Interview with Anthony Clevenger

Tell us a little about the history of the Latin America and Caribbean Transport Working Group (LACTWG) and how you got involved with the creation of the group.

LACTWG came about after the creation of the Connectivity Conservation Specialist Group – Transport Working Group (CCSG/TWG). With the TWG being general and not specific to species or regions, a group of us that have been working on linear transportation infrastructure/TI issues in Latin America for a decade decided that this was an ideal vehicle or mechanism to bring together everyone continent-wide, to be unified and informed in sharing experiences, best practices, policy achievements, research and funding mechanisms for TI mitigation. Until then, there was little or no communication within LAC about different practices, experiences, research results etc. Even between neighboring nations. Unification of some sort was desperately needed.
LAC is unique, unlike other continents like Asia or Africa, in that the majority of LAC nations share common language (Spanish), are relatively similar in cultures and also political systems. This we saw would facilitate information exchanges and the creation of a geographic-based TWG, unlike the Asian Elephant Transport Working Group (AsETWG).
Our original meeting was among a few LAC researchers at the Infrastructure and Ecology Network Europe (IENE) meeting in 2018. From that initial meeting we slowly charted our way forward, gathering more LAC practitioners/researchers with informal meetings, until the CCSG/TWG was formally approved, and we could pursue a LACTWG with Terms of Reference and guidance (co-chairs, steering committee).

What are the co-chair roles/responsibilities in the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Working Groups?

The co-chairs are responsible for the direction and oversight of the group activities. the co-chairs also report to the CCSC/TWG Secretariat. Co-chairs are involved in all the activities of the LACTWG (at least in setting direction and being aware of implementation). The co-chairs are a select sub-group which being few in number allow for regular and impromptu meetings to take place to discuss progress, delays, needs and changes that may be required to have the group function smoothly.
The Steering Committee (SC) evolved out of an enlarged initial group that met in IENE in Wildlands Networks 2018, referred to as the ‘grupo de amigos’ but does not include all members (official) of the LACTWG. Getting meetings of all SC members has been difficult due to size, and as co-chairs we believe that the important decisions should be made by the co-chairs given their investment of time and dedication to the group and regular meeting of issues that need attention.

What are the LACTWG’s main achievements in these first years?

I think the biggest is the attraction of people primarily throughout LAC to our webinars and training courses. One of the first 4-part webinars (1-2 hours each Monday during June 2020) organized by Wildlands Networks (WN) attracted 2000+ people (registering), in the end roughly 500-600 people actually took part online. These are significant numbers and demonstrate the interest, need and importance of our work in LAC.
Training and capacity building has been a foundational role of LAC TWG so far…other webinars and trainings have taken place (Bolivia, Nicaragua, Mexico, Costa Rica, Colombia….) and had equal success in attracting participants and government attention. Training and capacity building in LAC, Asia and Africa is the most urgent action needed to begin mainstreaming green infrastructure and nature-based solutions. So continuing this important work will lay a stable and deep foundation going into the future.

What are the main challenges you see in running LACTWG?

Growing the number of official members. We have roughly 50+ members, however our email list, for newsletters and webinars, have attracted more than 2500+ people, the large majority in LAC! How can this discrepancy exist? and how can we get more engagement of official members? It is super important that the LAC members NOT BE all researchers because ecologically sustainable TI planning, design and implementation requires the involvement of transportation practitioners from governments, financial institutions, engineering/environmental consulting firms, and research institutions. This wide and diverse base is what controls and guides LI projects. We need this diverse base to speak with and advance road ecology in their nations/regions.

What do you envision as future directions and priorities for this group?

– Developing LAC-wide or regional Best Practices and Technical Guidelines that are accepted by national ministries of transportation/public work and environment/natural resources conservation.

– Growing membership throughout LAC

– Developing close relationships with the major financial institutions funding LI in LAC (World Bank, InterAmerican

– Development Bank, European Development Bank, CONAF) and developing technical assistance and training/capacity building for these financial institutions.

– Developing a LAC Road ecology conference that is virtual so people that cannot afford to present can participate, and also being in-person.
– Working with and sharing experiences with agencies and Transportation practitioners in Asia and Africa, as there are similarities and overlap of some aspects of policy, research, best practices and financing of projects (via multi-lateral development banks and other financial institutions).
– Continuing regular formal (webinars/training courses) and informal (brown bag lunch “information exchanges”)