Socio-ecological gap analysis to forecast species range contractions for conservation

Abstract

Conservation requires both a needs assessment and prioritization scheme for planning and implementation. Range maps are critical for understanding and conserving biodiversity, but current range maps often omit content, negating important metrics of variation in populations and places. Here, we integrate a myriad of conditions that are spatially explicit across distributions of carnivores to identify gaps in capacity necessary for their conservation. Expanding on traditional gap analyses that focus almost exclusively on quantifying discordance in protected area coverage across a species’ range, our work aggregates threat layers (e.g., drought, human pressures) with resources layers (e.g., protected areas, cultural diversity) to identify gaps in available conservation capacity (ACC) across ranges for 91 African carnivores. Our model indicated that all species have some portion of their range at risk of contraction, with an average of 15 percentage range loss. We found that the ACC differed based on body size and taxonomy. Results deviated from current perceptions of extinction risks for species with an International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) threat status of Least Concern and yielded insights for species categorized as Data Deficient. Our socio-ecological gap analysis presents a geospatial approach to inform decision-making and resource allocation in conservation. Ultimately, our work advances forecasting dynamics of species’ ranges that are increasingly vital in an era of great socio-ecological change to mitigate human–wildlife conflict and promote inclusive carnivore conservation across geographies.

Evaluating dynamics in human‐bear interactions within social‐ecological system

“…The human-bear interface can also significantly influence Additionally, the diminishing proximity between human settlements and the human-bear interface has intensified the potential for human-bear interactions. This trend aligns with previous studies (Harris et al, 2023) and 2020 (Ji, Wei, Liu, Li, Li, Huang, et al, 2022). Our interview surveys have indicated that most respondents perceive a discernible rise in human-bear interactions over the past two decades.…”

A systematic global review of mammalian carnivore responses to production forests

“…The limited research in Oceania can be explained by only eight native terrestrial mammalian carnivore species > 500 g present there, all of which are in the Family Dasyuridae, except the dingo ( Canis dingo ). Carnivores in production forests in Africa remain understudied, despite the continent harbouring about a third of all carnivore species (Harris et al 2022) and 16% of the world’s forests. 60% of all Africa’s forest is not primary forest, indicating forestry is a major land use, though the continent contains only 2% of the world’s plantations (FAO 2020).…”

A systematic global review of mammalian carnivore responses to production forests

“…The limited research in Oceania can be explained by only eight native terrestrial mammalian carnivore species >500 g present there, all of which are in the Family Dasyuridae, except the dingo (Canis dingo). Carnivores in production forests in Africa remain understudied, despite the continent harbouring about a third of all carnivore species (Harris et al 2022) and 16% of the world's forests. Only 40% of all Africa's forest is unharvested, suggesting forestry is a major land use, though the continent contains only 2% of the world's plantations (FAO 2020).…”

“…Carnivores in production forests in Africa remain understudied, despite the continent harbouring about a third of all carnivore species (Harris et al. 2022) and 16% of the world's forests. Only 40% of all Africa's forest is unharvested, suggesting forestry is a major land use, though the continent contains only 2% of the world's plantations (FAO 2020).…”