Cargando…

Why Don't We Ask? A Complementary Method for Assessing the Status of Great Apes

Species conservation is difficult. Threats to species are typically high and immediate. Effective solutions for counteracting these threats, however, require synthesis of high quality evidence, appropriately targeted activities, typically costly implementation, and rapid re-evaluation and adaptation...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Meijaard, Erik, Mengersen, Kerrie, Buchori, Damayanti, Nurcahyo, Anton, Ancrenaz, Marc, Wich, Serge, Atmoko, Sri Suci Utami, Tjiu, Albertus, Prasetyo, Didik, Nardiyono, Hadiprakarsa, Yokyok, Christy, Lenny, Wells, Jessie, Albar, Guillaume, Marshall, Andrew J.
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2011
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3069039/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21483859
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0018008
_version_ 1782201309721526272
author Meijaard, Erik
Mengersen, Kerrie
Buchori, Damayanti
Nurcahyo, Anton
Ancrenaz, Marc
Wich, Serge
Atmoko, Sri Suci Utami
Tjiu, Albertus
Prasetyo, Didik
Nardiyono,
Hadiprakarsa, Yokyok
Christy, Lenny
Wells, Jessie
Albar, Guillaume
Marshall, Andrew J.
author_facet Meijaard, Erik
Mengersen, Kerrie
Buchori, Damayanti
Nurcahyo, Anton
Ancrenaz, Marc
Wich, Serge
Atmoko, Sri Suci Utami
Tjiu, Albertus
Prasetyo, Didik
Nardiyono,
Hadiprakarsa, Yokyok
Christy, Lenny
Wells, Jessie
Albar, Guillaume
Marshall, Andrew J.
author_sort Meijaard, Erik
collection PubMed
description Species conservation is difficult. Threats to species are typically high and immediate. Effective solutions for counteracting these threats, however, require synthesis of high quality evidence, appropriately targeted activities, typically costly implementation, and rapid re-evaluation and adaptation. Conservation management can be ineffective if there is insufficient understanding of the complex ecological, political, socio-cultural, and economic factors that underlie conservation threats. When information about these factors is incomplete, conservation managers may be unaware of the most urgent threats or unable to envision all consequences of potential management strategies. Conservation research aims to address the gap between what is known and what knowledge is needed for effective conservation. Such research, however, generally addresses a subset of the factors that underlie conservation threats, producing a limited, simplistic, and often biased view of complex, real world situations. A combination of approaches is required to provide the complete picture necessary to engage in effective conservation. Orangutan conservation (Pongo spp.) offers an example: standard conservation assessments employ survey methods that focus on ecological variables, but do not usually address the socio-cultural factors that underlie threats. Here, we evaluate a complementary survey method based on interviews of nearly 7,000 people in 687 villages in Kalimantan, Indonesia. We address areas of potential methodological weakness in such surveys, including sampling and questionnaire design, respondent biases, statistical analyses, and sensitivity of resultant inferences. We show that interview-based surveys can provide cost-effective and statistically robust methods to better understand poorly known populations of species that are relatively easily identified by local people. Such surveys provide reasonably reliable estimates of relative presence and relative encounter rates of such species, as well as quantifying the main factors that threaten them. We recommend more extensive use of carefully designed and implemented interview surveys, in conjunction with more traditional field methods.
format Text
id pubmed-3069039
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2011
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-30690392011-04-11 Why Don't We Ask? A Complementary Method for Assessing the Status of Great Apes Meijaard, Erik Mengersen, Kerrie Buchori, Damayanti Nurcahyo, Anton Ancrenaz, Marc Wich, Serge Atmoko, Sri Suci Utami Tjiu, Albertus Prasetyo, Didik Nardiyono, Hadiprakarsa, Yokyok Christy, Lenny Wells, Jessie Albar, Guillaume Marshall, Andrew J. PLoS One Research Article Species conservation is difficult. Threats to species are typically high and immediate. Effective solutions for counteracting these threats, however, require synthesis of high quality evidence, appropriately targeted activities, typically costly implementation, and rapid re-evaluation and adaptation. Conservation management can be ineffective if there is insufficient understanding of the complex ecological, political, socio-cultural, and economic factors that underlie conservation threats. When information about these factors is incomplete, conservation managers may be unaware of the most urgent threats or unable to envision all consequences of potential management strategies. Conservation research aims to address the gap between what is known and what knowledge is needed for effective conservation. Such research, however, generally addresses a subset of the factors that underlie conservation threats, producing a limited, simplistic, and often biased view of complex, real world situations. A combination of approaches is required to provide the complete picture necessary to engage in effective conservation. Orangutan conservation (Pongo spp.) offers an example: standard conservation assessments employ survey methods that focus on ecological variables, but do not usually address the socio-cultural factors that underlie threats. Here, we evaluate a complementary survey method based on interviews of nearly 7,000 people in 687 villages in Kalimantan, Indonesia. We address areas of potential methodological weakness in such surveys, including sampling and questionnaire design, respondent biases, statistical analyses, and sensitivity of resultant inferences. We show that interview-based surveys can provide cost-effective and statistically robust methods to better understand poorly known populations of species that are relatively easily identified by local people. Such surveys provide reasonably reliable estimates of relative presence and relative encounter rates of such species, as well as quantifying the main factors that threaten them. We recommend more extensive use of carefully designed and implemented interview surveys, in conjunction with more traditional field methods. Public Library of Science 2011-03-31 /pmc/articles/PMC3069039/ /pubmed/21483859 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0018008 Text en Meijaard et al. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are properly credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Meijaard, Erik
Mengersen, Kerrie
Buchori, Damayanti
Nurcahyo, Anton
Ancrenaz, Marc
Wich, Serge
Atmoko, Sri Suci Utami
Tjiu, Albertus
Prasetyo, Didik
Nardiyono,
Hadiprakarsa, Yokyok
Christy, Lenny
Wells, Jessie
Albar, Guillaume
Marshall, Andrew J.
Why Don't We Ask? A Complementary Method for Assessing the Status of Great Apes
title Why Don't We Ask? A Complementary Method for Assessing the Status of Great Apes
title_full Why Don't We Ask? A Complementary Method for Assessing the Status of Great Apes
title_fullStr Why Don't We Ask? A Complementary Method for Assessing the Status of Great Apes
title_full_unstemmed Why Don't We Ask? A Complementary Method for Assessing the Status of Great Apes
title_short Why Don't We Ask? A Complementary Method for Assessing the Status of Great Apes
title_sort why don't we ask? a complementary method for assessing the status of great apes
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3069039/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21483859
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0018008
work_keys_str_mv AT meijaarderik whydontweaskacomplementarymethodforassessingthestatusofgreatapes
AT mengersenkerrie whydontweaskacomplementarymethodforassessingthestatusofgreatapes
AT buchoridamayanti whydontweaskacomplementarymethodforassessingthestatusofgreatapes
AT nurcahyoanton whydontweaskacomplementarymethodforassessingthestatusofgreatapes
AT ancrenazmarc whydontweaskacomplementarymethodforassessingthestatusofgreatapes
AT wichserge whydontweaskacomplementarymethodforassessingthestatusofgreatapes
AT atmokosrisuciutami whydontweaskacomplementarymethodforassessingthestatusofgreatapes
AT tjiualbertus whydontweaskacomplementarymethodforassessingthestatusofgreatapes
AT prasetyodidik whydontweaskacomplementarymethodforassessingthestatusofgreatapes
AT nardiyono whydontweaskacomplementarymethodforassessingthestatusofgreatapes
AT hadiprakarsayokyok whydontweaskacomplementarymethodforassessingthestatusofgreatapes
AT christylenny whydontweaskacomplementarymethodforassessingthestatusofgreatapes
AT wellsjessie whydontweaskacomplementarymethodforassessingthestatusofgreatapes
AT albarguillaume whydontweaskacomplementarymethodforassessingthestatusofgreatapes
AT marshallandrewj whydontweaskacomplementarymethodforassessingthestatusofgreatapes