Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
R. Margoluis, C. Margoluis, K. Brandon, N. Salafsky (2000)
In good company: effective alliances for conservation.
the Biodiversity Support Program. We also thank C
N. Salafsky, B. Cordes, J. Parks, Cheryl Hochman (1999)
Evaluating linkages between business, the environment, and local communities : final analytical results from the Biodiversity Conservation Network
S. Pimm, G. Russell, J. Gittleman, Thomas Brooks (1995)
The Future of BiodiversityScience, 269
Michael Taylor (1994)
Diversity of lifeNature, 368
E. LeBourdais (1986)
Greater than the sum of their parts.Canadian doctor, 52 12
N. Salafsky, E. Wollenberg (2000)
Linking Livelihoods and Conservation: A Conceptual Framework and Scale for Assessing the Integration of Human Needs and BiodiversityWorld Development, 28
N. Salafsky, R. Margoluis (1999)
Threat Reduction Assessment: a Practical and Cost‐Effective Approach to Evaluating Conservation and Development ProjectsConservation Biology, 13
R. Margoluis, N. Salafsky (1998)
Measures of Success: Designing, Managing, and Monitoring Conservation and Development Projects
M. Pérez, N. Byron (1999)
A Methodology to Analyze Divergent Case Studies of Non-Timber Forest Products and Their Development PotentialForest Science, 45
J. Mcneely, K. Miller, W. Reid, R. Mittermeier, T. Werner (1990)
Conserving the World's Biological Diversity
Carl Hosticka (1995)
Compass and Gyroscope: Integrating Science and Politics for the Environment, 3
(2000)
IFRI research strategy
N. Myers, R. Mittermeier, C. Mittermeier, G. Fonseca, J. Kent (2000)
Biodiversity hotspots for conservation prioritiesNature, 403
Ronald Brunner, L. Gunderson, C. Holling, S. Light (1997)
Barriers and bridges to the renewal of ecosystems and institutionsJournal of Wildlife Management, 61
Abstract: A commonly held belief is that if people can benefit financially from enterprises that depend on nearby forests, reefs, and other natural habitats, then they will take action to conserve and sustainably use them. The Biodiversity Conservation Network brought together conservation and development organizations and local communities to systematically test this hypothesis across 39 conservation project sites in Asia and the Pacific. Each project implemented one or more community‐based enterprises such as setting up an ecotourism lodge, distilling essential oils from wild plant roots, producing jams and jellies from forest fruits, harvesting timber, or collecting marine samples to test for pharmaceutical compounds. Each project team collected the biological, enterprise, and social data necessary to test the network's hypothesis. We present the results of this test. We found that a community‐based enterprise strategy can lead to conservation, but only under limited conditions and never on its own. We summarize the specific conditions under which an enterprise strategy will and will not work in a decision chart that can be used by project managers to determine whether this strategy might make sense at their site. We also found that an enterprise strategy can be subsidized and still create a net gain that pays for conservation. Based on our experiences, we recommend developing “learning portfolios” that combine action and research to test other conservation strategies.
Conservation Biology – Wiley
Published: Dec 14, 2001
Read and print from thousands of top scholarly journals.
Already have an account? Log in
Bookmark this article. You can see your Bookmarks on your DeepDyve Library.
To save an article, log in first, or sign up for a DeepDyve account if you don’t already have one.
Copy and paste the desired citation format or use the link below to download a file formatted for EndNote
Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
All DeepDyve websites use cookies to improve your online experience. They were placed on your computer when you launched this website. You can change your cookie settings through your browser.