Nature markets are being operationalized as a tool to address the biodiversity finance gap and achieve global biodiversity targets. However, there is limited understanding of how the outcomes of these markets align with biodiversity targets. One example is the off-site market supporting construction projects that are required to achieve biodiversity net gain (BNG) in England. To quantify the preliminary market outcomes after 16 months of operation, we collected data from England's offset register and planning portals. We evaluated these data to understand the habitat diversity being delivered through the market offsets and offset alignment with environmental targets such as 30×30 under the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework. We found that current habitat delivery is skewed toward a few habitat types, with other neutral grassland constituting 44% of planned habitat. There is very limited delivery of new wetland and woodland habitats, with most committed offsets being dedicated to improving the condition of existing habitats. More importantly, only approximately 2% of the registered offset area has been sold. Our results demonstrated how the habitat scoring system within the statutory biodiversity metric used to measure BNG is shaping the market through the creation of incentives to deliver particular habitat types. The potential demand constraints identified also highlight the role of government regulation in scaling the market. These lessons from the off-site BNG market extend to other biodiversity offsetting systems and markets globally, particularly those that are using derivatives of England's biodiversity metric.
Global farmland biodiversity is declining rapidly, threatening both natural ecosystems and agricultural production. Although agri-environmental schemes incentivize farmers to adopt environmentally friendly measures, the spatial mismatch between their local implementation and the landscape-scale habitat requirements of farmland species has been criticized. Landscape-scale agri-environmental schemes (LAESs) are a promising approach for promoting biodiversity effectively through collaboration among multiple farmers. The success of such collaboration for biodiversity conservation relies substantially on well-functioning social networks and economic profitability for participating farmers. For an LAES to be an effective tool, it is crucial to capitalize on potential synergies among social, ecological, and economic benefits arising from collaborative implementation of LAESs and to promote positive feedback loops. We identified six potential synergies originating from the combined benefits of LAESs based on participatory workshops, expert discussions, and scientific evidence, focusing on intensive agricultural systems in Western Europe. Governance structures, such as a coordinating institution, bottom-up approaches, and adaptations to policy frameworks, can promote synergies and help overcome current challenges and trade-offs. The identified synergies and governance structures will be crucial for shaping future European agricultural policies that promote sustainable farmland biodiversity conservation and may serve as a model for transferring LAESs to other global regions.
Megafires have emerged as a considerable threat to biodiversity conservation worldwide. The biodiversity-focused response and recovery actions that occurred during Australia's 2019/2020 Black Summer bushfires demonstrate that it is possible to protect biodiversity alongside human life and property during disasters. During the fires, significant government support and collaboration between multiple stakeholders allowed emergency biodiversity conservation interventions to occur rapidly, often while the fires were still burning. To understand what was necessary to permit biodiversity-focused interventions, we conducted a thematic analysis of interviews with 45 people involved in the fire response. We then identified nine distinct themes critical to implementing an emergency response that includes biodiversity conservation concerns and successful planning and execution of interventions: political will, social expectations, collaborative leadership, data acquisition and use, funding, resources, communication, training, and reflection and incorporation. We further evaluated reports and documents describing the implemented interventions and their expected ecological or policy outcomes. Combining our findings with the Multiple Streams Framework approach, we developed a conceptual model demonstrating how the Black Summer fires simultaneously opened a policy window for biodiversity conservation action and revealed the importance of pre-existing networks, resource flows, and adaptive governance for translating emergency-driven political attention into biodiversity emergency management.
Current global conservation models face significant limitations in addressing the global polycrisis, and the constraints of the International Union for Conservation of Nature protected area (PA) classification system are part of the issue. The principles of the new conservation paradigm-governance, equity, and interculturality-are not viable while tethered to a framework dominated by Western natural sciences and Global North perspectives. Philosophical and empirical evidence from Argentina substantiates two core arguments: first, the current PA classification system remains confined to a monological and reductive epistemology, and second, fragmented conservation focuses, such as single-species prioritization, function as an ideology sustained by the economic privilege of developed nations and are not efficient strategies in areas where the share of gross domestic product allocated to environmental protection is as low as 0.07%. Rather than expanding existing management categories, this paper proposes a decolonization of the concept of classification. By dismantling legislative classification rigidity, cultural and natural heritage acquire an equal opportunity to be protected, enabling each PA to redirect legal and financial resources toward holistic and just conservation actions. This shift moves beyond narrow biodiversity targets and toward the realization of territorial justice, breaking away from a fragmented perspective of nature to understanding humans and nonhumans in relational terms, as a shared political community.
Identifying ecologically matching areas is both challenging and critical for understanding spatial patterns of biodiversity and advancing conservation planning. However, existing approaches often lack spatial flexibility, overlook shape and size constraints, or rely on limited environmental parameters, reducing their effectiveness in real-world applications. To address these limitations, we developed and tested a four-step framework for identifying ecologically and spatially matching areas. Our framework method involved defining the parameters for the comparative analyses; assessing similar environmental conditions between target protected areas and potential matching areas, through a modified version of the multivariate environmental similarity surface (mMESS); simulating randomly distributed polygons that mirror both the shape and surface area of the target protected area; and integrating the simulated polygons with the resulting mMESS to identify areas where environmental similarity, shape, and surface match. Finally, we applied decision criteria to identify real-world matching areas. We tested our approach in both the Northern and the Central Apennines (Italy), comparing a national park in each of these two regions to similar but unprotected areas-specifically excluding national parks, regional parks, and Natura 2000 Network sites. Our framework offers a robust tool for identifying matching and mismatching areas and enhancing our understanding of these areas' spatial distributions and environmental conditions to support conservation planning and management. The framework may be applied to a broad range of ecological studies at various scales and has the potential to guide future conservation efforts and policies.
Insects are vital to well-functioning terrestrial ecosystems. They are highly speciose and abundant across all but the very coldest areas. Only a small proportion (<1%) of recognized species are either pests or threatened species. Most species are somewhere in between and are poorly researched or remain undescribed. Among certain taxa, especially Orthoptera, Lepidoptera, Coleoptera, and Diptera, there is a paradox in that some species are pests, whereas other closely related species require conservation action. Confounding the issue is the overly simplistic and human binary perception that there are good insects that are aesthetic and benign and bad ones that are harmful to human well-being. Using Google Scholar Labs-assisted searches, we reviewed and summarized relevant literature to present a more nuanced perspective, the pest-preservation paradox (PPP), that focuses on the whole spectrum of insects and the dynamics of spatial and temporal population changes according to prevailing environmental conditions. Biologically underlying these spectrum shifts are ranges of insect genomic resilience, reproduction rates, feeding behaviors, dispersal abilities, and establishment abilities. These traits are important in human-modified, novel environments and in response to the overarching effects of climate change. Currently, certain pest species are thriving, whereas other species are becoming threatened or extinct, even among formerly abundant species. The information available today enables us to focus more specifically on the spectrum of insects and emphasize the need to study the silent majority in the spectrum center. The PPP helps move beyond the binary perception that insects are either good or bad and recognizes the nuanced spectrum between those that are pests and those that require conservation action.
Pollinators are important to humans and nature due to their role in ecosystem functioning and services. Research on the effects of pollinator management in protected areas is insufficient compared with that on farmlands and urban areas, potentially hindering appropriate policy implementation. We addressed this knowledge gap by conducting a data-based synthesis on measures to promote pollinators (especially bees, butterflies, and flies) across European protected areas. To compare the effects of management practices that enhance pollinators (pollinator-friendly; treatment) and those not focused on pollinators (conventional; control) in protected areas, we used vegetation, floral resource, and pollinator datasets. Our synthesis involved 10 countries, 34 datasets, and 639 sampling sites with different management activities (land abandonment, mowing, grazing, mulching, flower sowing, gap creation, and uprooting and girdling trees) and habitats (grasslands, forests, reed beds, and sandpits). Pooled analysis indicated that pollinator-friendly management had mainly neutral effects on floral resources and pollinators, with some positive effects but no negative effects. Dataset-level details revealed mostly neutral effects from pollinator-friendly management with some positive (15%) and fewer negative (3%) effects. Management slightly improved pollinator overall abundance and species richness, particularly for butterflies and wild bees (excluding bumblebees). Comparing our synthesis with previous studies suggests that implementing management practices for pollinators in protected areas is more challenging than in farmlands and cities, possibly because protected areas already host higher quality habitats. Alternatively, pollinator-friendly approaches commonly implemented in protected areas may be insufficient. Although the Nature Restoration Regulation provides new opportunities for pollinator conservation, implementation will require careful planning for target areas, as effective management, including pollinator requirements, requires more focused and context-specific measures than those applied in cities and farmlands. Although focused on Europe, our synthesis provides broadly applicable lessons for pollinator conservation in other highly modified landscapes but with adaptation to local ecological and socioeconomic conditions.
Conservation communication often uses the celebrity endorsement strategy. However, robust evidence regarding its effectiveness is still limited. More importantly, practitioners do not have guidelines for selecting an ideal endorser because there is no clear consensus on what endorser attributes are most critical. We explored these issues by examining advocacy for the ivory trade ban in China through the use of two public service announcements (PSAs). The contents of the two PSAs were similar, except that one was endorsed by a sports celebrity (Yao Ming) and the other by a noncelebrity (a police officer). Based on a real-world, randomized, controlled trial intervention experiment (N = 550), we found that although the celebrity was rated as more attractive, the PSAs did not differ significantly in perceived attractiveness. The police officer produced a statistically significant but small improvement in attitude toward the ban (Cliff's delta = -0.11), with no significant differences in behavioral intentions, indicating limited practical superiority. According to the structural equation model (SEM), endorser attractiveness was positively associated with PSA attractiveness, which in turn was associated with communication behavioral intention, whereas endorser credibility was more strongly associated with conservation behavioral intention. These findings suggested that the selection of endorsers should be contextualized. In particular, if the aim is to promote widespread communication, then celebrities may be the recommended endorsers, as they have the potential to attract people's attention. If the aim is to promote attitude or behavioral change, then endorsers with high credibility levels may be more appropriate. Future studies should conduct empirical research on multiple types of celebrities and explore how endorser attributes interact with different message framings and various conservation contexts to better inform strategic communication efforts.
The sustainability of area-based conservation initiatives depends on their value to society. Conservation often focuses inside protected areas, but the impacts of protected areas beyond their boundaries (spillovers) are critical for their social license. Despite their importance, spillovers remain poorly documented and difficult to characterize. To understand the current state of the field and identify avenues for improved generalization, we reviewed 51 spillover analyses of terrestrial protected areas published between 2000 and 2024. We identified several pervasive problems, including widespread use of unvalidated or proportionally scaled sampling zones, biased and incomplete coverage of different regions and ecosystem types, insufficient attention to spatial autocorrelation, statistical inadequacies, and a general failure to conceptualize spillover analysis as a hypothesis-testing inquiry into scale and protected area effect size. We argue that the lack of standardized methodological and reporting frameworks for spillover analysis has led to inconsistent sampling designs and unmatched spatial and temporal scales of analysis. Few studies consider spatial patterns of nonecological spillovers and their interactions with ecosystems, and limited integration of legal and management frameworks further constrains the capacity of spillover analysis to inform and be integrated with global conservation efforts and targets (e.g., the 30×30 goal of the Global Biodiversity Framework). We propose a set of methodological recommendations and best practices for reporting, sampling design, and analytical decisions. Improved rigor and comparability between studies are needed so that meta-analyses can be conducted to support global conservation policy for spillover governance. We suggest that future research and conservation practice focus on improving sampling designs and guiding analytical decisions for spillover analyses that explicitly define appropriate sampling distances and spatial granularity, incorporate spatial autocorrelation, and more deliberately consider ecosystem heterogeneity.
Subspecies have been used in conservation biology to account for intraspecific patterns in genetic diversity, which is crucial to long-term population viability. Although over 3200 subspecies are currently assessed by the International Union for Conservation of Nature Red List, their biological relevance remains controversial. Here, we analyzed patterns of subspecies counts across more than 33,000 tetrapod species, and using hurdle mixed-effect models, we modeled subspecies counts as a function of biological and sociocultural factors. Our results revealed a striking decline in the description of subspecies in recent decades, driven mostly by contemporary social factors. Birds exhibited the highest number of recognized subspecies, followed by mammals and reptiles, whereas amphibians currently lack any valid subspecies. Subspecies counts also varied spatially; temperate regions had more subspecies than tropical areas on average, as well as more species whose subspecies counts differ markedly from what would be expected given their attributes. Using multivariate models, we found preserved specimen availability, species range size, and geographic discontinuity (i.e., disjunct populations) as major predictors of subspecies counts. Additionally, well-studied and recently described species were less likely to have subspecies. Our findings suggested that subspecies recognition is shaped by complex sociocultural and research-related contexts rather than by purely biological criteria. This misalignment risks skewing conservation priorities, highlighting the need for more evidence-based approaches that integrate molecular, phenotypic, and geographic data for subspecies delimitation. This approach will help ensure that conservation resources are directed toward biologically meaningful units to enhance the effectiveness of conservation strategies.
Biodiversity offsetting aims to compensate for ecological losses from development through conservation and restoration. However, its long-term outcomes under repeated impact-offset cycles remain uncertain. Using a conceptual forest succession model, we evaluated how offset outcomes are affected by interactions among compensation scale, duration of protection, habitat conversion rate, and land availability constraints. Additionally, we considered that these outcomes may differ across biodiversity components, including habitat maturity associated with successional habitat-forming species and metapopulation dynamics of persistent colonizers and successional specialists. We showed that effective offsetting requires restoring areas larger than those impacted and maintaining protection over timescales aligned with ecological recovery, particularly where ongoing habitat conversion reshapes landscape structure. High rates of habitat conversion consistently reduced offsetting success, particularly for colonizing species reliant on habitat quality and long-term protection. Our results further showed that delayed ecological responses and cumulative impacts can undermine offsetting efforts that appear effective in the short term. Robust offset design must therefore explicitly account for temporal lags, dynamic landscape trajectories, adequate spatial compensation, and multiple biodiversity indicators to avoid the ecological fallacy that short-term restoration success equates to long-term biodiversity and ecosystem integrity.
Top-down interventions carried out by state and nonstate institutions to conserve biodiversity and improve the lives of forest-proximate people (FPP) in the Global South tend to reflect economistic understandings of human well-being. More progressive and people-centered conservation projects are guided by normative visions of how the world should be, yet these projects are limited because the social dimensions of project design, planning, and evaluation often remain focused on quantifiable aspects of well-being. We demonstrated that considering human well-being qualitatively in terms of freedom and dignity can help achieve rights-based, people-centered conservation. We applied the capabilities approach (CA), a social theory that emphasizes marginalized people's freedom to live a life they have reason to value. First, we reviewed English-language literature to assess how the CA has been used conceptually and empirically to examine the well-being of FPP. Based on 31 methodologically diverse studies from 16 countries, we found that equitable access to forest resources is essential for the flourishing of FPP, capability creation for FPP requires strong and local social institutions, and FPP's agency (a person's power to act and bring about change) to pursue valued capabilities is often deeply embedded in collective structures. Thus, we developed a framework to guide people-centered conservation actions that promote the flourishing of FPP. We applied this framework to the Brazilian Caatinga dry forest, which is characterized by diverse use of forest resources and deep social inequities, and identified examples of conservation practices and their mixed influences on the lives of people in this biome. Adopting the CA can help ensure that people-centered conservation initiatives uphold FPP's rights and prioritize their well-being, while striving for sustainability.
The concept of nonhuman animal agency has recently been introduced in fields from more-than-human geography to wildlife conservation. Nonhuman animal agency refers to the capacity of animals to create, set in motion, and cause or influence actions through their relations with humans and other nonhumans. Ecologists have long recognized that animal species are active components of ecosystems and have important ecological functions, yet most wildlife management treats species as objects that are (or should be) passive and controllable. We argue that explicit recognition of nonhuman agency can reduce human-wildlife conflict, enhance the capacity for coexistence, and create better outcomes for conservation and other human-based projects. Rather than attempting to control species, the emerging more-than-human perspective suggests that a better target of management is place-based relationships, where humans and a variety of nonhumans are active participants in shaping landscape structures and lived experiences. To implement this concept in practice, we present design with nonhuman species as a pragmatic approach that draws on and may combine elements of contemporary design methods, coexistence approaches, rewilding perspectives, adaptive management, and traditional land management practices. The uniqueness of this approach is its focus on responding to both human and nonhuman agencies and its interactive problem solving mediated by materials, objects, structures, spaces, and spatiotemporal patterns. Design with seeks to appreciate and embody desires and concepts, which can be understood as being held by both humans and nonhumans. Critically, design with enables forms of negotiation that are not based on impractical anthropocentric linguistic and political models. We encourage conservationists to engage with designers interested in design with nonhumans.
Many conservation challenges require negotiating trade-offs between the needs of different actors. Global frameworks such as the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework explicitly call for diverse participation and social equity in conservation decision-making. Achieving this requires integrating equity into both decisions and decision-making processes. Despite shifts toward strengthening social equity, practical guidance for incorporating equity into conservation decision-making processes remains limited. We argue that structured decision-making (SDM), an organized approach designed for complex decisions involving diverse actors, provides a useful framework for considering equity in conservation decision-making. We developed 10 strategies for improving social equity in conservation decision-making to strengthen both social and conservation outcomes. We systematically integrated equity's multiple dimensions throughout every SDM stage, making equity an inherent element in decision-making rather than an afterthought. For example, when clarifying the decision context, practitioners can create thorough stakeholder maps, ask diverse social groups how they want to be engaged, and design processes to facilitate their participation. At later stages, when assessing links between actions and outcomes, structured methods for information aggregation and tools to enable shared understanding support development of a shared vision and a path forward. By transforming general calls for inclusivity into specific, actionable strategies, we provide conservation practitioners, researchers, and decision makers practical guidance bridging the theory-to-practice gap.
