Human well-being impacts of terrestrial protected areas

BackgroundEstablishing Protected Areas (PAs) is among the most common conservation interventions. Protecting areas from the threats posed by human activity will by definition inhibit some human actions. However, adverse impacts could be balanced by maintaining ecosystem services or introducing new livelihood options. Consequently there is an ongoing debate on whether the net impact of PAs on human well-being at local or regional scales is positive or negative. We report here on a systematic review of evidence for impacts on human well-being arising from the establishment and maintenance of terrestrial PAs.MethodsFollowing an a priori protocol, systematic searches were conducted for evidence of impacts of PAs post 1992. After article title screening, the review was divided into two separate processes; a qualitative synthesis of explanations and meaning of impact and a review of quantitative evidence of impact. Abstracts and full texts were assessed using inclusion criteria and conceptual models of potential impacts. Relevant studies were critically appraised and data extracted and sorted according to type of impact reported. No quantitative synthesis was possible with the evidence available. Two narrative syntheses were produced and their outputs compared in a metasynthesis.ResultsThe qualitative evidence review mapped 306 articles and synthesised 34 that were scored as high quality. The quantitative evidence review critically appraised 79 studies and included 14 of low/medium susceptibility to bias. The meta-synthesis reveals that a range of factors can lead to reports of positive and negative impacts of PA establishment, and therefore might enable hypothesis generation regarding cause and effect relationships, but resulting hypotheses cannot be tested with the current available evidence.ConclusionsThe evidence base provides a range of possible pathways of impact, both positive and negative, of PAs on human well-being but provides very little support for decision making on how to maximise positive impacts. The nature of the research reported to date forms a diverse and fragmented body of evidence unsuitable for the purpose of informing policy formation on how to achieve win-win outcomes for biodiversity and human well-being. To better assess the impacts of PAs on human well-being we make recommendations for improving research study design and reporting.

When should communities and conservationists monitor exploited resources

Both conservationists and harvesters may be willing to contribute to participatory monitoring of exploited species. However, this can be costly and stakeholders need to choose whether monitoring programs or other alternatives, such as a moratorium or unmonitored exploitation, meet their objectives most efficiently. We discuss when, and how much, stakeholders may be willing to contribute to monitoring of exploited resources. We predict that communities’ contributions will usually be much less than the annual value of the harvest, and will be affected by their dependency upon it; their discount rate; its cultural importance, vulnerability to overexploitation and amenability to monitoring. ‘Efficient’ conservationists’ willingness to contribute should be similar to that of communities’, since monitoring and management programs must compete with compensated moratoria. The combined willingness to contribute of both stakeholder groups will usually be much less than twice the annual revenue from the resource. Applying this framework to a case-study of crayfish harvesting in Madagascar, we find that the total willingness to contribute to monitoring is likely to be insufficient to support conventional monitoring efforts. We conclude that conservation planners must be realistic about what stakeholders are willing to contribute to monitoring programmes and consider low cost methods or negotiated moratoria.

A systematic review of the reliability and validity of discrete choice experiments in valuing non-market environmental goods.

While discrete choice experiments (DCEs) are increasingly used in the field of environmental valuation, they remain controversial because of their hypothetical nature and the contested reliability and validity of their results. We systematically reviewed evidence on the validity and reliability of environmental DCEs from the past thirteen years (Jan 2003-February 2016). 107 articles met our inclusion criteria. These studies provide limited and mixed evidence of the reliability and validity of DCE. Valuation results were susceptible to small changes in survey design in 45% of outcomes reporting reliability measures. DCE results were generally consistent with those of other stated preference techniques (convergent validity), but hypothetical bias was common. Evidence supporting theoretical validity (consistency with assumptions of rational choice theory) was limited. In content validity tests, 2-90% of respondents protested against a feature of the survey, and a considerable proportion found DCEs to be incomprehensible or inconsequential (17-40% and 10-62% respectively). DCE remains useful for non-market valuation, but its results should be used with caution. Given the sparse and inconclusive evidence base, we recommend that tests of reliability and validity are more routinely integrated into DCE studies and suggest how this might be achieved.

Size-correlated division of labour and spatial distribution of workers in the driver ant, Dorylus molestus

Driver ants (Dorylus spp.) show a high degree of worker polymorphism. Previous reports suggest that large Dorylus workers are specialised for defensive tasks. In this study, we first quantitatively tested whether there is a size-correlated division of defensive labour among workers. Second, we determined whether the spatial distribution of workers outside the nest can be predicted based on such size-specific differences in task allocation. We show that the division of defensive behaviour among different-sized workers is not strict. However, there is a significant correlation between worker size and the tendency to carry out defensive tasks. First, workers of larger size were more likely than smaller workers to participate in colony defence. Second, larger workers were more frequent near the nest containing the reproducing individuals and the brood. Finally, large workers were more common in open sections of the trail than in covered sections, which are likely to be less exposed to predators.

Chapter 3:Soil Natural Capital and Ecosystem Service Delivery in a World of Global Soil Change

Society exploits nature to produce goods and services that are of benefit to our individual and societal well-being, food being a primary example of nature’s provision. Supporting this is the thin layer of soil that envelopes the earth, lying between us, our prosperity and certain starvation. Stewar...

Livelihoods and Welfare Impacts of Forest Comanagement

Comanagement programmes are gaining popularity among governments as one way of improving rural livelihoods. However, evidence of their effects on the livelihoods and welfare remains unclear. We used the sustainable livelihoods framework and stated preference techniques to assess the livelihoods and welfare impacts of forest comanagement on 213 households in Zomba and Ntchisi districts. The results show that approximately 63% of respondents perceive that, overall, comanagement has had no impact on their livelihoods. However, the programme is enhancing financial capital by introducing externally subsidised income generating activities and human and social capital among some community members through training programmes. A majority of households (80%) are willing to pay annual membership fees to participate in the programme (mean = 812 Malawi Kwacha), because of perceived potential future benefits. Education, gender of the household head, a positive perception of current livelihoods benefits, and a position on the committee increase household willingness to pay membership fees. However, the positive willingness to pay despite the negative perception of overall livelihoods impacts may also demonstrate the weaknesses of relying on stated preference surveys alone in estimating welfare effects.

Who bears the cost of forest conservation

Background While the importance of conserving ecosystems for sustainable development is widely recognized, it is increasingly evident that despite delivering global benefits, conservation often comes at local cost. Protected areas funded by multilateral lenders have explicit commitments to ensure that those negatively affected are adequately compensated. We make the first comparison of the magnitude and distribution of the local costs of a protected area with the magnitude and distribution of the compensation provided under the World Bank social safeguard policies (Performance Standard 5). Methods In the Ankeniheny-Zahamena Corridor (a new protected area and REDD+ pilot project in eastern Madagascar), we used choice experiments to estimate local opportunity costs (n = 453) which we annualized using a range of conservative assumptions concerning discount rates. Detailed surveys covering farm inputs and outputs as well as off-farm income (n = 102) allowed us to explore these opportunity costs as a proportion of local incomes. Intensive review of publically available documents provided estimates of the number of households that received safeguard compensation and the amount spent per household. We carried out a contingent valuation exercise with beneficiaries of this compensation two years after the micro-development projects were implemented (n = 62) to estimate their value as perceived by beneficiaries. Results Conservation restrictions result in very significant costs to forest communities. The median net present value of the opportunity cost across households in all sites was US

Risks of Extreme Heat and Unpredictability

2,375. When annualized, these costs represent 27–84% of total annual income for median-income households; significantly higher proportionally for poorer households. Although some households have received compensation, we conservatively estimate that more than 50% of eligible households (3,020 households) have not. Given the magnitude of compensation (based both on amount spent and valuation by recipients two years after the compensation was distributed) relative to costs, we argue that no one was fully compensated. Achieving full compensation will require an order of magnitude more than was spent but we suggest that this should be affordable given the global value of forest conservation. Discussion By analyzing in unprecedented depth both the local costs of conservation, and the compensation distributed under donor policies, we demonstrate that despite well-intentioned policies, some of the poorest people on the planet are still bearing the cost of forest conservation. Unless significant extra funding is provided by the global beneficiaries of conservation, donors’ social safeguarding requirements will not be met, and forest conservation in developing countries will jeopardize, rather than contribute to, sustainable development goals.

Understanding Community Criteria for Assessing Forest Co-Management Programmes: Evidence from Malawi

In their Report “Historical warnings of future food insecurity with unprecedented seasonal heat” (9 January, p. [240][1]), D. S. Battisti and R. L. Naylor argue that because agricultural yields are severely reduced in anomalously hot years, a general rise in average growing season temperature