Vultures are a highly intelligent group of birds that provide important ecosystem services. Yet, populations of old-world vultures decreased dramatically in the last decades owing to anthropogenic factors. Efficient conservation strategies that address critical threats such as indiscriminate poisoning or depleted food sources need to be developed. At the same time, their behaviour including social interactions is still poorly understood. Building on high-tech tracking equipment and AI-based analytical tools, GAIA aims at better understanding how vultures communicate, interact and cooperate, forage, breed and rear their young. Additionally, the GAIA scientists research the social foraging strategies of white-backed vultures and the information transfer within carnivore-scavenger-communities. In the animal kingdom it is common across taxa that the search for food is undertaken not only as individuals but in a group. Animals forage together or rely on knowledge from other individuals to find food. This so-called social foraging presumably yields benefits, for example concerning the amount of food that is found, the size of prey that can be hunted or the time required to access food. GAIA investigates species-specific mechanisms in behaviour and communication as well as the incentives, benefits and possible disadvantages for individuals.

The forestry sector is suffering from corruption and is limiting benefits for local and Indigenous communities. Our solution allows local communities to tackle forest illegalities and land rights violations and at the same time to secure their land rights and economic rights over forest resources by monitoring and protecting their territory, reinforcing sustainable development and autonomy.  Data collected through the tool also supports judicial or non-judicial cases when local and indigenous communities suffer human rights abuses. 

Having data collected and analysed through a digital tool is an innovation, although to foster changes and ensure local communities and Indigenous people's protection and sustainable lifestyle the data is used for law enforcement and advocacy purposes. To this end, strong local, national and international advocacy networks are needed to take action against reported abuses and to achieve policy changes. By enabling information to be shared between users and opening up data to the general public, the tool facilitates collaborative working. 

The evidence is building that granting Indigenous peoples and other local communities' control over their territories improves forest protection. This is because they are directly invested in the survival of forests and want to ensure that future generations can continue to live and thrive in them. Yet a lot of development and environmental and climate-related programs are not created in collaboration with the people who will be impacted by them. Therefore, our solution arose from the challenges that grassroots organisations and Indigenous and local communities brought to our attention. Those communities are the ones living all the forests illegalities and land tenure violations therefore by directly tackling their challenge it ensures the solution to be genuine and efficient. Working with them directly helps us to better understand the contexts they are facing and adapt the tool in consequence. 

With our platform and tools, we not only provide opportunities to raise funds, simplify data collection for monitoring, and detect forest fires earlier to enable faster response, but also foster a sense of ownership for small grassroots projects tackling the globally critical issue of the climate crisis. Each project on our platform is encouraged to share its challenges and success stories with us and the broader community. This engagement happens through regular Community Talks or direct connections with other projects facing similar challenges, fostering meaningful discussions and facilitating valuable knowledge exchange at both local and regional levels.

Our project badges further enhance this sense of belonging, serving as both a symbol of community membership and an official seal of quality for potential supporters. Additionally, our free and confidential advisory service offers Restoration Organizations tailored guidance from our team of experts, empowering them to sustainably develop and improve their initiatives.

Globally, fish consumption shows strong regional differences. For instance, in 2009 the average yearly fish consumption per capita in Africa was 9kg, while in Asia it reached almost 21kg per person. On every continent, small island developing states or coastal countries have higher consumption rates than their landlocked counterparts. In addition to these differences, the FAO State of World Fisheries and Aquaculture report of 2022 predicts these regional imbalances to increase in the future while fish consumption in Africa is expected to further decline.

These observations are consistent with the findings of the baseline studies conducted by the GP Fish, which found that the median annual fish consumption per capita was 0.9 kg in Malawi (2018), 1.1kg in Madagascar (2018), 1.8 kg in Zambia (2021), but 24.4kg in Cambodia (2022). It must be noted that these consumption patterns reflect the situation of the rural population, who typically have lower incomes compared to the national average. Considering the recommended average yearly fish consumption of 10 kg per person, these findings are worrying.

Considering the importance of fish as a protein and nutrient source for rural households it is important to better understand fish consumption patterns and their impact on food and nutrition security. In Malawi, Madagascar, Zambia and Cambodia the GP Fish and the Global Programme Food and Nutrition Security, Enhanced Resilience (GP Food and Nutrition Security hereafter) are working together to improve food and nutrition security. While the data from the GP Fish are focused on fish production and consumption of close by consumers, data from the GP Food and Nutrition Security provide information about the consumption of different protein sources by the Individual Dietary Diversity Score (IDDS). The GP Food and Nutrition Security collected data from women of reproductive age living in rural, low-income households, not focusing on people involved in the fisheries and aquaculture sector and the surveys included questions to determine a household food security status. Using the extensive dataset allowed an assessment of the current role of fish in comparison to other animal and plant protein sources, without the bias of an increased fish consumption among households involved in fish production. Given that data collection was based on 24-hour recalls, the table in the Annex contextualizes the date of the survey with seasonal implications on fish availability (fishing ban, harvesting seasons), indicating that results can be considered representative.

The frequency of the consumption of various protein sources over the last 24 hours, disaggregated by food security status, is shown in Figure 3. The food protein sources include fish and seafood, pulses (beans, peas, lentils), meat and poultry, eggs, and milk and dairy products. The percentages indicate how many of the respondents consumed a particular protein source (e.g., 19% of the food insecure women in Madagascar have consumed fish and seafood in the last 24 hours). The overall height of the column indicates the aggregated frequency of protein consumption by respondents for each country. Lowest frequency of protein consumption within the last 24 hours for food insecure respondents was found in Madagascar and the highest in Cambodia.

Figure 3 reveals several interesting trends:

1. In general, fish is currently the most frequently consumed protein source in nearly all countries. The importance of fish as a protein source can be explained by the fact that fish is often more affordable, more accessible, and culturally preferred compared to other animal- or plant-based protein sources.

2. Food secure respondents do not in general consume fish more frequently compared to food insecure respondents. This indicates that fish is a source of protein and nutrients that is accessible also to the most vulnerable, namely the food insecure population.

3. The results show regional differences in the frequency of protein consumption between African countries and Cambodia: in Madagascar, Malawi, and Zambia, between 19 – 56% of food insecure respondents and 38 –39% of food secure respondents have consumed fish during the last 24 hours, while in Cambodia more than 80% of the respondents consumed fish during the last 24 hours, independent of the food security status. These results are consistent with the abundance of fish in Cambodia, while access to fish in African countries is often limited by seasonality and distance from water bodies.

In addition to the differences between countries, Figure 4 illustrates high differences in consumption patterns within one country. In Zambia, the GP Food and Nutrition Security found fish to be a consumed by 68.3% (food insecure) and 88.5% (food secure) of the interviewed women in the last 24 hours, while in the Eastern Province, it was only 16.5% and 23.2% respectively. This is consistent with the results from the GP Fish survey, which found that the median annual fish consumption in Luapula Province was 2.2kg and 5.2 kg per capita, while fish consumption in Eastern Province amounts to only 0.9 kg for food insecure and 2kg per year for the food secure respondents. These results suggest that the Chambeshi/Luapula river system and connected wetlands in Luapula Province make fish more accessible than in the rather dry Eastern Province. For the success of new interventions in the field of food and nutrition security related to fish production and consumption, the local conditions and cultural context are important factors to consider during the planning process.

Programs like eco-classrooms, guided tours, and school collaborations raised awareness, while immersive experiences, such as observing salmon in their natural habitats, fostered public engagement.

More than 500,000 native trees were planted, converting polluted farmlands into forested areas. Additionally, wastewater treatment systems were implemented to minimize runoff from recreational zones.

The removal of silt traps and weirs restored ecological connectivity and increased salmon's access to cooler, upstream habitats suitable for breeding. The 2011 removal of Weir No. 1 marked a pivotal milestone in these efforts. 

Indigenous Atayal communities played a vital role in conservation patrols and monitoring environmental changes. Partnerships not only created employment opportunities but also strengthened the cultural connection between the communities and the species.