Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorMcKinnon, MC
dc.contributor.authorCheng, SH
dc.contributor.authorDupre, S
dc.contributor.authorEdmond, J
dc.contributor.authorGarside, R
dc.contributor.authorGlew, L
dc.contributor.authorHolland, MB
dc.contributor.authorLevine, E
dc.contributor.authorMasuda, YJ
dc.contributor.authorMiller, DC
dc.contributor.authorOliveira, I
dc.contributor.authorRevenaz, J
dc.contributor.authorRoe, D
dc.contributor.authorShamer, S
dc.contributor.authorWilkie, D
dc.contributor.authorWongbusarakum, S
dc.contributor.authorWoodhouse, E
dc.date.accessioned2017-02-02T09:15:59Z
dc.date.issued2016-04-27
dc.description.abstractBackground: Global policy initiatives and international conservation organizations have sought to emphasize and strengthen the link between the conservation of natural ecosystems and human development. While many indices have been developed to measure various social outcomes to conservation interventions, the quantity and strength of evidence to support the effects, both positive and negative, of conservation on different dimensions of human well-being, remain unclear, dispersed and inconsistent. Methods: We searched 11 academic citation databases, two search engines and 30 organisational websites for relevant articles using search terms tested with a library of 20 relevant articles. Key informants were contacted with requests for articles and possible sources of evidence. Articles were screened for relevance against predefined inclusion criteria at title, abstract and full text levels according to a published protocol. Included articles were coded using a questionnaire. A critical appraisal of eight systematic reviews was conducted to assess the reliability of methods and confidence in study findings. A visual matrix of the occurrence and extent of existing evidence was also produced. Results: A total of 1043 articles were included in the systematic map database. Included articles measured effects across eight nature conservation-related intervention and ten human well-being related outcome categories. Linkages between interventions and outcomes with high occurrence of evidence include resource management interventions, such as fisheries and forestry, and economic and material outcomes. Over 25 % of included articles examined linkages between protected areas and aspects of economic well-being. Fewer than 2 % of articles evaluated human health outcomes. Robust study designs were limited with less than 9 % of articles using quantitative approaches to evaluate causal effects of interventions. Over 700 articles occurred in forest biomes with less than 50 articles in deserts or mangroves, combined. Conclusions: The evidence base is growing on conservation-human well-being linkages, but biases in the extent and robustness of articles on key linkages persist. Priorities for systematic review, include linkages between marine resource management and economic/material well-being outcomes; and protected areas and governance outcomes. Greater and more robust evidence is needed for many established interventions to better understand synergies and trade-offs between interventions, in particular those that are emerging or contested.en_GB
dc.description.sponsorshipThis study was made possible by a grant from the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation to Conservation International (Grant No. 3519). This research was conducted by the Evidence-based Conservation Working Group and financially supported in part by SNAP: Science for Nature and People, a collaboration of The Nature Conservancy, the Wildlife Conservation Society and the National Center for Ecological Analysis and Synthesis (NCEAS).en_GB
dc.identifier.citationVol. 5, Iss. 8en_GB
dc.identifier.doi10.1186/s13750-016-0058-7
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10871/25554
dc.language.isoenen_GB
dc.publisherBioMed Centralen_GB
dc.rights© McKinnon et al. 2016. This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.en_GB
dc.subjectBiodiversity conservationen_GB
dc.subjectNatural resource managementen_GB
dc.subjectHuman welfareen_GB
dc.subjectPovertyen_GB
dc.subjectHuman developmenten_GB
dc.subjectSustainabilityen_GB
dc.titleWhat are the effects of nature conservation on human well-being? A systematic map of empirical evidence from developing countriesen_GB
dc.typeArticleen_GB
dc.date.available2017-02-02T09:15:59Z
dc.identifier.issn2047-2382
dc.descriptionThis is the final version of the article. Available from BioMed Central via the DOI in this record.en_GB
dc.identifier.eissn2047-2382
dc.identifier.journalEnvironmental Evidenceen_GB


Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record