Search

Voting systems aggregate preferences efficiently and are often used for deciding conservation priorities. Desirable characteristics of voting systems include transitivity, completeness, and Pareto optimality, among others. Voting systems that are common and potentially useful for environmental decision making include simple majority, approval, and preferential voting. Unfortunately, no voting system can guarantee an outcome, while also satisfying a range of very reasonable performance criteria. Furthermore, voting methods may be manipulated by decision makers and strategic voters if they have knowledge of the voting patterns and alliances of others in the voting populations. The difficult properties of voting systems arise in routine decision making when there are multiple criteria and management alternatives. Because each method has flaws, we do not endorse one method. Instead, we urge organizers to be transparent about the properties of proposed voting systems and to offer participants the opportunity to approve the voting system as part of the ground rules for operation of a group.

Demand is increasing among investors to create portfolios that encourage positive outcomes for biological diversity. The evolution of investment strategies for transitions to zero carbon over the last two decades provides insights that will assist in shaping strategies for biodiversity‐positive investments. Many emerging approaches to capture company impact and dependence on biodiversity focus on nature‐related threats to an organisation by assessing ecosystem integrity. Other approaches focus on minimising an organisation's contribution to risks of species extinction by using data sets such as the IUCN's Red List of Threatened Species. However, while these approaches are useful for assessing threats to and from biodiversity for individual companies, to be effective for investment portfolio construction, metrics need to be comparable across companies in an investment universe. Many of the threat assessments that could link corporate activities to impacts are incomplete and omit critical information. If the investment community focuses on biodiversity without sufficient forethought, there is a risk of entrenching metrics with significant flaws. In this paper, we suggest that interim approaches are needed to support investors in understanding the approaches being taken by potential investee companies. To that end, we present and discuss a disclosure‐based Biodiversity Management Quality and a classification‐based Biodiversity Revenues metric for biodiversity‐related investing. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The movement and dispersal of animals between populations is an important component of wildlife ecology and has been described as “the glue that holds local populations together.” Without adequate ability to disperse, the rate of movement of individuals and DNA between populations is reduced and these populations become isolated, increasing the risk of local extinction. Most research addressing the barrier effect of roads and traffic has focussed on the use of crossing structures by wildlife. Our study is a first for Australia and represents a unique collaboration to quantify the barrier effect in a highly fragmented landscape and (subsequently) the success of mitigation. The aims of the project are to use genetic techniques and empirical observations to quantify the barrier effect of roads on the movement and dispersal of mammals, reptiles, birds, and invertebrates and to assess the effectiveness of structures and road designs intended to mitigate the barrier effect. Quantitative modeling will also be implemented to predict the effects of reduced movement on population viability. A range of genetic markers is available for use in population biology to measure dispersal. Microsatellites are hypervariable and sensitive enough to be able to detect genetic differentiation in the short term and at small spatial scales, and are therefore appropriate to investigate genetic substructuring due to the presence of roads. Genetic analyses will be used at different scales of resolution. The genic approach will be employed for identifying population substructuring and patterns of gene flow at the population level. The genotypic approach will be used for finer-scale observations of dispersal of individuals. Direct methods still provide highly reliable data on dispersal parameters, although they rely on logistically difficult field observations. Trapping and radio tracking will be used in the present project to be combined with and strengthen the results obtained from genetic analyses. Repeated trapping will provide life history information which can aid in understanding the genetic data and contribute to the population viability models. Radio tracking will be used to collect information on daily movements of mammals in relation to foraging as well as dispersal and to assess the effectiveness of mitigation structures. Finally, quantitative population modelling will be conducted to estimate the effects of inhibited dispersal on population viability. Data from observations and genetic studies will be used to characterise populations in terms of age and stage structures, fecundity, survival, and dispersal. Data collected over three years will be used to characterise variability in the parameters to improve population modelling.