Content uploaded by Lorenzo von Fersen
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Lorenzo von Fersen on May 16, 2024
Content may be subject to copyright.
Content uploaded by Silvio Marchini
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Silvio Marchini on May 14, 2024
Content may be subject to copyright.
The franciscana dolphin (Pontoporia blainvillei) was a focal species of the workshop, sparking discussions on social engagement,
sustainability, and small cetacean conservation. (Photo credit: © Marta Cremer)
Aquatic Mammals 2024, 50(3), 259-271, DOI https://doi.org/10.1578/AM.50.3.2024.259
The Human Dimensions of
Small Cetacean Conservation:
2022 Workshop Report, Nuremberg, German
y
Lorenzo von Fersen,1 Dave Bader,2 James Danoff-Burg,3
Frank Cipriano,4 Laura Perry,5, 6 and Silvio Marchini7
1Nuremberg Zoo & YAQU PACHA, Nuremberg, Germany
E-mail: lorenzo@vonfersen.org
2The Marine Mammal Care Center, Los Angeles, CA, USA
3The Living Desert Zoo and Gardens, Palm Desert, CA, USA
4Independent Researcher, San Francisco, CA, USA
5Castlerock Conservation, 15 Temple Garth, York, UK
6Global Centre for Species Survival, Indianapolis Zoo, Indianapolis, IN, USA
7Wildlife Conservation Research Unit, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
In December 2022, a workshop on Human Dimensions of Small Cetacean Conservation
was held in Nuremberg, Germany. The goal of the workshop was to examine the role
of human behavior, thoughts, and feelings in species conservation efforts for dolphins
and porpoises. Participants reviewed current challenges and opportunities for engaging
local communities and stakeholders in conservation efforts. The need for a more holistic
approach that takes into account social, economic, cultural, and political factors was
highlighted. The importance of collaboration between conservation organizations, gov-
ernments, and local communities was emphasized, as was the need for adaptive man-
agement that considers the changing needs and perspectives of stakeholders over time.
The workshop concluded that (1) incorporating human dimensions considerations into
small cetacean conservation efforts means careful attention to the role of human behavior
in causing and mitigating impacts on the animals and their environment, (2) successful
strategies for improved dolphin and porpoise conservation must ultimately include actions
that result in changes in human behaviour, and (3) we must work with and for people to
identify shared goals for conserving dolphin and porpoise species while ensuring that
human communities prosper.
260 von Fersen et al.
Introduction
According to the most recent International Union for
Conservation of Nature (IUCN) status evaluations, a
total of 134 whale, dolphin, and porpoise (cetacean)
species, subspecies, and subpopulations are cur-
rently recognized, of which 24 are considered to be
“Critically Endangered” (CR) and 25 “Endangered”
(EN) (IUCN – Species Survival Commission [SSC]
Cetacean Specialist Group, 2022). The situation is
particularly desperate for riverine and coastal spe-
cies; of the seven dolphin and porpoise species/
subspecies living in freshwater habitats, three are
classified as “Critically Endangered” and four as
“Endangered” (Wang et al., 2015; Minton et al.,
2017; da Silva, et al., 2018a, 2018b; Braulik et al.,
2019).
During the last few decades, this negative trend
could not be reversed for most species using typical
“fisheries management” approaches such as gear
modifications, gear restrictions, time/area closures,
and human or technological observer programs and
monitoring. Despite intensive efforts to help these
species in their natural habitat through such in situ
conservation measures, declines in the affected
populations have continued. The Yangtze river
dolphin (baiji; Lipotes vexillifer) has gone extinct,
and the vaquita porpoise (Phocoena sinus) is on
the brink of extinction. It should also be noted that
the ranges of most of these species are in countries
where societal conditions of poverty and corrup-
tion make conservation policies less of a priority
and more difficult to implement. Often, stakehold-
ers involved have fewer opportunities and societal
supports to adopt new practices or to implement
new technologies. Consequently, many communi-
ties prioritize basic human needs over conserva-
tion. Traditional top-down conservation regulation
approaches often only alienate stakeholders and
create a more difficult and antagonistic environ-
ment in which to conduct conservation projects.
In response to this reality, the ESOCC (Ex Situ
Options for Cetacean Conservation) Workshop
was organized in 2018 (Taylor et al., 2020). At
the ESOCC Workshop, seven dolphin and por-
poise species, later joined by the Lahille’s dol-
phin (Tursiops truncatus gephyreus), a bottlenose
dolphin subspecies (Committee on Taxonomy,
2023), were identified as representative of the
threats also affecting many other small nearshore
Lahille’s bottlenose dolphin (Tursiops truncatus gephyreus) is one of the few small cetaceans that actively interacts with
fishermen in cooperative fishing. Such events are extremely rare in the world. Cooperative fishing with Lahille’s dolphins is
limited to a few places in southern Brazil. (Photo credit: © Fabio Daura Jorge)
261Workshop Report
cetaceans. Their plight epitomizes the situation for
other dolphin and porpoise species and subspecies
vulnerable to extinction. The aim of the ESOCC
Workshop was not only to review their conserva-
tion status, but, more importantly, to find out what
contribution the full range of ex situ measures
(including rescues, translocations, health assess-
ments, medical treatments, and rehabilitation)
might play in their future preservation.
Integrated conservation planning, also known
as the “One Plan Approach” was developed by
the IUCN SSC’s Conservation Planning Specialist
Group (CPSG; Byers et al., 2013; CPSG, 2014).
This integrated approach not only involves consid-
eration of all potential in situ and ex situ measures
but also promotes inclusion of a risk-averse cost/
benefit analysis, transparency, and participation of
a diverse set of stakeholders from the very begin-
ning of the assessment, conservation planning, and
implementation process.
The importance of the One Plan Approach as
a conservation framework was recognized by
the 2018 ESOCC Workshop. Recommendations
from that workshop led to the development of
priority projects, including fundraising for and
collaboration with a number of range-country part-
ners. The projects focus on conservation actions for
some of the most threatened small cetacean spe-
cies, including Atlantic humpback dolphins (Sousa
teuszii), Indus River dolphins (Platanista gangetica
minor), Yangtze finless porpoises (Neophocaena
asiaeorientalis ssp. asiaeorientalis), and francis-
cana dolphins (Pontoporia blainvillei).
Among the most prominent recommendations
from the ESOCC Workshop were (1) to expand
cetacean conservation planning efforts to focus
on improved communication, (2) to identify indi-
vidual stakeholder and community needs, (3) to
increase awareness by involving individuals and
communities, and (4) to incorporate mechanisms
to address the many human dimensions of wildlife
conservation (Taylor et al., 2020).
Integration of the human dimensions of con-
servation has not been a prominent component
of most descriptions of the One Plan Approach.
Herein, we encourage the broader inclusion of
the social science-based skills and tools that can
enhance both in situ and ex situ conservation
efforts as a core part of the One Plan Approach for
integrated conservation planning.
The Human Dimensions of Small Cetacean Conservation
Historically, species conservation has been a disci-
pline dominated by natural scientists. Their knowl-
edge has become the basis of species conservation
through evaluating population fluctuations, iden-
tifying threats, and ultimately proposing conser-
vation measures based on these observations and
focused on addressing the needs of endangered
species. Also historically, true integration of and
sufficient emphasis on all the human dimensions
of conservation has been underemphasized. The
introduction of the journal Human Dimensions of
Wildlife in 1996, under the editorship of Michael
Manfredo and Jerry Vaske (for a summary, see
Manfredo, 2008), brought new momentum to the
field. The editors asserted that wildlife conserva-
tion could be optimized through a better under-
standing of the social complexity of wildlife
issues. Since then, the field of human dimensions
of wildlife conservation has fundamentally been
understood as one that focuses on how people’s
knowledge, values, and behaviors influence and
are affected by decisions about wildlife conserva-
tion and management of natural resources.
Applying tools, methods, and approaches from
social science disciplines provides a great opportu-
nity to better understand the root problems of bio-
diversity loss. Because environmental problems
involve many human factors, conservation biolo-
gists need to be aware of the contribution of the
social sciences and to be trained in the related
concepts and techniques involved in the conserva-
tion of natural resources. This might require that
conservation biologists learn new skill sets and/
or include experts in social sciences along with
representatives from relevant agencies as part of
their conservation team. Without the expertise in
how to recognize and respond to critical human
dimensions considerations, we run the risk of
jeopardizing the credibility and respectability
of conservation programs. We also would risk
operating in a dangerous vacuum that isolates us
from local communities, politicians, economists,
health workers, educators, and other key players
involved in conservation actions. Local people
living in and around where a conservation project
operates will be present long after such interven-
tions have come to a close, and they therefore will
determine the success of any intervention. Failing
to address the relevant human needs makes failure
of conservation efforts much more likely.
Wherever conflicts between wildlife and people
occur, all sides must be considered: the inter-
ests of the species, the interests and culture of the
people who live there, and the resultant economic
262 von Fersen et al.
circumstances. Sustainable species conservation
is
most likely to be achieved when this “triple
bottom line” can be maximized. It should be
noted that ideas about economic values and nature
are not universal, and that there are also diver-
gent ideas about the roles and values attached to
concepts such as ecosystem services. These do
not necessarily coincide with simple economic
models attempting to quantify the value of eco-
system services, for example. In addition, both
the loss of biodiversity and many of the conser-
vation actions that have followed have their roots
in colonialism and industrialization, which have
harmed both people and nature. It is important to
work closely with communities both as critical
long-term stakeholders and as essential collabo-
rators to ensure that existing social and economic
misunderstandings and environmental injustices
are addressed.
Ultimately, it is important to note that all con-
servation measures involving people are intended
to achieve a very specific goal, which is often a
change in the behavior of humans. As Schultz
(2011) aptly puts it in his article “Conservation
Means Behavior,” conservation biologists, in
particular, need to draw on the expertise of other
disciplines to ultimately achieve this goal. There
is a fundamental link between conservation and
human behavior, with a particular need for skills
such as those involved in disciplines as varied
as economics, politics, sociology, anthropology,
communication, marketing, and psychology.
Goal #1 of the Society for Conservation Biology
Social Science Working Group’s 2015 Strategic
Plan is to “advance scientific understanding of
conservation as a social process” (p. 4). Their ratio-
nale for this was spelled out clearly:
The field of conservation, and the organi-
zations that represent it, have been rooted
largely in the natural sciences. Only within
the last generation have we begun to rec-
ognize the extent to which conservation is a
social process, designed and carried out by
people, with effects on both people and nature.
Recognizing that conservation is about people
as much as it is about species or ecosystems
suggests a paradigm shift in the nature and
use of science in conservation. Social sci-
ence theories, analytic tools, and established
knowledge can make a vital contribution to
conservation success. Moreover, because bio-
diversity conservation is a widespread social
phenomenon, conservation research by social
scientists can provide insights into human
society generally. Thus, advancing scientific
understanding of conservation as a social
process is a means both to preserve the earth’s
natural heritage and enhance our understand-
ing of ourselves. (p. 4)
Incorporating the human dimension has played a crucial role in efforts to save the golden lion tamarin (Leontopithecus
rosalia), an endangered primate species native to Brazil. (Photo credit: © Luis Paulo Ferraz)
263Workshop Report
Based on the above, it has become evident that
the natural sciences alone cannot address the
complexity of the problem. Without a broad
transdisciplinary approach focused on address-
ing the human dimensions, conservation mea-
sures will be less likely to succeed. This approach
has already been successfully incorporated into
the conservation of various terrestrial animal
species (Stolwijk, 2013) and is also increasingly
envisaged for future conservation actions. For
example, providing recommendations for man-
agers, researchers, and practitioners to recog-
nize the central role of human dimensions has
facilitated and improved the likelihood of suc-
cessful reintroduction of endangered bird spe-
cies (Martins et al., 2022) and the mitigation of
human-wildlife conflict involving a variety of
species (IUCN SSC, 2023).
With this premise in mind, our December 2022
workshop was planned to expand the integrated
species conservation/One Plan Approach (Byers
et al., 2013) by including experts from a wide
diversity of disciplines into the discussion about
improving the conservation of riverine and near-
shore cetaceans. The goal for this workshop was
to discuss how to apply human dimensions con-
siderations in both in situ and ex situ settings when
planning and implementing conservation mea-
sures for these cetaceans by placing communities
as central to the process. This transdisciplinary
approach included expertise from a wide variety
of social science disciplines. The workshop par-
ticipants hoped that through this transdisciplinary
approach, the future prospects for the cetacean
species, the human communities involved, and the
local economy would all improve.
The Transdisciplinary Approach
To do justice to all sectors, experts from the following disciplines participated in the 2022
workshop:
Cetacean Field Biology and
Conservation Biology
Specialists in dolphin population studies, abun-
dance estimation, fluctuations/changes over time,
threat analysis, design, and implementation of
protective measures
Social Psychology
Specialists in conservation psychology and social
psychology applied to wildlife conservation to
maximize community support and engagement in
conservation projects
Human-Wildlife Conflict/Coexistence
Specialists in human-wildlife conflicts, managing
conflicts, and developing coexistence measures
Community Engagement/
Communications
Specialists with experience in directly addressing
the human dimensions of species conservation
Human Dimensions Within
Multi-Species Conservation
Specialists that work in developing and dissemi-
nating the concepts and practice of integrated
species conservation and encouraging adop-
tion of effective species conservation planning
approaches worldwide
Economics/Ecosystem Services
Specialists in the area of economics or working on
ecosystem services
264 von Fersen et al.
Outcome of Workshop Discussions
Workshop participants emphasized the urgent
need for an inclusive, participatory approach to
small cetacean conservation. The in situ measures
implemented to date have been insufficient to halt
the steady decline of many populations. Potential
use of the full range of ex situ measures outlined
in the ex situ guidelines (CPSG, 2014) should also
be complemented with incorporation of social sci-
ence tools and techniques for addressing human
factors and concerns.
During the workshop, examples that show how
the involvement of local people and different stake-
holders in both in situ and ex situ settings have
facilitated conservation successes were presented.
Particularly helpful were cases where conservation-
ists and communities worked together to change
the behavior of people who formerly contributed to
a conservation challenge, where their involvement
in identifying and addressing the underlying issues
instead transformed their role to becoming part of
the solution.
There was consensus that careful assessment of
the conservation status of a species and the accom-
panying threat analysis are still the basis on which
conservation decisions should be made. However,
deciding how best to address direct human threats
to the survival of the species is an idiosyncratic
process that must necessarily be focused on pro-
moting human behavioral change and be devel-
oped on a case-by-case basis. This may require
the involvement of psychologists, biologists, soci-
ologists, government representatives, or others,
along with stakeholders, as specific conditions
dictate. When and how to involve these differ-
ent disciplines will typically be the task of those
developing conservation measures in consultation
with the primary stakeholders. Ultimately, the
specific solutions, tools, disciplines, and timelines
will need to be co-created and co-designed in col-
laboration with local communities.
A concrete outcome of the workshop was the
draft of a “toolbox” with a range of actions for
use in the design of effective conservation plans in
collaboration with local communities. Developing
a customized toolbox (see Figure 1) with a set of
actions that effectively incorporate human dimen-
sions considerations into the design of a species
conservation plan is critical to the success and
sustainability of conservation actions proposed
in the plan. Workshop participants agreed that in
such efforts it was important to bring together a
better understanding of the needs and concerns of
local communities, stakeholders, and policymak-
ers for consideration along with biological data.
Here are some essential components and activities
to include in this toolbox:
1. Identify relevant stakeholders: Identify
and engage all relevant stakeholders such as
local communities, nongovernmental organi-
zations (NGOs), government agencies, scien-
tists, and industries.
2. Facilitate collaboration and partnerships:
Promote collaboration between different stake-
holders, including NGOs, government agen-
cies, research institutions, and local commu-
nities. Through these partnerships, resources,
expertise, and knowledge can be pooled to
achieve more effective conservation outcomes.
3. Promote community-based conservation:
Involve local communities in decision-
making processes and share responsibilities
from the very start of the project. Center
communities as leaders within conservation
approaches.
4. Recognize local knowledge: The local
knowledge of indigenous and local com-
munities helps to develop more holistic and
culturally appropriate conservation strate-
gies. Decisionmakers should incorporate tra-
ditional ecological knowledge into conserva-
tion planning and decision-making processes.
5. Conduct social assessments: Understand
people’s behaviour and attitudes towards wild-
life and species conservation through surveys/
interviews. This information will help to better
tailor conservation plans to also address the
needs and values of local people.
6. Perform economic valuation: Understand
the economic value of the ecosystem ser-
vices generated by the species and habitats
to be conserved. Demonstrating the local and
regional economic benefits of conservation
can gain the support of policymakers and
businesses.
7. Develop strategies to prevent/mitigate
conflicts: Manage conflicts between conser-
vation objectives and human activities such
as fisheries. Adaptive management strategies
should be sought to limit or avoid frustration.
265Workshop Report
Figure 1. Essential components of the “toolbox”
266 von Fersen et al.
8. Develop a monitoring and evaluation
matrix: Establish a robust monitoring and
evaluation system to track the progress of
conservation actions and measure their impact
on species and human well-being.
9. Develop education and awareness-raising
campaigns, social marketing strategies,
and incentive mechanisms: Develop edu-
cation programs to raise awareness among
local communities and the general public
about the importance of species conservation
and the accompanying benefits. In parallel,
economic and social incentive mechanisms
should be developed to motivate local com-
munities to actively participate in conserva-
tion actions.
10. Facilitate legislative, regulatory, and gov-
ernmental approaches: These are often criti-
cal to species conservation efforts and enforce-
able only if appropriate attention is paid to
social, psychological, and economic factors.
These approaches often involve the develop-
ment and implementation of laws, regulations,
and policies that take into account both the
species’ ecological needs and the socioeco-
nomic realities of human communities.
Incorporating the human dimension into spe-
cies conservation plans is expected to create a
more inclusive, effective, and sustainable solution
that benefits both wildlife and local communi-
ties. It is important to note that each conservation
context is unique; therefore, this toolbox needs to
be continuously reviewed for effectiveness and
adapted to each specific situation.
Participants also agreed that there were many
commonalities shared by the eight ESOCC prior-
ity species—not only in terms of habitat, but also
in relation to the main threat: unsustainable fish-
ing practices. Although theoretical approaches are
of great importance, an attempt was made to keep
the focus on practical implementation, consider-
ing the needs and priorities of the different local
stakeholders.
Exploring the toolbox of solutions: workshop participants gather to define key tools for small cetacean conservation.
(Photo credit: © Luisa Rauenbusch, Nuremberg Zoo)
267Workshop Report
Conclusions and Recommendations
The workshop participants agreed on the following conclusions and recommendations:
1. Small cetacean conservation programs rarely
take human dimensions considerations into
account. The protection of these species has
predominantly centered around solutions
derived from the natural sciences domain.
2. To incorporate different perspectives, the con-
servation of small cetaceans should follow
a more equitable and inclusive approach in
which conservationists, government repre-
sentatives, community members, and other
stakeholders are engaged. The conservation
measures should definitely consider and
address the needs and perspectives of a range
of stakeholders.
3. Special attention should be paid to identify-
ing stakeholders, including the implementa-
tion of stakeholder analysis techniques to
understand the social landscape in which the
conservation intervention is happening or
will happen. Successfully identifying which
groups should be addressed, their receptiv-
ity to change, and what role they should play
is critical for success. Ideally, local stake-
holders and conservationists will co-create
approaches that produce direct benefits to the
communities and economies where the con-
servation project occurs.
4. We must promote the application of human
dimensions considerations in cetacean con-
servation within the natural sciences-domi-
nated conservation community. To this end,
it is essential to familiarize this community
with the concepts and their implementation.
There is still a need to explain and implement
the original, primarily biologically focused,
IUCN One Plan Approach among the marine
mammal scientific community, let alone what
we herein advocate involving addressing the
human dimensions.
5. Education and public awareness are crucial
components of conservation efforts as they
can help to change attitudes and behaviors
towards conservation. However, education
alone is not enough. When combined with
calls to action and an emphasis on cultivating
behavioral change, education can enhance
conservation success.
6. Every conservation issue is unique, and peo-
ple’s needs change constantly. Therefore, it
is important to recognize that human-focused
actions, as summarized within our toolbox,
are dynamic and need to be continuously
assessed for their effectiveness and value.
A one size fits all template does not work.
Instead, we need a flexible and responsive
toolbox. Each cetacean conservation project
and likely each of the communities across the
range of each cetacean species will require
different tools and approaches to achieve
success.
7. The workshop concluded with a call for
increased efforts in research, education, and
implementation to further develop methods
to address the human dimensions of wildlife
conservation.
Mapping the conservation mosaic: a kaleidoscope of ideas
generated at the Human Dimensions of Small Cetacean
Conservation workshop. Each post-it note represents a
unique perspective and a possible solution. (Photo credit:
© Frank Cipriano)
268 von Fersen et al.
Future Directions
It was recommended that species and subspecies
such as the vaquita porpoise, franciscana dolphin,
and Lahille’s bottlenose dolphin should be used
as case studies and analyzed in detail by applying
actual and potential social science approaches. In
the case of the vaquita, it might be crucial to under-
stand which components of a social science-based
approach were not conducted sufficiently or suc-
cessfully, how these steps might have altered the
course of the conservation intervention, and which
of these could still be used going forward with the
vaquita.
The same applies to the franciscana and
Lahille’s bottlenose dolphins, both of which are
cases in which social science conservation com-
ponents have been applied spo
radically and with
some degree of success. Best practices may include
mapping out the process in detail,
showing when
and how to draw on differ
ent
realms of expertise,
and demonstrating how these steps might contrib-
ute to the overall success of a project.
It was also decided to form a transdisciplinary
expert group to be available to accompany and
advise the process of certain small cetacean conser-
vation projects. Many participants of this workshop
have already signaled their interest in joining this
group of experts from various disciplines.
The workshop concluded by planning a fol-
low-up workshop for 2025 in Brazil. During
this next workshop, the different approaches
used to incorporate human dimensions consid-
erations into conservation plans and measures
in ongoing franciscana conservation projects
will be reviewed and analyzed. All stakehold-
ers—including politicians—will be invited to
this meeting. The meeting will serve to integrate
the existing knowledge from the social sciences
into the ongoing conservation project—not
only to propose improvements but also to better
define the limitations of such measures. It is also
important to recognize the research potential that
exists in a novel project that stretches from the
design of new measures to their implementation,
including front-end, formative, and summative
evaluations.
Building bridges between knowledge: a dialogue between fishermen and scientists. (Photo credit: © Camilah Antunez Zappes)
269Workshop Report
Acknowledgments
This report is the culmination of the collective efforts, insights, and enthusiasm of 42 participants (see
p. 270) from a range of disciplines who attended the Workshop on the Human Dimensions of Small
Cetacean Conservation. Although written by six individuals, this report reflects the shared knowledge
and diverse perspectives of all who contributed to the discussions and conversations during the workshop.
We would like to thank each of the participants for their invaluable input and passion for the topic.
Their contributions have been instrumental in shaping this report. Without their commitment, it would
not have been possible to bring this work to fruition. Thank you all for your commitment to the conserva-
tion of small cetaceans. We are grateful for the opportunity to work with such a talented and passionate
group of people.
We would also like to express our sincere gratitude to Kathleen Dudzinski and the Editorial Board of
Aquatic Mammals for their openness to this important issue and their willingness to accept this report for
publication. Their support has been instrumental in bringing our work to a wider audience.
The Human Dimensions of Small Cetacean Conservation workshop was hosted by YAQU PACHA
e.V. – Organization for the Conservation of Latin American Aquatic Mammals and Nuremberg Zoo,
Germany. The Association Friends of Nuremberg Zoo (Verein der Tiergartenfreunde Nürnberg e.V.),
Zoo Heidelberg, Zoo Duisburg, Zoomarine – Portugal, Planete Sauvage Nature, and Rancho Texas –
Lanzarote provided funding to cover workshop expenses. This publication has been made possible by
funding from Nuremberg Zoo and YAQU PACHA e.V.
Graphic Design: Imre Sebestyén/Unit Graphics
270 von Fersen et al.
Participants
Camilah Antunes Zappes (Universidade Federal do Espírito Santo, Brazil)
Dave Bader (Marine Mammal Care Center, USA)
Fanny Barz (Thünen Institute of Baltic Sea Fisheries, Germany)
Jörg Beckmann (Nuremberg Zoo, Germany)
Anna Böhm do Nascimento (Nuremberg Zoo, Germany)
Yurasi Briceño (Proyecto Sotalia, Venezuela)
Frank Cipriano (IUCN-ICPC, USA)
Susan Clayton (The College of Wooster, USA)
James Danoff-Burg (The Living Desert Zoo and Gardens, USA)
Raquel de la Cruz Modino (Universidad de La Laguna, Spain)
Liane Dias (Universidade Federal Rio Grande, Brazil)
Christian Dienemann (Nuremberg Zoo, Germany)
Björn Encke (Frogs & Friends, Citizen Conservation, Germany)
Luís Paulo Ferraz (Associação Mico-Leão-Dourado, Brazil)
Clara Fräger (Thünen Institute of Baltic Sea Fisheries, Germany)
Nadja Froitzheim (Nuremberg Zoo, Germany & Lund University, Sweden)
Jenny Glikman (IESA – CSIC, Spain)
Rafael Granvilla Oliveira (Espírito Santo Tourism Secretary, Brazil)
Tim Hüttner (Nuremberg Zoo, Germany)
Aristide Takoukam Kamla (African Aquatic Conservation Fund, Cameroon)
Nachiket Kelkar (Wildlife Conservation Trust, India)
Uzma Khan (River Dolphin Rivers Initiative, WWF International, Pakistan)
Danielle Kreb (Yayasan Konservasi RASI, Indonesia)
Silvio Marchini (IUCN SSC Human-Wildlife Conflict and Coexistence SG, Brazil)
Phil Miller (CPSG, USA)
João Neves (Zoomarine, Portugal)
Laura Perry (Indianapolis Zoo, USA)
Luisa Rauenbusch (Nuremberg Zoo, Germany)
Jon Paul Rodriguez (IUCN SSC, Venezuela)
Lorenzo Rojas-Bracho (Ocean Wise, Canada/Mexico)
Eduardo Secchi (Universidade Federal do Rio Grande, Brazil)
Ralph Simon (Nuremberg Zoo, Germany)
Cynthia Smith (National Marine Mammal Foundation, USA)
Barbara Taylor (IUCN-ICPC, USA)
Tara Teel (Colorado State University, USA)
Lena Thiele (Miiqo Studios, Germany)
Fernando Trujillo (Fundación Omacha, Colombia)
Lorenzo von Fersen (Nuremberg Zoo, ICPC, YAQU PACHA, Germany)
Sheila Walsh Reddy (The Nature Conservancy, USA)
Elisabeth Wilcox (Nuremberg Zoo, Germany)
Emmanuel Binyuy Wirsiy (CAMGEW, Cameroon)
Johannes Wurm (Bavarian State Forest Enterprise, Germany)
271Workshop Report
Literature Cited
Braulik, G., Natoli, A., Kiszka, J., Parra, G., Plön, S., &
Smith, B. D. (2019). Tursiops aduncus. In International
Union for Conservation of Nature (Ed.), The IUCN red
list of threatened species 2019 (e.T41714A50381127).
IUCN. https://doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2019-3.RLTS.
T41714A50381127.en
Byers, O., Lees, C., Wilcken, J., & Schwitzer, C. (2013).
The One Plan Approach: The philosophy and implemen-
tation of CBSG’s approach to integrated species conser-
vation planning. WAZA Magazine, 14, 2-5.
Committee on Taxonomy. (2023). List of marine mammal
species and subspecies. Society for Marine Mammalogy.
www.marinemammalscience.org
Conservation Planning Specialist Group (CPSG). (2014).
Guidelines on the use of ex situ management for spe-
cies conservation (Version 2.0, IUCN-2014-064). IUCN
SSC.
da Silva, V. M., Freitas, C. E., Dias, R. L., & Martin,
A. R. (2018a). Both cetaceans in the Brazilian Amazon
show sustained, profound population declines over
two decades. PLOS ONE, 13(5), e0191304. https://doi.
org/10.1371/journal.pone.0191304
da Silva, V., Trujillo, F., Martin, A. R., Zerbini, A., Crespo,
E. A., Aliaga Rossel, E., & Reeves, R. (2018b). Inia
geoffrensis, Amazon river dolphin. In International
Union for Conservation of Nature (Ed.), The IUCN red
list of threatened species (eT10831A50358152). IUCN.
International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) –
Species Survival Commission (SSC) Cetacean Specialist
Group. (2022). Update on cetacean red list assessments
published in 2022. IUCN, Cetacean Specialist Group.
https://iucn-csg.org/update-on-cetacean-red-list-assess-
ments-published-in-2022
IUCN SSC. (2023). IUCN SSC guidelines on human-wild-
life conflict and coexistence (1st ed.). IUCN.
Manfredo, M. J. (2008). Who cares about wildlife? Social
science concepts for exploring human-wildlife rela-
tionships and conservation issues. Springer. https://
doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-77040-6
Martins, F. C., Engel, M. T., Schulz, F., & Martins, C. S. G.
(2022). Human dimensions of the reintroduction of
Brazilian birds. Frontiers in Conservation Science, 3,
791103. https://doi.org/10.3389/fcosc.2022.791103
Minton, G., Smith, B., Braulik, G., Kreb, D., Sutaria, D.,
& Reeves, R. (2017). Orcaella brevirostris (Errata ver-
sion). In International Union for Conservation of Nature
(Ed.), The IUCN red list of threatened species 2017
(e.T15419A123790805). IUCN. https://doi.org/10.2305/
IUCN.UK.2017-3.RLTS.T15419A50367860.en
Schultz, P. W. (2011). Conservation means behavior.
Conservation Biology, 25(6), 1080-1083. https://doi.
org/10.1111/j.1523-1739.2011.01766.x
Social Science Working Group (SSWG), Society for
Conservation Biology (SCB). (2015). Strategic plan,
2015-2020. SSWG, SCB. https://conbio.org/images/
content_groups/SSWG/2015SP.pdf
Stolwijk, R. (2013). The golden lion tamarin (Leontopithecus
rosalia): A flagship species for the Atlantic forest of
Brazil (Master’s thesis). University of Utrecht, Utrecht,
Netherlands.
Taylor, B. L., Abel, G., Miller, P., Gomez, F., von Fersen,
L., DeMaster, D. P., Reeves, R. R., Rojas-Bracho, L.,
Wang, D., & Cipriano, F. (Eds.). (2020). Ex situ options
for cetacean conservation: December 2018 work-
shop, Nuremberg, Germany. International Union for
Conservation of Nature. https://doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.
CH.2020.SSC-OP.66.en
Wang, D., Wang, K., Hao, Y., & Zheng, J. (2015). Review
of population status and conservation measures for baiji
and Yangtze finless porpoise. American Fisheries Society
Symposium. https://doi.org/10.47886/9781934874448.ch7