Abstract

An increasing number of conservation interventions aim to reduce their negative impacts on vulnerable people and to provide incentives aimed at improving overall human well-being. Community and incentive based conservation interventions have had variable rates of success in producing well-being outcomes, yet it is unclear why. Researchers have hypothesised that socially equitable conservation interventions will improve their likelihood of success. However, for community and incentive based interventions, there is a lack of evidence synthesis for the effect that social equity has on human well-being outcomes. Using this protocol, we will undertake a systematic review of relevant literature with the aim of using existing knowledge to address this gap. This protocol outlines the methodology we will use to examine the research question: Does the social equitability of community and incentive based conservation interventions in non-OECD countries, affect human well-being? We will conduct a systematic review of available studies, using articles that measure the effect of social equity, defined as the absence of avoidable and unfair, cost and benefit distributions between socially stratifying factors. To make this process efficient, and in order to prevent replication, we will utilize and update a literature search, and sub-set of data, collected in a previous systematic map that assessed the quantity and strength of evidence to support the effects conservation interventions have on human wellbeing. We will critically appraise each study we identify and capture the degree to which interventions integrated social equity within project participation and outcomes. Where integrated, we will determine if studies record or describe the effect that social equity had on human well-being. We have developed a conceptual framework that describes the expected effect of social equity, in order to capture and understand these effects. To understand the strength of relationships in our framework, and where data availability allows, we will undertake and combine a series of qualitative and quantitative data syntheses. By undertaking this study, we intend to understand how social equity considerations, specifically within community and incentive based conservation interventions, can affect human well-being. A better understanding of these features will inform conservation practitioners and researchers on the extent to which they ought to incorporate social equity into interventions in order to promote human well-being.

Highlights

  • An increasing number of conservation interventions aim to reduce their negative impacts on vulnerable people and to provide incentives aimed at improving overall human well-being

  • A conceptual framework for community and incentive based con‐ servation (CIBC) interventions, social equity and human well‐being In order to interpret the results of this study we have developed a conceptual framework based on the standard conservation project management cycle [54]

  • Within community and incentive based conservation interventions, what is the strength and robustness of evidence within studies, which document the effects of socially equitable participation or outcomes on human well-being?

Read more

Summary

Methods

Searches All searches will be conducted in the English language. references, and records of non-English studies will be retained for potential use in future studies. We have developed a typology for social equity outcomes (see Additional file 2) This typology is adapted from the PROGRESS + framework used for social equity reviews in the health sciences, combined with previous articles specific to social equity and conservation interventions [37, 41, 45, 65]. We will extract other descriptive quantitative, and qualitative data such as bibliographic information, geography, IUCN category, date(s) of project lifecycle, study aims and focus, details of the intervention, the subjects, and sample size. Comparison The syntheses of the qualitative and the quantitative data will be combined and compared By combining these outputs, we will seek to answer our primary research question examining how social equity in CIBC interventions improves human well-being outcomes. Author details 1 School of Geography, Planning and Environmental Management, University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD 4072, Australia. 2 Conservation International, 2011 Crystal Drive, Suite 500, Arlington, VA 22202, USA. 3 National Center for Ecological Analysis and Synthesis (NCEAS), University of California-Santa Barbara, 735 State St. #300, Santa Barbara, CA 93101, USA. 4 Wildlife Conservation Society, Global Conservation Program, 2300 Southern Boulevard, Bronx, New York 10460‐1068, USA

Background
Findings
69. Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call