Artículos de revistas
Best of both worlds: Combining ecological and social research to inform conservation decisions in a Neotropical biodiversity hotspot
Fecha
2022-04-01Registro en:
Journal for Nature Conservation, v. 66.
1617-1381
10.1016/j.jnc.2022.126146
2-s2.0-85124617606
Autor
Universidade de São Paulo (USP)
Instituto Pró-Carnívoros
Tubney House
North of England Zoological Society (Chester Zoo)
University of East Anglia
Instituto Manacá
Universidade Federal do Paraná (UFPR)
Instituto de Pesquisas Cananéia
Instituto Chico Mendes de Conservação da Biodiversidade (ICMBio)
Universidade Federal de São Carlos (UFSCar)
Imperial College London
Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)
University of Miami
Institución
Resumen
Conservation decision is a challenging and risky task when it aims at prioritizing species or protected areas (PAs) to prevent extinction while ensuring fair treatment of all stakeholders. Better conservation decisions are those made upon a broader evidence base that includes both ecological and social considerations. However, in some of the most biodiverse ecosystems on Earth — tropical forests, for instance — multicriteria decision-making has been constrained by the following (i) ecological and social datasets available have been obtained in an independent, non-integrated manner, with social data typically more scarce than ecological ones, and (ii) capacity in social and/or interdisciplinary data analysis among decision-maker is limited. We describe a conservation prioritization exercise that combined findings from independent ecological and social research conducted in the Brazilian Atlantic Forest, and propose methods to integrate, analyze and visualize data. We found that the outcomes based on combined ecological and social research findings were, in some cases, different from those based on any of these lines of evidence alone. Indeed, the input from relatively basic social research significantly changed the outcomes of decision-making based on the results of ecological research. Results corroborate the importance and cost-effectiveness of broadening the interdisciplinary evidence base for conservation decision-making, even when social data is scarce and analytical capacity is limited.