30×30 Is Not Enough: Indigenous Governance Literature Reveals Conditions for Effective and Equitable Conservation

Achieving 30×30 requires more than expanding conserved areas; it also depends on how conservation is governed. We conducted a global scoping review of 110 empirical studies (2002–2024) involving Indigenous Peoples, examining governance arrangements, governance principles, ecological, social, and cultural outcomes, and thematic overlap with Kunming–Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF) Targets 1, 3, 14, 21, and 22. Shared governance was the most frequently documented arrangement (64.5%), followed by governance by Indigenous Peoples and local communities (34.5%). Positive outcomes predominated, yet 27.0% of the governance arrangements analyzed were associated with both positive ecological and negative social and/or cultural outcomes. Procedural principles were less consistently documented, particularly fairness (41.8%) and transparency (44.5%); when documented, both co-occurred with high proportions of positive outcomes and comparatively low negative outcomes. Co-occurrence was highest with Targets 22 (94.5%), 21 (90.9%), followed by 3 (88.2%) and 1 (72%), whereas Target 14 was least represented (51.8%). Effective and equitable 30×30 implementation therefore requires attention to decision-making authority, governance principles, and ecological, social, and cultural outcomes, supported by the complementary roles of Targets 1, 14, 21, and 22.