TY - JOUR

T1 - Social Synergies, Tradeoffs, and Equity in Marine Conservation Impacts

AU - Gill, David A.

AU - Cheng, Samantha H.

AU - Glew, Louise

AU - Aigner, Ernest

AU - Bennett, Nathan J.

AU - Mascia, Michael B.

N1 - Publisher Copyright: © 2019 by Annual Reviews. All rights reserved.

PY - 2019/10/17

Y1 - 2019/10/17

N2 - Biodiversity conservation interventions often aim to benefit both nature and people; however, the social impacts of these interventions remain poorly understood. We reviewed recent literature on the social impacts of four marine conservation interventions to understand the synergies, tradeoffs, and equity (STE) of these impacts, focusing on the direction, magnitude, and distribution of impacts across domains of human wellbeing and across spatial, temporal, and social scales. STE literature has increased dramatically since 2000, particularly for marine protected areas (MPAs), but remains limited. Few studies use rigorous counterfactual study designs, and significant research gaps remain regarding specific wellbeing domains (culture, education), social groups (gender, age, ethnic groups), and impacts over time. Practitioners and researchers should recognize the role of shifting property rights, power asymmetries, individual capabilities, and resource dependency in shaping STE in conservation outcomes, and utilize multi-consequential frameworks to support the wellbeing of vulnerable and marginalized groups.

AB - Biodiversity conservation interventions often aim to benefit both nature and people; however, the social impacts of these interventions remain poorly understood. We reviewed recent literature on the social impacts of four marine conservation interventions to understand the synergies, tradeoffs, and equity (STE) of these impacts, focusing on the direction, magnitude, and distribution of impacts across domains of human wellbeing and across spatial, temporal, and social scales. STE literature has increased dramatically since 2000, particularly for marine protected areas (MPAs), but remains limited. Few studies use rigorous counterfactual study designs, and significant research gaps remain regarding specific wellbeing domains (culture, education), social groups (gender, age, ethnic groups), and impacts over time. Practitioners and researchers should recognize the role of shifting property rights, power asymmetries, individual capabilities, and resource dependency in shaping STE in conservation outcomes, and utilize multi-consequential frameworks to support the wellbeing of vulnerable and marginalized groups.

KW - biodiversity conservation

KW - equity

KW - marine conservation

KW - social impacts

KW - synergies

KW - tradeoffs

KW - Economics

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85073423360&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - https://www.mendeley.com/catalogue/5f9b6b3b-d08e-3688-b3e7-f3db3efd82c4/

U2 - 10.1146/annurev-environ-110718-032344

DO - 10.1146/annurev-environ-110718-032344

M3 - Scientific review articles

AN - SCOPUS:85073423360

VL - 44

SP - 347

EP - 372

JO - Annual Review of Environment and Resources

JF - Annual Review of Environment and Resources

SN - 1543-5938

ER -