Info, news & views for anyone interested in biodiversity conservation and good environmental decision making
“The [billionare] bunker is not evidence that its owners “know something we don’t.” It is evidence of a particular loss function: one that treats acute shocks as actionable and planetary boundaries as someone else’s problem, or as problems too diffuse to warrant the same intensity of response.”
Wlodek Bogucki, What Billionaire Bunkers Are Actually Built For

-~<>~-

In this issue of Dbytes

1. Saving two birds with one legal measure? The legal basis for pursuing restoration and protected area targets simultaneously
2. Solar farms designed for wildlife
3. My real thoughts on the shark drone program
4. Role of funders in embedding tests in conservation practice
5. Eight ingenious homes for wildlife around the world
6. Climate change versus logging? That misses the point
7. The theory of change process: guidance for outcome delivery plans
8. Linking ecosystem restoration with social cohesion in Rwanda

-~<>~-

1. Saving two birds with one legal measure? The legal basis for pursuing restoration and protected area targets simultaneously

The Kunming–Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF), a landmark international agreement adopted at the United Nations (UN) Biodiversity Conference in December 2022, sets ambitious targets, including restoring 30 per cent of degraded land and water and protecting and conserving 30 per cent of terrestrial and marine areas by 2030. It is unclear, however, whether initiatives to meet these restoration and protection targets can be synergistically co-located to enhance biodiversity outcomes. While co-location can provide mutual benefits, it may not be possible in jurisdictions where preservation-focused legal frameworks impede intervention in protected areas, even where such intervention is undertaken for restoration purposes. This article considers two case studies: the European Union’s (EU) Nature Restoration Regulation, which facilitates restoration in protected areas, and Australia’s fragmented legal system, where restoration can be difficult to progress in protected areas, particularly when undertaken by nongovernment entities. If synergistic conservation outcomes under the GBF are to be pursued, legal reform and coordinated leadership may be required to reconcile restoration and protection objectives effectively.

Saving two birds with one legal measure? The legal basis for pursuing restoration and protected area targets simultaneously | Journal of Environmental Law | Oxford Academic

-~<>~-

2. Solar farms designed for wildlife

Solar farms designed for wildlife are harboring nearly three times more birds than the conventional crops they replaced, challenging long-held assumptions about renewable energy and nature.

https://scienceblog.com/a-ecologists-walked-matching-200-meter-transects-across-solar-farms-planted-for-wildlife-in-englands-east-anglian-fens-and-counted-35-birds-on-each-solar-pass-against-12-on-the-cropland-beside/

-~<>~-

3. My real thoughts on the shark drone program

After months of writing, listening and thinking about sharks, Andre Slade shares his personal view on NSW’s expanding drone program, the questions still unanswered, and what it could mean for our relationship with the ocean.

My Real Thoughts on the NSW Shark Drone Program

-~<>~-

4. Role of funders in embedding tests in conservation practice

Effective conservation practice requires decisions based on reliable and relevant evidence, but significant gaps in the evidence base exist. Incorporating well-designed tests of the effectiveness of interventions for biodiversity in conservation projects is one of the best ways to scale up the rate of evidence generation. Funders of conservation projects are uniquely positioned to support and incentivize such tests as part of the grant-making process. Using a structured process, as 25 conservation funders and members of Conservation Evidence, we identified means of improving the effectiveness of the work funded through the support of enhanced evidence generation. We identified 11 approaches through which funders can support embedding testing, ranging from encouraging inclusion of a test in the project proposal, to designating separate funds for incorporating a test, to supporting an external testing unit to provide training and advice. The appropriate approaches vary depending on the scale, process, and type of funding. Barriers to supporting testing and potential solutions were discussed, barriers such as a lack of skills to check tests are appropriate and well designed and the additional time needed to develop, implement, and see outcomes of tests and differing types of projects. By encouraging testing of actions as part of conservation practice (where appropriate), funders will ultimately facilitate a stronger evidence base for more effective decision-making and better outcomes for nature and society.

The Society for Conservation Biology

-~<>~-

5. Eight ingenious homes for wildlife around the world

Animal-friendly designers are creating bespoke structures for specific creatures. From a bat home in the UK countryside to a multi-species refuge in the Catskills, here are eight cleverly designed wildlife havens. Wildlife has long made its home in our buildings around the world, whether that’s swallows fashioning their nests in the eaves, or geckos getting comfortable in the cracks of an exterior wall. Now animal-friendly designers are creating bespoke architecture for specific creatures. These designers are treating wildlife as their clients, catering for their specific nesting, mating, roosting, hibernating and sheltering needs.

Eight ingenious homes for wildlife around the world

-~<>~-

6. Climate change versus logging? That misses the point

Climate change and logging are not competing threats to native forests. Their effects compound one another, increasing emissions, fire risk and pressure on biodiversity.

Climate change versus logging? That misses the point | Pearls and Irritations

-~<>~-

7. The theory of change process: guidance for outcome delivery plans

This webpage provides guidance on developing a theory of change (TOC). It describes the development and use of TOC in different contexts across government and non-governmental organisations. TOC is a methodology for planning, monitoring and evaluating an initiative. It is a tool that strengthens decision-making processes by ensuring that existing evidence, assumptions, and associated risks have been identified. The webpage describes the value of a TOC when designing and implementing a new policy or program and how a TOC can help account for complexities that may affect the success of the initiative, such as assumptions about the impact of actions and dependencies on stakeholders. This maximises the chances of achieving objectives and effectively evaluating outcomes. The webpage covers when and how to develop a TOC.

The theory of change process: guidance for outcome delivery plans

-~<>~-

8. Linking ecosystem restoration with social cohesion in Rwanda

Ecosystem restoration, a central priority of the global environmental policy agenda, is both a biophysical and social process. Although more and more emphasis has been placed on the social aspects of ecosystem restoration, social cohesion has not been at the forefront. It is, however, important to consider as it can be foundational for enabling collective action and sustained engagement throughout ecosystem restoration processes. The authors recognize that social cohesion and ecosystem restoration can have a complex relationship, and, in this paper, they focus on the strengthening, relational aspects of the two. The study was conducted in Rwanda, focusing on the Rutsiro and Ngororero districts in the Western Province (Figure 1). Its overarching aim was to analyze how social cohesion intersects with ecosystem restoration, with the findings ideally being able to support policymakers and practitioners in designing and implementing more inclusive policies and approaches. A systemic literature review was completed (to understand the scope of social cohesion and its indicators in Rwanda), followed by a World Café workshop (involved multiple rounds of discussions focused on key questions) and semi-structured interviews (explored participants’ understanding of social cohesion). 

Linking ecosystem restoration with social cohesion in Rwanda  – Ideas for Sustainability

-~<>~-

About Dbytes

Dbytes is a weekly eNewsletter presenting news and views on biodiversity conservation and environmental decision science. ‘D’ stands for ‘Decision’ and refers to all the ingredients that go into good, fair and just decision-making in relation to the environment.

From 2007-2018 Dbytes was supported by a variety of research networks and primarily the ARC Centre of Excellence for Environmental Decisions (CEED). From 2019 Dbytes is being produced by David Salt (Ywords). David was formerly the Editor of Decision Point, the research magazine of CEED.

Dbytes is supported by the Global Water Forum.

If you have any contributions to Dbytes (ie, opportunities and resources that you think might be of value to other Dbyte readers) please send them to David.Salt@anu.edu.au. Please keep them short and provide a link for more info.

Anyone is welcome to receive Dbytes. If you would like to receive it, simply visit
https://sustainabilitybites.com/dbytes/
enter you email and press the follow button. (IT’S FREE so if you see any value in it please recommend it to your friends!)

David Salt

and you can follow me on twitter (X) at
@davidlimesalt or the Global Water Forum on @GWFWater
Or Blue Sky at @susbites.bsky.social