MINI-REVIEW

Conservation in tropical Pacific Island countries: why mostcurrent approaches are failingGunnar Keppel1, Clare Morrison2, Dick Watling3, Marika V. Tuiwawa4, & Isaac A. Rounds5

1 Curtin Institute for Biodiversity and Climate, Department of Environment and Agriculture, Curtin University, GPO BoxU1987, Perth, WA 6845, Australia2 International Centre for Ecotourism Research, Griffith University Gold Coast, Queensland 4222, Australia3 NatureFiji-MareqetiViti, Suva, Fiji4 South Pacific Regional Herbarium, University of the South Pacific, Suva, Fiji5 Conservation International-Fiji, Pacific Islands Programme, 3 Ma’afu Street, Suva, Fiji

KeywordsCommunity participation; conservation

implementation and planning; developing

nations; funding; Oceania; sociocultural

systems; sustainable tourism development.

CorrespondenceGunnar Keppel, Curtin Institute for Biodiversity

and Climate, Department of Environment and

Agriculture, Curtin University, GPO BoxU1987,

Perth, WA 6845, Australia.

Tel: +61-08-9266-9674;

fax: +61-08-9266-9674, +61-08-9266-2495.

E-mail: g.keppel@curtin.edu.au

Received10 February 2012

Accepted3 April 2012

EditorDirk Roux

doi: 10.1111/j.1755-263X.2012.00243.x

Abstract

The independent island nations of the South Pacific have a rich and threat-ened terrestrial biota. Despite considerable investment of resources into con-servation over the last three decades, biodiversity is dwindling and protectedarea systems remain inadequate. This lack of success is caused by importantdifferences in cultural, economic, landownership, and social factors in devel-oping Pacific Island countries, compared to developed nations that often fundconservation programs and plans. Despite the obvious need for capacity build-ing and information exchange among stakeholders, little collaboration and de-velopment has eventuated. A coordinated and integrated approach, focusingconservation resources on national priorities, is essential to achieve efficientconservation. This will need to include active involvement of landowners, agood sociocultural understanding of target communities, improved collabo-ration between the various stakeholders, provision of sustainable alternativeeconomic activities, and a commitment to long funding cycles for projects.

Introduction

The terrestrial diversity and endemism per unit area inOceania are among the highest in the world (Keast &Miller 1996; Kier et al. 2009). There are four globalbiodiversity hotspots within the region, which harbormore than 30,000 plant and 3,000 vertebrate species(Mittermeier et al. 2004; Legra et al. 2008). More thanhalf of this diversity is in the 14 independent developingisland nations of the tropical Pacific (Table 1; Fig. 1),often with high endemism.

Despite this global conservation significance, only0.15% of total land area and less than 20% of knownecosystems in tropical Pacific Island countries are in

designated protected areas (Chape et al. 2003) and fewof these areas are well managed (Shearman et al. 2009;Kool et al. 2010). Protected areas are also relatively smalland often fail to represent the variety of ecosystems andhabitats (Dinerstein & Wiramanayake 1993; Gillespie &Jaffre 2003). Furthermore, knowledge of the biota andecological processes, including conservation threats, inPacific Island nations is limited (Keppel et al. 2009; Koolet al. 2010). This is evident in the IUCN red list, whereonly 9% of all known species from the region have beenassessed (Morrison 2012), and the absence of officialnational threatened species lists for most countries. As aresult, conservation planning is often based on the limiteddata available, introducing large uncertainties and error.

Conservation Letters 0 (2012) 1–10 Copyright and Photocopying: c©2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. 1

Conservation in tropical Pacific G. Keppel et al.

Table 1 Population size, terrestrial area, and proportion of land in different land tenure classes in Pacific Island countries

Land tenure class

Country Population Terrestrial area (km2) Public (%) Freehold (%) Customary (%)

Cook Islands 20,000 240 Some Little 95

Fiji 849,000 18,274 4 8 88

Federated States of Micronesia 111,000 702 35 <1 65

Kiribati 98,000 811 50 <5 >45

Marshall Islands 62,000 181 <1 0 >99

Nauru 10,000 21 <10 0 >90

Niue 1,400 260 1.5 0 98.5

Palau 20,000 459 Most Some Some

Papua New Guinea 6,732,000 462,840 2.5 0.5 97

Samoa 179,000 2,831 15 4 81

Solomon Islands 523,000 28,400 8 5 87

Tonga 104,000 748 100 0 0

Tuvalu 10,000 26 5 <0.1 95

Vanuatu 240,000 4,700 2 0 98

Sources: AusAid (2008) and PDDESAUNS (2009).

With rapidly growing human populations and relatedpressures, the terrestrial biodiversity of the region isamong the most threatened in the world (Mittermeieret al. 2004; Kier et al. 2009; Kueffer et al. 2010). On mostarchipelagos, this biodiversity crisis is driven by habitatloss and degradation, although other factors, such asinvasive species, are also important (Kingsford et al. 2009;Woinarski 2010). Climate change is likely to considerablyexacerbate existing problems (Wardell-Johnson et al.2011) and, in combination with other factors, will extendthe already high extinction record of the tropical Pacific(Steadman et al. 2002; Steadman 2006).

Despite commitments through National Biodiver-sity Strategy and Action Plans in association withthe Convention on Biological Diversity, the presenceof numerous nongovernment organizations (NGOs)and increasing availability of funding, rapid habitatdegradation, and species loss in Pacific Island countriescontinues (Lees & Siwatibau 2009; Shearman et al.2009; Wardell-Johnson et al. 2011). Differences inconservation approaches and priorities of two majorstakeholder groups, big international nongovernmentorganizations (BINGOs) and international donor agenciesversus government and local NGOs, contribute to theinefficiency of conservation efforts (Axlford et al. 2008;Lees & Siwatibau 2009). The latter group is generally lowon resources (Kingsford et al. 2009) and can mismanageavailable resources (Kabutaulaka 2000; Foale 2001;Laurance et al. 2011), while the former often fail toproduce conservation success despite adequate funding(Hunnam 2002; Lees & Siwatibau 2009). As a result,there are serious concerns about the persistence of large

components of Pacific biodiversity and the effectivenessof current approaches to conservation in the region.

Conservation plans and theory for Pacific Islandcountries are generally developed by conservationistsmost familiar with practices in countries that are com-paratively well-developed and have legal provisions todeclare protected areas for conservation purposes. Asmost Pacific Island countries are Third World countriesand land is owned by communities that have a strongconnection to their natural resources, much of thecurrent theory for conservation planning and practice isnot entirely applicable to island nations in the Pacific.

There is a critical need to design and implementeffective ways of conserving biodiversity in Pacific Islandcountries (Hunnam 2002). We argue that a collaborativeand coordinated approach of all stakeholders (includinglandowners) is critical for achieving conservation successand requires efficient utilization of available resourcesand support for long-term projects. We evaluate avail-able resources and discuss relevant stakeholders beforediscussing the complexities and problems in currentconservation practices. Finally, we propose solutions foreffective conservation in the region based on successfulconservation efforts illustrated with relevant case studies.

The Pacific region

Pacific Island countries comprise 14 nations with aboutnine million people living on 520,000 km2 of landover 29 million km2 of the Pacific Ocean (Table 1;Fig. 1). Country size ranges considerably from Papua

2 Conservation Letters 0 (2012) 1–10 Copyright and Photocopying: c©2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

G. Keppel et al. Conservation in tropical Pacific

Figure 1 The 14 independent Pacific Island nations (gray shading) and dependent territories in the Western Pacific. Nonshaded shapes indicate Pacific

territories that are not self-governing.

New Guinea (462,840 km2) to Nauru (22.5 km2). Mostpeople live in relatively small, isolated coastal or ruralvillage communities, and remain closely reliant on theirlocal natural resources for subsistence and economicdevelopment (Morrison & Buckley 2010).

Three systems of land tenure (customary, public,and freehold) exist (Table 1). Most land (>80%) isunder customary (or traditional) ownership, managed bycustomary groups according to their own processes, oftenlinked to social and spiritual/religious beliefs. Public landis owned by the state while freehold land is owned byindividuals or corporate bodies (Ward 2000). Public andfreehold land can be sold and transferred to someone elsewhile customary land cannot be sold except to other cus-tomary groups or the state. Government income is heav-ily dependent on primary industry including fishing, log-

ging, and mining by companies from outside the region.Lately, tourism is of increasing importance, accountingfor up to 80% of GDP in some countries (Morrison &Buckley 2010). Australia, New Zealand, and French andAmerican territories, while in the geographic region, arenot included in this review, which focuses on the terres-trial environments of independent developing nations.

Stakeholders and challenges

Various government departments, local and internationalNGOs, United Nations agencies, regional intergovern-mental institutions, community-based groups, andlandowners are involved in the conservation sector ofPacific island nations. For example, in Fiji there were fivemajor government agencies, four local, two regional, and

Conservation Letters 0 (2012) 1–10 Copyright and Photocopying: c©2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. 3

Conservation in tropical Pacific G. Keppel et al.

Table 2 Distribution of six different conservation resources (commitment to achieve conservation outcomes, knowledge of theory for conservation

planning and implementation, local knowledge, ability to approve conservation measures, personnel involved in conservation sector, funding available)

among major stakeholders in the conservation sector in Pacific Island nations

Stakeholder Commitment Theory Local knowledge Approval Personnel Funding

BINGOsa High High Low No Mod High

Local NGOsb High Moderate High No Low Low/moderate

Government Variable Moderate High Yes Low Very low

Local experts High Moderate/high Moderate/high No Low Low/moderate

Landowning communities Variable Low High Yes High None

aBig, international, nongovernment organizations.bNongovernment organizations.

13 international organizations active in the conservationsector in 2006 (Lees 2007). In addition, some of theembassies and private companies based in Pacific Islandnations provide funding for conservation projects (e.g.,Keppel 2002; Saffitz 2010). All these stakeholders varyin availability of financial resources, size of personnel,commitment to conservation, knowledge of conservationtheory, and presence of local knowledge (Table 2).

Landowners are of central importance for conservationin Pacific Island countries because they own most ofthe land (Table 1), have broad and unique knowledgeof their biodiversity, and are dependent on their en-vironment for survival. Therefore, conservation areasand activities generally cannot be implemented by thegovernment or other organizations without support andapproval by landowning communities (Hunnam 2002;van Helden 2005). Most rural landowning communitiesin Pacific Islands still possess extensive knowledge oftheir environment and often have unparalleled andotherwise unavailable knowledge, critical for develop-ing appropriate and effective conservation approaches(Cox & Elmqvist 1991; Baines & Hviding 1992; Raynor &Kostka 2003; West 2006).

The wide variety of stakeholders, the central impor-tance of landowners, and poor resources make imple-menting conservation programs and activities fundamen-tally different from more developed neighboring nations,such as Australia and New Zealand. These factors makerelevant Pacific Island government departments unable(underfunded, understaffed, limited legal authority) andsometimes unwilling (alternative priorities, corruption)to achieve their CBD obligations (Kabutaulaka 2000;Keppel 2006; Lees 2007; Laurance et al. 2011). Below, weoutline five major difficulties for implementing conser-vation in Pacific Island countries: resource discrepancies;participation of and benefits for landowning communi-ties; collaboration between stakeholders; social, political,and cultural dynamics; and management of conservationfunding.

Resource discrepancies

The number of personnel, availability of scientific in-formation, and financial resources for conservationactivities and programs are low in Pacific Island coun-tries, compared to their more prosperous neighbors inAustralia and New Zealand (Kingsford et al. 2009). Inaddition, available resources within Pacific Island nationsare strongly skewed toward BINGOs (Table 2), whichhave large financial, technical, and personnel resources,compared to government departments (Kingsford et al.2009; Lees & Siwatibau 2009). As in many developingnations, this has resulted in BINGOs dominating con-servation efforts in Pacific Island nations (Rodrıguezet al. 2007; Lees & Siwatibau 2009). For example, 45government staff were working in Fiji’s conservationsector in 2006 with a total budget of about 1 million FijiDollars, compared to 79 staff with a total budget of Fiji$8 million employed by BINGOs (Lees 2007).

BINGOs are also often led by nonnationals that spenda limited number of years in the Pacific, have to achievetargets set by their parent institution and donors, andhave limited responsibility to local governments. Conse-quently, conservation programs in the Pacific are oftenprioritized and implemented by outsiders (Hviding 2003).This dominating external influence in conservation fund-ing and activities is exacerbated by conservationists fromdeveloped nations dominating the international scientificdiscussion of conservation practices and policies (e.g.,Kingsford et al. 2009; Woinarski 2010), which developingPacific nations are then expected to follow or desire toemulate.

Participation of and benefits forlandowning communities

Most land in Pacific Island countries is owned by in-digenous communities, which therefore hold the key tosuccessful conservation. Despite their importance, the

4 Conservation Letters 0 (2012) 1–10 Copyright and Photocopying: c©2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

G. Keppel et al. Conservation in tropical Pacific

needs and knowledge of these communities are oftengiven limited consideration (Hunnam 2002; Hviding2003). Often, the only involvement of landowners is thediscussion of plans and agendas introduced by externalparties. This top-down approach is considered by manylocal conservationists as a major reason for the failureof conservation programs (Foale 2001; van Helden2005; Rodrıguez et al. 2007). For example, insufficientinvolvement of landowners in the conception, planning,and implementation of community-based conservationprojects at the 17 sites of the South Pacific BiodiversityConservation Program was a major reason for the overallfailure of the project (Hunnam 2002).

Landowning communities still have a close relation-ship with their environment, which provides manyof their needs. These dependencies on biodiversityare important considerations in conservation planning(Cox & Elmqvist 1991; Hunnam 2002; Hviding 2003).The same natural resources also often provide the onlysource of income for these communities, mostly throughdestructive practices such as logging and mining (vanHelden 2005; West 2006). In addition to basic householdexpenses, healthcare, and education, many in thesecommunities aspire to possess goods and resources thatrequire considerable money (Foale 2001; Hviding 2003).Therefore, the lack of sufficient economic benefits forlocal communities, associated with conservation, some-times reduces the effectiveness of conservation efforts.

Social, political, and cultural dynamics

A complex network of political, social, and cultural layersexists at various scales and levels in Pacific Island nations,which can be difficult to navigate. These include individ-uals, family clans, groups, and associations (e.g., women’sclubs or youth groups) within local communities andvillages that may hold some traditional right over thesame land (Ward 2000; van Helden 2005; Hviding 2006).In addition, there are regional administrations underthe national government (Raynor & Kostka 2003) andvarious environmental policy paradigms (Filer 2011).Important stakeholders exist in each administrative leveland political, social, and cultural dynamics vary amongregions, based on their histories (Hviding 2006; Schwarzet al. 2011). Conservation efforts need to understandand link into this complex network (Hunnam 2002; vanHelden 2005).

Matters are often further complicated by stakeholdersoutside the community. Farming, logging, or devel-opment projects may occur on community land, suchas Southeast Asian logging companies in the SolomonIslands and Papua New Guinea (Kabutaulaka 2000;

Keppel 2006; Laurance et al. 2011). In addition, reli-gious organizations have influenced in recent historyand now play a central role in the political, social,and cultural dynamics of Pacific communities (Foale2001; Hviding 2006). Within this complex network,disagreements and underlying issues may exist betweenvarious parties/individuals dating back several years orseveral generations, sometimes predating European andChristian influences (Keesing 1989). Such problems canconsiderably complicate conservation work (Foale 2001;van Helden 2005; Lees & Siwatibau 2009).

There are also different stakeholder perceptions andpractices of conservation. The Western scientific conceptof conservation seeks to protect species because of theiresthetic or evolutionary value. Most Pacific Islandersview their biodiversity as a resource of great cultural andsubsistence importance, where conservation safeguardsthese resources for continued supply or cultural reasons(Hunnam 2002; Hviding 2003; Lees & Siwatibau 2009;Bottrill et al. 2011). For example, while “scientific conser-vation” seeks to establish marine protected areas as long-term no-fishing (no-take) zones to increase biodiversity,traditional protection (sustainable-use) zones are oftenshort-term allowing abundant harvest when lifted (Rud-dle et al. 1992; Veitayaki 1997; Foale & Manele 2004).

Collaboration between relevantstakeholders

Often, there is little consultation and collaborationbetween the many different NGOs, government de-partments, and academic institutions (Hunnam 2002;Hviding 2006). This may be surprising as they pur-portedly share the common goal of biodiversity andecosystem protection. However, each organization has itsown goals and approaches, requiring demonstration ofsuccesses to donor agencies to attract more funding. Asa result, organizations often follow their own agendas,which frequently do not relate to national and localpriorities and/or may be in conflict with the interestsof other stakeholders (Hviding 2006; Lees & Siwatibau2009; Bottrill et al. 2011).

Furthermore, there are different perceptions ofsuccessful conservation. Donor agencies and BINGOsequate success to eventual self-sufficient running of thecommunity-based project by local communities, whilemany local conservationists are more concerned aboutcommitted and satisfied landowners (Axlford et al. 2008).The latter realize that financial sustainability is unlikelyfor many conservation projects without continuoussupport (financial and/or technical).

Conservation Letters 0 (2012) 1–10 Copyright and Photocopying: c©2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. 5

Conservation in tropical Pacific G. Keppel et al.

Management of conservation funding

Although funds are occasionally mismanaged (Foale2001; Dowie 2009), most financial resources are lost byinefficient application and/or management. Inefficien-cies occur through repetitive (and hence redundant)processes, excessive administrative costs, and inadequateprioritization of conservation targets. There is also dupli-cation. For example, the important bird areas identifiedby Birdlife International (Masibalavu & Dutson 2006)and remote forest refugia identified by the Wildlife Con-servation Society and other NGOs (Olson et al. 2010) forFiji are similar to important conservation areas alreadyidentified in earlier work (Lees 1989), but would haveutilized considerable finances in wages, workshops, andreport compilation and dissemination.

Funds are often spent on administration and pro-grams of limited relevance, with comparatively littlemoney spent on actual implementation of conservationprograms and improving the livelihoods of landowners(Bottrill et al. 2011). This can be viewed as moderncolonialism, where high salaries in BINGOs are financedby the conservation resources in these developingcountries. Furthermore, the distribution of funding canbe questionable. For example, although most endemicbiodiversity in larger Pacific archipelagos resides onland (Wardell-Johnson et al. 2011), less conservationeffort is invested in terrestrial environments compared tobetter-studied marine environments (Kool et al. 2010).

Finally, international donor-assisted projects usuallyhave short funding cycles (3–5 years), restricting thetime available to achieve project aims and establishcommunity involvement (Hunnam 2002; Bottrill et al.2011). This is insufficient time to produce, promote, andimplement successful conservation programs, accountingfor the needs of all stakeholders. Many behavioral andsocioeconomic changes needed for conservation in thePacific region occur slowly and incrementally, demand-ing 10 or more years of resources (Sayer & Campbell2004). In addition, international funders increasinglyseek multiple objectives in project proposals (Bottrillet al. 2011), complicating project designs and making itdifficult for local community-based programs to delivertimely results. Such local projects are often deemedfailures with little opportunity for further funding.

Solutions

There is an urgent need to improve the efficiency andproductivity of conservation programs in Pacific Islandnations. We outline six solution areas that will helpachieve this goal: sociocultural analyses; landownerparticipation; alternative revenue for local communities;

conservation funding and stakeholder collaboration;enduring investment; and capacity building. How-ever, conservation success will ultimately differ amongcommunities and countries due to cultural, economic,political, and social differences.

Sociocultural analyses

Sociocultural analyses of host communities are essentialbefore any project is undertaken (see also Sewall et al.2011). These can identify the most suitable approach fora particular community. For example, land in Fiji and theSolomon Islands is controlled by indigenous landowningcommunities, but legally linked to the government in Fiji(Ward 2000). Hence, the involvement of relevant gov-ernment departments is more important for conservationprojects in Fiji than in the Solomon Islands. In addition,it is preferable that local community facilitators conductsociocultural assessments and monitor community per-ceptions because they have in-depth knowledge of localdynamics (van Helden 2005).

The importance of detailed sociocultural understandingof landowning communities is illustrated by conservationinitiatives on the island of Pohnpei (Federated State ofMicronesia). Several early unsuccessful initiatives failedto gain support from the broader community because oflimited consultation and ignorance of traditional resourceuse. However, an initiative by the Nature Conservancywith the government, a local NGO, and landowners hasinitiated a successful and ongoing project based on athorough sociocultural understanding (Raynor & Kostka2003).

Landowner participation

Landowners need to participate at all stages, from theinitiative to conserve their natural resources, biodiversityassessments, project planning, project implementation,up to and including monitoring and evaluation (Hun-nam 2002; Hviding 2003; Game et al. 2011). Differentperceptions of “no-take zones” versus “subsistence-use”zones and other aspects of conservation (West 2006;Brockington et al. 2008) require intensive and continuingdialogue and education between landowners and theimplementing organization(s) at all stages. Such dialoguewould also allow all stakeholders to ascertain sincerecommitment toward conservation by all parties involved,which is essential for success (van Helden 2005). Fur-thermore, it allows increased ownership of the projectand improved long-term support by local communities.

The crucial role that landowners play is illustrated bythe successful conservation of the rich terrestrial andmarine biota of the uninhabited (for several decades)

6 Conservation Letters 0 (2012) 1–10 Copyright and Photocopying: c©2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

G. Keppel et al. Conservation in tropical Pacific

Tetepare Island, Solomon Islands (Read & Moseby 2006).Tetepare islanders established the Tetepare DescendantsAssociation in 2001 to convert the entire island to acommunity conservation area and prevent logging withsupport from the European Union, World-Wide Fundfor Nature, and Australian Volunteers International. Thisproject successfully included local communities at allstages of development and implementation and providesreal economic benefits through ecotourism.

Alternative revenue for local communities

Conservation programs must provide for sustainable eco-nomic and social development in landowning com-munities (Hunnam 2002; Hviding 2003). Simple fund-ing transactions are not sufficient and raise unrealis-tic expectations (Foale 2001; Hviding 2003; van Helden2005). Instead, innovative ways and alternative income-generating activities need to be developed. Ecotourismprovides an alternative source of revenue but may beunrealistic because of the remoteness of some communi-ties and potential adverse effects on biodiversity conser-vation (Morrison & Buckley 2010). Other alternative in-come strategies have often focused on increasing revenuefor existing produce of communities (van Helden 2005).

Alternative income generation was developed to pro-mote the financial and social development of landownersin the Sovi Basin Conservation Area, Fiji, which containsold-growth tropical lowland rainforest and numerousrare and threatened flora and fauna species (Keppel et al.2011). After several years of discussions and planning ledby Conservation International and the University of theSouth Pacific, a trust fund was established with fundingfrom the bottled water company Fiji Water. The interestaccumulated pays lease premiums, compensates fore-gone timber royalties, provides community developmentopportunities, and implements the comanagement planfor the protected area. In addition, a scholarship programfor landowning communities was created, supportingmore than 150 students.

Conservation funding and stakeholdercollaboration

Collaboration by all concerned stakeholders is requiredto maximize benefits from conservation efforts throughefficient spending of available conservation funding andaddressing the needs of stakeholders. A local body foreach country can achieve effective coordination, funding,and communication between different stakeholders forconservation. This could either be an independent localNGO or a committee composed of representatives fromdifferent stakeholders. In addition, Memorandums of

Understanding established between conservation NGOsand national governments for establishment, operation,and accountability could be expanded to include a Codeof Conduct, defined consequences for breaches of this,and mechanisms to ensure transparency of operations.

Enduring investment

Medium- or long-term program approaches with com-mitted stakeholders and funding agencies are needed.Ideally, these stakeholders should invest in projects for atleast 10–15 years. For example, the Micronesia Conserva-tion Trust (MCT), created in 2002, supports biodiversityconservation and related sustainable development forthe people of the Federated States of Micronesia andincludes members from national, state, and municipalgovernments, NGOs, business, and academic institutions.A primary aim is to build an endowment of US$20million for long-term support of sustainable biodiversityresource management in Micronesia (MCT 2011). In2009, the MCT obtained US$2 million from variouspublic and private sources, funding 55 local projects.

Capacity building

Capacity building at all levels (community, national, andregional) is essential for meaningful participation of allstakeholders and sustainability for the conservation pro-gram (Hunnam 2002; Raynor & Kostka 2003; Table 3).There is an urgent need to improve regional and local ca-pacity in conservation management, including scientificdata collection, species and threat management, projectmanagement, generation of funding, and sustainabledevelopment. This should include training people, cur-rently active in the conservation sector, and developingfuture conservation leaders through scholarships. Thelatter can curtail the problem of overseas conservationistsleading conservation programs in the region with limitedPacific experience. In addition, attractive and challenginglocal positions need to be created to retain excellentlocal conservationists in the region. Furthermore, therole of local institutions in conservation needs to bestrengthened in the Pacific (Foale 2001), as in otherdeveloping countries (Rodrıguez et al. 2007). This willfocus conservation activities on national priorities, ratherthan those of outside organizations.

Conclusions

We have illustrated that most conservation efforts inPacific Island countries are inefficient, noninclusive,and insufficiently sensitive to locality. While previous

Conservation Letters 0 (2012) 1–10 Copyright and Photocopying: c©2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. 7

Conservation in tropical Pacific G. Keppel et al.

Table 3 Summary of capacity building needs in relation to conservation in the Pacific region. Modified from Raynor & Kostka (2003)

Level Group Capacity needs

Landowning

community

Local village members; Women’s groups;

Youth groups; Church groups; Local

volunteers (non land owners); School

groups

Basic business skills; Proposal writing and fundraising; Traditional

ecology and resource management methods; Ecological

principals and basic resource management; Conservation area

management planning

Traditional leaders Village chiefs Legal responsibilities; Community organization; Community

meeting and record keeping; Conservation area management

planning

Government Field officers; Senior and midlevel officers of

government agencies involved in

conservation

Conservation area management planning; Community planning

and evaluation Legal responsibilities; Ecological principals and

resource management; Monitoring and evaluation; Community

liaison and involvement

NGOs (conservation

and academic)

Staff involved with conservation, community

development, and education

Proposal writing and fundraising; Monitoring and evaluation

Community planning and evaluation; Identification of

conservation priorities including research

BINGOs Staff involved with conservation, community

development, and education

Community planning and evaluation; Local social, economic, land

tenure, and cultural dynamics; Traditional ecology and

resource management methods

papers (e.g., Kingsford et al. 2009; Woinarski 2010) focuson policy measures, we highlight land tenure systems,cultural values, and social complexities that make conser-vation in Pacific Island countries fundamentally differentfrom developed nations. As conservation efforts andpolicy are often built on scientific approaches conceivedin developed nations, they may not be practical andeffective in developing Pacific Island nations.

We recommend a shift in conservation planning andimplementation toward central participation of landown-ing communities at all stages of conservation programs,better understanding of socioeconomic and culturalcomplexities, local capacity building, generation ofalternative income for landowning communities, and theprioritization and coordination of available conservationresources. Effort needs to focus on national priorities andmove away from current ad hoc approaches to greatlyimprove the effectiveness of conservation in Pacific Islandcountries. Changes need to be implemented urgentlybecause every failed project undermines the credibility ofNGOs and the national conservation communities (vanHelden 2005).

Many of the problems identified are known and notunique to the Pacific or developing nations (Mace 2004;Brockington et al. 2008). Furthermore, most of thesuggested changes are not novel and have been suc-cessfully incorporated in some conservation programs.Nevertheless, a fundamental paradigm shift is urgentlyrequired to develop effective strategies to safeguard thevanishing biodiversity of Pacific Island countries and toprepare for the impacts of anthropogenic climate change.Although there is no magic formula for successful con-

servation in Pacific Island countries because of the greatcultural and socioeconomic diversity, adoption of oursuggested solutions would greatly improve the success ofconservation actions and programs.

Acknowledgments

An Asia-Pacific Science Foundation grant (APSF10/4)contributed to facilitating the conception and compilationof this article.

References

AusAid. (2008) Land tenure systems in the Pacific. Making land

work Volume 1: reconciling customary land and development in

the Pacific. Australian Government, Canberra.

Axlford, J.C., Hockings, M.T., Carter, R.W. (2008) What

constitutes success in Pacific island community conserved

areas? Ecol Soc 13, Art 45.

Baines, G., Hviding, E. (1992) Traditional environmental

knowledge from the Marovo area of the Solomon Islands.

Pages 91–110 in M. Johnson, editor. LORE: capturing

traditional environmental knowledge. Dene Cultural Institute

and the International Development Institute, Ottawa.

Bottrill, M.C., Hockings, M., Possingham, H.P. (2011) In

pursuit of knowledge: addressing barriers to effective

conservation evaluation. Ecol Soc 16, Art 14.

Brockington, D., Duffy, R., Igoe, J. (2008) Nature unbound:

conservation, capitalism and the future of protected areas.

Earthscan, London.

Chape, S., Blyth, S., Fish, L., Fox, P., Spalding, M. (2003) 2003

United Nations list of protected areas. IUCN, Gland.

8 Conservation Letters 0 (2012) 1–10 Copyright and Photocopying: c©2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

G. Keppel et al. Conservation in tropical Pacific

Cox, P.A., Elmqvist, T. (1991) Indigenous control of tropical

rainforest reserves: an alternative strategy for conservation.

Ambio 20, 317–321.

Dinerstein, E., Wiramanayake, E.D. (1993) Beyond

“hotspots”: how to prioritize investments to conserve

biodiversity in the Indo-Pacific region. Conserv Biol 7,

53–65.

Dowie, M. (2009) Conservation refugees. The hundred-year conflict

between global conservation and native peoples. MIT Press,

Cambridge.

Filer, C. (2011) Interdisciplinary perspectives on historical

ecology and environmental policy in Papua New Guinea.

Environ Conserv 38, 256–269.

Foale, S. (2001) ‘Where’s our development?’ Landowner

apirations and environmentalist agendas in Western

Solomon Islands. Asia Pac J Anthropol 2, 44–67.

Foale, S., Manele, B. (2004) Social and political barriers to the

use of marine protected areas for conservation and fishery

management in Melanesia. Asia Pac Viewpoint 45, 373–386.

Game, E.T., Lipsett-Moore, G., Hamilton, R., et al. (2011)

Informed opportunism for conservation planning in the

Solomon Islands. Conserv Lett 4, 38–46

Gillespie, T.W., Jaffre, T. (2003) Tropical dry forests in New

Caledonia. Biodiver Conserv 12, 1687–1697.

Hunnam, P. (2002) Lessons in conservation for people and projects

in the Pacific Islands region. United Nations Development

Programme, New York.

Hviding, E. (2003) Contested rainforests, NGOs, and projects

of desire in Solomon Islands. Int Soc Sci J 55, 539–553.

Hviding, E. (2006) Knowing and managing biodiversity in the

Pacific Islands: challenges of environmentalism in Marovo

Lagoon. Int Soc Sci J 58, 69–85.

Kabutaulaka, T.T. (2000) Rumble in the jungle: land, culture

and (un)sustainable logging in Solomon Islands. In A.

Hooper, editor. Culture and sustainable development in the

Pacific. Asia Pacific Press, Canberra, pp. 88–97.

Keast, A. & Miller, S.E. (1996) The origin and evolution of Pacific

Island Biotas, New Guinea to Eastern Polynesia: patterns and

processes. SPB Academic Publishing, Amsterdam.

Keesing, R.M. (1989) Creating the past: custom and identity

in the contemporary Pacific. Contemp Pacific 1, 19–42.

Keppel, G. (2002) Low genetic variation in a Pacific cycad:

conservation concerns for Cycas seemannii (Cycadaceae).

Oryx 36, 41–49.

Keppel, G. (2006) The lowland rain forest of the Solomon

Islands: a bleak future. Melanesian Geo 2, 14–17.

Keppel, G., Lowe, A.J., Possingham, H.P. (2009) Changing

perspectives on the biogeography of the tropical South

Pacific: influences of dispersal, vicariance and extinction. J

Biogeogr 36, 1035–1054.

Keppel, G., Tuiwawa, M.V., Naikatini, A., Rounds, I.A. (2011)

Microhabitat specialization of tropical rain forest canopy

trees in the Sovi Basin, Viti Levu, Fiji Islands. J Trop Ecol 27,

491–501.

Kier, G., Kreft, H., Lee, T.M. et al. (2009) A global assessment

of endemism and species richness across island and

mainland regions. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 106, 9322–9327.

Kingsford, R.T., Watson, J.E.M., Lundquist, C.J. et al. (2009)

Major conservation policy issues for biodiversity in

Oceania. Conserv Biol 23, 834–840.

Kool, J., Brewer, T., Mills, M., Pressey, R.L. (2010) Ridges to

reef conservation for Solomon Islands. ARC Centre of

Excellence for Coral Reef Studies, James Cook University,

Townsville.

Kueffer, C., Daehler, C.C., Torres-Santana, C.W. et al. (2010)

A global comparison of plant invasions on oceanic islands.

Perspect Plant Ecol 12, 145–161.

Laurance, W.F., Kakul, T., Keenan, R.J. et al. (2011)

Predatory corporations, failing governance, and the fate of

forests in Papua New Guinea. Conserv Lett 4, 95–100.

Lees, A. (1989) A representative national park and reserves system

for Fiji’s tropical forests. Maruia Society Policy Reports Series.

Maruia Society, Nelson.

Lees, A. (2007) Review and analysis of Fiji’s conservation sector.

Final Report. The Austral Foundation, Waitakere City.

Available from: http://www.australfoundation.org/

uploads/9/8/3/5/9835787/final˙report˙pdf˙lees.pdf.

Accessed 20 January 2012.

Lees, A., Siwatibau, S. (2009) Stategies for effective and just

conservation: the Austral Foundation’s review of

conservation in Fiji. Curr Conserv 4, 21–23.

Legra, L., Li, X., Peterson, A.T. (2008) Biodiversity

consequences of sea level rise in New Guinea. Pac Conserv

Biol 14, 191–199.

Mace, G.M. (2004) The role of taxonomy in species

conservation. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 359,

711–719.

Masibalavu, V.T., Dutson, G. (2006) Important bird areas in Fiji.

Conserving Fiji’s natural heritage. BirdLife International

Pacific Partnership Secretariat, Suva.

MCT (2011) The Micronesia Conservation Trust. Available from:

http://www.mctconservation.org. Accessed 15 December

2011.

Mittermeier, R.A., Gil, P.R., Hoffman, M. et al. (2004) Hotspots

revisited: earth’s biologically richest and most threatened

terrestrial ecoregions. Agrupacion Sierra Madre, Mexico City.

Morrison, C. (2012) Impacts of tourism on threatened species

in the South Pacific. Pac Conserv Biol 18, in press.

Morrison, C., Buckley, R. (2010) Oceania. Pages 78–87 in R.

Buckley, editor. Conservation tourism. CABI Publishing,

Cambridge.

Olson, D., Farley, L., Patrick, A. et al. (2010) Priority forests

for conservation in Fiji: landscapes, hotspots and ecological

processes. Oryx 44, 57–70.

PDDESAUNS (2009) World population prospects: the 2008

revision. Highlights. Population Division of the Department

of Economic and Social Affairs of the United Nations

Secretariat, New York.

Conservation Letters 0 (2012) 1–10 Copyright and Photocopying: c©2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. 9

Conservation in tropical Pacific G. Keppel et al.

Raynor, B., Kostka, M. (2003) Back to the future: using

traditional knowledge to strengthen biodiversity

conservation in Pohnpei, Federated States of Micronesia.

Ethnobot Res Appl 1, 55–63.

Read, J.L., Moseby, K. (2006) Vertebrates of Tetepare Island,

Solomon Islands. Pac Sci 60, 69–79.

Rodrıguez, J.P., Taber, A.B., Daszak, P. et al. (2007)

Globalization of conservation: a view from the South.

Science 317, 755–756.

Ruddle, K., Hviding, E., Johannes, R.E. (1992) Marine

resource management in the context of customary tenure.

Mar Resour Econ 7, 249–273.

Saffitz, R.A. (2010) The implementation of corporate social

responsibility initiatives as a strategy for post-crisis rebuilding and

renewal. Masters thesis. University of Southern California,

Los Angeles.

Sayer, J.A., Campbell, B.M. (2004) The science of sustainable

development: local livelihoods and the global environment.

Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Schwarz, A.-M., Bene, C., Bennett, G. et al. (2011)

Vulnerability and resilience of remote rural communities to

shocks and global changes: empirical analysis from

Solomon Islands. Global Environ Chang 21, 1128–1140.

Sewall, B.J., Freestone, A.L., Moutui, M.F.E. et al. (2011)

Reorienting systematic conservation assessment for

effective conservation planning. Conserv Biol 25, 688–696.

Shearman, P.L., Ash, J., Mackey, B., Bryan, J.E., Lokes, B.

(2009) Forest conversion and degradation in Papua New

Guinea 1972–2002. Biotropica 41, 379–390.

Steadman, D.W. (2006) Extinction and biogeography of Tropical

Pacific birds. The University of Chicago Press,

Chicago.

Steadman, D.W., Pregill, G.K., Burley, D.V. (2002) Rapid

prehistoric extinction of iguanas and birds in Polynesia.

Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 99, 3673–3677.

van Helden, F. (2005) Lessons learned in community-based

conservation in Papua New Guinea. Adelbert Mountains

Forest Conservation Program of The Nature Conservancy

in partnership with the WWF Forests of New Guinea

Program. Available from: http://www.sprep.org/att/IRC/

eCOPIES/Countries/Papua˙New˙Guinea/50.pdf. Accessed

20 January 2012.

Veitayaki, J. (1997) Traditional marine resource management

practices used in the Pacific Islands: an agenda for change.

Ocean Coast Manage 37, 123–136.

Ward, R.G. (2000) Land tenure in Pacific Islands: changing

patterns and implications for land acquisition. Pages 75–87

in Asia Development Bank, editor. Resettlement policy and

practice in South East Asia and the Pacific. Asia Development

Bank, Sydney.

Wardell-Johnson, G.W., Keppel, G., Sander, J. (2011) Climate

change impacts on the terrestrial biodiversity and carbon

stocks of Oceania. Pac Conserv Biol 17, 220–240.

West, P. (2006) Conservation is our government now: the politics of

ecology in Papua New Guinea. Duke University Press, London.

Woinarski, J.C.Z. (2010) Biodiversity conservation in tropical

forest landscapes of Oceania. Biol Conserv 143, 2385–

2394.

10 Conservation Letters 0 (2012) 1–10 Copyright and Photocopying: c©2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.