Free Fallin’? The decline in evidence-based decision-making by Canada’s protected areas managers

Abstract

The conservation of biodiversity requires various forms of evidence to ensure effective outcomes. In this study, we provide an updated assessment of the state of evidence-based decision-making in Canada’s protected areas organizations by examining practitioner perceptions of: ( i) the value and use of various forms of evidence, ( ii) the availability of evidence to support decisions, and ( iii) the extent to which various institutional and behavioural barriers influence the use of evidence. Our results compare national surveys conducted in 2019 and 2013, revealing a significant and concerning decline in the use of all forms of evidence. We found significant declines in the use of peer-reviewed literature, local knowledge, and Indigenous knowledge. Our results correspondingly demonstrate a host of systemic barriers to the effective use of evidence, including a lack of trust, how to deal with uncertainty, and limited training. These challenges persist at a time when the quantity of information is greater than ever, and recognition of the value of Indigenous knowledge is relatively high (and increasing). Leadership is required to cultivate more relevant evidence, to embed scientists and Indigenous Knowledge-Holders in conservation organizations, to (re)establishing knowledge sharing forums, and to establish accountability and reporting measures to support efforts aimed at effectively achieving Canada’s biodiversity conservation goals.

A Global Assessment of Climate Change Adaptation in Marine Protected Area Management Plans

“…The absence of climate change vulnerability assessment for valued MPA components was evident in the results of our analysis. Canada's MPA management plan climate change robustness scores have not increased over the last two decades, which lends support to the finding that while our knowledge of climate change has increased over time, that knowledge has not been adequately incorporated into management (Geyer et al, 2017;Lemieux et al, 2021).…”

“…The lack of consideration of climate change in recent management plans is not explained by perceived uncertainty about climate change impacts and lack of knowledge about climate change adaptation strategies, but more so by the lack of capacity and financial resources necessary to incorporate climate change adaptation into MPA management (Whitney and Ban, 2019;Barr et al, 2020;Lemieux et al, 2021). Even when protected area practitioners think that adaptation options are affordable and feasible, decision makers and policymakers continue to think that climate change is too unfeasible to address Sharp et al, 2014).…”

Transformational changes for achieving the Post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework ecological connectivity goals

“…Indeed, ambition needs to be equalled by action (Watson et al 2021). While recent commitments by several Parties to the CBD to protect 30% of land and marine area by 2030 (Target 2) should be lauded, there is overwhelming evidence to suggest that agencies and organizations responsible for protected and conserved areas face significant, often systemic, human and financial resource constraints (Lemieux et al 2021a). The outfall of these constraints has been significant, with documented widespread understaffing, underfunding or outright termination of biodiversity inventory and monitoring programs, a lack of resources to complete protected areas management effectiveness assessments, and challenges using various forms of evidence to support management decisions (Auditor General of British Columbia 2010; Office of the Auditor General of British Columbia 2013; Office of the Auditor General of Ontario 2020).…”

“…Transformational change 4: invest in diverse forms of knowledge coproduction and management in support of adaptive governance Effective connectivity conservation initiatives that result in the protection and (or) restoration of ecosystems require access to and use of robust natural and social science data, evidence-based scientific knowledge, Indigenous Knowledge, and local knowledge. Knowledge management and exchange is directly linked to management effectiveness and is associated with an organization's (or nation's) capacity to improve, transfer, share, and apply knowledge (Lemieux et al 2021a). The knowledge and expertise requirements for connectivity conservation initiatives can encompass a broad range of activities, including: identifying key areas for connectivity conservation; creating effective governance arrangements; engaging in outreach and communication with different groups; estimating restoration, administrative, and management costs; coping with legal issues; monitoring and reporting on biodiversity outcomes; managing for changing socio-economic conditions; and implementing remediation programs and enforcement.…”

“…While knowledge and information related to the above would be empowering, it must be resourced and current evidence suggests that various challenges plague conservation organizations in Canada, some of which have been detailed above, and conspire to limit and use various forms of knowledge that can be used to support decision-making (Lemieux et al 2021a).…”