Loading...
Local costs of conservation exceed those borne by the global majority
Green, Jonathan M.H. Fisher, Brendan Green, Rhys E. Makero, Joseph Platts, Philip J. Robert, Neema Schaafsma, Marije Turner, R. Kerry Balmford, Andrew
Green, Jonathan M.H.
Fisher, Brendan
Green, Rhys E.
Makero, Joseph
Platts, Philip J.
Robert, Neema
Schaafsma, Marije
Turner, R. Kerry
Balmford, Andrew
Citations
Altmetric:
License
© 2018 The Authors
DOI
10.1016/j.gecco.2018.e00385
Abstract
Cost data are crucial in conservation planning to identify more efficient and equitable land use options. However, many studies focus on just one cost type and neglect others, particularly those borne locally. We develop, for a high priority conservation area, spatial models of two local costs that arise from protected areas: foregone agricultural opportunities and increased wildlife damage. We then map these across the study area and compare them to the direct costs of reserve management, finding that local costs exceed management costs. Whilst benefits of conservation accrue to the global community, significant costs are borne by those living closest. Where livelihoods depend upon opportunities forgone or diminished by conservation intervention, outcomes are limited. Activities can be displaced (leakage); rules can be broken (intervention does not work); or the intervention forces a shift in livelihood profiles (potentially to the detriment of local peoples’ welfare). These raise concerns for both conservation and development outcomes and timely consideration of local costs is vital in conservation planning tools and processes.
Description
Date
2018-04-01
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Files
Loading...
fisher2018c.pdf
Adobe PDF, 777.26 KB
Research Projects
Organizational Units
Journal Issue
Citation
Green JM, Fisher B, Green RE, Makero J, Platts PJ, Robert N, Schaafsma M, Turner RK, Balmford A. Local costs of conservation exceed those borne by the global majority. Global Ecology and Conservation. 2018 Apr 1;14:e00385.