Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-p9bg8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-02T13:41:02.941Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Local conservation action requires ethical investments in global digital equity

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 December 2024

Karyn M Tabor Open the ORCID record for Karyn M Tabor [Opens in a new window] ,
Natasha Stavros Open the ORCID record for Natasha Stavros [Opens in a new window]  and
Margaret B Holland Open the ORCID record for Margaret B Holland [Opens in a new window]
Karyn M Tabor*
Affiliation:
University of Maryland, Baltimore County, Baltimore, MD, USA
Natasha Stavros
Affiliation:
WKID Solutions, LLC, Altadena, CA, USA
Margaret B Holland
Affiliation:
University of Maryland, Baltimore County, Baltimore, MD, USA
*
Corresponding author: Karyn M Tabor; Email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Satellite remote sensing is vital for monitoring anthropogenic changes and for alerting us to escalating environmental threats. With recent technological advances, a variety of satellite-based monitoring systems are available to aid conservation practitioners. Yet, documented knowledge of who uses near-real-time satellite-based monitoring and how these technologies are applied to inform conservation decisions is sparse. Through an online survey and semi-structured interviews, we explored how developers and users leverage conservation early-warning and alert systems (CEASs) for enhanced conservation decisions. Some 167 developers and users of near-real-time fire and forest monitoring systems from 40 countries participated in this study. Globally, respondents used 66 unique CEASs. The most common applications were for education and awareness, fire/disaster management and law enforcement. Respondents primarily used CEASs to enforce land-use policies and deter illegal activities, and they perceived these tools as underutilized for incentivizing policy compliance or conservation. Respondents experienced inequities regarding system access, exposure and ability to act upon alert information. More investments in capacity-building, resources and action plans are needed to better link information to action. Implementing recommendations from this research can help us to increase the accessibility and inclusivity of CEAS applications to unlock their powerful capabilities for achieving conservation goals.

Keywords

Conservationearly warningenvironmental monitoringsatellite remote sensingtechnologyhuman-centered design
Type
Research Paper
Information
Environmental Conservation , First View , pp. 1 - 11
Check for updates
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2024. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of Foundation for Environmental Conservation

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Adams, WM (2019) Geographies of conservation II: technology, surveillance and conservation by algorithm. Progress in Human Geography 43: 337–350.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arts, K, van der Wal, R, Adams, WM (2015) Digital technology and the conservation of nature. Ambio 44: 661–673.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Assunção, J, Gandour, C, Rocha, R (2023) DETERring deforestation in the Amazon: environmental monitoring and law enforcement. American Economic Journal Applied Economics 15: 125–156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brenner, W, Uebernickel, F, Abrell, T (2016) Design thinking as mindset, process, and toolbox. In: Brenner, W, Uebernickel, F (eds), Design Thinking for Innovation (pp. 3–21). Cham, Switzerland: Springer International Publishing.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cappello, C, Pratihast, AK, Pérez Ojeda Del Arco, A, Reiche, J, De Sy, V, Herold, M et al. (2022) Alert-driven community-based forest monitoring: a case of the Peruvian Amazon. Remote Sensing 14: 4284.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carroll, SR, Herczog, E, Hudson, M, Russell, K, Stall, S (2021) Operationalizing the CARE and FAIR principles for Indigenous data futures. Scientific Data 8: 108.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cohn, M (2004) User Stories Applied: For Agile Software Development. Boston, MA, USA: Addison-Wesley, Inc.Google Scholar
Cook, CN, de Bie, K, Keith, DA, Addison, PFE (2016) Decision triggers are a critical part of evidence-based conservation. Biological Conservation 195: 46–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Costanza-Chock, S (2020) Design Justice: Community-Led Practices to Build the Worlds We Need. Cambridge, MA, USA: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davies, DK, Ilavajhala, S, Min Minnie Wong, Justice CO (2009) Fire Information for resource management system: archiving and distributing MODIS active fire data. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing 47: 72–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dedoose (2022) Dedoose Version 9.0.54 web application for managing, analyzing, and presenting qualitative and mixed method research data [www document]. URL https://www.dedoose.com/.Google Scholar
Elwood, S (2008) Volunteered geographic information: future research directions motivated by critical, participatory, and feminist GIS. GeoJournal 72: 173–183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Finer, M, Novoa, S, Weisse, MJ, Petersen, R, Mascaro, J, Souto, T et al. (2018) Combating deforestation: from satellite to intervention. Science 360: 1303–1305.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gibson, FL, Rogers, AA, Smith, ADM, Roberts, A, Possingham, H, McCarthy, M et al. (2017) Factors influencing the use of decision support tools in the development and design of conservation policy. Environmental Science & Policy 70: 1–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goodman, LA (1961) Snowball sampling. The Annals of Mathematical Statistics 32: 148–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jarvis, RM, Borrelle, SB, Forsdick, NJ, Pérez-Hämmerle, K, Dubois, NS, Griffin, SR et al. (2020) Navigating spaces between conservation research and practice: are we making progress? Ecological Solutions and Evidence 1: e12028.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jennings, L, Anderson, T, Martinez, A, Sterling, R, Chavez, DD, Garba, I et al. (2023) Applying the ‘CARE Principles for Indigenous Data Governance’ to ecology and biodiversity research. Nature Ecology & Evolution 7: 1547–1551.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jepson, P, Ladle, RJ (2015) Nature apps: waiting for the revolution. Ambio 44: 827–832.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kadykalo, AN, Cooke, SJ, Young, N (2021) The role of Western-based scientific, Indigenous and local knowledge in wildlife management and conservation. People and Nature 3: 610–626.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Knight, AT, Cook, CN, Redford, KH, Biggs, D, Romero, C, Ortega-Argueta, A et al. (2019) Improving conservation practice with principles and tools from systems thinking and evaluation. Sustainability Science 14: 1531–1548.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lahoz-Monfort, JJ, Magrath, MJL (2021) A comprehensive overview of technologies for species and habitat monitoring and conservation. BioScience 71: 1038–1062.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Malterud, K (2001) Qualitative research: standards, challenges, and guidelines. The Lancet 358: 483–488.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Moustard, F, Haklay, M, Lewis, J, Albert, A, Moreu, M, Chiaravalloti, R et al. (2021) Using Sapelli in the field: methods and data for an inclusive citizen science. Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution 9: 638870.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mullan, K, Biggs, T, Caviglia-Harris, J, Ribeiro, JR, Ottoni, T, Sills, E et al. (2022) Estimating the Value of Near-Real-Time Satellite Information for Monitoring Deforestation in the Brazilian Amazon [www document]. URL https://media.rff.org/documents/WP_22-22.pdf.Google Scholar
Musinsky, J, Tabor, K, Cano, CA, Ledezma, JC, Mendoza, E, Rasolohery, A et al. (2018) Conservation impacts of a near real-time forest monitoring and alert system for the tropics. Remote Sensing in Ecology and Conservation 4: 189–196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Palomino, J, Muellerklein, OC, Kelly, M (2017) A review of the emergent ecosystem of collaborative geospatial tools for addressing environmental challenges. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems 65: 79–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pritchard, R, Sauls, LA, Oldekop, JA, Kiwango, WA, Brockington, D (2022) Data justice and biodiversity conservation. Conservation Biology 36: e13919.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Qualtrics (2022) Qualtrics software [www document]. URL https://www.qualtrics.com/.Google Scholar
Reiche, J, Balling, J, Pickens, AH, Masolele, RN, Berger, A, Weisse, MJ et al. (2024) Integrating satellite-based forest disturbance alerts improves detection timeliness and confidence. Environmental Research Letters 19: 054011.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Saja, AMA, Goonetilleke, A, Teo, M, Ziyath, AM (2019) A critical review of social resilience assessment frameworks in disaster management. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction 35: 101096.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sandbrook, C, Clark, D, Toivonen, T, Simlai, T, O’Donnell, S, Cobbe, J et al. (2021) Principles for the socially responsible use of conservation monitoring technology and data. Conservation Science and Practice 3: e374.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sandelowski, M (2000) Whatever happened to qualitative description? Research in Nursing & Health 23: 334–340.3.0.CO;2-G>CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Shea, K (2022) Measuring the impact of monitoring: how we know transparent near-real-time data can help save the forests. In: Uitto, JI, Batra, G (eds), Transformational Change for People and the Planet (pp. 263–273). Cham, Switzerland: Springer International Publishing.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Slough, T, Kopas, J, Urpelainen, J (2021) Satellite-based deforestation alerts with training and incentives for patrolling facilitate community monitoring in the Peruvian Amazon. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 118: e2015171118.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Speaker, T, O’Donnell, S, Wittemyer, G, Bruyere, B, Loucks, C, Dancer, A et al. (2022) A global community-sourced assessment of the state of conservation technology. Conservation Biology 36: e13871.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tabor, KM, Hewson, JH (2018) The evolution of remote sensing applications vital to effective biodiversity conservation and sustainable development. In: Leidner, AK, Buchanan, GM (eds), Satellite Remote Sensing for Conservation Action: Case Studies from Aquatic and Terrestrial Ecosystems (pp. 274–317). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tabor, KM, Holland, MB (2021) Opportunities for improving conservation early warning and alert systems. Remote Sensing in Ecology and Conservation 7: 7–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Temi (2022) Audio to Text Automatic Transcription Service & App [www document]. URL https://www.temi.com/.Google Scholar
Weisse, MJ, Noguerón, R, Vicencio, REV, Soto, DAC (2019) Use of Near-Real-Time Deforestation Alerts: A Case Study From Peru. World Resources Institute [www document]. URL https://www.wri.org/research/use-near-real-time-deforestation-alerts.Google Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Tabor et al. supplementary material 1

Tabor et al. supplementary material
Download Tabor et al. supplementary material 1(File)
File 19.9 KB
Supplementary material: File

Tabor et al. supplementary material 2

Tabor et al. supplementary material
Download Tabor et al. supplementary material 2(File)
File 49.1 KB
Supplementary material: File

Tabor et al. supplementary material 3

Tabor et al. supplementary material
Download Tabor et al. supplementary material 3(File)
File 453 KB