Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Reviewing the science on 50 years of conservation: Knowledge production biases and lessons for practice.
Dawson, Neil M; Coolsaet, Brendan; Bhardwaj, Aditi; Brown, David; Lliso, Bosco; Loos, Jacqueline; Mannocci, Laura; Martin, Adrian; Oliva, Malena; Pascual, Unai; Sherpa, Pasang; Worsdell, Thomas.
Afiliação
  • Dawson NM; Global Environmental Justice Research Group, School of Global Development, University of East Anglia, Norwich Research Park, Norwich, NR4 7TJ, UK. Neil.Dawson@uea.ac.uk.
  • Coolsaet B; Centre for the Synthesis and Analysis of Biodiversity (CESAB), French Foundation for Research on Biodiversity (FRB), 34000, Montpellier, France. Neil.Dawson@uea.ac.uk.
  • Bhardwaj A; Fund for Scientific Research (FNRS), 1000, Brussels, Belgium.
  • Brown D; Institute for the Analysis of Change in Contemporary and Historical Societies, UCLouvain, 1348, Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium.
  • Lliso B; Tata Institute of Social Sciences, Mumbai, India.
  • Loos J; Global Environmental Justice Research Group, School of Global Development, University of East Anglia, Norwich Research Park, Norwich, NR4 7TJ, UK.
  • Mannocci L; Centre for Landscape Regeneration, University of Cambridge Conservation Research Institute, Cambridge, CB2 3QZ, UK.
  • Martin A; World Benchmarking Alliance, 1012 TM, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
  • Oliva M; Basque Centre for Climate Change, 48940, Leioa, Spain.
  • Pascual U; Department of Botany and Biodiversity Research, University of Vienna, 1030, Vienna, Austria.
  • Sherpa P; Institute of Ecology and Social-Ecological Systems Institute, Leuphana University, 21335, Lüneburg, Germany.
  • Worsdell T; Centre for the Synthesis and Analysis of Biodiversity (CESAB), French Foundation for Research on Biodiversity (FRB), 34000, Montpellier, France.
Ambio ; 2024 Jul 18.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-39023682
ABSTRACT
Drawing on 662 studies from 102 countries, we present a systematic review of published empirical studies about site-level biodiversity conservation initiated between 1970 and 2019. Within this sample, we find that knowledge production about the Global South is largely produced by researchers in the Global North, implying a neocolonial power dynamic. We also find evidence of bias in reported ecological outcomes linked to lack of independence in scientific studies, serving to uphold narratives about who should lead conservation. We explore relationships in the sample studies between conservation initiative types, the extent of Indigenous Peoples' and local communities' influence in governance, and reported social and ecological outcomes. Findings reveal positive ecological and social outcomes are strongly associated with higher levels of influence of Indigenous Peoples and local communities and their institutions, implying equity in conservation practice should be advanced not only for moral reasons, but because it can enhance conservation effectiveness.
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Idioma: En Revista: Ambio Ano de publicação: 2024 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Idioma: En Revista: Ambio Ano de publicação: 2024 Tipo de documento: Article