Incorporating feasibility of conservation action into planning
Some of us (including me) have spent the last few years talking about how social data should be integrated into conservation decisions. It makes sense, right? Effective conservation requires people to make choices about how they interact with the environment. It’s about choices on the amount of resources they extract and how they extract them.
Given that we’ve been talking about the importance of social data for a while, where are we now? How much better are our decisions once people’s values and costs are incorporated into our spatial prioritisations? And what social data should we be using to represent the diversity of social dimensions that influence the
feasibility of implementing actions on sea and land. Much of this is still unknown.
Together with colleagues, I started looking at the characteristics that could influence the feasibility of implementing marine resource management (see the box on ‘What is feasibility?’). We wanted to think broader than just cost, as the cost of implementation is not the only issue we encounter when implementing a conservation project. Sometimes people have other priorities or they simply can’t engage…