Abstract

Conservation requires successful outcomes. However, success is perceived in many different ways depending on the desired outcome. Through a questionnaire survey, we examined perceptions of success among 355 scientists and practitioners working on amphibian conservation from over 150 organizations in more than 50 countries. We also sought to identify how different types of conservation actions and respondent experience and background influenced perceptions. Respondents identified 4 types of success: species and habitat improvements (84% of respondents); effective program management (36%); outreach initiatives such as education and public engagement (25%); and the application of science‐based conservation (15%). The most significant factor influencing overall perceived success was reducing threats. Capacity building was rated least important. Perceptions were influenced by experience, professional affiliation, involvement in conservation practice, and country of residence. More experienced practitioners associated success with improvements to species and habitats and less so with education and engagement initiatives. Although science‐based conservation was rated as important, this factor declined in importance as the number of programs a respondent participated in increased, particularly among those from less economically developed countries. The ultimate measure of conservation success—population recovery—may be difficult to measure in many amphibians; difficult to relate to the conservation actions intended to drive it; and difficult to achieve within conventional funding time frames. The relaunched Amphibian Conservation Action Plan provides a framework for capturing lower level processes and outcomes, identifying gaps, and measuring progress.

Highlights

  • The roots of conservation biology can be traced back over many decades, the field emerged as a scientific discipline over 30 years ago (Soule 1985) and continues to evolve (Kareiva & Marvier 2012)

  • We explored the perceptions of success held by amphibian conservation scientists and practitioners

  • The 7th World Congress of Herpetology (7WCH) sample had a higher proportion of respondents from academic institutions (7WCH 60%; online 51%), and the online questionnaire attracted a greater proportion of respondents from LEDC countries (7WCH 11%; online 30%)

Read more

Summary

Introduction

The roots of conservation biology can be traced back over many decades, the field emerged as a scientific discipline over 30 years ago (Soule 1985) and continues to evolve (Kareiva & Marvier 2012). Community-based conservation projects (as classified by Souto et al [2014]) associate success with supportive social processes that encompass the needs, values, and awareness of local stakeholders and the general public (Clark & Wallace 1998; Mascia et al 2003), such as development of sustainable livelihoods and improved welfare of local stakeholders (du Toit et al 2004; Davies et al 2014) This anthropocentric focus on measuring conservation success has been dubbed the “new conservation” and entails replacing species and habitat interventions with economic development and poverty reduction (Soule 2013)

Objectives
Methods
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call