Environmental justice in conservation philanthropy: Do intermediary organizations help?

IF 4.4 Q1 ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES Earth System Governance Pub Date : 2025-01-01 DOI:10.1016/j.esg.2024.100232
Jeffrey E. Blackwatters , Michele Betsill , Eugene Eperiam , Trina Leberer , Geraldine Rengiil , Elizabeth Terk , Rebecca L. Gruby
{"title":"Environmental justice in conservation philanthropy: Do intermediary organizations help?","authors":"Jeffrey E. Blackwatters ,&nbsp;Michele Betsill ,&nbsp;Eugene Eperiam ,&nbsp;Trina Leberer ,&nbsp;Geraldine Rengiil ,&nbsp;Elizabeth Terk ,&nbsp;Rebecca L. Gruby","doi":"10.1016/j.esg.2024.100232","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Many private philanthropic foundations are engaging intermediary organizations as a strategy to better integrate justice into their grantmaking. This study examines how intermediary organizations work in practice and how they can or cannot contribute to justice in conservation funding. We employed Q methodology and a knowledge co-production approach to examine grantees’ experiences of justice in their grantmaking relationship with a funding intermediary, the Micronesia Conservation Trust (MCT). Using a collaborative process of knowledge creation and interpretation, we identified three distinct perspectives: 1. <em>Intermediaries bridge gaps in justice</em>; 2. <em>Intermediaries are helpful but constrained</em>; and 3. <em>Intermediaries cannot solve injustice in conservation</em> <em>funding</em>. Our findings indicate that while intermediaries can play a vital role in advancing justice in grant-making relationships, they are not a silver bullet for addressing injustices that are inherent to funding dynamics.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":33685,"journal":{"name":"Earth System Governance","volume":"23 ","pages":"Article 100232"},"PeriodicalIF":4.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Earth System Governance","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2589811624000326","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Many private philanthropic foundations are engaging intermediary organizations as a strategy to better integrate justice into their grantmaking. This study examines how intermediary organizations work in practice and how they can or cannot contribute to justice in conservation funding. We employed Q methodology and a knowledge co-production approach to examine grantees’ experiences of justice in their grantmaking relationship with a funding intermediary, the Micronesia Conservation Trust (MCT). Using a collaborative process of knowledge creation and interpretation, we identified three distinct perspectives: 1. Intermediaries bridge gaps in justice; 2. Intermediaries are helpful but constrained; and 3. Intermediaries cannot solve injustice in conservation funding. Our findings indicate that while intermediaries can play a vital role in advancing justice in grant-making relationships, they are not a silver bullet for addressing injustices that are inherent to funding dynamics.
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
CiteScore
9.00
自引率
14.30%
发文量
31
审稿时长
35 weeks
期刊最新文献
Bridging the adaptation-finance gap: Pathways for the green climate fund in the Pacific Matching supply and demand? Exploring UNFCCC reform options Human flourishing: An integrated systems approach to development post 2030 Governing marine cloud brightening for ecosystem conservation under a warming climate
×
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