Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment最新文献

Human–nature relationships are often framed positively, but research rarely addresses biophobia, the aversion to nature. However, negative relationships with nature are likely to become more widespread following societal and environmental changes, with serious implications for public health and conservation efforts. Here, we performed a systematic review of 196 studies on biophobia, revealing a fragmentation of knowledge across disciplines, including environmental sciences, psychology, and social sciences. To unify this research, we introduce a cohesive framework summarizing the drivers and consequences of, as well as treatments for, biophobia. Based on the current body of evidence, understanding changes in human–nature dynamics will require enhanced interdisciplinary collaboration, greater attention to cultural and regional differences, and longitudinal studies. In addition, we call for studies of biophobia that extend beyond animal species typically linked to fear or disgust. Broadening the scope of such research will lead to greater appreciation of the full range of human–nature interactions—from affinity to aversion—and ultimately improve conservation strategies.

Ecology and conservation researchers have diverse goals that often include both personal career aspirations and desires to enhance the well-being of the natural world and its inhabitants. Perception of ecological research by ecologists typically involves a triad—linking goals, research, and impact. Yet the realities of scientific practice are substantially more complicated due to numerous constraints that limit the ability of researchers to conduct ecological research and to have a genuine impact. Many of these barriers can be mitigated, leading to more effective contributions to society and biodiversity conservation. Here, we outline frequently encountered constraints in ecological research institutions and, by drawing upon many practices used internationally, we identify feasible mitigations and highlight examples of negative consequences that can occur in the absence of effective mitigation strategies. Finally, we propose changes to aspects of the culture and reward systems that would allow ecological research as a discipline to more effectively achieve societal, environmental, and personal goals.

Sizable efforts and international collaborations are underway to restore natural landscape connectivity and establish green infrastructure. At the same time, there is evidence globally of how disturbance-related changes in tree composition from human activities such as reforestation, logging, fire management, and land clearing are impacting nutritional landscapes, altering ecosystem functioning, and influencing the distribution and abundance of browsers. In disturbance and restoration scenarios, the underlying chemical ecology that influences the function of these forests as food for folivores is often overlooked in management actions. This oversight can result in landscapes that fall short in their ability to support viable populations of browsers and other species that depend on them. We must improve our understanding and awareness of how plant composition affects habitat nutritional quality so that this knowledge can be applied to landscape management and restoration.

Protected areas (PAs) and other effective area-based conservation measures (OECMs) are crucial to sustainable development, yet their contributions to environmental, social, and economic dimensions remain unclear. We investigated the role of PAs and OECMs in advancing the sustainable development agenda by summarizing 400 effect-size values and measuring their impact on the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Our meta-analysis reveals that, while PAs generally have the potential to enhance sustainable development indicators, certain negative outcomes also emerge, highlighting the need for context-specific analysis and a keen understanding of inherent trade-offs. Although PAs typically support environmental goals, such as SDGs 14 and 15, they often struggle to balance social and economic objectives. We emphasize the importance of integrated assessments that incorporate diverse and better indicators, context-specific factors, and the perspectives of multiple stakeholders. This approach is vital for maximizing the contributions of PAs to sustainable development, particularly in terms of advancing various dimensions of human well-being.

Successful conservation of migratory birds relies on coordinated management across international borders. Here, we determined the geographic and taxonomic coverage of international agreements aimed at protecting migratory birds. We identified 49 international migratory bird agreements spanning 187 countries and covering 1,677 (86%) of the world’s 1,958 migratory bird species. Fewer such agreements were located in middle-income countries characterized by less effective governance, small size, and few bordering countries. Threatened species were listed in fewer agreements than non-threatened species. Waterbird species tended to be listed individually by species name, while non-waterbird species tended to be covered implicitly through the listing of higher taxonomic ranks such as Families or Orders. Of the migratory bird species, only 28% had all their range countries participating in at least one agreement, while 14% had none. With large geographic gaps remaining, much work needs to be done to expand the global network of migratory bird agreements.

The value of scientists engaging with community members and other public audiences is widely recognized, and there is a growing literature devoted to the theory and practice of public engagement with science. However, as a group of professionals concerned with how public engagement is understood and practiced in the fields of ecology and environmental science, we see a need for accessible guidance for scientists who want to engage effectively, and for scientific leaders who want to support successful public engagement programs in their institutions. Here, we highlight six attributes of successful public engagement efforts led by scientists and scientific institutions: (1) strategic, (2) cumulative, (3) reciprocal, (4) reflexive, (5) equitable, and (6) evidence-based. By designing and developing practices that incorporate these attributes, scientists and scientific organizations will be better poised to build two-way linkages with communities that, over time, support science-informed decision-making in society and societally informed decision-making in science.

Over the past few decades, we’ve witnessed an explosion in the amount of data available to ecologists. We can now measure the greenness of the planet from satellites; track the movements of individual organisms across the globe; and obtain real-time, high-frequency information from sensor networks distributed across land, air, and aquatic systems. But is the current interest in big data distracting us from measuring what truly matters?

Clearly, so much ecological research involves careful experimental design and considerations of statistical power. But not every hypothesis can be tested with experiments. Here, I am more focused on observational studies with large, often publicly available, datasets. Much of my own research has concentrated on this type of work. Monitoring for the sake of monitoring is important as it can lead to surprising results or new questions we never envisioned. At the same time, I believe that, at both individual and institutional levels, we need to be thoughtful about how we design new monitoring programs or use data from existing programs.

In some cases, the right variables often prove difficult to measure, while the wrong ones remain within easy reach. For example, imagine you are studying what may be driving invertebrate population dynamics in a temperate estuary. Temperature loggers cost little to deploy, and temperature data may already be available from existing monitoring programs. Each logger can collect millions of datapoints over a short time window, even if there is little variation over time. In addition, we may have equal rationale to consider other variables, such as dissolved oxygen or pH, which are harder and costlier to monitor. The sheer volume of temperature data and relative ease in its collection can create the illusion of importance, but convenience is not the same as relevance. What’s more, when our response variables and predictors are constrained by what data are available, the scope of questions we can ask is also limited.

The same dynamic plays out with new technologies—from eDNA to acoustic recorders to GPS tags—that generate reams of new data. These tools expand what we can measure, but they don’t tell us what we should measure. Too often, our technological tunnel vision drives the questions we ask, drawing attention away from the data that may be harder to collect but ultimately more important.

The abundance of data also brings new challenges. With large datasets, issues of data quality and bias can easily go unnoticed, creating a false sense of confidence that more data automatically translates into better science. In hypothesis testing, very large samples reduce standard errors, making even trivial relationships appear statistically significant—though they may have little or no biological meaning.

To overcome these challenges, we need to return to the roots of our discipline. What questions do we want to address? By choosing the questions ourselves, i