species loss in Pacific Island countries continue (Wardell- Johnson and others 2011; Lees and Siwatibau 2009; Shearman and others 2009). As most land in the Pacific ([80 %) is under customary (or traditional) ownership and managed by customary groups (Ward 2000), the limited involvement of local landowners in the conception, plan- ning, implementation and management of conservation projects has also played an important role in the failure of many conservation activities in the region (Hunnam 2002).
As landowners are ultimately responsible for any activities on their land, conservation areas and actions generally cannot simply be implemented by the government or other organi- zations, but require support and approval by landowning communities. In addition, most rural landowning communi- ties in Pacific countries still possess extensive knowledge of their environment that is extremely valuable for developing appropriate and effective conservation approaches (Raynor and Kostka 2003; Baines and Hviding 1992; Cox and Elmqvist 1991). As a result, most successful conservation programs/activities in the region involve community co-management (Morrison and Buckley 2010; Hunnam 2002).
While local communities are of critical importance in Pacific conservation management, they (in conjunction with Provincial or National government environment agencies) are not always aware of important conservation issues. Recovery planning, which collates quantitative data for species with expert opinion to identify threats, man- agement priorities and recovery actions, is a key compo- nent of many threatened species conservation initiatives and can be a powerful awareness raising tool for all stakeholders during the initial plan proposal and final public consultation phases (Gruber 2010; Schwartz 2008). Awareness raising through the recovery plan process in a Pacific context is more common in the initial stages involving community consultation to generate support for the plan and its associated conservation initiatives.
While recovery planning is a significant component of conservation, one of the largest impediments to conserva- tion efforts in the Pacific region is the lack of ecological data and its subsequent effects on the development of feasible and useful recovery plans for threatened species (Kingsford and others 2009). Most countries in the region (Australia and New Zealand excepted) do not have National Lists of threatened species nor complete current IUCN Red Lists to highlight and promote threatened and vulnerable taxa (Morrison ‘‘in press’’). Even countries with relatively good conservation programs such as Fiji, have very few species recovery plans in place for threatened species management. The absence of such plans exacer- bates difficulties faced by the understaffed, underfunded and often technically ill-equipped, conservation agencies in the region to plan, prioritize and conduct conservation activities and therefore adequately protect biodiversity.