Agreements for conserving migratory shorebirds in the Asia-Pacific are better fit for addressing habitat loss than hunting.

A full-life cycle approach is a tenet of migratory species conservation, yet the degree to which this is achieved remains largely unassessed. This knowledge gap can be addressed using the concept of social-ecological fit, understood as the match between governance and ecological dimensions. Here, we assess the social-ecological fit for conserving migratory shorebirds in the Asia-Pacific, focusing on habitat loss and hunting. We identify the governance architectures for addressing these two threats and then assess the coordinating capacity of each architecture, measure institutional coverage for each species across their range, and determine the degree of institutional connectivity along their migratory network. We find that social-ecological fit is higher for the governance of habitat designation than for hunting management, with implications for governance practice. Analyses of social-ecological fit thus provide critical insights on the potential effectiveness of governance and therefore are a useful first step for migratory species conservation.