3.8 Article

How do we drive a renaissance for national island conservation in Australia?

期刊

PACIFIC CONSERVATION BIOLOGY
卷 28, 期 4, 页码 372-382

出版社

CSIRO PUBLISHING
DOI: 10.1071/PC22011

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Australia's approach to managing and conserving its offshore islands needs urgent review, as the loss of natural heritage on these islands must be reversed. A proposed national alliance can prioritize investments and coordinate with partners to assess threats and report on condition. The alliance should be based on evidence-based management and involve the participation of indigenous peoples.
Australia's approach to managing and conserving its offshore islands as important national assets warrants urgent review. There is a growing realisation that the current trajectory of loss of natural heritage on islands must be reversed, particularly in an era of increasing climate change. We propose a role description and an organisational model for a national Australian Islands Alliance that champions conservation action, prioritises investments aligned to risks, and that connects partners at a strategic national level. A national alliance offers important opportunity to assess threats and report on condition. Four key foundations underpin a national alliance dedicated to championing island care and expert management: (1) management informed by evidence; (2) sound return on investment; (3) national coordination in partnership with States and Territories; and (4) community participation inclusive of Aboriginal peoples' and Torres Strait Islanders' custodial rights and interests. The message from experiences shared across Australia, New Zealand and the Pacific region is that traditional island custodians and stakeholders are vital partners to restoration efforts. These shared learnings collectively demonstrate the time is now for Australia to move forward with a respectful and unified direction to progress successful and sustainable island conservation and restoration.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

3.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据