Crop expansion and conservation priorities in tropical countries

Expansion of cropland in tropical countries is one of the principal causes of biodiversity loss, and threatens to undermine progress towards meeting the Aichi Biodiversity Targets. To understand this threat better, we analysed data on crop distribution and expansion in 128 tropical countries, assessed changes in area of the main crops and mapped overlaps between conservation priorities and cultivation potential. Rice was the single crop grown over the largest area, especially in tropical forest biomes. Cropland in tropical countries expanded by c. 48,000 km2 per year from 1999–2008. The countries which added the greatest area of new cropland were Nigeria, Indonesia, Ethiopia, Sudan and Brazil. Soybeans and maize are the crops which expanded most in absolute area. Other crops with large increases included rice, sorghum, oil palm, beans, sugar cane, cow peas, wheat and cassava. Areas of high cultivation potential—while bearing in mind that political and socio-economic conditions can be as influential as biophysical ones—may be vulnerable to conversion in the future. These include some priority areas for biodiversity conservation in tropical countries (e.g., Frontier Forests and High Biodiversity Wilderness Areas), which have previously been identified as having ‘low vulnerability’, in particular in central Africa and northern Australia. There are also many other smaller areas which are important for biodiversity and which have high cultivation potential (e.g., in the fringes of the Amazon basin, in the Paraguayan Chaco, and in the savanna woodlands of the Sahel and East Africa). We highlight the urgent need for more effective sustainability standards and policies addressing both production and consumption of tropical commodities, including robust land-use planning in agricultural frontiers, establishment of new protected areas or REDD+ projects in places agriculture has not yet reached, and reduction or elimination of incentives for land-demanding bioenergy feedstock

Key conservation issues for migratory landand waterbird species on the world’s major flyways

Summary An estimated 19% of the world's 9,856 extant bird species are migratory, including some 1,600 species of land-and waterbirds. In 2008, 11% of migratory land-and waterbirds were classed by BirdLife International as threatened or near-threatened on the IUCN Red List. Red List indices show that these migrants have become more threatened since 1988, with 33 species deteriorating and just six improving in status. There is also increasing evidence of regional declines. Population trend data show that more Nearctic-Neotropical migrants have declined than increased in North America since the 1980s, and more Palearctic-Afrotropical migrants breeding in Europe declined than increased during 1970-2000. Reviews of the status of migratory raptors show unfavourable conservation status for 51% of species in the African-Eurasian region (in 2005), and 33% of species in Central, South and East Asia (in 2007). Land-use change owing to agriculture is the most frequently cited threat affecting nearly 80% of all threatened and nearthreatened species. However, while agricultural intensification on the breeding grounds is often proposed as the major driver of declines in Palearctic-Afrotropical migrants, some species appear to be limited by the quantity and quality of available habitat in non-breeding areas, notably the drylands of tropical Africa. Forest fragmentation in breeding areas has contributed to the declines of Nearctic-Neotropical migrants with deforestation in non-breeding areas another possible factor. Infrastructure development including wind turbines, cables, towers and masts can also be a threat. Over-harvesting and persecution remain serious threats, particularly at key migration locations. Climate change is affecting birds already, is expected to exacerbate all these pressures, and may also increase competition between migratory and non-migratory species. The conservation of migratory birds thus requires a multitude of approaches. Many migratory birds require effective management of their critical sites, and Important Bird Areas (IBAs) provide an important foundation for such action; however to function effectively in conserving migratory species, IBAs need to be protected and the coherence of the network requires regular review. Since many migratory species (c. 55%) are widely dispersed across their breeding or nonbreeding ranges, it is essential to address the human-induced changes at the wider landscape scale, a very considerable challenge. Efforts to conserve migratory birds in one part of the range are less effective if unaddressed threats are reducing these species' populations and habitats elsewhere. International collaboration and coordinated action along migration flyways as a whole are thus key elements in any strategy for the conservation of migratory birds

TESSA: A toolkit for rapid assessment of ecosystem services at sites of biodiversity conservation importance

Sites that are important for biodiversity conservation can also provide significant benefits (i.e. ecosystem services) to people. Decision-makers need to know how change to a site, whether development or restoration, would affect the delivery of services and the distribution of any benefits among stakeholders. However, there are relatively few empirical studies that present this information. One reason is the lack of appropriate methods and tools for ecosystem service assessment that do not require substantial resources or specialist technical knowledge, or rely heavily upon existing data. Here we address this gap by describing the Toolkit for Ecosystem Service Site-based Assessment (TESSA). It guides local non-specialists through a selection of relatively accessible methods for identifying which ecosystem services may be important at a site, and for evaluating the magnitude of benefits that people obtain from them currently, compared with those expected under alternative land-uses. The toolkit recommends use of existing data where appropriate and places emphasis on enabling users to collect new field data at relatively low cost and effort. By using TESSA, the users could also gain valuable information about the alternative land-uses; and data collected in the field could be incorporated into regular monitoring programmes

Measuring Global Trends in the Status of Biodiversity: Red List Indices for Birds

The rapid destruction of the planet's biodiversity has prompted the nations of the world to set a target of achieving a significant reduction in the rate of loss of biodiversity by 2010. However, we do not yet have an adequate way of monitoring progress towards achieving this target. Here we present a method for producing indices based on the IUCN Red List to chart the overall threat status (projected relative extinction risk) of all the world's bird species from 1988 to 2004. Red List Indices (RLIs) are based on the number of species in each Red List category, and on the number changing categories between assessments as a result of genuine improvement or deterioration in status. The RLI for all bird species shows that their overall threat status has continued to deteriorate since 1988. Disaggregated indices show that deteriorations have occurred worldwide and in all major ecosystems, but with particularly steep declines in the indices for Indo-Malayan birds (driven by intensifying deforestation of the Sundaic lowlands) and for albatrosses and petrels (driven by incidental mortality in commercial longline fisheries). RLIs complement indicators based on species population trends and habitat extent for quantifying global trends in the status of biodiversity. Their main weaknesses are that the resolution of status changes is fairly coarse and that delays may occur before some status changes are detected. Their greatest strength is that they are based on information from nearly all species in a taxonomic group worldwide, rather than a potentially biased subset. At present, suitable data are only available for birds, but indices for other taxonomic groups are in development, as is a sampled index based on a stratified sample from all major taxonomic groups

Potential impact of invasive alien species on ecosystem services provided by a tropical forested ecosystem: a case study from Montserrat

Local stakeholders at the important but vulnerable Centre Hills on Montserrat consider that the continued presence of feral livestock (particularly goats and pigs) may lead to widespread replacement of the reserve’s native vegetation by invasive alien trees (Java plum and guava), and consequent negative impacts on native animal species. Since 2009, a hunting programme to control the feral livestock has been in operation. However long-term funding is not assured. Here, we estimate the effect of feral livestock control on ecosystem services provided by the forest to evaluate whether the biodiversity conservation rationale for continuation of the control programme is supported by an economic case. A new practical tool (Toolkit for Ecosystem Service Site-based Assessment) was employed to measure and compare ecosystem service provision between two states of the reserve (i.e. presence and absence of feral livestock control) to estimate the net consequences of the hunting programme on ecosystem services provided by the forest. Based on this we estimate that cessation of feral livestock management would substantially reduce the net benefits provided by the site, including a 46 % reduction in nature-based tourism (from $419,000 to$228,000) and 36 % reduction in harvested wild meat (from $205,000 to$132,000). The overall net benefit generated from annual ecosystem service flows associated with livestock control in thereserve, minus the management cost, was $214,000 per year. We conclude that continued feral livestock control is important for maintaining the current level of ecosystem services provided by the reserve

Outcomes, not implementation, predict conservation success

To use more effectively the limited resources available for conservation there is an urgent need to identify which conservation approaches are most likely to succeed. However, measuring conservation success is often difficult, as it is achieved outside the project time frame. Measures of implementation are often reported to donors to demonstrate achievement but it is unclear whether they really predict conservation success. We applied a conceptual framework and score-card developed by the Cambridge Conservation Forum (CCF) to a sample of 60 conservation activities to determine the predictive power of implementation measures versus measures of key outcomes (later steps in the models defined in the CCF tools). We show that assessing key outcomes is often more difficult than quantifying the degree of implementation of a project but that, while implementation is a poor predictor of success, key outcomes provide a feasible and much more reliable proxy for whether a project will deliver real conservation benefits. The CCF framework and evaluation tool provide a powerful basis for synthesizing past experience and, with wider application, will help to identify factors that affect the success of conservation activities