[Coral-List] Coral Reef Conservation Preferences

[International Coral Reef Observatory]

Interesting analysis to note that contributions towards coral reef
conservation tend to increase when major stressors are removed from the
equation. Thus, effective coral reef management should be based on that
priority when we identify Coral Reefs Optimism.

However, current group thinking is leading international initiatives that
exactly are just favouring restoration projects instead of expanding
effective marine protected areas or strengthening legislation to avoid
further coral reef degradation.  It is not effective for conservation when
restoration is funded by developers or causers of coral destruction. This
last strategy justifes the increase of threats on coral reefs and it is based
on Coral Reefs Pessimism.

Cordially,
Nohora Galvis
International Cora lReef Observatory
Follow us on Facebook.com/ICROBSERVATORY
Twitter ICR_Observatory
Instagram ICR_Observatory
YouTube ICR_Observatory





El martes, 26 de septiembre de 2023, Steve Mussman via Coral-List <
coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov> escribió:

>
> A Global Analysis of Coral Reef Conservation Preferences
>
> https://assets.researchsquare.com/files/rs-2350723/v1/2b8d20
> cc-30df-4b4a-8384-0f4c4bb52e2b.pdf?c=1677092671
>
> This study’s findings should be of interest to everyone subscribing to
> Coral List as many of authors’ conclusions would seem to challenge what
> appear to be the guiding principles of many high profile coral reef
> conservation projects in existence today.
>
> Some of the more interesting findings include:
>
> “. . . there is a task for scientists and media to more clearly convey the
> true urgency of the coral reef crisis, because individuals respond more
> actively if reefs are perceived to be in serious decline”.
>
> “We also found that conservation demand is highest in relatively
> low-income countries. Residents of developing countries appear to
> appreciate reefs for their non-use values to a larger extent than residents
> of developed countries”.
>
> “. . . interpreting our findings in the context of loss aversion bias,
> implies that losses weigh heavier than gains in decision making (Tversky
> and Kahneman, 1991) and that conservation programs may highlight worst-case
> future coral reef scenarios rather than the benefits of effective
> management”.
>
> “. . . the pathway through which individuals prefer to contribute their
> money towards conservation is arguably only effective if persistent
> stressors, such as climate change and overfishing are removed. On
> aggregate, individuals prefer hands on measures, like the funding of coral
> and reef fish restoration projects, over more indirect measures where the
> conservation benets are perhaps less immediately visible, such as expanding
> marine protected areas and strengthening legislation. Coral reef
> restoration of this kind is expensive, has varying success rates (Edwards
> and Clark, 1999; Rinkevich, 2006), and is only feasible at small spatial
> scales (Bongiorni et al., 2011). This non-alignment of public preferences
> and effectiveness of conservation measure could potentially be addressed
> through information and education campaigns that explain how protection and
> legislation deliver conservation benefits”.
>
> I would argue that, to some extent, the coral science community may
> actually be (unintentionally?) contributing to the non-alignment of public
> preferences and effectiveness of conservation measures through their focus
> on restoration in their current information and education campaigns. It is
> also interesting to note that contributions towards coral reef conservation
> tend to increase when major stressors are removed from the equation.
>
> Regards,
>
> Steve
>
> _______________________________________________
> Coral-List mailing list
> Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov
> https://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list