Is wildlife research useful for wildlife conservation in the tropics? A review for Borneo with global implications

Published source details Meijaard E. & Sheil D. (2007) Is wildlife research useful for wildlife conservation in the tropics? A review for Borneo with global implications. Biological Conservation, 16, 3053-3065.
Share Tweet Email

Summary

The urgency of the tropical biodiversity conservation continues to be a major driver and justification for wildlife research and its funding. To examine the benefits of this research for on-the-ground conservation, this review focused on the island of Borneo, where conservation has a long history and the authors both have direct experience.

Search procedure: The search for published and unpublished documents focused on taxa-focussed studies of wildlife conducted in Borneo, (Indonesian Kalimantan, Malaysian Sarawak and Sabah, and Brunei). Searches involved formal bibliographic searches of academic literature as well as numerous consultations with local, national and international experts, NGOs and local civil servants (based in Indonesia and Malaysia) to identify all potentially relevant documents they possessed in any language. General literature on protected areas and resource management that lacked species-specific wildlife information was excluded. Studies of species occurring in Borneo but performed elsewhere, and many other documents from Borneo and the region that had initially appeared of potential relevance, were also excluded.

The results of the review focused on the implications for integrating wildlife conservation with forest management and timber production practices.

Gauging wider significance: To investigate the broader relevance of the review findings and their implications 20 conservation practitioners, either senior conservation scientists or those holding senior management positions in international conservation or research organizations, were approached for their opinions.

A total of 284 publications were compiled and evaluated, 153 (54%) from peer-reviewed journals, 50 (18%) of accounts in books, and 81 (29%) from unpublished reports or theses. Being familiar with much of the literature, the authors were confident that few if any readily available documents were missed; other documents may exist, but these were not identified by the broad search and consultation, and therefore appear unlikely to have much technical influence in the region (with some acknowledged caveats).

Few studies address threats to species or provide input for or guidance to effective conservation management. Several reasons are put forward for these shortcomings: research is seldom judged on its relevance to pragmatic problem solving; and many research programs lack the necessary long-term vision and structure for useful applied research. Conservation leaders consulted about these conclusions indicated that this is not unique to Borneo but reflect wider problems.
The inclusion of only four Indonesian language documents in the review was considered striking. Local colleagues agreed that indeed, good Indonesian language material is scarce.

Conclusions: The authors conclude that conservation research across Borneo and perhaps most of the tropics, is failing to address conservation needs and doubt that a more systematic review procedure would substantially alter their conclusions. A main recommendation is that conservation biologists should place a higher priority on addressing practical conservation needs. At present it seems that much knowledge of value is not being disseminated effectively as few researchers communicate their research findings to those who make decisions or who are actively involved in forest management and conservation initiatives. The results of the review may also perhaps reflect that the research conclusions are too seldom useful.

Note: If using or referring to this published study, please read and quote the original paper, this can be viewed at:

http://www.springerlink.com/content/x7v1805231w70821/fulltext.pdf