They Ask for Bread and Are Given a Bone: Wildlife Researchers and Research Permits in Argentina
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.25260/EA.24.34.3.0.2412Keywords:
research, licence, non-domesticated organisms, Argentine territoryAbstract
In Argentina, as in other countries around the world, studying wildlife requires research permits, which are generally issued by a competent agency to authorize, limit or describe a scientific activity in a particular location or species. The immense diversity of ecoregions that our country has, the high number of wildlife researchers who carry out field studies and the national and international regulations related to the conservation and protection of biological and genetic resources highlight the need to hold a state-of-the-art analysis of the relationship between wildlife researchers and the agencies in charge of managing and issuing research permits at the national level. To our knowledge, there is no study of this nature for Argentina. For this purpose, we evaluated —through an online survey— the general perception of these researchers about the agencies in charge of managing and issuing research permits in Argentina. Based on the results obtained, the perception by researchers of these agencies in our country could be considered negative, this appreciation being similar throughout the country and for all strata of the researchers surveyed. The responses obtained show the myriad of complications, disappointments and contradictions that researchers face when requesting research permits. With this work we seek to identify the main points of conflict, evaluate system deficiencies and propose alternatives that help mitigate or avoid these problems. We hope that this work will serve to open the dialogue between the scientific sector and the public administration.
References
Agresti, A. 2002. Categorical Data Analysis. John Wiley and Sons. https://doi.org/10.1002/0471249688.
Alder, J. 1993. Permits, an evolving tool for the day-to-day management of the cairns section of the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park. Coastal Management 21:25-36. https://doi.org/10.1080/08920759309362190.
Alexander, G. J., K. A. Tolley, B. Maritz, A. McKechnie, P. Manger, R. L. Thomson, et al. 2021. Excessive red tape is strangling biodiversity research in South Africa. South African Journal of Science 117:1-4. https://doi.org/10.17159/sajs.2021/10787.
Alves, R. J. V., M. Weskler, J. A. Oliveira, P. A. Buckup, J. P. Pombal, H. R. G. Santana, et al. 2018. Brazilian legislation on genetic heritage harms Biodiversity Convention goals and threatens basic biology research and education. Anais da Academia Brasileira de Ciências 90:1279-1284. https://doi.org/ 10.1590/0001-3765201820180460.
Antonelli, A., and V. Rodríguez. 2009. Brazil should facilitate research permits. Conservation Biology 23:1068-1069. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1523-1739.2009.01300.x.
Augugliaro, C., P. Christe, C. Janchivlamdan, H. Baymanday, and F. Zimmermann. 2020. Patterns of human interaction with snow leopard and co-predators in the Mongolian western Altai: current issues and perspectives. Global Ecology Conservation 24:e01378. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gecco.2020.e01378.
Benson, E. 2010. A difficult time with the permit process. Journal of the History of Biology 44:103-123. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10739-010-9244-6.
Biel, A. W. 2004. The bearer has permission - a brief history of research permitting in Yellowstone National Park. Yellowstone Science 12:5-20.
Borsellino, L., E. Zufiarre, and D. Bilenca. 2012. La investigación científica y la conservación de la biodiversidad en parques nacionales de la Argentina. Dónde estamos y hacia dónde podríamos ir. Ecología Austral 32:493-501. https://doi.org/10.25260/EA.22.32.2.0.1942.
Braby, M. F. 2007. Collecting biological specimens in the Northern Territory with particular reference to terrestrial invertebrates: guidelines to current legislation and permits. Northern Territory Naturalist 19:35-45. https://doi.org/10.5962/p.295520.
Britz, R., A. Hundsdörfer, and U. Fritz. 2021. Funding, training, permits—the three big challenges of taxonomy. Megataxa 1:49-52. https://doi.org/10.11646/megataxa.1.1.10.
Burkart, R., N. O., Bárbaro, R. O. Sánchez, and D. A. Gómez. 1999. Eco-regiones de la Argentina. Secretaría de Recursos Naturales y Desarrollo Sustentable a través del Programa Institucional Ambiental (PRODIA) y la Administración de Parques Nacionales.
Cervantes, O., I. Espejel, E., Arellano, and S. Delhumeau. 2008. Users’ perception as a tool to improve urban beach planning and management. Environmental Management 42:249-264. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-008-9104-8.
Cervantes. F. A. 1995. Permisos de investigación y de colector científico de flora y fauna silvestres. Ciencia 46:1-6.
Chinsembu, W. W., and K. C. Chinsembu. 2020. ‘Poisoned chalice’: Law on access to biological and genetic resources and associated traditional knowledge in Namibia. Resources 9:83. https://doi.org/10.3390/resources9070083.
Christensen, R. H. B. 2019. Regression models for ordinal data. URL: cran.r-project.org/package=ordinal.
Croasmun, J. T., and L. Ostrom. 2011. Using Likert-type scales in the social sciences. Journal of Adult Education 40:19-22.
Cumming, G. S., and K. A. Dobbs. 2019. Understanding regulatory frameworks for large marine protected areas: permits of the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park. Biological Conservation 237:3-11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2019.06.007.
Davies, K., F. Martin, F. Smit, K. Martin, S. Sharrock, and P. Allestein. 2015. An access and benefit-sharing awareness survey for botanic gardens: are they prepared for the Nagoya Protocol? South African Journal of Botany 98:148-156. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sajb.2015.01.015.
Di Franco, A., K. E. Hogg, A. Caló, N. J., Bennett, M. A. Sévin-Allouet, O. Esparza Alaminos, and P. Guidetti. 2020. Improving marine protected area governance through collaboration and co-production. Journal of Environmental Management 269:110757. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2020.110757.
Diamond, J. M. 1985. Taxonomy: how many unknown species are yet to be discovered? Nature 315:538-539. https://doi.org/10.1038/315538a0.
Donaldson, I. S. 1993. The dead hand on discovery: permits for the study of protected plants. South African Journal of Science 89:120-122.
Dubay, S. G., and Fulder, C. C. 2017. Bird specimens track 135 years of atmospheric black carbon and environmental policy. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 114:11321-11326. https://doi.org/10.1002/fee.1794.
Fernández, F. 2011. The greatest impediment to the study of biodiversity in Colombia. Caldasia 33:iii-v.
Finley, R. B. Jr. 1988. Guidelines for the management of scientific collecting permits. Wildlife Society Bulletin 16:75-79.
Gasparri B. 2023. Las áreas naturales protegidas municipales de la provincia de Buenos Aires. 1ra. edición. Fundación de Historia Natural Félix de Azara, Buenos Aires.
Hamer, M., K. Behr, I. Engelbrecht, and L. Richards. 2021. Permit requirements, associated challenges and recommendations for biodiversity collections and research in South Africa. South African Journal of Science 117:11765. https://doi.org/10.17159/sajs.2021/11765.
Hatami, F. 2022. Number of Earth’s tree species estimated to be 14% higher than currently known, with some 9,200 species yet to be discovered. Iran Nature 7:156-157.
Henen, B. T. 2016. Do scientific collecting and conservation conflict? Herpetological Conservation and Biology 11:13-18.
Holmes, M. W., T. H. Hammond, G. O. U. Wogan, R. E. Walsh, K. LaBarbera, E. A. Wommack, et al. 2016. Natural history collections as windows on evolutionary processes. Molecular Ecology 25:864-881. https://doi.org/10.1111/mec.13529.
Kamau, E. C., B. Fedder, and G. Winter. 2010. The Nagoya Protocol on access to genetic resources and benefit sharing: What is new and what are the implications for provider and user countries and the scientific community. Law, Environment and Development Journal 6:246-262.
Kreimer, P. 2009. El científico también es un ser humano. Veintiuno Editores.
Lloyd, H. 1919. Permits to collect birds for scientific purposes in Canada. The Auk 36:621-623. https://doi.org/10.2307/4073421.
Lock, R. 1998. Fieldwork in the life sciences. International Journal of Science Education 20:633-642. https://doi.org/10.1080/0950069980200602.
Marshall, K., R. White, and A. Fischer. 2007. Conflicts between humans over wildlife management: on the diversity of stakeholder attitudes and implications for conflict management. Biodiversity and Conservation 16:3129-3146. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-007-9167-5
Mazzei, K. C., and A. M. Shapiro. 2001. Lepidopterists’ perceptions of a proposed permitting system for butterfly collection on public lands. Journal of the Lepidopterists’ Society 55:101-111.
McDiarmid, R. W., R. P. Reynolds, and R. I. Crombie. 1996. Permits. Pp. 68-69 en D. E. Wilson, F. Russell Cole, J. D. Nichols, R. Rudran and M. S. Forster (eds.). Measuring and Monitoring Biological Diversity: Standard Methods for Mammals. Smithsonian Institution Press.
McLean, B. S., K. C. Bell, J. L. Dunnum, B. Abrahamson, J. P. Colella, E. R. Deardorff, et al. 2016. Natural history collections-based research: progress, promise, and best practices. Journal of Mammalogy 97:287-297. https://doi.org/10.1093/jmammal/gyv178.
Palmer, A., and B. Greenhough. 2021. Out of the laboratory, into the field: perspectives on social, ethical and regulatory challenges in UK wildlife research. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B 376:20200226. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2020.0226.
Paul, E., and R. S. Sikes. 2013. Wildlife researchers running the permit maze. ILAR Journal 54:14-23. https://doi.org/10.1093/ilar/ilt013.
Pertierra, L. R., and K. A. Hughes. 2013. Management of Antarctic Specially Protected Areas: permitting, visitation and information exchange practices. Antarctic Science 25:553-564. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0954102012001204.
Prathapan, K. D., P. D. Rajan, T. C. Narendran, C. A. Viraktamath, K. A. Subramanian, N. A. Aravind, and J. Poorani. 2006. Biological Diversity Act, 2002: Shadow of permit-raj over research. Current Science 91:1006-1007.
R Development Core Team. 2023. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria.
Ralls, K., and R. L. Brownell. 1988. Protected species - research permits and the value of basic research. BioScience 39:394-396. https://doi.org/10.2307/1311069.
Ramírez-Castañeda, V., E. P. Westeen, J. Frederick, S. Amini, D. R. Wait, A. S. Achami, et al. 2022. A set of principles and practical suggestions for equitable fieldwork in biology. PNAS 119:e2122667119. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2122667119.
Rourke, M. F. 2018. Access and benefit-sharing in practice: non-commercial research scientists face legal obstacles to accessing genetic resources. Journal of Science Policy and Governance 13, October.
Saarman, E. T., B. Owens, S. N. Murray, S. B. Weisberg, R. F. Ambrose, J. C. Field, et al. 2018. An ecological framework for informing permitting decisions on scientific activities in protected areas. PLoS ONE 13:e0199126. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0199126.
Sahide, M. A. K., and L. Giessen. 2015. The fragmented land use administration in Indonesia-Analysing bureaucratic responsibilities influencing tropical rainforest transformation systems. Land Use Policy 43:96-110. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2014.11.005.
Sánchez, R. A. 2018. Instituto Antártico Argentino. Pionero en ciencia antártica. La Lupa - Colección fueguina de divulgación científica 17.
Scott, G. W., R. Goulder, P. Wheeler, L. J. Scott, M. L. Tobin, and S. Marhsham. 2012. The value of fieldwork in life and environmental sciences in the context of a higher education: A case study in learning about diversity. Science and Education Technology 21:11-21. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-010-9276-x.
Secretaría de Ambiente y Desarrollo Sustentable de la Nación. 2019. Recopilación de normas sobre permisos de investigación y acceso a los recursos genéticos por jurisdicción. URL: tinyurl.com/mwwp3rmz.
Shamoo, A. E., and D. B. Resnik. 2015. Responsible conduct of research. Oxford University Press.
Sikes, R. A., and J. A. Bryan II. 2015. Institutional animal care and use committee considerations for the use of wildlife in research and education. ILAR Journal 56:335-341. https://doi.org/10.1093/ilar/ilv071.
Sikes, R. S., J. A. Bryan II, D. Byman, B. J. Danielson, J. Eggleston, M. R. Gannon, et al. 2016. 2016 Guidelines of the American Society of Mammologists for the use of wild animals in research and education. Journal of Mammalogy 97:663-688. https://doi.org/10.1093/jmammal/gyw078.
Soga, M., and K. J. Gaston. 2018. Shifting baseline syndrome: causes, consequences, and implications. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 16:222-230. https://doi.org/10.1002/fee.1794.
Varsavksy, O. 2010. Ciencia, política y cientificismo. Capital Intelectual.
Von Der Heyden, S. 2011. ‘Carry on sampling!’-assessing marine fish biodiversity and discovery rates in southern Africa. Diversity and Distributions 17:81-92. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1472-4642.2010.00712.x.
Wagner, C. S., and L. Leydesdorff. 2005. Network structure, self-organization, and the growth of international collaboration in science. Research Policy 34:1608-1618. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2005.08.002.
Welch, E. W., G. Taggart, M. K. Feeney, and M. Siciliano. 2019. Navigating the labyrinth: Academic scientists’ responses to new regulatory controls on biological material inputs to research. Environmental Science and Policy 101:136-146. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2019.08.001.
Zimkus, B. M., L. S. Ford, and P. J. Morris. 2021. The need for permit management within biodiversity collection management systems to digitally track legal compliance documentation and increase transparency about origins and uses. Collection Forum 35:1-20. https://doi.org/10.14351/0831-4985-35.1.1.
Downloads
Additional Files
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Juan P. Seco Pon, Patricio J. Pereyra
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors retain their rights as follows: 1) by granting the journal the right to its first publication, and 2) by registering the published article with a Creative Commons Attribution License (CC-BY 4.0), which allows authors and third parties to view and use it as long as they clearly mention its origin (citation or reference, including authorship and first publication in this journal). Authors can make other non-exclusive distribution agreements as long as they clearly indicate their origin and are encouraged to widely share and disseminate the published version of their work.
