Justice in Conservation

The science and practice of conservation has dynamically evolved over the past centuries, shaped by economic, social, and political contexts to yield different approaches or strategies. Different approaches bring distinct assumptions or value orientations, influencing what types of solutions are seen as legitimate. Making these assumptions explicit helps avoid blind spots and unintended harm. This thesis focuses on one such blind spot: the relationship between global conservation planning and justice outcomes for local communities. Chapter 2 examines potential equity concerns for mainstream conservation planning frameworks. Global prioritizations and exploratory scenarios often rely on global data that can obscure local socio-ecological needs. This generates risks, as there are many biodiverse areas where people are more directly dependent on local landscapes. In this study we develop an equity metric to evaluate whether these land-dependent communities would be disproportionately impacted by the expansion of conservation and restoration areas under several common prioritizations and scenarios. While conservation proposals are more equitable than leading socioeconomic scenario outcomes, they also effect more land-dependent communities in total, and so if practiced in an exclusionary manner they would still be unjust. Chapter 3 builds on this by presenting an exploratory scenario which seeks to protect land-dependent communities from land grabbing, while also meeting our global food production demands and biodiversity objectives. Using the spatially explicit land-system model CLUMondo we were able to map the likely distribution of land systems in the year 2050, illuminating key land-use strategies. Rather than concentrating protection in biodiverse areas, this study adopts a landscape ecology perspective, promoting biodiversity across all land uses while restoring degraded regions. The results suggest that targeted agricultural intensification can free cropland for partial reforestation, enhancing biodiversity without reducing food production. Crucially, protecting land-dependent communities from land-grabbing did not pose any trade-offs with regional food production or conservation goals, emphasizing the need for diverse, context-specific solutions. Chapter 4 shifts from planning to questions of implementation. The Convention on Biological Diversity recently set a goal to protect 30% of the Earth’s surface by 2030, raising concern that the rapid timeframe and lack of qualitative indicators will lead to unjust and ineffective implementation. In the absence of clear proposals, it might be assumed that NGOs – who are major actors in terms of bridging scales and sharing resources – will provide the ethical guardrails. In this study we assess the ability of NGOs to influence conservation practices by evaluating their ability to help conservation conflicts achieve a just resolution, and if so under what conditions. The lack of a clear pattern indicates that NGO support by itself does not constitute a reliable pathway for achieving our global normative objectives in domestic spaces, indicating the need to more clearly define mechanisms which can hold governments accountable. Chapter 5 offers a broader transformation pathway to a future in which ecological resilience, human development, and freedom from suffering are natural systemic outcomes. Here I use the X-curve framework to orient major conservation strategies within an explicit theory of change, identifying potential complementarity but also the need for more systemic changes. This study integrates diverse bodies of scholarship to conceptualize how we may balance local autonomy with global solidarity for a more just and biodiverse future. Chapter 6 synthesizes the research, connecting various approaches to highlight shared themes. This thesis employs multiple methods—spatial analysis, scenario modeling, qualitative comparative analysis, and transformation research—to address both planning and implementation challenges. The research underscores the importance of making justice an explicit goal in conservation planning, as well as the complexities of translating agendas and the need for a better understanding of the politics of land.