The role of Indigenous peoples and local communities in effective and equitable conservation

Abstract

Debate about what proportion of the Earth to protect often overshadows the question of how nature should be conserved and by whom. We present a systematic review and narrative synthesis of 169 publications investigating how different forms of governance influence conservation outcomes, paying particular attention to the role played by Indigenous peoples and local communities. We find a stark contrast between the outcomes produced by externally controlled conservation, and those produced by locally controlled efforts. Crucially, most studies presenting positive outcomes for both well-being and conservation come from cases where Indigenous peoples and local communities play a central role, such as when they have substantial influence over decision making or when local institutions regulating tenure form a recognized part of governance. In contrast, when interventions are controlled by external organizations and involve strategies to change local practices and supersede customary institutions, they tend to result in relatively ineffective conservation at the same time as producing negative social outcomes. Our findings suggest that equitable conservation, which empowers and supports the environmental stewardship of Indigenous peoples and local communities represents the primary pathway to effective long-term conservation of biodiversity, particularly when upheld in wider law and policy. Whether for protected areas in biodiversity hotspots or restoration of highly modified ecosystems, whether involving highly traditional or diverse and dynamic local communities, conservation can become more effective through an increased focus on governance type and quality, and fostering solutions that reinforce the role, capacity, and rights of Indigenous peoples and local communities. We detail how to enact progressive governance transitions through recommendations for conservation policy, with immediate relevance for how to achieve the next decade's conservation targets under the UN Convention on Biological Diversity.

Relating Country-Level Governance and Tree Cover Loss in Sub-Saharan African Protected Areas: Identifying Knowledge Gaps and a More Nuanced Perspective

“…The type and quality of site-level governance may be more important in determining the effectiveness of PAs than governance at higher levels (Andrade and Rhodes, 2012;Ferraro et al, 2013;Macura et al, 2015;Bradshaw and Di Minin, 2019). In a recent extensive systematic review, Dawson et al (2021) synthesize the findings from 169 publications (of which 36% were based on case studies from Africa) in regard to how different forms of conservation governance influence ecological and social outcomes. The most positive outcomes could be observed where Indigenous peoples and local communities played a central role in decision-making and held clear tenure rights.…”

“…Which aspects of governance become important depends on the level and subject of consideration. In the field of conservation, governance scholars have been mostly concerned with governance at the conservation site (Macura et al, 2015;Archibald et al, 2020;Dawson et al, 2021) and at the country-level (Barrett et al, 2006;Miller et al, 2015;Amano et al, 2018;Geldmann et al, 2019).…”

“…Site-based governance regimes can be split into four types: governance by government, governance by private individuals and organizations, governance by Indigenous peoples and/or local communities, and shared governance (Dudley, 2008;Borrini-Feyerabend et al, 2013). Which of these is most suitable for achieving ecological and socioeconomic objectives is case-and context-specific (Ferraro et al, 2013;Macura et al, 2015;Archibald et al, 2020;Dawson et al, 2021). Site-based governance quality is not necessarily bound to the governance type and is mostly understood in terms of ecological effectiveness and social equity (Andrade and Rhodes, 2012;Borrini-Feyerabend et al, 2013;Miller and Nakamura, 2018).…”

“…Various frameworks for effective and equitable governance at conservation sites exist but are typically built on the three dimensions of recognition, procedure and distribution (Sikor et al, 2014;Schreckenberg et al, 2016;Franks et al, 2018;Friedman et al, 2018) and include principles such as legitimacy and voice, direction, and performance, accountability, fairness, and rights (Borrini-Feyerabend et al, 2013;Schreckenberg et al, 2016;Franks et al, 2018). There is general agreement that equitable governance is beneficial toward reaching and sustaining ecological effectiveness, although further empirical work in this area is needed (Andrade and Rhodes, 2012;Friedman et al, 2018;Dawson et al, 2021).…”

Predicting the impacts of land management for sustainable development on depression risk in a Ugandan case study

“…In Uganda, this could include strengthening and promoting collaborative forest management agreements, a legal mechanism with dual aims of enhancing livelihoods while conserving forests 75 . More broadly, mounting evidence shows that Indigenous groups and local communities play vital roles in protecting nature 76,77 . So governments, conservation organizations, and other actors might consider ways to support residents to use nature sustainably.…”