"Frame" capture - why the war on poaching can never be won: about the John Hanks’ book <i>Operation lock and the war on rhino poaching</i>

This essay is an extended and critical review, of John Hanks’ book Operation Lock and the war on rhino poaching, which is an insider account of hitherto untold stories of a secretive undercover operation to gather intelligence to counter the ongoing slaughter of Africa’s elephants and rhinos. Our critique employs the metaphor “ecology of mind”, following Gregory Bateson, to highlight how so much conservation effort with an espoused focus on improving natural ecologies fails at the level of “mind”, in particular the choices that are made to frame situations of concern. The outcome, we argue, is persistent framing failure. This failure, despite the efforts of Hanks with his authentic cry for more effective action, runs the risk of institutionalising systemic failure. Hanks consistently espouses support for local community as key stakeholders in the future of conservation - but his book lacks evidence of investment, good practice examples and institutional and governance reforms needed to create and sustain such initiatives. Indeed, the framing of the poaching challenge as a war presents barriers to finding systemic and sustainable solutions to the crisis

Impacts of a trophy hunting ban on private land conservation in South African biodiversity hotspots

Private land conservation areas (PLCAs) have become critical for achieving global conservation goals, but we lack understanding of how and when these areas respond to global pressures and opportunities. In southern Africa, where many PLCAs rely on trophy hunting as an income-generating strategy, a potential ban on trophy hunting locally or abroad holds unknown consequences for the future conservation of these lands. In this study, we investigate the consequences of a potential trophy hunting ban in PLCAs in two biodiversity hotspots in South Africa's Eastern and Western Cape provinces. We used semistructured interviews with PLCA managers and owners to elicit perceived impacts of an internationally imposed trophy hunting ban on conservation activities in PLCAs, and to probe alternative viable land uses. The majority of interviewees believed that both the economic viability of their PLCA and biodiversity would be lost following a hunting ban. Owners would primarily consider transitioning to ecotourism or livestock farming, but these options were constrained by the social-ecological context of their PLCA (e.g., competition with other PLCAs, ecological viability of farming). Our results suggest that a trophy hunting ban may have many unintended consequences for biodiversity conservation, national economies, and the livelihoods of PLCA owners and employees. Along with similar social-ecological studies in other areas and contexts, our work can inform policy decisions around global trophy hunting regulation.Peer reviewe

Tools and terms for understanding illegal wildlife trade

Illegal wildlife trade (IWT) is a global conservation issue that threatens thousands of species, including fish, fungi, medicinal plants, and charismatic mammals. Despite widespread recognition of the problem, debates on the science and policy of IWT generally concentrate on a few high- profile species (eg rhinoceros, tigers, elephants) and often overlook or conflate complex IWT products, actors, networks, and contexts. A poor understanding of IWT is aggravated by the lack of systematic vocabulary and conceptual tools with which to analyze complex phenomena in a more structured way. We synthesize the available evidence on IWT across taxa and contexts into a typology- based framework that considers (1) the diversity of wildlife products; (2) the roles of various actors involved with IWT, including harvesters, intermediaries, and consumers; and (3) common IWT network configurations. We propose ways in which these tools can inform structured analyses of IWT, to help ensure more nuanced, appropriate, targeted, and effective responses to illegal wildlife harvest, trade, and use

Impacts of a trophy hunting ban on private land conservation in South African biodiversity hotspots

CITATION: Parker, K. et al. 2020. Impacts of a trophy hunting ban on private land conservation in South African biodiversity hotspots. Conservation Science and Practice, 2:e214, doi:10.1111/csp2.214.The original publication is available at https://conbio.onlinelibrary.wiley.comPrivate land conservation areas (PLCAs) have become critical for achieving global conservation goals, but we lack understanding of how and when these areas respond to global pressures and opportunities. In southern Africa, where many PLCAs rely on trophy hunting as an income-generating strategy, a potential ban on trophy hunting locally or abroad holds unknown consequences for the future conservation of these lands. In this study, we investigate the consequences of a potential trophy hunting ban in PLCAs in two biodiversity hotspots in South Africa's Eastern and Western Cape provinces. We used semistructured interviews with PLCA managers and owners to elicit perceived impacts of an internationally imposed trophy hunting ban on conservation activities in PLCAs, and to probe alternative viable land uses. The majority of interviewees believed that both the economic viability of their PLCA and biodiversity would be lost following a hunting ban. Owners would primarily consider transitioning to ecotourism or livestock farming, but these options were constrained by the social-ecological context of their PLCA (e.g., competition with other PLCAs, ecological viability of farming). Our results suggest that a trophy hunting ban may have many unintended consequences for biodiversity conservation, national economies, and the livelihoods of PLCA owners and employees. Along with similar social-ecological studies in other areas and contexts, our work can inform policy decisions around global trophy hunting regulation.Publisher's versio

The evidence for the bushmeat crisis in African savannas: A systematic quantitative literature review

Bushmeat hunting, trade and consumption is a growing biodiversity and food security concern. Much of the collated research is currently limited to forested regions however, despite indications of the increasing threat in savannas. Savanna regions are biodiverse and often have high-value wildlife tourism industries, but also have rapidly-growing rural populations, often highly dependent on natural resources. In this systematic quantitative literature review we seek to understand the state of knowledge about bushmeat in savanna regions in Africa. We aim to identify gaps in the literature, both spatially and topically, understand what methodologies are used, what common recommendations are made and what interventions have been quantified. We identified 144 relevant studies from the literature. Although studies have increased over time and diversified thematically, there were strong biases. Most studies were conducted in Tanzania, with gaps in research in southern Africa and the Sahelian region. Additionally, only 25% of papers investigated interventions used to reduce bushmeat hunting, with traditional enforcement being the most common intervention studied (53% of intervention studies, 13% of papers). Other frequently recommended interventions such as alternative incomes received little attention (14% of intervention studies, 3.5% of papers). Further, although many studies cite common drivers of bushmeat hunting such as income or livestock, the evidence for these drivers was lacking and contradictory. We reveal that although bushmeat in savanna regions is gaining recognition, many gaps in knowledge remain. This is the first study to systematically quantify the research about bushmeat in African savannas and aims to inform future research

The State of Knowledge and Practice on Human-Wildlife Conflicts

Conflicts in conservation are widespread issues of global concern, seriously threatening worldwide goals of biodiversity preservation and sustainable development. As the human population rises, and wider environmental issues, such as climate change and habitat degradation, continue to escalate, conflicts are predicted to increase in both frequency and intensity. In recognition of the severity of such problems and the multiple threats they present, international organisations, governments, and research institutes alike have expanded their efforts into the understanding and resolution of conflicts. Despite this increasing attention from both academic and empirical perspectives, conflicts persist, fostering environmental, social, economic and political problems on a global scale. Scholars and experts have suggested that, in order to progress, a complete overhaul is required in how we frame, think about, and manage conflicts in conservation. However, such suggestions are yet to be translated into a more practical context. A consortium of Griffith University in Australia, the Namibian Nature Foundation, and WWF, being incubated by the Luc Hoffmann Institute, is exploring the potential for a novel initiative that will address the shortcomings of present management efforts. This initiative would involve developing and testing a new process in conflict management: the creation of a standard to guide and improve approaches to conflicts globally. This report provides the starting point for this process. From an extensive review of the literature and interviews with leading experts, we present an overview of current conflict management, associated problems. and knowledge gaps, as well as areas in which management might be improved. We then examine the possibility of combining these insights into a standardised approach to guide future management, focusing on the governance and social outcomes of conflict management

The State of Knowledge and Practice on Human-Wildlife Conflicts

Conflicts in conservation are widespread issues of global concern, seriously threatening worldwide goals of biodiversity preservation and sustainable development. As the human population rises, and wider environmental issues, such as climate change and habitat degradation, continue to escalate, conflicts are predicted to increase in both frequency and intensity. In recognition of the severity of such problems and the multiple threats they present, international organisations, governments, and research institutes alike have expanded their efforts into the understanding and resolution of conflicts. Despite this increasing attention from both academic and empirical perspectives, conflicts persist, fostering environmental, social, economic and political problems on a global scale. Scholars and experts have suggested that, in order to progress, a complete overhaul is required in how we frame, think about, and manage conflicts in conservation. However, such suggestions are yet to be translated into a more practical context. A consortium of Griffith University in Australia, the Namibian Nature Foundation, and WWF, being incubated by the Luc Hoffmann Institute, is exploring the potential for a novel initiative that will address the shortcomings of present management efforts. This initiative would involve developing and testing a new process in conflict management: the creation of a standard to guide and improve approaches to conflicts globally. This report provides the starting point for this process. From an extensive review of the literature and interviews with leading experts, we present an overview of current conflict management, associated problems. and knowledge gaps, as well as areas in which management might be improved. We then examine the possibility of combining these insights into a standardised approach to guide future management, focusing on the governance and social outcomes of conflict management

Studying the complexity of change: toward an analytical framework for understanding deliberate social-ecological transformations

Faced with numerous seemingly intractable social and environmental challenges, many scholars and practitioners are increasingly interested in understanding how to actively engage and transform the existing systems holding such problems in place. Although a variety of analytical models have emerged in recent years, most emphasize either the social or ecological elements of such transformations rather than their coupled nature. To address this, first we have presented a definition of the core elements of a social-ecological system (SES) that could potentially be altered in a transformation. Second, we drew on insights about transformation from three branches of literature focused on radical change, i.e., social movements, socio-technical transitions, and social innovation, and gave consideration to the similarities and differences with the current studies by resilience scholars. Drawing on these findings, we have proposed a framework that outlines the process and phases of transformative change in an SES. Future research will be able to utilize the framework as a tool for analyzing the alteration of social-ecological feedbacks, identifying critical barriers and leverage points and assessing the outcome of social-ecological transformations

The unequal burden of human-wildlife conflict

The costs of human-wildlife conflict are measurably more impactful in areas of the developing world where the loss of cattle can mean the entire livelihood of a family being erased.Human-wildlife conflict is one of the most pressing sustainable development challenges globally. This is particularly the case where ecologically and economically important wildlife impact the livelihoods of humans. Large carnivores are one such group and their co-occurrence with low-income rural communities often results in real or perceived livestock losses that place increased costs on already impoverished households. Here we show the disparities associated with the vulnerability to conflict arising from large carnivores on cattle (Bos taurus) globally. Across the distribution of 18 large carnivores, we find that the economic vulnerability to predation losses (as measured by impacts to annual per capita income) is between two and eight times higher for households in transitioning and developing economies when compared to developed ones. This potential burden is exacerbated further in developing economies because cattle keepers in these areas produce on average 31% less cattle meat per animal than in developed economies. In the lowest-income areas, our estimates suggest that the loss of a single cow or bull equates to nearly a year and a half of lost calories consumed by a child. Finally, our results show that 82% of carnivore range falls outside protected areas, and five threatened carnivores have over one third of their range located in the most economically sensitive conflict areas. This unequal burden of human-carnivore conflict sheds light on the importance of grappling with multiple and conflicting sustainable development goals: protecting life on land and eliminating poverty and hunger