Empirical test of the participation paradox in conservation and development

IF 2.8 2区 环境科学与生态学 Q1 BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION Conservation Science and Practice Pub Date : 2025-01-02 DOI:10.1111/csp2.13276
Nabin Baral, Joel T. Heinen, Marc J. Stern
{"title":"Empirical test of the participation paradox in conservation and development","authors":"Nabin Baral,&nbsp;Joel T. Heinen,&nbsp;Marc J. Stern","doi":"10.1111/csp2.13276","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Local participation has been greatly promoted to accomplish conservation and development goals globally, but the participation paradox, in which those empowered to participate fail to do so, has rarely been thoroughly scrutinized. Here we test the participation paradox with empirical data of 234 local decision-makers' participation in a decision-making forum, Conservation Area Management Committees, in the Annapurna Conservation Area, Nepal. Using an explanatory sequential mixed methods design, both quantitative and qualitative data were collected in 2013 and 2016, analyzed, interpreted, and integrated. Women, minorities, younger members, and non-elected members participated significantly less in decision-making than men, older members, and elected members and those with leadership roles and longer tenures on the committees. Qualitative analyses revealed five major themes for motivation to participate: influence in the community; personal incentives; conservation; improving access to natural resources; and feelings of accomplishment. Key constraints to participation included hardships and competing tasks; lack of incentives; perceptions of limited agency; disinterest; and emotional burdens. Participation motivations and constraints varied by gender, social group, and membership types. We discuss the theoretical and practical implications of these results for participatory approaches to conservation and sustainable development in general and the governance of protected areas in particular.</p>","PeriodicalId":51337,"journal":{"name":"Conservation Science and Practice","volume":"7 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/csp2.13276","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Conservation Science and Practice","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/csp2.13276","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Local participation has been greatly promoted to accomplish conservation and development goals globally, but the participation paradox, in which those empowered to participate fail to do so, has rarely been thoroughly scrutinized. Here we test the participation paradox with empirical data of 234 local decision-makers' participation in a decision-making forum, Conservation Area Management Committees, in the Annapurna Conservation Area, Nepal. Using an explanatory sequential mixed methods design, both quantitative and qualitative data were collected in 2013 and 2016, analyzed, interpreted, and integrated. Women, minorities, younger members, and non-elected members participated significantly less in decision-making than men, older members, and elected members and those with leadership roles and longer tenures on the committees. Qualitative analyses revealed five major themes for motivation to participate: influence in the community; personal incentives; conservation; improving access to natural resources; and feelings of accomplishment. Key constraints to participation included hardships and competing tasks; lack of incentives; perceptions of limited agency; disinterest; and emotional burdens. Participation motivations and constraints varied by gender, social group, and membership types. We discuss the theoretical and practical implications of these results for participatory approaches to conservation and sustainable development in general and the governance of protected areas in particular.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Conservation Science and Practice
Conservation Science and Practice BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION-
CiteScore
5.50
自引率
6.50%
发文量
240
审稿时长
10 weeks
期刊最新文献
Issue Information Sources of uncertainty in estimation of climate velocity and their implications for ecological and conservation applications Sown wildflower fields and hedgerows synergistically promote insectivorous bats Exposure, sensitivity, or adaptive capacity? Reviewing assessments that use only two of three elements of climate change vulnerability Plant–pollinator interactions in apple orchards from a production and conservation perspective
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1