Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/10609/146747
Title: Inclusive conservation and the post-2020 global biodiversity framework: tensions and prospects
Author: M. Raymond, Christopher
Cebrián-Piqueras, Miguel Ángel  
Andersson, Erik  
Andrade, Riley  
Arroyo Schnell, Alberto
Battioni Romanelli, Barbara
Filyushkina, Anna  
Goodson, Devin  
Lo, Veronica  
Kuiper, Jan J.  
Keller, Rose
Johnson, Dana N.
Horcea-Milcu, Andra-Ioana  
Sellberg, My M.  
Salcido, Evan
Oteros-Rozas, Elisa  
Metzger, Marc  
March, Hug  
López-Rodríguez, María D.  
Verburg, Peter  
Wiedermann, Magdalena M.  
Others: University of Helsinki
University of Göttingen
Stockholm University
University of Florida
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam
Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences
Norwegian Institute for Nature Research
University of British Columbia
Babeş-Bolyai University
Universitat Oberta de Catalunya (UOC)
University of Edinburgh
Lund University
Keywords: inclusive conservation
biodiversity conservation
equity
plural valuation
values
ecosystem services
protected area management
Issue Date: 18-Mar-2022
Publisher: One Earth
Citation: Raymond, C., Cebrián-Piqueras, M.A., Andersson, E., Andrade, R., Arroyo Schnell, A., Battioni Romanelli, B., Filyushkina, A., Goodson, D.J., Horcea Milcu, A., Johnson, D., Keller, R., Kuiper, J.J., Lo, V.B., López-Rodríguez, M.D., March, H., Metzger, M.J., Oteros Rozas, E., Salcido, E., Sellberg, M., Stewart, W., Ruiz Mallen, I., Plieninger, T., van Riper, C.J., Verburg, P.H. & Wiedermann, M.M. (2022). Inclusive conservation and the Post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework: Tensions and prospects. One Earth, 5(3), 252-264. doi: 10.1016/j.oneear.2022.02.008
Published in: 5;3
Project identifier: info:eu-repo/grantAgreement/2018-02429
Also see: https://www.doi.org/10.1016/j.oneear.2022.02.008
Abstract: 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.
Language: English
URI: http://hdl.handle.net/10609/146747
ISSN: 2590-3330MIAR
Appears in Collections:Articles
Articles cientÍfics

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
PIIS2590332222000938.pdfInclusive conservation and the Post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework: Tensions and prospects4,31 MBAdobe PDFThumbnail
View/Open
Share:
Export:
View statistics

Items in repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.