A variety of policy instruments are used to promote the conservation of biodiversity on private l... more A variety of policy instruments are used to promote the conservation of biodiversity on private land. These instruments are often employed in unison to encourage land stewardship beneficial for biodiversity across a broad range of program types, but questions remain about which instruments are the appropriate tools when seeking long-term change to land-management practice. Drawing on three case studies, two in Australia and one in South Africa, spanning various program types—a biodiverse carbon planting scheme, a covenanting program, and a voluntary stewardship program—we investigate the importance of financial incentives and other mechanisms from the landholder’s perspective. From participant interviews we find that landholders have preconceived notions of stewardship ethics. Motivations to enroll into a private land conservation program are not necessarily what drives ongoing participation, and continued delivery of multiple mechanisms will likely ensure long-term landholder engagement. Financial incentives are beneficial in lowering uptake costs to landholders but building landholder capacity, management assistance, linking participants to a network of conservation landholders, and recognition of conservation efforts may be more successful in fostering long-term biodiversity stewardship. Furthermore, we argue that diverse, multiple instrument approaches are needed to provide the flexibility required for dynamic, adaptive policy responses. We raise a number of key considerations for conservation organizations regarding the appropriate mix of financial and nonfinancial components of their programs to address long-term conservation objectives.
Kareiva and Fuller (2016) consider the future prospects for biodiversity conservation in the face... more Kareiva and Fuller (2016) consider the future prospects for biodiversity conservation in the face of the profound disruptions of the Anthropocene. They argue that more flexible and entrepreneurial approaches to conservation are needed. While some of the approaches they promote may work in particular situations, we believe their proposal risks unintended and detrimental social and ecological consequences by presenting them as global solutions to complex political, economic, social and ethical problems that are context-dependent. Here we argue that the authors inadequately considers the following core issues of biodiversity conservation, namely: (1) the structural causes of biodiversity depletion and the responsibilities of key actors; (2) the questions around what should be conserved, the processes by which biodiversity is valued, and who has the legitimate authority to value it; (3) the fact that new tools, technologies and innovative approaches are unsuitable as guiding principles to solve complex, context-dependent social-ecological problems; (4) the challenges of choosing relevant interventions, given experts’ limited ability to ‘manage for change and evolution’; and (5) the risks associated with promoting a utilitarian approach and a neoliberal governance model for conservation at the global scale.
Biodiversity offsets are often required to be like-for-like (non-flexible in type).Research has p... more Biodiversity offsets are often required to be like-for-like (non-flexible in type).Research has proposed that more flexible offsetting (in-type and otherwise) could be beneficial.We systematically categorise the various ways in which offsets could be flexible.Via simulation models, we show flexible offsets can have unintended consequences.Our work provides a means for considering flexibility in offset policy development.Biodiversity offsets (‘offsets’) are an increasingly widespread conservation tool. Often, offset policies have a like-for-like requirement, whereby permitted biodiversity losses must be offset by gains in similar ecosystem components. It has been suggested that some flexibility might improve offset outcomes — such as out-of-kind offsets, which channel compensation towards priority species. But there has been little formal exploration of other types of flexibility, and the possible ecological consequences.Building upon an existing framework for analysing conservation interventions, we first categorise the types of flexibility relevant to offsetting. We then explore ecological outcomes under two types of flexibility in offsetting, using a model which tracks biodiversity value (via the surrogate of ‘habitat condition’ × area) over time for multiple vegetation communities. We simulate offset policies that are flexible in time (i.e., offsets implemented before or after development) and flexible in type (i.e., losses in one habitat compensated for by gains in another).Our categorisation of flexibility identifies categories previously not explicitly considered during offset policy development. The simulation model showed that offsets that were flexible in time resulted in biodiversity declines happening sooner or later than they would otherwise — important, as conservation priorities change with time. Incorporating flexibility in type resulted in significantly different outcomes in value for each vegetation community modelled, including some counter-intuitive results.We emphasize the importance of considering the full spectrum of flexibility in biodiversity offsets during policy development. As offset policies become increasingly prevalent, insufficient consideration of the consequences of flexibility could lead to undesirable biodiversity outcomes.
Utilising relevant social data can improve the conservation effectiveness of SEA.Social data can ... more Utilising relevant social data can improve the conservation effectiveness of SEA.Social data can be incorporated into the existing Australian Strategic Assessment process.Spatially-referenced values, attitudes and behaviour can inform biodiversity impacts of plans.Social context of proposed land uses can guide development, protection and offsetting action.Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) is increasingly used to assess land use plans in a way that is broader in spatial, temporal and conceptual scope than traditional Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA). Meanwhile, conservation scientists have recognised that successful biodiversity conservation outcomes rely on information about both biological priorities and the feasibility of undertaking conservation actions. SEA provides a framework for integrating information on the social determinants of conservation feasibility with supporting environmental legislation in order to achieve enhanced conservation outcomes. In this paper we argue that data on the social context of land use plans are vital to ensure effective biodiversity conservation outcomes that result from SEAs. We explore the Australian Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act (1999) (EPBC Act) as a case example of how the integration of these data can be practically achieved within an existing legal process. While a range of social data is relevant to this type of assessment, we focus on the use of spatially-referenced social data in the context of land use planning. When applied to the design and implementation of land use plans, this type of information can improve the acceptability of conservation actions, enhance environmental stewardship, and minimise land use conflict through taking stock of the values and attitudes (precursors to behaviour) that are relevant to proposed land use change and conservation action. Through exploring the integration of these data into each of the stages of SEA under the EPBC Act, we show that opportunities exist to strengthen the effectiveness of SEA in delivering conservation outcomes without altering existing legal processes. Yet, for this to be done effectively, practitioners need to be cognisant of a range of theoretical and methodological challenges related to the generation and interpretation of these data, as well as the socio-political context in which they are applied.
We use a value orientation framework to analyse how the participation benefits of Australian priv... more We use a value orientation framework to analyse how the participation benefits of Australian private land conservation (PLC) schemes are framed.We find that messages are biased towards promoting environmental benefits compared to landholder and social benefits.This includes market-based schemes that seek to appeal to production-focussed landholders and those not already involved in conservation.We argue that framing the benefits of PLC more broadly would engage a greater diversity of landholders, aiding PLC recruitment.How conservation messages are framed will impact the success of our efforts to engage people in conservation action. This is highly relevant in the private land conservation (PLC) sector given the low participation rates of landholders. Using a case study of PLC schemes targeted at Australian landholders, we present the first systematic analysis of communication strategies used by organisations and government departments delivering those schemes to engage the public. We develop a novel approach for analysing the framing of conservation messages that codes the stated benefits of schemes according to value orientation. We categorised the benefits as flowing to either the landholder, to society, or to the environment, corresponding to the egoistic, altruistic and biospheric value orientations that have been shown to influence human behaviour. We find that messages are biased towards environmental benefits. Surprisingly, this is the case even for market-based schemes that have the explicit objective of appealing to production-focussed landholders and those who are not already involved in conservation. The risk is that PLC schemes framed in this way will fail to engage more egoistically oriented landholders and are only likely to appeal to those likely to already be conservation-minded. By understanding the frame in which PLC benefits are communicated, we can begin to understand the types of people who may be engaged by these messages, and who may not be. Results suggest that the framing of the communications for many schemes could be broadened to appeal to a more diverse group (and thus ultimately to a larger group) of landholders.
Conservation on private land is a growing part of international efforts to stem the decline of bi... more Conservation on private land is a growing part of international efforts to stem the decline of biodiversity. In many countries, private land conservation policy often supports in perpetuity covenants and easements, which are legally binding agreements used to protect biodiversity on private land by restricting activities that may negatively impact ecological values. With a view to understand the long-term security of these mechanisms, we examined release and breach data from all 13 major covenanting programs across Australia. We report that out of 6,818 multi-party covenants, only 8 had been released, contrasting with approximately 130 of 673 single-party covenants. Breach data was limited, with a minimum of 71 known cases where covenant obligations had not been met. With a focus on private land conservation policy, we use the results from this case study to argue that multi-party covenants appear an enduring conservation mechanism, highlight the important role that effective monitoring and reporting of the permanency of these agreements plays in contributing to their long-term effectiveness, and provide recommendations for organizations seeking to improve their monitoring programs. The collection of breach and release data is important for the continuing improvement of conservation policies and practices for private land.
A variety of policy instruments are used to promote the conservation of biodiversity on private l... more A variety of policy instruments are used to promote the conservation of biodiversity on private land. These instruments are often employed in unison to encourage land stewardship beneficial for biodiversity across a broad range of program types, but questions remain about which instruments are the appropriate tools when seeking long-term change to land-management practice. Drawing on three case studies, two in Australia and one in South Africa, spanning various program types—a biodiverse carbon planting scheme, a covenanting program, and a voluntary stewardship program—we investigate the importance of financial incentives and other mechanisms from the landholder’s perspective. From participant interviews we find that landholders have preconceived notions of stewardship ethics. Motivations to enroll into a private land conservation program are not necessarily what drives ongoing participation, and continued delivery of multiple mechanisms will likely ensure long-term landholder engagement. Financial incentives are beneficial in lowering uptake costs to landholders but building landholder capacity, management assistance, linking participants to a network of conservation landholders, and recognition of conservation efforts may be more successful in fostering long-term biodiversity stewardship. Furthermore, we argue that diverse, multiple instrument approaches are needed to provide the flexibility required for dynamic, adaptive policy responses. We raise a number of key considerations for conservation organizations regarding the appropriate mix of financial and nonfinancial components of their programs to address long-term conservation objectives.
Kareiva and Fuller (2016) consider the future prospects for biodiversity conservation in the face... more Kareiva and Fuller (2016) consider the future prospects for biodiversity conservation in the face of the profound disruptions of the Anthropocene. They argue that more flexible and entrepreneurial approaches to conservation are needed. While some of the approaches they promote may work in particular situations, we believe their proposal risks unintended and detrimental social and ecological consequences by presenting them as global solutions to complex political, economic, social and ethical problems that are context-dependent. Here we argue that the authors inadequately considers the following core issues of biodiversity conservation, namely: (1) the structural causes of biodiversity depletion and the responsibilities of key actors; (2) the questions around what should be conserved, the processes by which biodiversity is valued, and who has the legitimate authority to value it; (3) the fact that new tools, technologies and innovative approaches are unsuitable as guiding principles to solve complex, context-dependent social-ecological problems; (4) the challenges of choosing relevant interventions, given experts’ limited ability to ‘manage for change and evolution’; and (5) the risks associated with promoting a utilitarian approach and a neoliberal governance model for conservation at the global scale.
Biodiversity offsets are often required to be like-for-like (non-flexible in type).Research has p... more Biodiversity offsets are often required to be like-for-like (non-flexible in type).Research has proposed that more flexible offsetting (in-type and otherwise) could be beneficial.We systematically categorise the various ways in which offsets could be flexible.Via simulation models, we show flexible offsets can have unintended consequences.Our work provides a means for considering flexibility in offset policy development.Biodiversity offsets (‘offsets’) are an increasingly widespread conservation tool. Often, offset policies have a like-for-like requirement, whereby permitted biodiversity losses must be offset by gains in similar ecosystem components. It has been suggested that some flexibility might improve offset outcomes — such as out-of-kind offsets, which channel compensation towards priority species. But there has been little formal exploration of other types of flexibility, and the possible ecological consequences.Building upon an existing framework for analysing conservation interventions, we first categorise the types of flexibility relevant to offsetting. We then explore ecological outcomes under two types of flexibility in offsetting, using a model which tracks biodiversity value (via the surrogate of ‘habitat condition’ × area) over time for multiple vegetation communities. We simulate offset policies that are flexible in time (i.e., offsets implemented before or after development) and flexible in type (i.e., losses in one habitat compensated for by gains in another).Our categorisation of flexibility identifies categories previously not explicitly considered during offset policy development. The simulation model showed that offsets that were flexible in time resulted in biodiversity declines happening sooner or later than they would otherwise — important, as conservation priorities change with time. Incorporating flexibility in type resulted in significantly different outcomes in value for each vegetation community modelled, including some counter-intuitive results.We emphasize the importance of considering the full spectrum of flexibility in biodiversity offsets during policy development. As offset policies become increasingly prevalent, insufficient consideration of the consequences of flexibility could lead to undesirable biodiversity outcomes.
Utilising relevant social data can improve the conservation effectiveness of SEA.Social data can ... more Utilising relevant social data can improve the conservation effectiveness of SEA.Social data can be incorporated into the existing Australian Strategic Assessment process.Spatially-referenced values, attitudes and behaviour can inform biodiversity impacts of plans.Social context of proposed land uses can guide development, protection and offsetting action.Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) is increasingly used to assess land use plans in a way that is broader in spatial, temporal and conceptual scope than traditional Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA). Meanwhile, conservation scientists have recognised that successful biodiversity conservation outcomes rely on information about both biological priorities and the feasibility of undertaking conservation actions. SEA provides a framework for integrating information on the social determinants of conservation feasibility with supporting environmental legislation in order to achieve enhanced conservation outcomes. In this paper we argue that data on the social context of land use plans are vital to ensure effective biodiversity conservation outcomes that result from SEAs. We explore the Australian Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act (1999) (EPBC Act) as a case example of how the integration of these data can be practically achieved within an existing legal process. While a range of social data is relevant to this type of assessment, we focus on the use of spatially-referenced social data in the context of land use planning. When applied to the design and implementation of land use plans, this type of information can improve the acceptability of conservation actions, enhance environmental stewardship, and minimise land use conflict through taking stock of the values and attitudes (precursors to behaviour) that are relevant to proposed land use change and conservation action. Through exploring the integration of these data into each of the stages of SEA under the EPBC Act, we show that opportunities exist to strengthen the effectiveness of SEA in delivering conservation outcomes without altering existing legal processes. Yet, for this to be done effectively, practitioners need to be cognisant of a range of theoretical and methodological challenges related to the generation and interpretation of these data, as well as the socio-political context in which they are applied.
We use a value orientation framework to analyse how the participation benefits of Australian priv... more We use a value orientation framework to analyse how the participation benefits of Australian private land conservation (PLC) schemes are framed.We find that messages are biased towards promoting environmental benefits compared to landholder and social benefits.This includes market-based schemes that seek to appeal to production-focussed landholders and those not already involved in conservation.We argue that framing the benefits of PLC more broadly would engage a greater diversity of landholders, aiding PLC recruitment.How conservation messages are framed will impact the success of our efforts to engage people in conservation action. This is highly relevant in the private land conservation (PLC) sector given the low participation rates of landholders. Using a case study of PLC schemes targeted at Australian landholders, we present the first systematic analysis of communication strategies used by organisations and government departments delivering those schemes to engage the public. We develop a novel approach for analysing the framing of conservation messages that codes the stated benefits of schemes according to value orientation. We categorised the benefits as flowing to either the landholder, to society, or to the environment, corresponding to the egoistic, altruistic and biospheric value orientations that have been shown to influence human behaviour. We find that messages are biased towards environmental benefits. Surprisingly, this is the case even for market-based schemes that have the explicit objective of appealing to production-focussed landholders and those who are not already involved in conservation. The risk is that PLC schemes framed in this way will fail to engage more egoistically oriented landholders and are only likely to appeal to those likely to already be conservation-minded. By understanding the frame in which PLC benefits are communicated, we can begin to understand the types of people who may be engaged by these messages, and who may not be. Results suggest that the framing of the communications for many schemes could be broadened to appeal to a more diverse group (and thus ultimately to a larger group) of landholders.
Conservation on private land is a growing part of international efforts to stem the decline of bi... more Conservation on private land is a growing part of international efforts to stem the decline of biodiversity. In many countries, private land conservation policy often supports in perpetuity covenants and easements, which are legally binding agreements used to protect biodiversity on private land by restricting activities that may negatively impact ecological values. With a view to understand the long-term security of these mechanisms, we examined release and breach data from all 13 major covenanting programs across Australia. We report that out of 6,818 multi-party covenants, only 8 had been released, contrasting with approximately 130 of 673 single-party covenants. Breach data was limited, with a minimum of 71 known cases where covenant obligations had not been met. With a focus on private land conservation policy, we use the results from this case study to argue that multi-party covenants appear an enduring conservation mechanism, highlight the important role that effective monitoring and reporting of the permanency of these agreements plays in contributing to their long-term effectiveness, and provide recommendations for organizations seeking to improve their monitoring programs. The collection of breach and release data is important for the continuing improvement of conservation policies and practices for private land.
Uploads
articles by Mat Hardy