Insights from equitable governance assessments in conservation areas around the world
Global policy commitments to ensure that protected and conserved areas (PCAs) are equitably governed have increased interest in empirically assessing and analyzing social equity. Although numerous assessments have been conducted in individual PCAs, there is limited empirical insight into equity as a multidimensional concept beyond the site level. We investigated the distributional, procedural, and recognitional equity challenges associated with the governance of PCAs and determined whether the identified challenges differed according to governance type and actor group. We conducted a meta-level analysis of equitable governance assessments conducted at 37 PCAs in 19 countries that form part of the new SAGE (Site-level Assessment of Governance and Equity) database. SAGE is a participatory tool for site-level actors to systematically discuss and assess equity dynamics at their PCAs. We found a large variation in assessment results across the sites. Mitigating the negative impacts of conservation on local communities was most often identified as the biggest challenge. In general, equity assessments tended to be slightly more positive for PCAs governed by and with Indigenous Peoples and local communities than those governed purely by government agencies. Evaluations of different actors often revealed substantial differences in opinion on specific governance issues. In particular, evaluations of PCA decision-makers tended to be more positive than those of PCA users. As an early-stage exploration of the growing SAGE database, our findings provide proof of concept that tools for assessing and improving PCA governance gain value from taking multidimensional approaches and need to consider different actors' views. Although the growing SAGE database holds potential for further insights on how equity is perceived across governance types, ecosystems, and geographical regions, the primary objective of SAGE needs to remain understanding and advancing equity at the site level.
Authors
- Naira Dehmel (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9373-549X)
- Juliana Echeverri (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1072-8436)
- Constance M. Schéré (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2084-0333)
- Rodgers Lubilo
- Reuben Lendira
- Phil Franks
- María Alejandra Cely-Gómez (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1352-5792)
- Cosmas Kombat Lambini (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3642-836X)
- Tomás Morales (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6113-9677)
- Samwel Shaba
- Nguyễn Viết Dũng (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2649-2520)
- Natalie J. Robinson (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1994-1866)
- Kate Schreckenberg (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3666-3792)
- Francesca Booker (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0988-5218)
- Raul Pinto (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1981-6793)
- Ioli Christopoulou
- Medard Twinamatsiko (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8693-3925)
- Kalyan Hou
- Nikoleta Jones (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2899-2075)
- Donald Chilengwe Chikumbi
- Retche P. Colegado (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4543-2689)
- Emelda Miyanda Hachoofwe (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7756-2306)
- Corinne Samantha Julie
- Bertille Mayen
- Joyce Nyaruai Mbataru
- Vincent Oduka Oluoch
- Jean‐Aimé Razafindra‐Paul
- Ishmael Chaukura
- Phanith Chou (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2910-2222)
Institutions
- Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey (US)
- University of Palangka Raya (ID)
- Bukidnon State University (PH)
- Mbarara University of Science and Technology (UG)
- Kenya Wildlife Service (KE)
- King's College London (GB)
- International Institute for Environment and Development (GB)
- Copperbelt University (ZM)
- University of Warwick (GB)
- University of Seychelles (SC)
- Royal University of Phnom Penh (KH)
Publication Details
- Journal
- Conservation Biology
- Published
- 2025-07-05
- DOI
- https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.70101
- Citations
- 1
- Primary Topic
- Conservation, Biodiversity, and Resource Management
- Type
- article
- Field-Weighted Citation Impact
- 1.11
Funders
- UK Research and Innovation
- Economic and Social Research Council