Inclusive conservation and the Post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework: Tensions and prospects
Research output: Journal contributions › Journal articles › Research › peer-review
Standard
In: One Earth, Vol. 5, No. 3, 18.03.2022, p. 252-264.
Research output: Journal contributions › Journal articles › Research › peer-review
Harvard
APA
Vancouver
Bibtex
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
T1 - Inclusive conservation and the Post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework
T2 - Tensions and prospects
AU - Raymond, Christopher M.
AU - Cebrián-Piqueras, Miguel A.
AU - Andersson, Erik
AU - Andrade, Riley
AU - Schnell, Alberto Arroyo
AU - Battioni Romanelli, Barbara
AU - Filyushkina, Anna
AU - Goodson, Devin J.
AU - Horcea-Milcu, Andra
AU - Johnson, Dana N.
AU - Keller, Rose
AU - Kuiper, Jan J.
AU - Lo, Veronica
AU - López-Rodríguez, María D.
AU - March, Hug
AU - Metzger, Marc
AU - Oteros-Rozas, Elisa
AU - Salcido, Evan
AU - Sellberg, My
AU - Stewart, William
AU - Ruiz-Mallén, Isabel
AU - Plieninger, Tobias
AU - van Riper, Carena J.
AU - Verburg, Peter H.
AU - Wiedermann, Magdalena M.
N1 - Publisher Copyright: © 2022 The Author(s)
PY - 2022/3/18
Y1 - 2022/3/18
N2 - The draft Post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework commits to achievement of equity and justice outcomes and represents a “relational turn” in how we understand inclusive conservation. Although “inclusivity” is drawn on as a means to engage diverse stakeholders, widening the framing of inclusivity can create new tensions with regard to how to manage protected areas. We first offer a set of tensions that emerge in the light of the relational turn in biodiversity conservation. Drawing on global case examples applying multiple methods of inclusive conservation, we then demonstrate that, by actively engaging in the interdependent phases of recognizing hybridity, enabling conditions for reflexivity and partnership building, tensions can not only be acknowledged but softened and, in some cases, reframed when managing for biodiversity, equity, and justice goals. The results can improve stakeholder engagement in protected area management, ultimately supporting better implementation of global biodiversity targets.
AB - The draft Post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework commits to achievement of equity and justice outcomes and represents a “relational turn” in how we understand inclusive conservation. Although “inclusivity” is drawn on as a means to engage diverse stakeholders, widening the framing of inclusivity can create new tensions with regard to how to manage protected areas. We first offer a set of tensions that emerge in the light of the relational turn in biodiversity conservation. Drawing on global case examples applying multiple methods of inclusive conservation, we then demonstrate that, by actively engaging in the interdependent phases of recognizing hybridity, enabling conditions for reflexivity and partnership building, tensions can not only be acknowledged but softened and, in some cases, reframed when managing for biodiversity, equity, and justice goals. The results can improve stakeholder engagement in protected area management, ultimately supporting better implementation of global biodiversity targets.
KW - biodiversity conservation
KW - ecosystem services
KW - equity
KW - inclusive conservation
KW - plural valuation
KW - protected area management
KW - values
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85126608408&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - https://www.mendeley.com/catalogue/562b9e2a-fb2d-3dc8-a2b6-60c98407aeb1/
U2 - 10.1016/j.oneear.2022.02.008
DO - 10.1016/j.oneear.2022.02.008
M3 - Journal articles
AN - SCOPUS:85126608408
VL - 5
SP - 252
EP - 264
JO - One Earth
JF - One Earth
SN - 2590-3330
IS - 3
ER -