This article appeared in a journal published by Elsevier. The attached copy is furnished to the author for internal non-commercial research and education use, including for instruction at the authors institution and sharing with colleagues. Other uses, including reproduction and distribution, or selling or licensing copies, or posting to personal, institutional or third party websites are prohibited. In most cases authors are permitted to post their version of the article (e.g. in Word or Tex form) to their personal website or institutional repository. Authors requiring further information regarding Elsevier’s archiving and manuscript policies are encouraged to visit: http://www.elsevier.com/authorsrights Author's personal copy Opinion Does research help to safeguard protected areas? William F. Laurance Centre for Tropical Environmental and Sustainability Science and School of Marine and Tropical Biology, James Cook University, Cairns, QLD 4878, Australia Although many protected areas are foci for scientific scenery. Beyond this, field researchers might also benefit research, they also face growing threats from illegal en- parks and biodiversity, both actively and passively. Here, I croachment and overharvesting. Does the presence of make a first effort to evaluate the impact of researchers on field researchers help to limit such threats? Although protected areas and their biodiversity, and argue that this evidence is largely anecdotal, researchers do appear to is a prime issue for further investigation. provide some protective effects, both actively (such as by deterring poachers) and passively (such as by benefiting Apparent advantages of researcher presence local communities economically and thereby generating If protected areas benefit from a science-safeguarding support for protected areas). However, much remains effect, an ancillary and sometimes hidden benefit of re- unknown about the generality and impacts of such ben- search may be promoting nature conservation. What is the efits. A key priority is to develop a better understanding of evidence? In the most direct sense, several ‘conservation the advantages and limitations of field research for aiding heroes’ have battled to establish or sustain protected areas protected areas and their biodiversity. (Table 1). Obvious examples include Dian Fossey in Rwanda [10], Daniel Janzen in Costa Rica, Patricia Wright Are protected areas protected? in Madagascar, and Sir Ghillean Prance in Argentina [11]. In a world beset by environmental challenges, protected Scientists employed by conservation organizations have areas are seen as a cornerstone of efforts to sustain the also played key roles. For decades, the Wildlife Conserva- biodiversity and natural ecosystem processes of the Earth. tion Society (WCS), under the leadership of William Con- The good news is that we have more protected areas than way, emplaced talented scientists in the field as ever: since 1985, the total land area with at least some legal conservation watchdogs, including Alan Rabinowitz in protection has more than tripled, now totaling 13% of the Belize, George Schaller in the Himalayas, Terese and John global terrestrial surface [1]. Hart in Zaire, and Lee White in Gabon. These dynamic The bad news, however, is that many protected areas individuals were prime movers in the creation of many new are under threat (Figure 1) [2–5]. Some areas are plagued protected areas (J. Terborgh, personal communication). by illegal encroachment, logging, and burning, whereas Field researchers can also benefit protected areas by wildlife poaching and overharvesting of fuel wood are actively deterring poachers and encroachers (Table 1, Box serious threats for other reserves, especially in developing 2). The best-documented evidence for this is at Tai Nation- nations [3]. As land-use and population pressures increase, al Park in Coˆte d’Ivoire, Africa, where active research sites protected areas are increasingly being surrounded by hos- have higher wildlife abundances and less evidence of tile modified landscapes [3,4]. In many areas, illegal gold poaching, compared with areas with little research activity mining has expanded apace [5] (Box 1 i). As a consequence [12–15]. Suppression of poaching and illegal logging has of these and other perils, defending the integrity of pro- also been noted in areas frequented by scientists or bird- tected areas and their biodiversity is a growing challenge, watchers at Nouable´-Ndoki Reserve in Congo [16], Lope in part because many reserves are inadequately resourced Reserve in Gabon (F. Maisels, personal communication), and safeguarded [2,3,6,7]. The recent slaughter of ele- Gunung Palung National Park in Borneo (A.J. Marshall, phants in Cameroon (Box 1 ii), murders of numerous park personal communication) and Soberania National Park in guards (Box 1 iii,iv) and massive human encroachment in Panama (S.J. Wright, personal communication). Some some protected areas (Box 1 v) testify to the challenges at scientists are audacious. In a central Amazonian reserve hand. where I work, a plucky Brazilian graduate student once Ecotourism is known to promote nature conservation by faced down a truckload of armed poachers [17], whereas providing revenues for protected areas [8], especially in foreign scientists at Gunung Palung spiked trees to deter areas with large, charismatic wildlife [9] and spectacular rampant illegal logging (Table 1). If scientists do often function as de facto park guards, Corresponding author: Laurance, W.F. ([email protected]). then the benefits for biodiversity might be considerable. Keywords: biodiversity conservation; illegal mining; poaching; park management; Several studies suggest that detecting and apprehending protected areas; scientific research. poachers in the field is generally a more effective deterrent 0169-5347/$ – see front matter ß 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2013.01.017 than is imposing more severe punishments, such as higher Trends in Ecology & Evolution, May 2013, Vol. 28, No. 5 261 Author's personal copy Opinion Trends in Ecology & Evolution May 2013, Vol. 28, No. 5 (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) TRENDS in Ecology & Evolution Figure 1. Research activity can reduce a variety of environmental threats in protected areas, such as: (a) illegal logging in Sumatra; (b) wildcat gold mining in Suriname; (c) poached gorilla in Equatorial Guinea; (d) fires near Xingu´ National Park and associated Kayapo indigenous lands in Brazil; (e) elephant killed by gunshot in Gabon; and (f) apparent poachers detected by an automatic camera in Peninsular Malaysia. Reproduced, with permission, from W.F. Laurance (a,b), J. Fa (c), NASA Modis satellite (d), R. Buij (e), G.R. Clements (f). fines [18–20]. Although the proportion of scientists that habitats (M. Peck, personal communication). This effort engage in active safeguarding is unknown, veteran re- links local communities to scientists, conservation orga- searcher Jeffrey Sayer suggests that it ‘might be the rule nizations, and local and national governments (http:// rather than the exception’ (personal communication). www.primenet.org.uk/). Field researchers can also advance conservation of Finally, one cannot ignore the prominent role that parks less directly. In the northern Republic of Congo, scientists have in publicizing parks and their biodiversity. scientists from the WCS have promoted ecotourism and For instance, during the 1970s, researchers at Manu Na- motivated park guards to redouble their enforcement tional Park in Peru attracted world-class photojournalists efforts (J. Sayer, personal communication). Some scientists whose films, documentaries, and books made the park build local support for protected areas with education famous and attracted many tourists. Almost every other programs for nearby communities and by hiring locals river in the region has been logged and hunted out, but as field assistants or para-taxonomists (S.L. Pimm, M. with boatloads of tourists entering the park each day, ‘no Peck, and A.J. Marshall, personal communication). In poacher or logger would dare show his face’ (J. Terborgh, Gabon, the field assistants that my colleagues and I employ personal communication). The busy tourism industry helps are former hunters with impressive knowledge of local to protect the park directly and also has a strong vested wildlife [21], and several have become keenly interested interest, which it freely expresses publicly, in maintaining in nature conservation. Similarly, researchers and ecotour- the integrity of the park. In this manner, science promotes ists at Ranomafana National Park in Madagascar are the tourism and tourism in turn promotes nature conservation largest source of income for impoverished nearby villages, [9,23–25]. providing some US$2 million in revenues and assistance annually that helps to build local support for the park [22]. Limitations of science safeguarding Scientists are also advancing conservation by helping to Despite such apparent successes, the science-safeguarding empower local residents in a complex and rapidly changing effect seems partial at best. In response to burgeoning world (Table 1). In Papua New Guinea, field researchers Asian demands for ivory and rhino horn, Africa is the have helped indigenous communities respond to logging midst of an epic elephant [26] and black rhino [27] slaugh- and mining companies seeking access to their lands, so ter by armed poachers, rebels, and even the military that that the communities can judge the promises