Institutions and inequality interplay shapes the impact of economic growth on biodiversity loss

Mirza, M. Usman; Richter, Andries; Nes, Egbert H. van; Scheffer, Marten

doi:10.5751/es-12078-250439

Cited by 17 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 60 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The findings from Mirza et al (2020) might help in interpreting this finding as they showed that institution effectiveness (measured through the World Bank's Governance Indicators) can have a mediating role in the relationship between inequality, economic growth, and biodiversity, particularly when comparing Global North and Global South countries. Bradshaw et al (2019) also considered the role of institutions and governance and found no relationship.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 96%

“…Most studies provided causal mechanisms for the reported relationships, yet these were mostly suggestions rather than explicit analyses. Mirza et al (2020) used Structural Equation Modelling, which incorporates causal assumptions and provides evidence to suggest that institution effectiveness, or governance, plays an important role as a mediating or causal factor in the relationship between inequality and biodiversity. Nevertheless, this does not prove causality de facto and we support their conclusion that there is a need for more research attention to causality.…”

Section: Causal Mechanismsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The complex relationships between economic inequality and biodiversity: A scoping review

Kubiszewski

Ward

Pickett

et al. 2023

The Anthropocene Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Biodiversity change and increasing within-country economic inequalities represent two of the greatest global challenges of the Anthropocene. The most marginalized in society are often the most vulnerable to biodiversity change but there is no consensus on the relationships between biodiversity change and rising economic inequalities. To address this gap, we conducted a systematic scoping review of the literature and found 27 studies that explicitly examined the relationships between economic inequality and biodiversity. These were predominantly quantitative but also included qualitative, scenario, and review papers. The majority of studies (21/27) found evidence to suggest that more unequal regions had lower levels of biodiversity, and also that wealthier areas had higher levels of biodiversity. However, few studies investigated the causal mechanisms underlying the reported relationships, and there was little consistency in the metrics used to measure either inequality or biodiversity. Future research needs to focus on testing, or in-depth explorations, of causal mechanisms, with both quantitative and qualitative approaches needed. It is crucial that we understand how economic inequality and biodiversity interact if we are to meet the aims of reducing economic inequality and preventing further biodiversity loss.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 96%

Section: Causal Mechanismsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The complex relationships between economic inequality and biodiversity: A scoping review

Kubiszewski

Ward

Pickett

et al. 2023

The Anthropocene Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…4 Other variables previously considered in models for PA effectiveness and/or environmental performance overall include geophysical and other characteristic variables at the PA level (elevation, slope, distance to nearest city, PA size, date of establishment, IUCN management category etc. ), as well as road density, the Gini index of income inequality and the human development index at the country level (Barnes et al, 2016;Geldmann et al, 2018Geldmann et al, , 2019Bradshaw and Di Minin, 2019;Usman Mirza et al, 2020;Wolf et al, 2021). As our analysis is conducted at the country-level, the PA level characteristics were not considered.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Previous cross-country analyses of this type have either not considered governance (Beresford et al, 2013;Barnes et al, 2016;Geldmann et al, 2018;Wade et al, 2020;Wolf et al, 2021), or considered less comprehensive metrics for country-level governance such as corruption indices as one contextual factor for PA effectiveness amongst many others (Geldmann et al, 2019). Other studies analyzed the role of country-level governance and different aspects thereof in influencing biodiversity loss or pressures and drivers thereof more generally (Ceddia et al, 2013(Ceddia et al, , 2014Amano et al, 2018;Bradshaw and Di Minin, 2019;Usman Mirza et al, 2020). Some of these studies take a global perspective (Barnes et al, 2016;Amano et al, 2018;Geldmann et al, 2018Geldmann et al, , 2019Usman Mirza et al, 2020;Wade et al, 2020;Wolf et al, 2021), while others focus on single continents (Beresford et al, 2013;Ceddia et al, 2013Ceddia et al, , 2014Bradshaw and Di Minin, 2019).…”

Section: Governance In Conservationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Other studies analyzed the role of country-level governance and different aspects thereof in influencing biodiversity loss or pressures and drivers thereof more generally (Ceddia et al, 2013(Ceddia et al, , 2014Amano et al, 2018;Bradshaw and Di Minin, 2019;Usman Mirza et al, 2020). Some of these studies take a global perspective (Barnes et al, 2016;Amano et al, 2018;Geldmann et al, 2018Geldmann et al, , 2019Usman Mirza et al, 2020;Wade et al, 2020;Wolf et al, 2021), while others focus on single continents (Beresford et al, 2013;Ceddia et al, 2013Ceddia et al, , 2014Bradshaw and Di Minin, 2019). In this study, we link a complete set of country-level governance indicators with PA conservation outcomes focusing specifically on sub-Saharan African countries.…”

Section: Governance In Conservationmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Relating Country-Level Governance and Tree Cover Loss in Sub-Saharan African Protected Areas: Identifying Knowledge Gaps and a More Nuanced Perspective

Dehmel

Franks

Schreckenberg

et al. 2022

Front. For. Glob. Change

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

‘Good governance’ is highlighted by many as being essential for improving protected area (PA) management and conservation outcomes, with a growing body of evidence based on site-level governance data. Yet how exactly governance at other levels supports or hinders successful PA implementation, and how this should be considered in conservation planning and practice, remains insufficiently understood. We conducted an exploratory analysis of the relationship between the quality of country-level governance and trends in tree cover loss within sub-Saharan African PAs. For the period 2008–2017, we correlated annual governance scores from the Ibrahim Index of African Governance (IIAG) with the annual rate of tree cover loss in the total terrestrial area of PAs in 33 forested sub-Saharan African countries. Overall governance was not correlated with tree cover loss in a simple model, but there was evidence that overall governance was positively correlated with tree cover loss in PAs when the interaction with environmental governance was included. The interaction indicated that the rate of tree cover loss decreased for a given level of overall governance as environmental governance increased. Human development was negatively correlated with forest loss. Thus, the relationship between country-level ‘good governance’ and conservation success is more complex than a direct and positive cause and effect. Yet, uncertainty remains about the many possible and likely confounding pathways: whilst the quality of overall governance may be mirrored at the site-level, it may also contribute to increased anthropogenic pressures on natural resources. Through this research we found significant limitations in data quality and availability both to evaluate the effectiveness of protection beyond tree cover, as well as less conventional governance aspects, such as environmental policy and regulation or site-level governance. With an expected increase in area-based protection and conservation financing in the coming decades, such data will be vital to monitor the effectiveness of our efforts and ensure financial accountability.

show abstract

Sustainability and Green Finance and its Relevance to Debt for Nature Swap Financing

Ahmad,

Rahman,

Azam

2024

Palgrave Studies in Impact Finance

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Institutions and inequality interplay shapes the impact of economic growth on biodiversity loss

Cited by 17 publications

References 60 publications

The complex relationships between economic inequality and biodiversity: A scoping review

The complex relationships between economic inequality and biodiversity: A scoping review

Relating Country-Level Governance and Tree Cover Loss in Sub-Saharan African Protected Areas: Identifying Knowledge Gaps and a More Nuanced Perspective

Sustainability and Green Finance and its Relevance to Debt for Nature Swap Financing

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About