The challenge of biased evidence in conservation

Efforts to tackle the current biodiversity crisis need to be as efficient and effective as possible given chronic underfunding. To inform decision‐makers of the most effective conservation actions, it is important to identify biases and gaps in the conservation literature to prioritize future eviden...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Conservation biology 2021-02, Vol.35 (1), p.249-262
Main Authors: Christie, Alec P., Amano, Tatsuya, Martin, Philip A., Petrovan, Silviu O., Shackelford, Gorm E., Simmons, Benno I., Smith, Rebecca K., Williams, David R., Wordley, Claire F. R., Sutherland, William J.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Amphibians
Animals
Aquatic reptiles
Australasia
bias
Biodiversity
Birds
conservación basada en evidencias
Conservation
conservation evidence
Conservation of Natural Resources
conservation research
Decision making
diseño de estudio
Endangered & extinct species
Endangered Species
Europe
evidence‐based conservation
evidencia de la conservación
Grasslands
investigación sobre la conservación
North America
prioritization
priorización
sesgo
study design
Synthesis
síntesis
Taxonomy
Temperate forests
Threatened species
toma de decisiones
Wildlife conservation
优先保护
保护研究
保护证据
偏倚
决策
基于证据的保护
研究设计
综合分析
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Efforts to tackle the current biodiversity crisis need to be as efficient and effective as possible given chronic underfunding. To inform decision‐makers of the most effective conservation actions, it is important to identify biases and gaps in the conservation literature to prioritize future evidence generation. We used the Conservation Evidence database to assess the state of the global literature that tests conservation actions for amphibians and birds. For the studies in the database, we investigated their spatial and taxonomic extent and distribution across biomes, effectiveness metrics, and study designs. Studies were heavily concentrated in Western Europe and North America for birds and particularly for amphibians, and temperate forest and grassland biomes were highly represented relative to their percentage of land coverage. Studies that used the most reliable study designs—before‐after control‐impact and randomized controlled trials—were the most geographically restricted and scarce in the evidence base. There were negative spatial relationships between the numbers of studies and the numbers of threatened and data‐deficient species worldwide. Taxonomic biases and gaps were apparent for amphibians and birds—some entire orders were absent from the evidence base—whereas others were poorly represented relative to the proportion of threatened species they contained. Metrics used to evaluate effectiveness of conservation actions were often inconsistent between studies, potentially making them less directly comparable and evidence synthesis more difficult. Testing conservation actions on threatened species outside Western Europe, North America, and Australasia should be prioritized. Standardizing metrics and improving the rigor of study designs used to test conservation actions would also improve the quality of the evidence base for synthesis and decision‐making. El Desafío de la Evidencia Sesgada en la Conservación Resumen Los esfuerzos para lidiar con la actual crisis de la biodiversidad necesitan ser tan eficientes y efectivos como sea posible dado el crónico subfinanciamiento. Para informar a los órganos de decisión sobre las acciones de conservación más efectivas, es importante identificar los sesgos y las brechas en la literatura de la conservación para priorizar generación de evidencias en el futuro. Usamos la base de datos Conservation Evidence para evaluar el estado de la literatura mundial que analiza las acciones para la conservación de anfibi
ISSN:0888-8892
1523-1739
DOI:10.1111/cobi.13577