Impact case study database

1. Changing protected area policy in Guyana to benefit biodiversity

Before engagement with Bicknell, Davies, Struebig, and Smith (2012 to 2016), the Government of Guyana’s Protected Areas Commission had no evidence-based approach to decision-making. The research delivered this, enabling the Government to target where the country’s protected-area network should be expanded to meet international commitments, ensuring that species of conservation concern, potential land conflicts, and the needs of local communities and indigenous people were explicitly taken into account. In 2016, the Commissioner of Protected Areas stated: ‘your work has been critical to delivering a scientifically-robust and transparent process to support NPAS [National Protected Area System] decision-making’ [a]. A cabinet paper written in 2016 described the new approach and need to establish 2 million hectares of new protected areas [b], directly referring to the research [R1]. This was submitted to the President of Guyana, who publically committed to the expansion plan. The process of establishing the first two protected areas began in 2018 and 2020, respectively, covering an area of >1.4 million hectares (equating to ~6% of the country) [a, b, c]. One of these, the North Rupununi, is a globally important wetland of 700,000 hectares. It was identified by the research as being a top conservation priority for biodiversity, and requiring engagement with local indigenous communities to protect it successfully [R1]. As a result, in 2019, the Vice-President of Guyana and Minister of Indigenous Peoples Affairs stated: ‘A particular high point for us is the work of DICE to help our Government’s Protected Areas Commission to identify priority areas for the conservation of our biodiversity’ [c]. The other protected area in progress covers an area of ~800,000 hectares of lowland primary rainforest, an area of substantial ecotourism potential for local communities that encompasses core jaguar habitat [d].

1. Changing forest set-aside standards and policies to biodiversity in tropical agricultural landscapes

The research of Struebig and Davies (2013-19) [R3, R4] was integral to the revision of the High Carbon Stock approach in 2017 [e]. It validated the conservation credentials of the methodology, convincing environmental professionals advising the RSPO of its value. RSPO is the leading sustainability certification system for palm oil production globally, covering ~19% of the oil palm estate across multiple tropical nations. In 2018, the RSPO formally adopted HCS as the principle means by which all oil palm companies seeking certification should identify forest areas for conservation or production. The Global Solutions Senior Advisor for the Greenpeace Forests Campaign stated: ‘The rigor of the science and the testing were robust, and so were an important contribution towards RSPO adopting the High Carbon Stock Approach, as well as the credibility of the toolkit, which was released with assistance from Dr Struebig. It was likewise valuable that the testing and trialling were carried out by the DICE team in cooperation with government, stakeholders (including Greenpeace) and international researchers’ [f]. As a result, since 2016 more than 2.8 million hectares of land have been assessed, and at least 690,000 hectares have been set aside for conservation [f]. In 2017, Struebig provided evidence to RSPO and Sabah State Government in Malaysia regarding the protection of forest set-asides along rivers. RSPO then updated its best-practice management guidelines for these riparian set-asides [g], based directly on the research recommendations [R4]. The RSPO Biodiversity Manager confirmed that ‘Dr Struebig is one of the authors of the RSPO Simplified Guide: Management and Rehabilitation of Riparian Reserves. The guidelines are exceptionally helpful for growers, remediating formerly cleared areas, to understand the requirements and develop the framework for management and remediation’ [g]. In July 2020, the Sabah State Government established a Technical Committee, led by the Environmental Protection Department and Department for Irrigation and Drainage, to revise the Sabah Water Resources Enactment (1998) and forest protection regulations for rivers. They plan to increase the minimum mandated set-aside width from 20m to 40m [h], owing to the research findings [R4]. The Director of the South East Asian Rainforest Research Partnership emphasises the impact that this will have: ‘Uptake of the project findings and incorporation into policy of decision-making tools for increased forest-edge set-aside protection zone widths dependent on local species assemblages is expected to dramatically improve conservation of local species populations and movement corridors’ [h].

1. Changing internationally recognised protected area standards to benefit biodiversity

The 2016 Key Biodiversity Area Standard is underpinned by systematic conservation planning research undertaken by Smith (2012-16) [R5, R6]. It provides the first internationally endorsed framework for identifying globally important areas for every aspect of biodiversity. The Head of the Key Biodiversity Areas Secretariat states: ‘This research played a fundamental role in developing the Key Biodiversity Area Standard, helping ensure that it was based on the best available science and would be widely accepted by the international conservation community’ [i]. For instance, the Head of the Key Biodiversity Areas Secretariat provides this illustrative example: ‘The EU is proposing to use Key Biodiversity Area criteria to guide the expansion of protected area coverage to meet their 30% goals under their new biodiversity strategy’ [i]. The Key Biodiversity Area Standard has improved the biodiversity benefits of conservation management and funding in three ways. First, since 2016, it has been used to identify important areas for species that were previously neglected in 25 countries from six continents. For example, in 2019, Smith’s team co-led a Key Biodiversity Area process with the Government of Mozambique. Scientists identified 16 currently unprotected Key Biodiversity Areas for plants and invertebrates with a combined area of 1.8 million hectares, which were then demarcated as conservation areas in the Government’s territorial plan [i]. The Head of the Key Biodiversity Areas Secretariat highlights that this ‘will help conserve dozens of threatened and endemic plant, amphibian, reptile and invertebrate species that were missing from the existing nature reserve system’ [i]. Second, since 2016, every country must report the percentage of their Key Biodiversity Areas protected, in line with UN Sustainable Development Goal commitments, encouraging progress towards Goals 14 (Life below water) and 15 (Life on land) [j]. Third, Key Biodiversity Areas underpin a number of global financing mechanisms: in 2016, the Equator Principles were updated, so the 114 global financial institutions that are signatories (including the UK banks Barclays, HSBC, and Lloyds, plus the UK Government’s Export Finance) cannot fund projects unless they avoid or mitigate negative impacts in Key Biodiversity Areas [i]. In 2018, the World Bank’s Global Environment Facility updated their funding criteria so their US$178 million per annum spending only supports new protected areas if they have KBA status [k, l]. The Head of the Key Biodiversity Areas Secretariat emphases that: ‘Research carried out by the Kent team is already playing an important part in changing global conservation policy and practice, both at the national level to inform conservation management on the ground and at the international level by influencing funding policies and so preventing the destruction of these important areas’ [i].