Transformative Conservation of Ecosystems

Abstract

Non-technical summary Many conservation initiatives call for ‘transformative change’ to counter biodiversity loss, climate change, and injustice. The term connotes fundamental, broad, and durable changes to human relationships with nature. However, if oversimplified or overcomplicated, or not focused enough on power and the political action necessary for change, associated initiatives can perpetuate or exacerbate existing crises. This article aims to help practitioners deliberately catalyze and steer transformation processes. It provides a theoretically and practically grounded definition of ‘transformative conservation’, along with six strategic, interlocking recommendations. These cover systems pedagogy, political mobilization, inner transformation, as well as planning, action, and continual adjustment. Technical summary Calls for ‘transformative change’ point to the fundamental reorganization necessary for global conservation initiatives to stem ecological catastrophe. However, the concept risks being oversimplified or overcomplicated, and focusing too little on power and the political action necessary for change. Accordingly, its intersection with contemporary biodiversity and climate change mitigation initiatives needs explicit deliberation and clarification. This article advances the praxis of ‘transformative conservation’ as both (1) a desired process that rethinks the relationships between individuals, society, and nature, and restructures systems accordingly, and (2) a desired outcome that conserves biodiversity while justly transitioning to net zero emission economies and securing the sustainable and regenerative use of natural resources. It first reviews criticisms of area-based conservation targets, natural climate solutions, and nature-based solutions that are framed as transformative, including issues of ecological integrity, livelihoods, gender, equity, growth, power, participation, knowledge, and governance. It then substantiates six strategic recommendations designed to help practitioners deliberately steer transformation processes. These include taking a systems approach; partnering with political movements to achieve equitable and just transformation; linking societal with personal (‘inner’) transformation; updating how we plan; facilitating shifts from diagnosis and planning to action; and improving our ability to adjust to transformation as it occurs. Social media summary Curious about stemming the global biodiversity and climate crises? Browse this article on transformative conservation!

Transdisciplinary transformative change: An analysis of some best practices and barriers and the role of critical social science in getting us there

“…Other scholars have noted that, once initiated, TTCIs often fail to achieve the paradigmatic outcomes they aspire to, and there is much debate in the literature on why this is the case (Bennett et al, 2019;Fazey et al, 2018;Klenk and Meehan, 2015;Visseren-Hamakers and Kok, 2022). One dominant argument points to a lack of coherent problem-framing, which inevitably leads to disorganized and incoherent application of solutions (Brandt et al, 2013;Fisher et al, 2022;Fougères et al, 2022). To further illuminate this issue, Scoones et al (2020) typecast approaches to transformation into three general nonmutually-exclusive categories and show how the ways in which the problem is framed govern which of these approaches is prioritized.…”

“…Thus, international expert panels now advocate for a "fundamental, system-wide reorganization across technological, economic and social factors, including paradigms, goals and values" (IPBES, 2019: XVIII). While such 'transformative change' offers new hope for the trajectory of human-driven planetary modi cations, it necessarily requires a level of complexity equal to that of the crises it aims to address (Fougères et al, 2022). For many biodiversity and climate change experts, transdisciplinary collaborations (TCs) on transformative change initiatives are the best, if not the only, way to ful l this need (Caniglia et al, 2021;Fisher et al, 2022; Visseren-Hamakers and .…”

Thinking Like a Mountain: Exploring the Potential of Relational Approaches for Transformative Nature Conservation

“…Considering that people are relational beings [26][27][28], that personal and societal transformations are inexorably linked [9], and that human well-being and biodiversity cannot be dissociated from each other [1-3,29], we recognize that relational approaches must be incorporated into any guiding framework if it is to be relevant, i.e., able to impact people's values and, ultimately, behaviours for nature conservation.…”

“…Such perspectives and directions are partially acknowledged by some elements of the global conservation community. In a recent discussion paper commissioned by the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) and its Commission on Ecosystem Management (CEM) in preparation for the 2021 World Conservation Congress, Fougères and colleagues highlight the urgent need for transformative conservation, an approach to conservation "[that] rethinks the relationships between nature, society, individuals, and risk in light of nature's contributions to people, equity and justice, and sustainable development goals [and that consequently] restructures systems to create durable change at large geographic, ecological, political-economic, and demographic scales" [9] (p. 2). Further technical reports and policy briefs calling for a greater recognition of and engagement with IPLCs in the context of global conservation goals have multiplied in 2021, especially in the lead-up to post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework meetings [39,[57][58][59][60].…”

“…Against this backdrop, recent years have witnessed a widening space for critical debates about how best to envision and develop nature conservation solutions in order to mutually reinforce ecological health and human wellbeing. Most recently, these debates have embraced a systemic understanding of transformation by incorporating the role of relations, cultural practices, and mental models as deep leverage points for change [9]. We do not directly address the proximate causes of environmental degradation, nor even those of human population growth, important as they are, but instead focus on the ultimate drivers of change, in particular, human agency and the major decisions we make, i.e., how we choose to live-that is, the why or the basis upon which we make our most important decisions.…”