Applied Filters
- Perspective
- Integrative SciencesRemove filter
- Ecology and EvolutionRemove filter
- FACETSRemove filter
- Open AccessRemove filter
Publication Date
Author
- Beirne, Christopher1
- Bowman, Jeff1
- Burton, A Cole1
- Chow-Fraser, Gillian1
- Chu, Cindy1
- Cimon-Morin, Jérôme1
- Connors, Katrina1
- Dey, Cody J1
- Drake, D Andrew R1
- Fortin, Marie-Josée1
- Francis, Abraham1
- Goyette, Jean-Olivier1
- Granados, Alys1
- Hodgson, Emma E1
- Hughes, Josie1
- Koops, Marten A1
- Kwong, Lian1
- Livingstone, Stuart W1
- Lortie, Christopher J1
- Mendes, Poliana1
- Miettunen, Anita1
- Owen, Malory1
- Pellerin, Stéphanie1
- Pither, Richard1
- Poulin, Monique1
Access Type
1 - 6of6
Save this search
Please login to be able to save your searches and receive alerts for new content matching your search criteria.
Filters
You do not have any saved searches
- OPEN ACCESSThere is a gap between fundamental science and managers. There are many general solutions including the need to better leverage the primary scientific literature for decision-making. Herein, we provide a list of 10 simple rules to support environmental management through better scientific writing and suggest practices for more transparent publications. These rules can also be used as a checklist for reusing the primary literature when searching for relevant evidence in the environmental sciences. We need to better structure knowledge in papers for connections within sustainable societies.
- OPEN ACCESSBalancing human well-being with the maintenance of ecosystem services (ES) for future generations has become one of the central sustainability challenges of the 21st century. In working landscapes, past and ongoing production-centered objectives have resulted in the conversion of ecosystems into simple land-use types, which has also altered the provision of most ES. These inevitable trade-offs between the efficient production of individual provisioning ES and the maintenance of regulating and cultural ES call for the development of a land-use strategy based on the multifunctional use of the landscape. Due to the heterogeneous nature of working landscapes, both protection and restoration actions are needed to improve their multifunctionality. Systematic conservation planning (SCP) offers a decision support framework that can support landscape multifunctionality by indicating where ES management efforts should be implemented. We describe an approach that we developed to include ES provision protection and restoration objectives in SCP with the goal of providing ongoing benefits to society. We explain the general framework of this approach and discuss concepts, challenges, innovations, and prospects for the further development of a comprehensive decision support tool. We illustrate our approach with two case studies implemented in the pan-Canadian project ResNet.
- OPEN ACCESSMismatches between institutions and social–ecological systems (SESs) are one of the foremost challenges in natural resource management. However, while mismatches are often cited in the literature as a major challenge, empirical evidence of mismatches and their consequences is limited. This is particularly true for complex SESs, such as on the Pacific Coast of North America, where salmon drive interactions across multiple environments, jurisdictions, and scales. Here, I use the theoretical concept of fit to examine institutional alignment in a large-scale Pacific salmon SES, the Skeena River watershed in British Columbia, Canada. Utilizing Canadian federal environmental assessments as a proxy for colonial environmental governance institutions, I describe the common causes and consequences of mismatches between institutions and salmon SESs. This case study suggests that mismatches are threatening salmon sustainability and negatively affecting Indigenous People’s rights, livelihoods, and approaches to resource management and stewardship. I argue that improving social–ecological fit in salmon SESs will require new or revitalized forms of environmental governance that consciously fit the underlying social–ecological dynamics. While these findings are based on the Skeena River watershed, they may be generalizable to other salmon SESs in which mismatches between social and ecological processes and institutions exist.
- OPEN ACCESSHabitat sensitivity is a consideration for decision-making under environmental laws in many jurisdictions. However, habitat sensitivity has been variously defined and there is no consistent approach to its quantification, which limits our understanding of how habitat sensitivity varies among systems and in response to different pressures. We review various definitions offered in the scientific literature and policy documents before suggesting a universal framework for habitat sensitivity as (i) a habitat trait that defines the ecological impacts from a given pressure, (ii) which is composed of three components (habitat resistance, resilience, and recoverability), and (iii) which is quantified by measuring the change and recovery in the state of key habitat attributes in response to pressures. In addition, we provide guidance toward a consistent approach to assessing habitat sensitivity, which includes the use of pressure benchmarks and standardized metrics of change in key habitat attributes to create a common scale for comparison among habitat attributes and pressures. Our framework and recommendations should help to standardize the way in which habitat sensitivity is defined and assessed, and could be integrated into decision-making processes to improve ecosystem management in different jurisdictions.
- OPEN ACCESS
- Catherine Sun,
- Alys Granados,
- Christopher Beirne,
- Gillian Chow-Fraser,
- Abraham Francis,
- Lian Kwong,
- Peter Soroye,
- Helen Yip,
- Anita Miettunen,
- Jeff Bowman, and
- A. Cole Burton
Funding is critical in ecology and related fields, as it enables research and sustains livelihoods. However, early-career researchers (ECRs) from diverse backgrounds are disproportionately underrepresented as funding recipients. To help funding programs self-evaluate progress towards increasing equity, diversity, and inclusion (EDI) in their funding opportunities, we introduce the Stage-based Assessments of Grants for EDI (SAGE) Toolkit. Developed using existing literature, semi-structured interviews, and coauthors’ experiences, the toolkit considers how each funding stage (Advertisement, Application, Review, Awarding) interacts with applicants from racialized and other underrepresented backgrounds. The toolkit offers specific criteria and recommendations, with explanations and examples from funding agencies, to support applicants who have been historically marginalized in ecology and are often left out of equitable funding consideration. Changes in funding mechanisms alone will not reverse the marginalization of communities and peoples in the field of ecology, but advancing EDI must include action throughout the grant process. Efforts to increase EDI must be sustained, and the toolkit allows for additional considerations and evolving best practices. With the SAGE Toolkit, efforts to increase EDI can help to transition away from a transactional dynamic between funder and applicant to instead supportive community and collaboration. The SAGE Toolkit is available online at bit.ly/ediSAGEtoolkit. - OPEN ACCESSExpanding and creating protected area networks has become a central pillar of global conservation planning. In the management and design of protected area networks, we must consider not only the positive aspects of landscape connectivity but also how that connectivity may facilitate the spread of invasive species, a challenge that has become known as the connectivity conundrum. Here, we review key considerations for landscape connectivity planning for protected area networks, focusing on interactions between network connectivity and the management of invasive species. We propose an integrative adaptive management framework for protected area network planning with five main elements, including monitoring, budgeting considerations, risk assessment, inter-organizational coordination, and local engagement. Protected area planners can address the dynamic aspects of the connectivity conundrum through collaborative and integrative adaptive management planning.