Integrative nature conservation

Against the backdrop of the upcoming Post-2020 Global Diversity Framework (GBF), which aims to set new guidelines for the management of nature by 2030, Dr. Miguel Ángel Cebrián-Piqueras and Prof. Tobias Plieninger from the Department of "Socio-Ecological Interactions in Agricultural Systems" at the Universities of Kassel and Göttingen, together with an international group of 25 researchers, explored the obstacles and pathways towards equitable and just protected area management as part of the ENVISION project.

Led by Prof. Christopher Raymond of the Swedish Agricultural University, they recently published the results of their work in the journal One Earth. In light of the GBF's goals of sharing nature's benefits fairly and equitably (Goal #13) and ensuring equitable and effective biodiversity decision-making (Goal #21), tensions and prospects for so-called "inclusive conservation" are described here. According to the researchers:in order to promote it, certain tensions associated with its implementation worldwide must be acknowledged and addressed:

1. The first tension relates to the question of whether inclusive conservation should end at the boundaries of protected areas or follow a landscape-based approach: "While the idea of a protected area provides clear boundary lines, management approaches that span sectors, boundaries and landscapes better take into account the realities of our interconnected world," says Prof. Tobias Plieninger.
2. When it comes to multi-stakeholder engagement, conservation management faces the complex problem of balancing multiple visions for nature and of its values. The challenge here is to reduce conflicting goals without overlooking the existing plurality.
3. What is considered evident and how can this evidence be systematically gathered and presented to support decision-making? This tension is about the need to integrate local and experiential knowledge into the dominant Western knowledge system. "Here, reform is overdue and would go a long way in advancing conservation management in terms of equity and fairness," argues Dr. Miguel Ángel Cebrián-Piqueras.
4. Finally, there is a tension between recognizing dissenting voices, respect for which is so important to non-exclusive conservation approaches, and the need to seek consensus. "Seeking points of consensus and acknowledging disagreement usually come at the expense of each other," said Prof. Christopher Raymond.

To acknowledge, mitigate and, where possible, reshape these tensions, the researchers:present a governance framework based on case studies of protected area management in Sweden, the Netherlands, the United States and Spain. In it, they recommend for inclusive protected area management to (1) acknowledge hybridity and multilayered tensions, (2) create conditions for reflexivity, and (3) seek new partnerships in conservation management. This framework can promote stakeholder engagement in protected area management, ultimately contributing to better implementation of global biodiversity goals.

Full Paper:

Raymond et al. Inclusive conservation and the Post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework: tensions and prospects, One Earth (2022), doi.org/10.1016/j.oneear.2022.02.008