TY - JOUR

T1 - Justice and conservation

T2 - the need to incorporate recognition

AU - Martin, Adrian

AU - Coolsaet, Brendan

AU - Corbera, Esteve

AU - Dawson, Neil

AU - Fraser, James Angus

AU - Lehmann, Ina

AU - Rodriguez, Iokiñe

N1 - This is the author’s version of a work that was accepted for publication in Biological Conservation. Changes resulting from the publishing process, such as peer review, editing, corrections, structural formatting, and other quality control mechanisms may not be reflected in this document. Changes may have been made to this work since it was submitted for publication. A definitive version was subsequently published in Biological Conservation, 197, 2016 DOI: 10.1016/j.biocon.2016.03.021

PY - 2016/5

Y1 - 2016/5

N2 - In light of the Aichi target to manage protected areas equitably by 2020, we ask how the conservation sector should be incorporating concerns for social justice. We focus in particular on ‘recognition’, because it is the least well understood aspect of environmental justice, and yet highly relevant to conservation because of its concern with respect for local knowledge and cultures. In order to explore the meaning of recognition in the conservation context, we take four main steps. First, we identify four components of recognition to serve as our analytical framework: subjects of justice, the harms that constitute injustice, the mechanisms that produce injustices,and the responses to alleviate these. Secondly, we apply this framework to explore four traditions of thinking about recognition: Hegelian intersubjectivity, critical theory, southern decolonial theory, and the capabilities approach. Thirdly, we provide three case studies of conservation conflicts highlighting how different theoretical perspectives are illustrated in the claims and practices of real world conservation struggles. Fourthly, we finish the paper by drawing out some key differences between traditions of thinking, but also important areas of convergence.The convergences provide a basis for concluding that conservation should look beyond a distributive model of justice to incorporate concerns for social recognition, including careful attention to ways to pursue equality of status for local conservation stakeholders. This will require reflection on working practices and looking at forms of intercultural engagement that, for example, respect alternative ways of relating to nature and biodiversity.

AB - In light of the Aichi target to manage protected areas equitably by 2020, we ask how the conservation sector should be incorporating concerns for social justice. We focus in particular on ‘recognition’, because it is the least well understood aspect of environmental justice, and yet highly relevant to conservation because of its concern with respect for local knowledge and cultures. In order to explore the meaning of recognition in the conservation context, we take four main steps. First, we identify four components of recognition to serve as our analytical framework: subjects of justice, the harms that constitute injustice, the mechanisms that produce injustices,and the responses to alleviate these. Secondly, we apply this framework to explore four traditions of thinking about recognition: Hegelian intersubjectivity, critical theory, southern decolonial theory, and the capabilities approach. Thirdly, we provide three case studies of conservation conflicts highlighting how different theoretical perspectives are illustrated in the claims and practices of real world conservation struggles. Fourthly, we finish the paper by drawing out some key differences between traditions of thinking, but also important areas of convergence.The convergences provide a basis for concluding that conservation should look beyond a distributive model of justice to incorporate concerns for social recognition, including careful attention to ways to pursue equality of status for local conservation stakeholders. This will require reflection on working practices and looking at forms of intercultural engagement that, for example, respect alternative ways of relating to nature and biodiversity.

KW - Environmental Justice

KW - Equity

KW - Protected Areas

KW - Aichi targets

KW - Biodiversity conservation

U2 - 10.1016/j.biocon.2016.03.021

DO - 10.1016/j.biocon.2016.03.021

M3 - Journal article

VL - 197

SP - 254

EP - 261

JO - Biological Conservation

JF - Biological Conservation

SN - 0006-3207

ER -