390 B. Karlsdóttir et al.


reintroduction stage (Griffiths & Pavajeau, 2008; Harding et al., 2016), emphasizing the importance of monitoring and evaluation to improve cost-efficiency (Bottrill et al., 2011;CMP, 2013), and to avoid the sunk cost fallacy trap.


Links to in situ conservation


Captive breeding programmes should complement in situ conservation (Pritchard et al., 2012; Byers et al., 2013). However, we found that programmes often lacked links to in situ partners. Harding et al. (2016) similarly found that only 64% of programmes had links to in situ conservation initiatives. Establishing links to develop an integrated field component was not always perceived as feasible because of a lack of resources or experience. Paradoxically, this con- tradicts the perception by amphibian conservationists that species and habitat improvements are the most important foundations for programme success (Meredith et al., 2017). Most programmes with an in-situ conservation component were located within the species’ native range in-country, whereas other activities such asmonitoringamphibian popu- lations and engaging in awareness raising and education were sometimes undertaken outside the captive species’ na- tive range or country, and these activities were slightly fa- voured by larger, multi-species programmes. Ensuring captive breeding programmes are linked with


field programmes is an action within the Amphibian Con- servation Action Plan (Wren et al., 2015). Broadening the network of field conservation partners to more effectively link ex situ and in situ mechanisms could facilitate this. The One Plan Approach (a well-planned, collaborative, integrated programme design in which programmes com- plement in situ conservation; Byers et al., 2013) encourages zoos to support such linkages through provision of grants, internship opportunities for field components of pro- grammes, and advocating for increased institutional and government support.


Collecting and sharing information


Programmes and zoos have identified a lack of information, knowledge and expertise as a barrier to success (Brady et al., 2017). Research on a species’ threat status and habitat re- quirements should precede the establishment of a pro- gramme (Michaels et al., 2014), as this will support an evidence-based approach and allow for valuable knowledge exchange through social learning; a prerequisite for suc- cessfully navigating the transition from research to imple- mentation (Toomey et al., 2017). Social learning institutions provide expertise for adapting management activities, and should complement the implementation of operational models (Knight et al., 2006, 2008). The Amphibian Ark acts as such an institution. However, this expertise is


currently mainly accessible through pre-established part- nerships, a husbandry documents library and a newsletter (Amphibian Ark, 2019). Social media groups could provide a platform for expert networking, driving timely problem solving, and the ethical involvement of students and interns for targeted research on poorly known species should be facilitated when possible. In addition, programmes must embrace the urgent need to improve implementation of future programmes by disseminating lessons learnt from past failures (Catalano et al., 2019).


Limitations and future research


Linguistic barriers and lack of prior experience with am- phibian captive breeding programmes potentially influ- enced the lead researcher’s interpretation of the data. Further research into the human dimensions of implementing effective programmes will be essential to confirm, or not, the findings presented here. It is possible that people who initiate amphibian captive


breeding programmes, feeling attachment and responsibility towards their target species, are not capable of recognizing a lack of progress as a failure because of confirmation bias (Catalano et al., 2018). As a result, programmesmight stagnate when they would benefit from a strategic change. Further research is required to examine how the psychology and dynamics of individuals and teams influence their operations and effectiveness (Catalano et al., 2018). Partnerships have been identified as critical to effective


programmes. Zoos were the main partners, contributing through a wide variety of activities. These contributions are reasonably well understood as they are periodically reviewed. Further research into the contributions of inter- national NGOs is required to target captive breeding initia- tives more strategically. This could be complemented with research into how programmes can increase support for tar- geted field components, improving the availability of suit- able habitats for both captive and wild populations, thereby assisting managers to navigate the transition between ex situ and in situ conservation more effectively. The barriers and enablers identified in this study are


probably shared by captive breeding programmes for other taxa. Future research could investigate the similarities and differences between taxa as a basis for adaptation of the operational model for other species. Explicit testing of these operational models could enhance the effectiveness of species-specific conservation programmes. The operational model, in combination with other avail-


able planning tools, provides an opportunity for a more collective, systematic and strategic approach to amphibian captive breeding programmes. This has the potential to increase the effectiveness of these programmes and thus improve outcomes for amphibian conservation.


Oryx, 2021, 55(3), 382–392 © The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of Fauna & Flora International doi:10.1017/S0030605320000332


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76  |  Page 77  |  Page 78  |  Page 79  |  Page 80  |  Page 81  |  Page 82  |  Page 83  |  Page 84  |  Page 85  |  Page 86  |  Page 87  |  Page 88  |  Page 89  |  Page 90  |  Page 91  |  Page 92  |  Page 93  |  Page 94  |  Page 95  |  Page 96  |  Page 97  |  Page 98  |  Page 99  |  Page 100  |  Page 101  |  Page 102  |  Page 103  |  Page 104  |  Page 105  |  Page 106  |  Page 107  |  Page 108  |  Page 109  |  Page 110  |  Page 111  |  Page 112  |  Page 113  |  Page 114  |  Page 115  |  Page 116  |  Page 117  |  Page 118  |  Page 119  |  Page 120  |  Page 121  |  Page 122  |  Page 123  |  Page 124  |  Page 125  |  Page 126  |  Page 127  |  Page 128  |  Page 129  |  Page 130  |  Page 131  |  Page 132  |  Page 133  |  Page 134  |  Page 135  |  Page 136  |  Page 137  |  Page 138  |  Page 139  |  Page 140  |  Page 141  |  Page 142  |  Page 143  |  Page 144  |  Page 145  |  Page 146  |  Page 147  |  Page 148  |  Page 149  |  Page 150  |  Page 151  |  Page 152  |  Page 153  |  Page 154  |  Page 155  |  Page 156  |  Page 157  |  Page 158  |  Page 159  |  Page 160  |  Page 161  |  Page 162  |  Page 163  |  Page 164