IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/nat/natsus/v2y2019i4d10.1038_s41893-019-0267-5.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The global conservation movement is diverse but not divided

Author

Listed:
  • Chris Sandbrook

    (University of Cambridge, Department of Geography
    UN Environment World Conservation Monitoring Centre)

  • Janet A. Fisher

    (University of Edinburgh)

  • George Holmes

    (University of Leeds)

  • Rogelio Luque-Lora

    (University of Cambridge, Department of Geography)

  • Aidan Keane

    (University of Edinburgh)

Abstract

Biodiversity is being lost at an unprecedented rate, making the conservation movement of critical importance for life on Earth. However, recent debates over the future of conservation have been polarized, acrimonious and dominated by an unrepresentative demographic group. The views of the wider global conservation community on fundamental questions regarding what, why and how to conserve are unknown. Here we characterize the views of 9,264 conservationists from 149 countries, identifying specific areas of consensus and disagreement, and three independent dimensions of conservation thinking. The first two dimensions (people-centred conservation and science-led ecocentrism) have widespread support, whereas conservation through capitalism is more contentious. While conservationists’ views on these three dimensions do not fall into distinct clusters, there are clear relationships between dimension scores and respondents’ gender, age, educational background, career stage and continent of nationality. Future debates and policy processes should focus on the most contentious issues, and do more to include the perspectives of under-represented groups in conservation who may not share the views of those in more powerful positions.

Suggested Citation

  • Chris Sandbrook & Janet A. Fisher & George Holmes & Rogelio Luque-Lora & Aidan Keane, 2019. "The global conservation movement is diverse but not divided," Nature Sustainability, Nature, vol. 2(4), pages 316-323, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:nat:natsus:v:2:y:2019:i:4:d:10.1038_s41893-019-0267-5
    DOI: 10.1038/s41893-019-0267-5
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41893-019-0267-5
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1038/s41893-019-0267-5?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. van de Water, Antoinette & Henley, Michelle & Bates, Lucy & Slotow, Rob, 2022. "The value of elephants: A pluralist approach," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 58(C).
    2. Schaal, Tamara & Jacobs, Annie & Leventon, Julia & Scheele, Ben C. & Lindenmayer, David & Hanspach, Jan, 2022. "‘You can’t be green if you’re in the red’: Local discourses on the production-biodiversity intersection in a mixed farming area in south-eastern Australia," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 121(C).
    3. Agnieszka E. Latawiec & Rodrigo Penna-Firme & Ingrid A.B. Pena & Bernardo B.N. Strassburg & Adam Drosik & Maciej Kubon & Hubert Latala & Katarzyna Grotkiewicz & Krzysztof Kubon & Pedro Teixeira & Luca, 2020. "Perception-Based Study on the Value of Nature to People and Land Sparing for Nature in Brazil and Poland," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(21), pages 1-11, October.
    4. Phelps, Jacob & Zabala, Aiora & Daeli, Willy & Carmenta, Rachel, 2021. "Experts and resource users split over solutions to peatland fires," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 146(C).
    5. Dempsey, Benedict, 2021. "Understanding conflicting views in conservation: An analysis of England," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 104(C).
    6. Stefan Partelow & Klara Johanna Winkler & Gregory M Thaler, 2020. "Environmental non-governmental organizations and global environmental discourse," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(5), pages 1-19, May.
    7. Jan Bebbington & Tom Cuckston & C. Feger, 2021. "Biodiversity," Post-Print hal-03746729, HAL.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:nat:natsus:v:2:y:2019:i:4:d:10.1038_s41893-019-0267-5. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.nature.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.