Forests as Resources for the Poor : The Rainforest Challenge.

At AGM01, the CGIAR decided to immediately initiate the regular Challenge Program(CP) process by calling for ideas. Of the 41 CP ideas received, 13 were recommended bythe interim Science Council (iSC) and endorsed by the CGIAR for pre-proposaldevelopment. The attached pre-proposal, Forests as Resources for the Poor: The Rainforest Challenge, is one of four proposals that the iSC considered meritorious and would further consider for review after meeting certain requirements. This preproposal was discussed at the stakeholder meeting at AGM02 : Agenda item 3, session III.Document date and author are unspecified

Women, wellbeing and Wildlife Management Areas in Tanzania

Community-based wildlife management claims pro-poor, gender-sensitive outcomes. However, intersectional political ecology predicts adverse impacts on marginalised people. Our large-scale quantitative approach draws out common patterns and differentiated ways women are affected by Tanzania’s Wildlife Management Areas (WMAs). This first large-scale, rigorous evaluation studies WMA impacts on livelihoods and wellbeing of 937 married women in 42 villages across six WMAs and matched controls in Northern and Southern Tanzania. While WMAs bring community infrastructure benefits, most women have limited political participation, and experience resource use restrictions and fear of wildlife attacks. Wealth and region are important determinants, with the poorest worst impacted

Care in the time of catastrophe: citizenship, community and the ecological imagination

Published without an abstract

Funding begets biodiversity

Aim  Effective conservation of biodiversity relies on an unbiased knowledge of its distribution. Conservation priority assessments are typically based on the levels of species richness, endemism and threat. Areas identified as important receive the majority of conservation investments, often facilitating further research that results in more species discoveries. Here, we test whether there is circularity between funding and perceived biodiversity, which may reinforce the conservation status of areas already perceived to be important while other areas with less initial funding may remain overlooked. Location  Eastern Arc Mountains, Tanzania. Methods  We analysed time series data (1980–2007) of funding (n = 134 projects) and plant species records (n = 75,631) from a newly compiled database. Perceived plant diversity, over three decades, is regressed against funding and environmental factors, and variances decomposed in partial regressions. Cross-correlations are used to assess whether perceived biodiversity drives funding or vice versa. Results  Funding explained 65% of variation in perceived biodiversity patterns – six times more variation than accounted for by 34 candidate environmental factors. Cross-correlation analysis showed that funding is likely to be driving conservation priorities and not vice versa. It was also apparent that investment itself may trigger further investments as a result of reduced start-up costs for new projects in areas where infrastructure already exists. It is therefore difficult to establish whether funding, perceived biodiversity, or both drive further funding. However, in all cases, the results suggest that regional assessments of biodiversity conservation importance may be biased by investment. Funding effects might also confound studies on mechanisms of species richness patterns. Main conclusions  Continued biodiversity loss commands urgent conservation action even if our knowledge of its whereabouts is incomplete; however, by concentrating inventory funds in areas already perceived as important in terms of biodiversity and/or where start-up costs are lower, we risk losing other areas of underestimated or unknown value