Skip to main content Accessibility help
  • Print publication year: 2015
  • Online publication date: May 2015

20 - Finding a way out of conservation conflicts

from Part III - Approaches to managing conflicts


The world is undergoing rapid change from increasing human pressure. The scale and intensity of this change are deeply worrying from a conservation perspective. For example, we see severe threats to species, habitat and ecosystems from poaching (Maisels et al., 2013), the illegal use of poison (Ogada, 2014), overharvesting (Pinsky and Palumbi, 2014) and agricultural expansion (Laurance et al., 2014). In this book we have focused on how those who represent conservation arguments (conservationists) can respond to these types of challenges. These conservation conflicts arise because one side is passionate about the need to conserve biological diversity, whether for moral, intrinsic or anthropocentric reasons, and the other side may be more focused on different objectives related to human livelihoods and well-being. That is not to say that those arguing for human livelihoods do not recognise the need to conserve biodiversity, and vice versa, but each side may question the relative importance of the arguments, or the specific objectives, or the methods used to achieve those objectives. What is clear is that conservationists are antagonists in these conflicts, and this realisation is important because in order to navigate a path out of destructive conflict, conservationists will need to recognise their role in these issues, address the roots of the problem and be clear about their objectives and about how they engage with the other parties (Redpath et al., 2014).

Throughout the book, we have presented a range of richly complex and multilayered examples. Each has its own idiosyncrasies, but together they expose general principles and highlight what is needed to map and manage conservation conflicts. In this final chapter we build on these perspectives and draw out the principles and steps towards collaborative conflict management. While we recognise that conflicts may be a force for good (Coser, 1956), the conflicts presented here are more often damaging and costly both to humans and biodiversity.

Adams, W. M. and Sandbrook, C. (2013). Conservation, evidence and policy. Oryx, 47, 329–335.
Adams, W. M., et al. (2003). Managing tragedies: understanding conflict over common pool resources. Science, 302, 1915–1916.
Ansell, C. and Gash, A. (2008). Collaborative governance in theory and practice. J. Public Adm. Res. Theory, 18, 571.
Beierle, T. C. (1998). Public participation in environmental decisions: an evaluation framework using social goals. Discussion paper 99-06. Washington, DC: Resources for the Future.
Beierle, T. C. and Konisky, D. M. (2001). What are we gaining from stakeholder involvement? Observations from environmental planning in the Great Lakes. Environ. Plann. C: Govern. Pol., 19, 515–527.
Buizer, M., Arts, B. and Kok, K. (2011). Governance, scale and the environment: the importance of recognizing knowledge claims in transdisciplinary areas. Ecol. Soc., 16, 1–18.
Chess, C. and Purcell, K. (1999). Public participation and the environment: do we know what works?Environ. Sci. Technol., 33, 2685–2692.
Collins, K. and Burgess, J. (1999). Summary of the London seminar. In: Deliberative and Inclusionary Processes: A Report from Two Seminars, CSERGE Working Paper PA 99-06, eds. O'Riordan, T., Burgess, J. and Szerszynski, B..
Colyvan, M.J. and Regan, H.M. (2011). The conservation game. Biol. Conserv., 144, 1246–1253.
Coser, L. (1956). The Function of Social Conflict. New York, NY: Free Press.
Courchamp, F., Hoffmann, B. D., Russell, J. C., Leclerc, C. and Bellard, C. (2014). Climate change, sea-level rise, and conservation: keeping island biodiversity afloat. Trends Ecol. Evol.
Fazey, I., Fazey, J., Salisbury, J., Lindenmayer, D. B. and Dovers, S. (2006). The nature and role of experiential knowledge for environmental conservation. Environ. Conserv., 33, 1–10.
Fischer, F. (2004). Professional expertise in deliberative democracy: facilitating participatory inquiry. The Good Soc., 13, 21–27.
Fraser, D. J., Coon, T., Prince, M. R., Dion, R. and Bernatchez, L. (2006). Integrating traditional and evolutionary knowledge in biodiversity conservation: a population level case study. Ecol. Soc., 11, 4.
Heydon, M. J., Wilson, C. J. and Tew, T. (2011). Wildlife conflict resolution: a review of problems, solutions and regulation in England. Wildl. Res., 37, 731–748.
Holling, C. S. (1978). Adaptive Environmental Assessment and Management. Chichester: Wiley.
Jones-Walters, L. and Cil, A. (2011). Biodiversity and stakeholder participation. J. Nat. Conserv., 19, 327–329.
Kok, K. and Veldkamp, T. A. (2011). Scale and governance: conceptual considerations and practical implications. Ecol. Soc., 16, 1–10.
Laurance, W. F., Sayer, J. and Cassman, K. G. (2014). Agricultural expansion and its impacts on tropical nature. Trends Ecol. Evol., 29, 107–116.
Maisels, F., et al. (2013). Devastating decline of forest elephants in Central Africa. PLoS One, 8(3), e59469.
Meadowcroft, J. (2002). Politics and scale: some implications for environmental governance. Landscape Urban Plan., 61, 169–179.
Milner-Gulland, E. J. and Rowcliffe, M. J. (2007). Conservation and Sustainable Use: A Handbook of Techniques. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Newig, J. and Fritsch, O. (2009). Environmental governance: participatory, multi-level – and effective? Env. Pol. Gov., 19, 197–214.
Ogada, D. L. (2014). The power of poison: pesticide poisoning of Africa's wildlife. Ann. N Y Acad. Sci. DOI: 10.1111/nyas.12405.
Pilgrim, S. E. and Pretty, J. (2010). Nature and Culture. London: Earthscan.
Pinsky, M. L. and Palumbi, S. R. (2014). Meta-analysis reveals lower genetic diversity in overfished populations. Molec. Ecol., 23, 29–39.
Ramsbotham, O., et al. (eds). (2011). Contemporary Conflict Resolution. Third edition. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Raymond, C. M., Fazey, I., Reed, M. S., Stringer, L. C., Robinson, G. M. and Evely, A. C. (2010). Integrating local and scientific knowledge for environmental management. J. Environ. Manage., 91, 1766–1777.
Redpath, S. M., Bhatia, S. and Young, J. (2014). Tilting at wildlife: reconsidering human–wildlife conflict. Oryx, doi: 1001017/S003O605314000799.
Reed, M. S. (2008). Stakeholder participation for environmental management: a literature review. Biol. Conserv., 141, 2417–2431.
Reed, M. S., et al. (2009). Who's in and why? A typology of stakeholder analysis methods for natural resource management. J. Environ. Manage., 90, 1933–1949.
Richards, C., Sherlock, K. and Carter, C. (2004). Practical Approaches to Participation. SERP Policy Brief No. 1. Aberdeen: Macaulay Institute.
Rowe, G. and Frewer, L. J. (2000). Public participation methods: a framework for evaluation. Sci. Technol. Human Val., 25, 3–29.
Salafsky, N. (2011). Integrating development with conservation: a means to a conservation end, or a mean end to conservation?Biol. Conserv., 144, 973–978.
Sarewitz, D. (2004). How science makes environmental controversies worse. Environ. Sci. Pol., 7, 385–403.
Warren, M. (1996). Deliberative democracy and authority. Am. Polit. Sci. Rev., 90, 46–60.
Williams, B. K., Szaro, R. C. and Shapiro, C. D. (2009). Adaptive Management: The U.S. Department of the Interior Technical Guide. Washington, DC: Adaptive Management Working Group, U.S. Department of the Interior.
Wood, K. A., Stillman, R. A., Daunt, F. and O'Hare, M. T. (2013). Evaluating the effects of population management on a herbivore grazing conflict. PLoS ONE, 8, e56287.
Wood, K. A., Stillman, R. A., Daunt, F. and O'Hare, M. T. (2014). Chalk streams and grazing mute swans. Br. Wildl., 25, 171–176.
Woodroffe, R., et al. (2005). People and Wildlife: Conflict or Coexistence?Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Young, I. M. (2000). Inclusion and Democracy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Young, J. C. and Marzano, M. (2012). Embodied interdisciplinarity: what is the role of polymaths in environmental research? Environ. Conserv., 37, 373–375.
Young, J. C., Butler, J. R. A., Jordan, A. and Watt, A. D. (2012). Less government intervention in biodiversity management: risks and opportunities. Biodivers. Conserv., 21, 1095–1100.
Young, J. C., et al. (2013a). Does stakeholder involvement really benefit biodiversity conservation? Biol. Conserv., 158, 359–370.
Young, J. C., Jordan, A., Searle, K. R., Butler, A. and Simmons, P. (2013b). Framing scale in participatory biodiversity management may contribute to more sustainable solutions. Conserv. Lett., 6, 333–340.
Young, J. C., et al. (2014). Improving science-policy dialogue to meet the challenges of biodiversity conservation: having conversations rather than talking at one-another. Biodivers. Conserv., 23, 387–404.