Opinion
What Conservation Does

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2018.07.004Get rights and content

Highlights

We test how conservation documents biodiversity status, threats, and solutions.

Many threats to biodiversity are reported as well as some taxonomic bias.

However, biodiversity comebacks are documented as well as effective conservation tools.

New routes to conservation are neither necessary nor sufficient to halt biodiversity loss.

New agendas for conservation are regularly proposed based on the ground that existing strategies are overly pessimistic, restricted to biodiversity hotspots, and inappropriate to halt biodiversity loss. However, little empirical evidence supports such claims. Here we review the 12 971 papers published in the leading conservation journals during the last 15 years to assess what conservation actually does. Although conservation research is affected by specific bias, conservation is playing a major role in providing empirical evidence of human impacts on biodiversity. Encouraging biodiversity comebacks are also published and a wide range of conservation tools, beyond the development of protected areas in wilderness areas, are promoted. We argue that finding new routes to conservation is neither necessary nor sufficient to halt biodiversity loss.

Section snippets

The Agenda of Conservation Science Discredited

Biodiversity loss is not decelerating [1], either in the terrestrial [2] or marine biotas [3] and affects most taxa, particularly birds and mammals [4]. In addition to its velocity, one of the features of the current situation lies in its anthropogenic origin [5]. This critical transition has been labeled as ‘Anthropocene’ by scientists, policymakers, and the broader public [6]. However, these conditions were already recognized more than three decades ago, when they led to the emergence of the

Scrutinizing the Academic Conservation Corpus

We analyzed the titles, abstracts, and, if necessary, full-texts of all scientific papers published from January 2000 to February 2015 in the nine leading international conservation science journals. We restricted this analysis to journals corresponding to the field ‘conservation’ according to the Web of Science: Animal Conservation, Biodiversity and Conservation, Biological Conservation, Conservation Biology, Conservation Letters, Diversity and Distributions, Environmental Conservation,

Diversity and Distribution of Status, Threats, and Solutions in Space and among Taxonomic Groups

From January 2000 to February 2015, the nine journals published 12 971 papers. The annual publication rate increased from 2000 to 2014, partly due to the appearance of three new journals: Conservation Letters, Diversity and Distributions, and the Journal for Nature Conservation. The year 2015 was not included in this analysis as data were not available for the full year (linear trend: +35 papers a year, F1,13 = 49.25, P < 0.01, R2 = 0.79).

The analysis showed that 76% of papers (9844) could not be

The Diversity and Effectiveness of Conservation Solutions

Our review reveals a wide range of conservation solutions, with numerous types of solutions ranging from traditional conservation tools such as protected areas and rather ‘technical’ solutions (species translocation, habitat restoration–creation, species-specific management, etc.), to ‘human-friendly’ measures such as promoting a sustainable use of natural resources, or social and economic solutions rather than restricting conservation strategies to nature protection. If protected areas remain

Diversity in Study Areas and Species

We found great diversity in focus regarding geographical areas and species. As it has been reported elsewhere (e.g., 19, 20, 21, 22, 23), more studies have been conducted in terrestrial than marine systems. Most studies were species specific, and essentially focused on birds and mammals. This taxa bias was demonstrated by Amori and Gippoliti [24]. It continues to be used to justify the revision of conservation agendas, specifically to take the focus off charismatic species and biodiversity

Realistic Conservation: Beyond Pessimism and Optimism

Investigating the past, present, and future of conservation science needs empirical support. Assessing its effectiveness should rest on empirical studies that make an objective evaluation of the failure and success of conservation actions 25, 26, 27. Long-term progress toward the global objective of reducing biodiversity loss has led to massive efforts dedicated to the inventory, survey, and monitoring of biological components in space and time. Lists of biodiversity indicators (e.g., the Red

Concluding Remarks

The aim of our study was to take a step back from current, simplistic, ideological positions, and investigate the scientific conservation literature. In doing so, we do not claim to contribute to classical ethical debates on conservation motives (e.g., as in the long-lasting discussions about wilderness and intrinsic values) or to more recent initiatives on global land sparing or sharing (e.g., Nature Needs Half movement [40]). But our empirical approach provides sufficient arguments to

References (41)

  • P.J. Crutzen

    Geology of mankind

    Nature

    (2002)
  • M. Soulé

    What is conservation biology?

    Bioscience

    (1985)
  • G. Mace

    Whose conservation?

    Science

    (2014)
  • T.S. Garnett et al.

    Conservation science must engender hope to succeed

    Trend Ecol. Evol.

    (2011)
  • P. Kareiva et al.

    What is conservation science?

    Bioscience

    (2012)
  • P. Kareiva

    Conservation in the Anthropocene: beyond solitude and fragility

    Breakthrough J.

    (2012)
  • P. Kareiva

    New conservation: setting the record straight and finding common ground

    Conserv. Biol.

    (2014)
  • B. Lomborg

    The Skeptical Environmentalist: Measuring the Real State of the World

    (2001)
  • S. Pimm et al.

    The skeptical environmentalist: measuring the real state of the world

    Nature

    (2001)
  • W.R. Moowaw

    Lomborg’s The skeptical environmentalist: refuting a scientific model without science

    Conserv. Biol.

    (2002)
  • Cited by (61)

    • The bright side of ecological stressors

      2023, Trends in Ecology and Evolution
    • Do environmental systematic reviews impact policy and practice? Author perspectives on the application of their work

      2022, Environmental Science and Policy
      Citation Excerpt :

      Ten and twenty years later, there were 108,716 (in 2008) and 271,080 (in 2018). The volume of published academic research continues to increase as new journals of varying quality are launched around the world (Godet and Devictor, 2018). This worsens problems of search and interpretation for decision-makers, as it increases the time required for evaluating individual publications, as well as the possibility that essential information to guide decision-making is lost in the sea of scientific publications.

    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text