Search

The Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF), signed in 2022 by Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity, recognized the importance of area-based conservation, and its goals and targets specify the characteristics of protected and conserved areas (PCAs) that disproportionately contribute to biodiversity conservation. To achieve the GBF's target of conserving a global area of 30% by 2030, this Essay argues for recognizing these characteristics and scaling them up through the conservation of areas that are: extensive (typically larger than 5,000 km2); have interconnected PCAs (either physically or as part of a jurisdictional network, and frequently embedded in larger conservation landscapes); have high ecological integrity; and are effectively managed and equitably governed. These areas are presented as "Nature's Strongholds," illustrated by examples from the Congo and Amazon basins. Conserving Nature's Strongholds offers an approach to scale up initiatives to address global threats to biodiversity., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist., (Copyright: © 2024 Robinson et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.)

As the terrestrial human footprint continues to expand, the amount of native forest that is free from significant damaging human activities is in precipitous decline. There is emerging evidence that the remaining intact forest supports an exceptional confluence of globally significant environmental values relative to degraded forests, including imperilled biodiversity, carbon sequestration and storage, water provision, indigenous culture and the maintenance of human health. Here we argue that maintaining and, where possible, restoring the integrity of dwindling intact forests is an urgent priority for current global efforts to halt the ongoing biodiversity crisis, slow rapid climate change and achieve sustainability goals. Retaining the integrity of intact forest ecosystems should be a central component of proactive global and national environmental strategies, alongside current efforts aimed at halting deforestation and promoting reforestation.

The conservation community increasingly views the corporate sector as a positive force for conservation. Collaborations between corporations and nongovernmental conservation organizations (NGOs) seek to mitigate the negative effects of corporate activities and augment positive conservation outcomes. I reviewed the establishment of corporate social responsibility (CSR) policies by corporations; the emerging focus on environmental practices and sustainability; and the history of engagement between corporations and nongovernmental organizations. I considered the ethical and reputation vulnerabilities of these collaborations, which depend especially on the financial nature of the relationship and reviewed how CSR approaches have influenced corporate practices. I concluded that whereas CSR practices can act to mitigate negative environmental impact, to date they have had limited positive effect on biodiversity conservation., (©2012 Society for Conservation Biology.)

In the 20 years since Conservation Biology was launched with the aim of disseminating scientific knowledge to help conserve biodiversity and the natural world, our discipline has hugely influenced the practice of conservation. But we have had less impact outside the profession itself and we have not transformed that practice into an enterprise large enough to achieve our conservation goals. As we look to the next 20 years, we need to become more relevant and important to the societies in which we live. To do so, the discipline of conservation biology must generate answers even when full scientific knowledge is lacking, structure scientific research around polices and debates that influence what we value as conservationists, go beyond the certitude of the biological sciences into the more contextual debates of the social sciences, engage scientifically with human-dominated landscapes, and address the question of how conservation can contribute to the improvement of human livelihoods and the quality of human life.

Abstract: Conservation organizations are asked to be responsive to a number of ethical obligations beyond that of the conservation of biodiversity: the reduction of poverty, the imperative of social justice and cultural integrity, and the improvement in human livelihoods. Yet how a conservation project is designed and structured can negatively impact people’s access to resources, privilege one group of people over another, or protect some species at a cost to others. Ideological conflict among nature protectionists, advocates for indigenous people, those promoting a pro-poor agenda, and those seeking to move conservation into the economic mainstream has characterized the conservation debate. I argue that in practice, most conservation programs should adopt a pluralistic and pragmatic approach, adopting multiple goals and making decisions on the basis of what works. Choosing among approaches requires an appreciation of trade-offs, and consideration of biological, social, and cultural values. Ultimately conservation approaches must be sustainable – ecologically, culturally, socially, economically and politically – otherwise they will fail both practically and ethically. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

The article comments on the paper "Partnerships for tropical conservation," by Sonja Vermeulen and Douglas Sheil. The author claims the paper makes a strong case that partnerships between conservationists and local people. The author contends that the concept of partnerships must evolve away from notions of common goals and sharing decisions, rights, responsibilities and risks equitably, and towards specified outcomes associated with clearly understood expectations, commitments and roles.