Liam LanganNov 23, 2023
Tobias Kuemmerle
International #conservation #funding in #SouthAmerica tends to go to areas with high conservation value, not where threats (deforestation in our case) are high. New paper led by Siyu Qin @BiogeoBerlin just out in Biological Conservation --> https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2023.110362
Nov 22, 2023 at 8:28amWeb
Show threadTobias KuemmerleNov 22, 2023
What does that mean?
1. Selection bias in conservation (funding) allocation prevails
2. Donor preference for remote areas, rich in carbon & biodiversity
3. Effectiveness and additionality of funding likely lower than it could be
4. Areas under high levels of threat neglected
Show threadTobias KuemmerleNov 22, 2023
Surprising result: the presence of Indigenous People and traditional communities did not come out as a major determinant of where conservation funding goes (although many projects aim for co-benefits between biodiversity conservation and protecting/maintaining traditional livelihoods).
Show threadTobias KuemmerleNov 22, 2023
We find strong evidence for a ‘flagship ecoregion’ effect: most intl. conservation funds flow to #Amazonia – and other regions are neglected despite high levels of threat such as #Chaco #Cerrado #Caatinga or #Chiquitania
Show threadTobias KuemmerleNov 22, 2023
Also interesting: clear evidence for specific combinations of donor and recipient countries (e.g. Norway-Brazil, Spain & Spanish-speaking part of South America). This can be interpreted as Conservation #Telecouplings (more here https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-030-11105-2_15).
Conservation Telecouplings

Local threats to biodiversity are increasingly caused by distal drivers. Likewise, conservation responses are increasingly shaped by distal actors and processes as information on biodiversity loss percolates, and this, in turn, triggers conservation actions. Here, we...

SpringerLink
Show threadPaco FerriNov 22, 2023
@TobiasKuemmerle Very, VERY interesting results! I can't wait to have some time to read the paper!