Delocalizing Communities: Changing Forms of Community Engagement in Natural Resources Governance

Perceived barriers to and drivers of community participation in protected‐area governance

“…Following much of the conservation and development literature (e.g., Ojha et al. ; Wright et al. ), we did not consider a community a “static, isolated group of people” (Berkes : 623); rather, we considered a community heterogeneous and an entity that changes over time, is affected by global trends, and is geographically bounded.…”

“…Participatory conservation governance is now globally widespread (Ojha et al. ), and nonparticipatory governance systems are increasingly seen as “illegitimate, ineffective and undemocratic” (Bulkeley & Mol : 144). Yet few studies provide evidence to evaluate participation.…”

The role of social license in conservation

“…Most communities are heterogeneous (Ojha et al. ), particularly in relation to environmental issues (Kendal et al. ; Ford & Williams ).…”

“…Societies and communities change over time (Ojha et al. ), which means a social license could need to be continually renegotiated as the community or its opinions change (Dare et al. ).…”

“…These models are not necessarily founded in the same kinds of legitimacy as traditional government initiatives because government, communities, and NGOs work in complex networks to achieve management outcomes (Ojha et al. ). Community members may be active participants in conservation actions (e.g., Reid et al.…”