What are the effects of nature conservation on human well-being? A systematic map of empirical evidence from developing countries

Abstract

Background: Global policy initiatives and international conservation organizations have sought to emphasize and strengthen the link between the conservation of natural ecosystems and human development. While many indices have been developed to measure various social outcomes to conservation interventions, the quantity and strength of evidence to support the effects, both positive and negative, of conservation on different dimensions of human wellbeing, remain unclear, dispersed and inconsistent. Methods:We searched 11 academic citation databases, two search engines and 30 organisational websites for relevant articles using search terms tested with a library of 20 relevant articles. Key informants were contacted with requests for articles and possible sources of evidence. Articles were screened for relevance against predefined inclusion criteria at title, abstract and full text levels according to a published protocol. Included articles were coded using a questionnaire. A critical appraisal of eight systematic reviews was conducted to assess the reliability of methods and confidence in study findings. A visual matrix of the occurrence and extent of existing evidence was also produced.Results: A total of 1043 articles were included in the systematic map database. Included articles measured effects across eight nature conservation-related intervention and ten human well-being related outcome categories. Linkages between interventions and outcomes with high occurrence of evidence include resource management interventions, such as fisheries and forestry, and economic and material outcomes. Over 25 % of included articles examined linkages between protected areas and aspects of economic well-being. Fewer than 2 % of articles evaluated human health outcomes. Robust study designs were limited with less than 9 % of articles using quantitative approaches to evaluate causal effects of interventions. Over 700 articles occurred in forest biomes with less than 50 articles in deserts or mangroves, combined. Conclusions:The evidence base is growing on conservation-human well-being linkages, but biases in the extent and robustness of articles on key linkages persist. Priorities for systematic review, include linkages between marine resource management and economic/material well-being outcomes; and protected areas and governance outcomes. Greater and more robust evidence is needed for many established interventions to better understand synergies and trade-offs between interventions, in particular those that are emerging or contested.

Examining the evidence base for forest conservation interventions

“…The EGM highlights that while impact evaluation designs are capable of attributing causal impact, quasi-experimental designs (in particular IV, matching and DID designs) are the most commonly adopted impact evaluation techniques in the context of forest conservation (Ferraro, 2009;Greenstone & Gayer 2009;Pattanayak 2009;Joppa & Pfaff 2010;Miteva, Pattanayak & Ferraro 2012). It is worth noting, however, that well-designed impact evaluations represent a small fraction of the overall conservation evidence base (McKinnon et al 2016). …”

“…McKinnon et al 2016) illustrates both the challenges and opportunities facing evidence-based conservation.…”

A Crystal Ball for Forests?: Analyzing the Social-Ecological Impacts of Forest Conservation and Management over the Long Term

“…Th ose studies that have examined social outcomes have typically focused on understanding socioeconomic or poverty-related eff ects of conservation programs (McKinnon et al 2016). Given that the particular impacts are more easily amenable to quantifi cation than some other aspects of human well-being, it is not surprising that IE studies have emphasized them.…”

Riverine Ecosystem Management

“…The sustainable development goals (SDGs) came into effect in January 2016, setting 17 goals and 169 targets to achieve a sustainable global development that meets the needs of the present generations, without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs (UN 2015). Science is perceived to play an important role for the achievement of the SDGs, in terms of reflecting the interconnection of goals and targets, formulating evidence-based targets and indicators, assessing progress, testing solutions, and identifying emerging risks and opportunities (ICSU -ISSC 2015;Costanza et al 2016;McKinnon et al 2016;Lu et al 2015). These global trends are paving the way to a new era for HEIs, suggesting fundamental changes of their structures, functions, societal roles, and collaborative activities with a wide array of stakeholders.…”