Forests are often frontiers, and like all frontiers, they are sites of dynamic social, ecological, political and economic changes. Such dynamism involves constantly changing advantages and disadvantages to different groups of people, which not surprisingly can lead to armed conflict, and all too frequently to war. Many governments have contributed to conflict, however inadvertently, by nationalizing their forests, so that traditional forest inhabitants have been disenfranchised while national governments sell the rights to trees in order to earn foreign exchange. Biodiversity-rich tropical forests in Papua New Guinea, Indonesia, Indochina, Myanmar, Sri Lanka, Central and West Africa, the Amazon, Colombia, Central America and New Caledonia have all been the sites of armed conflict in recent years, sometimes involving international forces. Forests have sometimes been part of the cause of conflict (as in Myanmar and Sierra Leone) but more often victims of it. Violent conflicts in temperate areas also typically involve forests as shelters for both civilians and combatants, as in the Balkans. While these conflicts have frequently, even invariably, caused negative impacts on biodiversity, peace can be even worse, as it enables forest exploitation to operate with impunity. Because many of the remaining forests are along international borders, international cooperation is required for their conservation. As one response, the concept of international “Peace Parks” is being promoted in many parts of the world as a way of linking biodiversity conservation with national security. The Convention on Biological Diversity, which entered into force at the end of 1993 and now has 187 State Parties, offers a useful framework for such cooperation.

Post-release monitoring, including abundance estimation, is an important part of reintroductions, providing a basis for management intervention designed to achieve long-term persistence. The Arabian oryx Oryx leucoryx became extinct in the wild in 1972, surviving as captive populations. Since 1982 reintroductions of Arabian oryx have taken place in Oman and Saudi Arabia. Modelling of oryx population dynamics has highlighted the importance of precise estimation of population size (N). Between 1990 and 2000 three methods of estimating N have been applied in Mahazat as-Sayd protected area in Saudi Arabia: derived population estimates (DPE) based on known births and deaths, distance sampling, and mark-resighting (MR). This study assesses the feasibility and precision of these methods. Inability to assess precision, interdependence of consecutive estimates, and the assumption that all gains and losses are recorded, make DPE of limited value. At current densities, distance sampling along 455 km of driven transects yields too few detections to derive precise estimates of N. To achieve a coefficient of variation of 20% it would be necessary to drive up to c. 2,900 km of transect; this amount of survey effort could be achieved through pooling of data across repeat surveys of established transects. MR estimates, based on re-sighting of collared oryx, have the potential to yield the most precise estimates of N when the proportion of marked animals reaches 30% of the total population. The most reliable MR estimates available indicate the Mahazat as-Sayd Arabian oryx population had grown to >400 animals by 2000.

Captive breeding programmes for the Asian elephant Elephas maximus have failed to establish self-sustaining zoo populations. Birth rates are low and calf mortality rates are high. The zoo population is widely dispersed, with few animals being moved on breeding loan. New techniques may increase birth rates but current predictions suggest demographic extinction within 50 years. It would be difficult to justify importing elephants from sustainable zoo reserves in Asia to participate in ex situ breeding programmes where reproductive success is low. Zoos should either urgently regroup animals to form breeding units, or accept that Asian elephants will die out in zoos and that funds should be diverted to in situ conservation projects.

Forest certification provides a means by which producers who meet stringent sustainable forestry standards can identify their products in the marketplace, allowing them to potentially receive greater market access and higher prices for their products. An examination of the ways in which certification may contribute to biodiversity conservation leads to the following conclusions: 1) the process of Forest Stewardship Council (FSC)-certification generates improvements to management with respect to the value of managed forests for biodiversity. 2) Current incentives are not sufficient to attract the majority of producers to seek certification, particularly in tropical countries where the costs of improving management to meet FSC guidelines are significantly greater than any market benefits they may receive; available incentives are even less capable of convincing forest owners to retain forest cover and produce certified timber on a sustainable basis, rather than deforesting their lands for timber and agriculture. 3) At present, current volumes of certified forest products are insufficient to reduce demand to log high conservation value forests. If FSC certification is to make greater inroads, particularly in tropical countries, significant investments will be needed both to increase the benefits and reduce the costs of certification. Conservation investors will need to carefully consider the biodiversity benefits that will be generated from such investments, versus the benefits generated from investing in more traditional approaches to biodiversity conservation.