ORCID Profile
0000-0001-7337-8977
Current Organisation
University of Kent
Does something not look right? The information on this page has been harvested from data sources that may not be up to date. We continue to work with information providers to improve coverage and quality. To report an issue, use the Feedback Form.
In Research Link Australia (RLA), "Research Topics" refer to ANZSRC FOR and SEO codes. These topics are either sourced from ANZSRC FOR and SEO codes listed in researchers' related grants or generated by a large language model (LLM) based on their publications.
Environment Policy | Environmental Science and Management | Environmental Management | Conservation and Biodiversity
Remnant Vegetation and Protected Conservation Areas at Regional or Larger Scales | Mining Land and Water Management | Ecosystem Assessment and Management of Mining Environments |
Publisher: Wiley
Date: 13-02-2014
DOI: 10.1111/COBI.12243
Publisher: Wiley
Date: 10-09-2020
DOI: 10.1111/COBI.13570
Publisher: Wiley
Date: 14-07-2016
Publisher: Wiley
Date: 05-05-2021
DOI: 10.1111/CSP2.431
Abstract: In the USA, Species Conservation Banking is a prominent ex le of compensatory bio ersity impact mitigation, with an annual market value estimated at US$354.2 million. Species Conservation Banking represents a useful case study of a well‐established program that can provide empirical insights into the practicalities of implementing quantitative compensatory bio ersity mitigation on‐the‐ground. Using semi‐structured key‐informant interviews structured around well‐established technical challenges to compensatory mitigation, this study aimed to understand (i) how and why these challenges are or are not addressed in practice and (ii) how these challenges relate to practical challenges faced by conservation banking stakeholders on‐the‐ground. Challenges identified included: (i) defining trading currencies and equivalence, (ii) regulatory and political uncertainty, (iii) regulatory agency capacity, will and knowledge, (iv) lack of policies, standards, and competition with other mitigation mechanisms, (v) long‐term uncertainty/longevity, and (vi) lack of species knowledge and data transparency. These challenges are numerous, erse, interlinked and transdisciplinary, and collectively inhibit the ability of practitioners to resolve underlying technical challenges—a finding likely applicable to related bio ersity offset programs. To help address challenges and navigate this complexity, we formulate several recommendations for conservation banking stakeholders to improve the chances of beneficial bio ersity outcomes being achieved.
Publisher: Elsevier BV
Date: 12-2015
Publisher: Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Date: 08-01-2018
Publisher: Wiley
Date: 20-02-2015
Publisher: Wiley
Date: 31-05-2021
DOI: 10.1111/CONL.12816
Abstract: The new global bio ersity framework (GBF) being developed under the Convention on Biological Diversity must drive action to reverse the ongoing decline of the Earth's bio ersity. Explicit, measurable goals that specify the outcomes we want to achieve are needed to set the course for this action. However, the current draft goals and targets fail to set out these clear outcomes. We argue that distinct outcome goals for species, ecosystems, and genetic ersity are essential and should specify net outcomes required for each. Net outcome goals such as “no net loss” do, however, have a controversial history, and loose specification can lead to perverse outcomes. We outline seven general principles to underpin net outcome goal setting that minimize risk of such perverse outcomes. Finally, we recommend inclusion of statements of impact in action targets that support bio ersity goals, and we illustrate the importance of this with an ex le from the draft GBF action targets. These modifications would help reveal the specific contribution each action would make to achieving the outcome goals and provide clarity on whether the successful achievement of action targets would be adequate to achieve the outcome goals and, in turn, the 2050 vision: living in harmony with nature .
Publisher: Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Date: 16-12-2020
DOI: 10.1038/S41559-019-1067-Z
Abstract: A global goal of no net loss of natural ecosystems or better has recently been proposed, but such a goal would require equitable translation to country-level contributions. Given the wide variation in ecosystem depletion, these could vary from net gain (for countries where restoration is needed), to managed net loss (in rare circumstances where natural ecosystems remain extensive and human development imperative is greatest). National contributions and international support for implementation also must consider non-area targets (for ex le, for threatened species) and socioeconomic factors such as the capacity to conserve and the imperative for human development.
Publisher: Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Date: 04-11-2019
Publisher: Oxford University Press (OUP)
Date: 13-04-2016
Publisher: Oxford University Press (OUP)
Date: 18-04-2018
Publisher: Wiley
Date: 2021
Abstract: 1. To be effective, the next generation of conservation practitioners and managers need to be critical thinkers with a deep understanding of how to make evidence‐based decisions and of the value of evidence synthesis. 2. If, as educators, we do not make these priorities a core part of what we teach, we are failing to prepare our students to make an effective contribution to conservation practice. 3. To help overcome this problem we have created open access online teaching materials in multiple languages that are stored in Applied Ecology Resources. So far, 117 educators from 23 countries have acknowledged the importance of this and are already teaching or about to teach skills in appraising or using evidence in conservation decision‐making. This includes 145 undergraduate, postgraduate or professional development courses. 4. We call for wider teaching of the tools and skills that facilitate evidence‐based conservation and also suggest that providing online teaching materials in multiple languages could be beneficial for improving global understanding of other subject areas.
Publisher: Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Date: 14-05-2013
DOI: 10.1017/S003060531200172X
Abstract: Bio ersity offsets are an increasingly popular yet controversial tool in conservation. Their popularity lies in their potential to meet the objectives of bio ersity conservation and of economic development in tandem the controversy lies in the need to accept ecological losses in return for uncertain gains. The offsetting approach is being widely adopted, even though its methodologies and the overriding conceptual framework are still under development. This review of bio ersity offsetting evaluates implementation to date and synthesizes outstanding theoretical and practical problems. We begin by outlining the criteria that make bio ersity offsets unique and then explore the suite of conceptual challenges arising from these criteria and indicate potential design solutions. We find that bio ersity offset schemes have been inconsistent in meeting conservation objectives because of the challenge of ensuring full compliance and effective monitoring and because of conceptual flaws in the approach itself. Evidence to support this conclusion comes primarily from developed countries, although offsets are increasingly being implemented in the developing world. We are at a critical stage: bio ersity offsets risk becoming responses to immediate development and conservation needs without an overriding conceptual framework to provide guidance and evaluation criteria. We clarify the meaning of the term bio ersity offset and propose a framework that integrates the consideration of theoretical and practical challenges in the offset process. We also propose a research agenda for specific topics around metrics, baselines and uncertainty.
Publisher: Wiley
Date: 13-09-2016
DOI: 10.1111/ECOG.02481
Publisher: Elsevier BV
Date: 2021
Publisher: Elsevier BV
Date: 12-2015
Publisher: Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Date: 30-07-2015
Publisher: Wiley
Date: 14-07-2020
DOI: 10.1002/BSE.2573
Location: United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
Location: United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
Start Date: 10-2022
End Date: 09-2026
Amount: $484,029.00
Funder: Australian Research Council
View Funded Activity