TY - JOUR
T1 - Inclusive conservation and the Post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework: Tensions and prospects
AU - Raymond, Christopher M.
AU - Raymond, Christopher M.
AU - Cebrian-Piqueras, Miguel A.
AU - Andersson, Erik
AU - Andrade, Riley
AU - Schnell, Alberto Arroyo
AU - Romanelli, Barbara Battioni
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 - Lopez-Rodriguez, Maria D.
AU - March, Hug
AU - Metzger, Marc
AU - Oteros-Rozas, Elisa
AU - Salcido, Evan
AU - Sellberg, My
AU - Stewart, William
AU - Ruiz-Mallen, Isabel
AU - Plieninger, Tobias
AU - van Riper, Carena J.
AU - Verburg, Peter H.
AU - Wiedermann, Magdalena M.
PY - 2022
Y1 - 2022
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.
UR - https://res.slu.se/id/publ/118369
U2 - 10.1016/j.oneear.2022.02.008
DO - 10.1016/j.oneear.2022.02.008
M3 - Review article
SN - 2590-3330
VL - 5
SP - 252
EP - 264
JO - One Earth
JF - One Earth
IS - 3
ER -