Social drivers forewarn of marine regime shifts

Some ecosystems can undergo regime shifts to alternative compositions of species. Although ecological indicators can identify approaching regime shifts, we propose that rapid changes in the social drivers underlying ecosystem change may provide additional and potentially earlier indicators of impending shifts. We demonstrate this by reconstructing the underlying social drivers of four iconic marine regime shifts: Pacific kelp forests, Northwest Atlantic continental shelf, Jamaican coral reefs, and the Chesapeake Bay estuary. In all cases, a range of social drivers – including opening of lucrative markets, technological innovations, and policies that enhanced the driver – ultimately prompted these ecosystem shifts. Drawing on examples emerging from environmental management practice, we present three practical recommendations for using social drivers as early indicators: monitor social change, determine social trigger points, and identify policy responses. We argue that accounting for the underlying social drivers of ecosystem change could improve decision making

Philanthropic foundations as agents of environmental governance:a research agenda

Philanthropic foundations play increasingly prominent roles in the environmental arena, yet remain largely under the radar of environmental governance scholars. We build on the small body of existing research on foundations in environmental governance to outline a research agenda on foundations as agents of environmental governance. The agenda identifies current understandings, debates, and research gaps related to three themes: 1) the roles foundations perform in environmental governance, 2) the outcomes of environmental philanthropy, and 3) the sources of foundation legitimacy. We call for more systematic and empirical research using diverse theoretical perspectives and methodological approaches. This research agenda will contribute to literature on agency in environmental governance by providing a more comprehensive picture of who governs the environment and how. Coming at a time when foundations are facing growing public scrutiny, it can also inform contemporary debates and offer practical insights for effective and equitable environmental philanthropy

Opening the black box of conservation philanthropy: A co-produced research agenda on private foundations in marine conservation

In the ‘new Gilded Age’ of mega-wealth and big philanthropy, academics are not paying enough attention to private foundations. Mirroring upward trends in philanthropy broadly, marine conservation philanthropy has more than doubled in recent years, reaching virtually every globally salient marine conservation issue in all corners of the planet. This paper argues that marine conservation philanthropy warrants a dedicated research agenda because private foundations are prominent, unique, and under-studied actors seeking to shape the future of a “frontier” space. We present a co-produced social science research agenda on marine conservation philanthropy that reflects the priorities of 106 marine conservation donors, practitioners, and stakeholders who participated in a research co-design process in 2018. These “research co-designers” raised 137 unique research questions, which we grouped into five thematic research priorities: outcomes, governance roles, exits, internal foundation governance, and funding landscape. We identify issues of legitimacy, justice, and applied best practice as cross-cutting research priorities that came up throughout the five themes. Participants from the NGO, foundation, and government sectors identified questions within all five themes and three cross-cutting issues, underscoring shared interest in this work from diverse groups. The research we call for herein can inform the practice of conservation philanthropy at a time when foundations are increasingly reckoning with their role as institutions of power in society. This paper is broadly relevant for social and natural scientists, practitioners, donors, and policy-makers interested in better understanding private philanthropy in any environmental context globally

Staphylococcus aureus infective endocarditis versus bacteremia strains: Subtle genetic differences at stake

AbstractInfective endocarditis (IE)(1) is a severe condition complicating 10–25% of Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia. Although host-related IE risk factors have been identified, the involvement of bacterial features in IE complication is still unclear. We characterized strictly defined IE and bacteremia isolates and searched for discriminant features. S. aureus isolates causing community-acquired, definite native-valve IE (n=72) and bacteremia (n=54) were collected prospectively as part of a French multicenter cohort. Phenotypic traits previously reported or hypothesized to be involved in staphylococcal IE pathogenesis were tested. In parallel, the genotypic profiles of all isolates, obtained by microarray, were analyzed by discriminant analysis of principal components (DAPC)(2). No significant difference was observed between IE and bacteremia strains, regarding either phenotypic or genotypic univariate analyses. However, the multivariate statistical tool DAPC, applied on microarray data, segregated IE and bacteremia isolates: IE isolates were correctly reassigned as such in 80.6% of the cases (C-statistic 0.83, P<0.001). The performance of this model was confirmed with an independent French collection IE and bacteremia isolates (78.8% reassignment, C-statistic 0.65, P<0.01). Finally, a simple linear discriminant function based on a subset of 8 genetic markers retained valuable performance both in study collection (86.1%, P<0.001) and in the independent validation collection (81.8%, P<0.01). We here show that community-acquired IE and bacteremia S. aureus isolates are genetically distinct based on subtle combinations of genetic markers. This finding provides the proof of concept that bacterial characteristics may contribute to the occurrence of IE in patients with S. aureus bacteremia

Conceptualizing responsible exits in conservation philanthropy

Conservation philanthropy has grown significantly in the past decade. As the number of philanthropic-supported conservation initiatives increases, so too will the frequency of exits-the ending of funding relationships. A trend toward "strategic philanthropy, " where foundations fund time-limited grants, is already contributing to near-constant exits. We draw attention to exits as a critical and ubiquitous-yet understudied-part of conservation grantmaking processes that can have tremendous impacts on the people and places foundations invest in. This paper begins to address this research gap with the first empirical study of exit processes in the context of ocean conservation philanthropy. We draw on an analysis of interviews and a knowledge co-production workshop with donors representing 36 foundations investing in ocean conservation globally to: (1) develop a conceptual framework that broadens and clarifies definitions of exits and provides a common language to characterize exits along varied dimensions, and (2) derive best practices for exiting responsibly. This paper provides timely guidance for environmental philanthropy broadly, including the need to think about exits early and often as an integral part of the grantmaking strategy. Responsible giving must include responsible exits

Who’s setting the agenda? Philanthropic donor influence in marine conservation

We are in a period of unprecedented growth in conservation philanthropy. How will this influx of private funding affect conservation agendas? Inspired by a collaborative research co-design process, this paper addresses questions about how foundations influence conservation agendas in the places they work. We draw from a case study of the world’s largest philanthropic funder of marine conservation, the David and Lucile Packard Foundation and their 20 years of investment in marine conservation in Palau and Fiji. Conservation practitioners in both countries universally agreed that the Packard Foundation had a significant and positive influence on the agenda, which they attribute to both how the foundation worked and what they chose to fund. Specifically, our study reveals how the Packard Foundation shaped conservation agendas in Palau and Fiji in partnership with its grantees through a grant-making process characterized by relationship building, collaborative decision making, convening and promoting of collective action, flexibility, and long-term funding. Packard’s approach was often identified as unique, and contrasted with numerous other donors, including foundations and other types of donors, who use a more top-down approach. By describing a relative success story in how philanthropic foundations can work with conservation practitioners to co-design a shared conservation agenda, our work provides timely guidance for donors and practitioners

Community engagement and power dynamics in conservation philanthropy grant making

Funding decisions influence where, how, and by whom conservation is pursued globally. In the context of growing calls for more participatory, Indigenous-led, and socially just conservation, we undertook the first empirical investigation of how philanthropic foundations working in marine conservation globally engage communities in grant-making decisions. We paid particular attention to whether and how community engagement practices reinforce or disrupt existing power dynamics. We conducted semistructured remote interviews with 46 individuals from 32 marine conservation foundations to identify how conservation foundations engage communities in setting their priorities and deciding which organizations and projects to fund. We found that community engagement in foundation decision-making was limited in practice. Eleven of the 32 foundations reported some form of community engagement in funding decisions. Two of these foundations empowered communities to shape funding priorities and projects through strong forms of engagement. Many engagement practices were one way, one time, or indirect and confined to certain points in decision-making processes. These weaker practices limited community input and reinforced unequal power relations, which may undermine the legitimacy, equity, and effectiveness of conservation efforts. We suggest that foundations aim for stronger forms of community engagement and reflect on how their grant-making practices affect power relations between foundations and communities

Managing Small-Scale Commercial Fisheries for Adaptive Capacity:Insights from Dynamic Social-Ecological Drivers of Change in Monterey Bay

Globally, small-scale fisheries are influenced by dynamic climate, governance, and market drivers, which present social and ecological challenges and opportunities. It is difficult to manage fisheries adaptively for fluctuating drivers, except to allow participants to shift effort among multiple fisheries. Adapting to changing conditions allows small-scale fishery participants to survive economic and environmental disturbances and benefit from optimal conditions. This study explores the relative influence of large-scale drivers on shifts in effort and outcomes among three closely linked fisheries in Monterey Bay since the Magnuson-Stevens Fisheries Conservation and Management Act of 1976. In this region, Pacific sardine (Sardinops sagax), northern anchovy (Engraulis mordax), and market squid (Loligo opalescens) fisheries comprise a tightly linked system where shifting focus among fisheries is a key element to adaptive capacity and reduced social and ecological vulnerability. Using a cluster analysis of landings, we identify four modes from 1974 to 2012 that are dominated (i.e., a given species accounting for the plurality of landings) by squid, sardine, anchovy, or lack any dominance, and seven points of transition among these periods. This approach enables us to determine which drivers are associated with each mode and each transition. Overall, we show that market and climate drivers are predominantly attributed to dominance transitions. Model selection of external drivers indicates that governance phases, reflected as perceived abundance, dictate long-term outcomes. Our findings suggest that globally, small-scale fishery managers should consider enabling shifts in effort among fisheries and retaining existing flexibility, as adaptive capacity is a critical determinant for social and ecological resilience

A practical approach for putting people in ecosystem-based ocean planning

Marine and coastal ecosystems provide important benefits and services to coastal communities across the globe, but assessing the diversity of social relationships with oceans can prove difficult for conservation scientists and practitioners. This presents barriers to incorporating social dimensions of marine ecosystems into ecosystem-based planning processes, which can in turn affect the success of planning and management initiatives. Following a global assessment of social research and related planning practices in ocean environments, we present a step-by-step approach for natural resource planning practitioners to more systematically incorporate social data into ecosystem-based ocean planning. Our approach includes three sequential steps: (1) develop a typology of ocean-specific human uses that occur within the planning region of interest; (2) characterize the complexity of these uses, including the spatiotemporal variability, intensity, and diversity thereof, as well as associated conflicts and compatibility; and (3) integrate social and ecological information to assess trade-offs necessary for successful implementation of ecosystem-based ocean planning. We conclude by showing how systematic engagement of social data - together with ecological information - can create advantages for practitioners to improve planning and management outcomes

Map of the Monterey Bay area.

<p>Map includes the three major ports: Santa Cruz, Moss Landing, and Monterey.</p