Millions of dollars have been invested in conservation projects with little to show for it: people are still poor; biodiversity is still declining. In this presentation CIFOR¹s founding Director General, Jeff Sayer, contends that incentives are the key to engaging society in conservation, and therefore efforts would have better outcomes if we move from threat-based conservation (primarily good for fundraising and media) to results-based conservation (engaging industry and negotiating incentives and outcomes). He gave this presentation on 6 December 2011 at the 25th international congress of the Society for Conservation Biology. The theme of the congress was 'Engaging Society in Conservation' and more than 1,300 scientists, practitioners and students of conservation biology from around the globe attended.
Beyond the EU: DORA and NIS 2 Directive's Global Impact
Engaging society in the design of conservation programmes
1. Engaging Society in the Design of
Conservation Programmes
Intu Boedhihartono and Jeff Sayer
James Cook University
2. We have tried to engage “society”
•Civil society in rich countries
•The people who live in tropical forests
•Decision makers?
•Who should be the target?
10. • Development comes with investment
• Richer people:
– Use land more efficiently
– Move to cities
– Value their time
11. So which “society” to “engage”
• The people whose decisions are important
• The politicians who make decisions
• The activists who seek social justice
• The corporations who control the land
12. Threats or outcomes
• “Threat based conservation” – good for fund
raising, the media etc
• But maybe “Results based conservation”
• Reinforce the conservation “bottom line”
• Engage “industry” & negotiate conservation
outcomes
CI / Erdi Lazuardi
13. Place-based conservation
• 1983 – WWF/IUCN – field projects
• 2011 – Political declarations – media -
conferences - money
• “Field practitioners no longer valued” yet
they engage the relevant sectors of society
• Grand Design or Muddling Through (Sayer et al Biotropica 2009)