在大象保护中纳入 "共同福祉 "方法:评估管理干预措施的后果

IF 3.6 2区 社会学 Q1 ECOLOGY Ecology and Society Pub Date : 2024-08-31 DOI:10.5751/es-15193-290315
Antoinette Van de Water, Marion E. Garaï, Matthew M. Burnett, Michelle D. Henley, Enrico Di Minin, Jarryd P. Streicher, Lucy A. Bates, Rob Slotow
{"title":"在大象保护中纳入 \"共同福祉 \"方法:评估管理干预措施的后果","authors":"Antoinette Van de Water, Marion E. Garaï, Matthew M. Burnett, Michelle D. Henley, Enrico Di Minin, Jarryd P. Streicher, Lucy A. Bates, Rob Slotow","doi":"10.5751/es-15193-290315","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Innovative conservation approaches are urgently needed to balance biodiversity conservation with human development. Safeguarding elephant populations often involves active management, leading to direct intentional, direct unintentional, and indirect consequences for animals, people, and ecosystems. Drawing from One Health and One Welfare principles, our study introduces a multicriteria framework for developing conservation strategies that enhance well-being across dimensions. This approach establishes priorities, acceptability zones, and One Well-being scores that guide decision making toward optimal outcomes. We applied our One Well-being framework to evaluate 12 elephant management interventions currently or historically used in South Africa. Examining data from 3306 instances of these interventions, including on-the-ground data, we assessed their relative impact on environmental, human, and animal well-being. Our analysis identified 250 consequences of these interventions, categorized as 58 direct intentional, 127 direct unintentional, and 65 indirect. Although most direct intentional consequences were beneficial (93.4%), the direct unintentional and indirect consequences were predominantly harmful (96.9% and 75.4%, respectively). Although most interventions improved environmental well-being, their consequences for animal and human well-being were less positive. This highlights a conflict among the three well-being dimensions, underscoring the importance of incorporating human and animal well-being into elephant management strategies. Recognizing the interconnected nature of these dimensions and aiming for multiple, mutually reinforcing gains is imperative. This iterative process helps address social-ecological vulnerabilities and risks while advocating for ethical conservation practices, fostering multidisciplinary collaboration, and garnering broader support for conservation efforts. Our approach aligns with global goals for sustainable and equitable wildlife management outcomes.</p>\n<p>The post Integrating a “One Well-being” approach in elephant conservation: evaluating consequences of management interventions first appeared on Ecology & Society.</p>","PeriodicalId":51028,"journal":{"name":"Ecology and Society","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Integrating a “One Well-being” approach in elephant conservation: evaluating consequences of management interventions\",\"authors\":\"Antoinette Van de Water, Marion E. Garaï, Matthew M. Burnett, Michelle D. Henley, Enrico Di Minin, Jarryd P. Streicher, Lucy A. Bates, Rob Slotow\",\"doi\":\"10.5751/es-15193-290315\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Innovative conservation approaches are urgently needed to balance biodiversity conservation with human development. Safeguarding elephant populations often involves active management, leading to direct intentional, direct unintentional, and indirect consequences for animals, people, and ecosystems. Drawing from One Health and One Welfare principles, our study introduces a multicriteria framework for developing conservation strategies that enhance well-being across dimensions. This approach establishes priorities, acceptability zones, and One Well-being scores that guide decision making toward optimal outcomes. We applied our One Well-being framework to evaluate 12 elephant management interventions currently or historically used in South Africa. Examining data from 3306 instances of these interventions, including on-the-ground data, we assessed their relative impact on environmental, human, and animal well-being. Our analysis identified 250 consequences of these interventions, categorized as 58 direct intentional, 127 direct unintentional, and 65 indirect. Although most direct intentional consequences were beneficial (93.4%), the direct unintentional and indirect consequences were predominantly harmful (96.9% and 75.4%, respectively). Although most interventions improved environmental well-being, their consequences for animal and human well-being were less positive. This highlights a conflict among the three well-being dimensions, underscoring the importance of incorporating human and animal well-being into elephant management strategies. Recognizing the interconnected nature of these dimensions and aiming for multiple, mutually reinforcing gains is imperative. This iterative process helps address social-ecological vulnerabilities and risks while advocating for ethical conservation practices, fostering multidisciplinary collaboration, and garnering broader support for conservation efforts. Our approach aligns with global goals for sustainable and equitable wildlife management outcomes.</p>\\n<p>The post Integrating a “One Well-being” approach in elephant conservation: evaluating consequences of management interventions first appeared on Ecology & Society.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51028,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Ecology and Society\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-31\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Ecology and Society\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5751/es-15193-290315\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ECOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ecology and Society","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5751/es-15193-290315","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

迫切需要创新的保护方法来平衡生物多样性保护与人类发展之间的关系。保护大象种群通常需要积极的管理,这会给动物、人类和生态系统带来直接有意、直接无意和间接的后果。根据 "同一健康 "和 "同一福利 "原则,我们的研究引入了一个多标准框架,用于制定可提高各方面福利的保护战略。这种方法确定了优先事项、可接受性区域和 "同一福祉 "评分,从而指导决策以实现最佳结果。我们运用 "一个幸福 "框架对南非目前或历史上使用的 12 种大象管理干预措施进行了评估。通过研究这些干预措施的 3306 个实例的数据(包括实地数据),我们评估了它们对环境、人类和动物福祉的相对影响。我们的分析确定了这些干预措施的 250 种后果,分为 58 种直接有意后果、127 种直接无意后果和 65 种间接后果。虽然大多数直接有意后果是有益的(93.4%),但直接无意后果和间接后果主要是有害的(分别为 96.9% 和 75.4%)。虽然大多数干预措施改善了环境福祉,但对动物和人类福祉的影响却不那么积极。这凸显了三个福祉维度之间的冲突,强调了将人类和动物福祉纳入大象管理战略的重要性。当务之急是要认识到这些方面的相互关联性,并以取得多重、相互促进的收益为目标。这种迭代过程有助于解决社会生态脆弱性和风险,同时倡导道德保护实践,促进多学科合作,为保护工作赢得更广泛的支持。我们的方法符合可持续和公平的野生动物管理成果的全球目标。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Integrating a “One Well-being” approach in elephant conservation: evaluating consequences of management interventions

Innovative conservation approaches are urgently needed to balance biodiversity conservation with human development. Safeguarding elephant populations often involves active management, leading to direct intentional, direct unintentional, and indirect consequences for animals, people, and ecosystems. Drawing from One Health and One Welfare principles, our study introduces a multicriteria framework for developing conservation strategies that enhance well-being across dimensions. This approach establishes priorities, acceptability zones, and One Well-being scores that guide decision making toward optimal outcomes. We applied our One Well-being framework to evaluate 12 elephant management interventions currently or historically used in South Africa. Examining data from 3306 instances of these interventions, including on-the-ground data, we assessed their relative impact on environmental, human, and animal well-being. Our analysis identified 250 consequences of these interventions, categorized as 58 direct intentional, 127 direct unintentional, and 65 indirect. Although most direct intentional consequences were beneficial (93.4%), the direct unintentional and indirect consequences were predominantly harmful (96.9% and 75.4%, respectively). Although most interventions improved environmental well-being, their consequences for animal and human well-being were less positive. This highlights a conflict among the three well-being dimensions, underscoring the importance of incorporating human and animal well-being into elephant management strategies. Recognizing the interconnected nature of these dimensions and aiming for multiple, mutually reinforcing gains is imperative. This iterative process helps address social-ecological vulnerabilities and risks while advocating for ethical conservation practices, fostering multidisciplinary collaboration, and garnering broader support for conservation efforts. Our approach aligns with global goals for sustainable and equitable wildlife management outcomes.

The post Integrating a “One Well-being” approach in elephant conservation: evaluating consequences of management interventions first appeared on Ecology & Society.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Ecology and Society
Ecology and Society 环境科学-生态学
CiteScore
6.20
自引率
4.90%
发文量
109
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: Ecology and Society is an electronic, peer-reviewed, multi-disciplinary journal devoted to the rapid dissemination of current research. Manuscript submission, peer review, and publication are all handled on the Internet. Software developed for the journal automates all clerical steps during peer review, facilitates a double-blind peer review process, and allows authors and editors to follow the progress of peer review on the Internet. As articles are accepted, they are published in an "Issue in Progress." At four month intervals the Issue-in-Progress is declared a New Issue, and subscribers receive the Table of Contents of the issue via email. Our turn-around time (submission to publication) averages around 350 days. We encourage publication of special features. Special features are comprised of a set of manuscripts that address a single theme, and include an introductory and summary manuscript. The individual contributions are published in regular issues, and the special feature manuscripts are linked through a table of contents and announced on the journal''s main page. The journal seeks papers that are novel, integrative and written in a way that is accessible to a wide audience that includes an array of disciplines from the natural sciences, social sciences, and the humanities concerned with the relationship between society and the life-supporting ecosystems on which human wellbeing ultimately depends.
期刊最新文献
Integrating a “One Well-being” approach in elephant conservation: evaluating consequences of management interventions Examining the influence of sociodemographics, residential segregation, and historical redlining on eBird and iNaturalist data disparities in three U.S. cities What does it take to build resilience against droughts in food value chains? Incorporating climate change into restoration decisions: perspectives from dam removal practitioners Exploring perceptions to improve the outcomes of a marine protected area
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1