Remember Me
Or use your Academic/Social account:


Or use your Academic/Social account:


You have just completed your registration at OpenAire.

Before you can login to the site, you will need to activate your account. An e-mail will be sent to you with the proper instructions.


Please note that this site is currently undergoing Beta testing.
Any new content you create is not guaranteed to be present to the final version of the site upon release.

Thank you for your patience,
OpenAire Dev Team.

Close This Message


Verify Password:
Verify E-mail:
*All Fields Are Required.
Please Verify You Are Human:
fbtwitterlinkedinvimeoflicker grey 14rssslideshare1
West, Simon; Cairns, Rose; Schultz, Lisen (2016)
Publisher: Elsevier
Languages: English
Types: Article
Subjects: GE170, H1, G0001-0922, GE300
‘Success’ is a vigorously debated concept in conservation. There is a drive to develop quantitative, comparable metrics of success to improve conservation interventions. Yet the qualitative, normative choices inherent in decisions about what to measure — emerging from fundamental philosophical commitments about what conservation is and should be — have received scant attention. We address this gap by exploring perceptions of what constitutes a successful biodiversity corridor in the Cape Floristic Region, South Africa, an area of global biodiversity significance. Biodiversity corridors are particularly illustrative because, as interventions intended to extend conservation practices from protected areas across broader landscapes, they represent prisms in which ideas of conservation success are contested and transformed. We use Q method to elicit framings of success among 20 conservation scientists, practitioners and community representatives, and find three statistically significant framings of successful corridors: ‘a last line of defence for biodiversity under threat,’ ‘a creative process to develop integrative, inclusive visions of biodiversity and human wellbeing,’ and ‘a stimulus for place-based cultural identity and economic development.’ Our results demonstrate that distinct understandings of what a corridor is — a planning tool, a process of governing, a territorialized place — produce divergent framings of ‘successful’ corridors that embody diverse, inherently contestable visions of conservation. These framings emerge from global conservation discourses and distinctly local ecologies, politics, cultures and histories. We conclude that visions of conservation success will be inherently plural, and that in inevitably contested and diverse social contexts success on any terms rests upon recognition of and negotiation with alternative visions.
  • The results below are discovered through our pilot algorithms. Let us know how we are doing!

    • Axford, J. C., Hockings, M. T., Carter, R. W. 2008. What constitutes success in Pacific island community conserved areas? Ecol. Soc. 13, 45.
    • Bennett, A.F. 2003. Linkages in the Landscape: The Role of Corridors and Connectivity in Wildlife Conservation. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland.
    • Berkes, F., Colding, J., Folke, C. (Eds.). 2003. Navigating Social-Ecological Systems: Building Resilience for Complexity and Change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
    • Brechin, S.R., Murray, G., Mogelgaard, K. 2010. Conceptual and Practical Issues in Defining Protected Area Success: The Political, Social, and Ecological in an Organized World. J. Sus. For. 29, 362 - 389.
    • Brown, S.R. 1980. Political Subjectivity: Applications of Q Methodology in Political Science. Yale University Press, New Haven.
    • Brown, S.R. 1993. A primer on q-methodology. Operant Subjectivity, 16, 91 - 138.
    • Cairns, R., Sallu, S.M., Goodman, S. 2013. Questioning calls to consensus in conservation: a Q study of conservation discourses on Galapagos. Environ. Conserv. 41, 13 - 26.
    • Cairns, R., Stirling, A. 2014. 'Maintaining planetary systems' or 'concentrating global power?' High stakes in contending framings of climate geoengineering. Global Environ. Change, 28, 25 - 38.
    • Chetkiewicz, C.L.B., St. Clair, C.C., Boyce, M.S. 2006. Corridors for Conservation: Integrating Pattern and Process. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst. 37, 317 - 342.
    • Cowling, R.M., Pressey, R.L., Rouget, M., Lombard, A.T. 2003. A conservation plan for a global biodiversity hotspot - the Cape Floristic Region, South Africa. Biol. Conserv. 112, 191 - 216.
    • Crooks, K.R., Sanjayan, M. 2006. Connectivity Conservation. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
    • Evans, J.P. 2007. Wildlife Corridors: An Urban Political Ecology. Local Environ. 12, 129 - 152.
    • Fahrig, L. 2003. Effects of Habitat Fragmentation on Biodiversity. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst. 34, 487 - 515.
    • Fischer, J., Lindenmayer, D.B. 2007. Landscape modification and habitat fragmentation: a synthesis.
    • Global Ecol. Biogeogr. 16, 265 - 280.
    • Fisher, B., Christopher, T. 2007. Poverty and biodiversity: Measuring the overlap of human poverty and the biodiversity hotspots. Ecol. Econ. 62, 93 - 101.
    • Gilpin, M. E., Diamond, J. M. 1980. Subdivision of nature reserves and the maintenance of species diversity. Nature, 285, 267 - 268.
    • Goldblatt, P., Manning, J. 2002. Plant diversity of the Cape Region of South Africa. Ann. Missouri Bot.
    • Gard. 89, 281 - 302.
    • Graham, M., Ernstson, H. 2012. Comanagement at the fringes: examining stakeholder perspectives at Macassar Dunes, Cape Town, South Africa-at the intersection of high biodiversity, urban poverty, and inequality. Ecol. Soc. 17, 34. http://dx.doi.org/10.5751/ES-04887-170334 Newing, H. 2010. Conducting research in conservation: social science methods and practice.
    • Robbins, P. 2012. Political Ecology: A Critical Introduction, second ed. Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford.
    • Salafsky, N., Margoluis, R., Redford, K.H., Robinson, J.G. 2002. Improving the practice of conservation: a conceptual framework and research agenda for conservation science. Conserv. Biol. 16, 1469 - 1479.
    • Salafsky, N, Salzer D., Stattersfield, A.J., Hilton-Taylor, C., Neugarten, R., Butchart, S.H.M., Collen, B., Cox, N., Master, L.L., O'Connor, S., Wilkie, D. 2008. A standard lexicon for biodiversity conservation: unified classifications of threats and actions. Conserv. Biol., 22, 897 - 911. DOI: 10.1111/j.1523-1739.2008.00937.x Sandbrook, C. 2015. What is conservation? Oryx 49, 565 - 566.
    • DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0030605315000952 Sandbrook, C., Adams, W.M., Buscher, B., Vira, B. 2013. Social Research and Biodiversity Conservation. Conserv. Biol. 27, 1487 - 1490. DOI: 10.1111/cobi.12141 Schmolck, 2002. PQMethod 2.11. Available at: http://schmolck.userweb.mwn.de/qmethod/index.htm (accessed 26.11.15).
    • Soulé , M. 1985. What is Conservation Biology? BioScience, 35, 727 - 734.
    • Soulé , M. 2013. The “New Conservation.” Conserv. Biol. 27, 895 - 897.
    • Star, S.L., Griesemer, J.R. 1989. Institutional Ecology, 'Translations' and Boundary Objects: Amateurs and Professionals in Berkeley's Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, 1907-39. Soc. Stud. Sci. 19, 387- 420.
    • DOI: 10.1177/030631289019003001 Stephenson, W. 1953. The Study of Behavior: Q-technique and its Methodology. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
    • Stern, M. 2001. Parks and Factors in Their Success. Science 293, 1045 - 1047.
    • Sutherland, W.J. 2005. How can we make conservation more effective? Oryx 39, 1 - 2.
    • Swyngedouw, E. 2009. The Antinomies of the Postpolitical City: In Search of a Democratic Politics of Environmental Production. Int. J. Urban Reg. Res. 33, 601 - 620.
    • Tallis, H., Lubchenco, J. 2014. A call for inclusive conservation. Nature 515, 27 - 28.
    • Watts, S., Stenner, P. 2012. Doing Q Methodological Research: Theory, Method and Interpretation.
    • Webler, T., Tuler, S., Krueger, R. 2001. What Is a Good Public Participation Process? Five Perspectives from the Public. Environ. Manage. 27, 435 - 450.
    • Webler, T., Danielson, S., Tuler, S. 2009. Using Q method to reveal social perspectives in environmental research. Social and Environmental Research Institute, Greenfield MA.
    • Young, A., Fowkes, S. 2003. The Cape Action Plan for the Environment: overview of an ecoregional planning process. Biol. Conserv. 112, 15 - 28.
  • No related research data.
  • No similar publications.

Share - Bookmark

Cite this article