Our study shows that conservation is a diverse movement, both in people and ideas.
- Chris Sandbrook
The first large-scale study of the views held by those working to protect the natural world has found agreement on the goals of conservation – but substantial disagreement on how to move towards them.
Latest research reveals a sizable consensus among conservationists for many core aims: maintaining ecosystems, securing public support, and reducing environmental impact of the world’s richest.
However, the study also shows the global community is deeply split on whether to place economic value on nature. The necessity of protected areas – and whether people should be moved to create them – is highly disputed, as is the worth of “non-native” species.
Conducted by Cambridge University’s Dr Chris Sandbrook with colleagues from Edinburgh and Leeds universities, the new study collected opinions of over 9,200 conservationists in over 140 countries. It is published in the journal Nature Sustainability.
The research uncovers some demographic variation. For example, women and those from Africa and South America lean more toward “people-centered” conservation, which aims to benefit communities and give them a say in conservation decisions. Men and those from North America tend to favour a “science-led” approach associated with protecting nature for its own sake.
'...like a political party'
Next year’s Convention on Biological Diversity meeting will see UN member states gather in Beijing to set global conservation goals for the following decade. The research team says their findings “raise important questions about whose voices get heard in conservation debates”.
“A core set of aims must form the bedrock of any social movement,” said lead author Sandbrook, from the Cambridge Conservation Initiative. “We can see that the world’s conservation community is in general agreement on many fundamental beliefs and objectives.”
Read the full story
Image: A conservationist and a farmer in Rosebud County, Montana
Credit: Photo courtesy of USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service
Reproduced courtesy of the University of Cambridge