Conservation Evidence: Evidence Data

Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Legally protect peatlands Five studies evaluated the effects on peatland habitats of legally protecting them: two of tropical peat swamp forest, two of unspecified peatlands and one of a bog. Peatland habitat (3 studies): Two studies in Indonesia reported that peat swamp forest was lost from within the boundaries of national parks. However, one of these studies was a site comparison and reported that forest loss was greater outside the national park. One before-and-after study of peatlands in China reported that peatland area initially decreased, but then increased, following legal protection. Plant community composition (1 study): One before-and-after study in a bog in Denmark reported that the plant community compositon changed over 161 years of protection. In particular, woody plants became more abundant. Vegetation cover (1 study): One site comparison study in a peatland in Chile found that a protected area had greater vegetation cover (total, herbs and shrubs) than an adjacent grazed and moss-harvested area. Overall plant richness/diversity (2 studies): One before-and-after study in Denmark reported that the number of plant species in a protected bog fluctuated over time, with no clear trend. One site comparison study in a peatland in Chile found that a protected area had lower plant richness and diversity (but also fewer non-native species) than an adjacent grazed and harvested area. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F1796https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F1796Tue, 28 Nov 2017 08:26:41 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Create legislation for ‘no net loss’ of wetlands We found no studies that evaluated the effects, on peatland habitats, of creating legislation for no net loss of wetlands. ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated this action during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore we have been unable to assess whether or not the action is effective or has any harmful impacts. Please get in touch if you know of such a study for this action.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F1797https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F1797Tue, 28 Nov 2017 08:27:01 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Adopt voluntary agreements to protect peatlands We found no studies that evaluated the effects, on peatland habitats, of adopting voluntary agreements to protect them. ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated this action during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore we have been unable to assess whether or not the action is effective or has any harmful impacts. Please get in touch if you know of such a study for this action.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F1798https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F1798Tue, 28 Nov 2017 08:27:20 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Pay landowners to protect peatlands One study evaluated the effects on peatland habitats of paying landowners to protect them. The study was of bogs. Peatland habitat (1 study): One review from reported that agri-environment schemes in the UK had mixed effects on bogs, protecting the area of bog habitat in three of six cases. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F1799https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F1799Tue, 28 Nov 2017 08:27:33 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Increase ‘on-the-ground’ protection (e.g. rangers) One study evaluated the effects on peatland habitats of increasing ‘on-the-ground’ protection. The study was in tropical peat swamps. Behaviour change (1 study): One before-and-after study in a peat swamp forest in Indonesia reported that the number of illegal sawmills decreased over two years of anti-logging patrols. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F1800https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F1800Tue, 28 Nov 2017 08:27:48 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Allow sustainable use of peatlands We found no studies that evaluated the effects, on peatland habitats, of allowing sustainable use. ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated this action during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore we have been unable to assess whether or not the action is effective or has any harmful impacts. Please get in touch if you know of such a study for this action.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F1801https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F1801Tue, 28 Nov 2017 08:28:04 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Lobby, campaign or demonstrate to protect peatlands Two studies evaluated the effects of lobbying/campaigning/demonstrating for peatland protection on knowledge, behaviour, peatland habitats or peatland vegetation. Both studies reported effects, on unspecified peatlands, of the same campaign in the UK. Peatland protection (2 studies): Two studies in the UK reported that the area of protected peatland increased following pressure from a campaign group. Behaviour change (1 study): One study in the UK reported that following pressure from a campaign group, major retailers stopped buying compost containing peat from important peatland areas and horticultural companies began marketing peat-free compost. Attitudes/awareness (1 study): One study in the UK reported that following campaign pressure, garden centres and local governments signed peatland conservation agreements. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F1849https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F1849Tue, 28 Nov 2017 10:29:16 +0000