This paper explores the question: How is the NGO observer application process to the Arctic Council influenced by perceptions of legitimacy of the applicant? Using information gleamed from numerous interviews we map out the application process for NGO observer status in the Arctic Council. In addition to the formal criteria, we argue that Arctic states have a set of informal criteria for evaluating NGO observer applications, and that the evaluation of these criteria are coloured by individual Arctic state and the Permanent Participant perceptions of the legitimacy of the NGO applicant. Reaching into the literature on NGO legitimacy, we develop a framework detailing four key components upon which the perceptions of the legitimacy of an NGO are generally formed. This framework is then incorporated into a broader model of the overall application process through which NGOs must submit in order to attempt to gain observer status at the Arctic Council.

In a case study of conservation planning by a conservation organization working at a continental scale we examine how WWF identified and prioritized its African elephant Loxodonta africana conservation activities. We (1) review lessons learnt from previous work, (2) identify priority landscapes using biological criteria (e.g. population size and viability) and institutional criteria (e.g. feasibility, sustainability and cost-effectiveness of WWF interventions), and (3) conduct a threat analysis and review of national and subregional action plans. We suggest that species action plans should use priority-setting criteria that focus on conserving the largest and most viable populations at the subspecies level. Clear definition of geographical priorities helps an organization focus its resources and assists monitoring. Species action plans should also take account of plans developed by governments and other stakeholders. Conservation agencies wishing to select which landscapes to invest in for a given species or subspecies could then consider institutional prioritization criteria, such as those used by WWF for the African elephant. This would allow them to invest pragmatically in conservation that has a higher chance of success than work planned solely through scientific analysis. Ultimately, however, no species action plan will succeed unless it has the resources necessary for implementation and the key stakeholders work together in partnership.

WWF's spatial landscape planning methods are diverse, reflecting WWF's global, decentralized organizational structure. Over the past decade WWF's spatial planning methods have varied from expert-only workshops to systematic conservation planning using decision support software, and combinations of both. We provide four case studies from the Asia-Pacific region to illustrate the variety of approaches that have been used, emphasizing assessment directed at implementation. The method appropriate to each situation was chosen based on data availability, timing, costs, available range of stakeholders, and the technical facility and interest of the stakeholders themselves. In all cases, methods were chosen to balance staff technical capacity, technical rigour, and political buy-in, hoping to ensure that the resulting plan would actually be implemented.