Balancing Nature And Rights: New Study Reveals Challenges In Conservation Governance
In an eye-opening study led by Naira Dehmel from King’s College London, researchers have cast a spotlight on the critical issue of equity in conservation governance. Published in Conservation Biology, the research team examined equity assessments from 37 conservation areas spanning 19 countries, uncovering significant disparities in how these areas are managed worldwide.
Conservation efforts globally are guided by international agreements that aim to minimize harm to local communities while ensuring their participation in decision-making processes. However, the study highlights a persistent struggle to uphold the rights of Indigenous Peoples and local communities, despite intentions to foster inclusivity and avoid conflict.
With the ambitious target set by the Kunming–Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework to protect 30% of the Earth's land and sea by 2030, the mandate for equitable governance has never been more urgent. Yet, the researchers found that mitigating negative impacts on local communities remains a prevalent challenge.
One of the most revealing findings is the disparity in perceptions of governance fairness among different stakeholders. Decision-makers often viewed governance more favorably than local community members, pointing to a disconnect that could jeopardize trust and long-term success in conservation efforts.
The study utilized the Site-level Assessment of Governance and Equity (SAGE), a participatory tool that evaluates conservation governance through three key dimensions: distributional equity (how benefits and burdens are shared), procedural equity (how decisions are made), and recognitional equity (how rights and identities are respected). This comprehensive analysis underscores the importance of context-specific approaches that center local voices.
Interestingly, conservation sites managed by or in collaboration with Indigenous Peoples and local communities scored higher on equity measures compared to those governed solely by government agencies. This finding supports the argument for more inclusive, just, and effective conservation strategies.
Co-author Professor Kate Schreckenberg emphasizes that while global databases and metrics provide valuable insights, true progress lies in fostering dialogue and action at the site level. She cautions that as the world strives to meet conservation targets, protecting nature should not come at the expense of human rights.