Academia.eduAcademia.edu

Outline

Title
Abstract
Conclusion
References
All Topics
Environmental Science
Environmental Studies

npj | biodiversity Perspective

Profile image of Joni SeagerJoni SeagerProfile image of Leonie N . BossertLeonie N . Bossert

2024, Nature

https://doi.org/10.1038/S44185-024-00072-4
visibility

…

description

5 pages

link

1 file

Abstract

It is essential to ensure the effectiveness of current conservation efforts to meet the interconnected crises of biodiversity loss, habitat degradation, and climate change. In this article, we discuss one aspect that undermines conservation's effectiveness while at the same time being underexplored in the academic and political discourse on conservation: patriarchal norms and structures. We argue that these norms and structures, which promote male supremacy and inequality, are central to driving environmental destruction. Many conservation programs unintentionally reinforce patriarchal thinking, thereby undermining their effectiveness. We provide examples of how patriarchy influences conservation, such as the precarious position of women (Working Conditions for Women in Conservation), the treatment of animals (Violence against animals), the suppression of particular forms of knowledge (Science and knowledge production), militarization trends in conservation (Securitization and militarization of conservation enforcement), and the financialization of nature (The monetary valuation of nature). We conclude that patriarchal norms and structures within conservation must be questioned and dismantled to make conservation more effective and just.

Related papers

Women's risk and well-being at the intersection of dowry, patriarchy, and conservation: The gendering of human-wildlife conflict
KALLI F DOUBLEDAY

Nature and Space Women's risk and well-being at the intersection of dowry, patriarchy, and conservation: The gendering of human- wildlife conflict, 2019

Drawing on work in feminist political ecologies and employing a grounded theory approach, this article examines the socio-spatial links between the patriarchal tradition of dowry, tigers, and women's well-being. It shows how a landscape governed for conservation purposes can produce embodied and material harm for women living under a patriarchal system. Focus groups conducted in eastern Rajasthan, India, reveal how human-tiger interaction, even if primarily potential rather than actual, initiates a chain of social impacts that presents severe risks to women's well-being, mental health, and life itself. Analysis connecting the pressures of dowry (financial, physical, and psychological) to tiger presence helps expose the presumptions of unfairness, intra-household power dynamics, and hidden costs of human-wildlife cohabitation while supporting calls for the inclusion of women's perspectives in environmental theory and management.

View PDFchevron_right
What Does Conservation Mean for Women? the Case of the Cantanhez Forest National Park
Susana Costa, Catarina C N Casanova

Conservation and Society

Rural women living in poor countries are often more vulnerable to the effects of extreme poverty than men (Ellis 1999; Moser 2007). This may be due to a variety of cultural and socioeconomic factors-they may be less educated than men (UNDP 2006: 9-12; UNDP 2012: 21-25); have lower social status; lack access to or ownership of land; are excluded from decision-making processes and are expected to play a submissive role in the community (Ellis 1999; Moser 2007). Men may control income from sale of cash crops and harvests of commercially valuable natural resources (Sunderland et al. 2014). Thus, women and men may differ in the way they perceive and interact with their surrounding natural resource contexts (Flinton 2003; Kanji 2003; Mukadagi and Nabalegwa 2007; Stringer et al. 2007; Bandiaky 2008). Many of these cultural and socioeconomic factors also influence the way rural men and women relate to wildlife conservation activities and initiatives (Gadd 2005; Stringer

View PDFchevron_right
Gender and biodiversity: a feminist political ecology perspective
Dianne Rocheleau

IDS bulletin, 1995

After two decades of 'women and development' and 'environment and development' the nineties promise to be the decade of 'women and environment' or, perhaps, 'women and sustainable development'. Development planners have 'discovered' both women and the environment and have addressed each separately as special issues within development theory and practice. There is now widespread discussion of the role of women in the global work of sustainable development (Braidotti et al. 1994). There is also a parallel discussion of the effects of 'sustainable' development on women (Jackson 1993; Mies and Shiva 1993; Women, Environment and Development Organization 1992). Recent works by ecofeminists

View PDFchevron_right
Conceptual framework for gender and community-based conservation
Marianne Schmink

Case Study, 1999

View PDFchevron_right
Toward a more effective conservation biology: including social equity in the formulation of scientific questions and management options
Brent Blair

Theomai, 2002

View PDFchevron_right
Steven R. Brechin, Peter R. Wilshusen, Crystal L. Fortwangler, Patrick C. West,Editors, ,Contested nature: Promoting international biodiversity with social justice in the twenty-first century (2003) State University of New York Press,Albany 0-7914-5775-3, $59.50 (hbk), 0-7914-5776-1, $19.95 (pbk)...
Anja Nygren

2005

View PDFchevron_right
Men and Women as Conservation Partners in Conflict Settings
Janet Edmond, Brittany Ajroud
View PDFchevron_right
Gender, Poverty and the Conservation of Biodiversity A Review of Issues and Opportunities
jamie bechtel

2010

View PDFchevron_right
Unpacking the perceived benefits and costs of integrating gender into conservation projects: voices of conservation field practitioners
Kame Westerman

Oryx

Many in the conservation sphere have noted that robust and gender-equitable stakeholder engagement is crucial in achieving conservation outcomes, ensuring project sustainability and supporting human well-being. However, despite policies, international agreements and increasing requirements of donors, gender is still often viewed as an add-on rather than as a fundamental element of effective conservation. In an effort to overcome this, Conservation International has invested in nearly 20 project sites since 2014 to support targeted gender integration into existing conservation projects. We conducted a survey with practitioners across these sites to examine the barriers to and enablers of gender integration, and practitioners’ perceptions of the benefits and challenges involved in this. Our findings demonstrate the importance of both external drivers (funding requirements) and a supportive environment (capacity building, technical and financial support) in incentivising a focus on gen...

View PDFchevron_right
Deda, Paola and Renata Rubian (2004) Women and biodiversity: The long journey from users to policy-makers, Natural Resources Forum 28 (2004) 201–204
Renata Rubian

Although there has been a broad acknowledgment that women's local and traditional knowledge is fundamental to guarantee food security and conserve biological diversity, few women are represented at the managerial and decision-making level of environmental movements and organizations. The United Nations, its agencies and agreements have long promoted the full and effective participation of women in decision-making processes. So how can commitments contained in international agreements be translated into concrete actions? By using the case of the Convention on Biological Diversity, one of the key agreements adopted at the 1992 Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro, this article analyses how gender-equitable initiatives tend to assume an ad hoc character with few governments effectively involving women in their sustainable development strategies.

View PDFchevron_right

References (61)

  1. IPBES. Global assessment report on biodiversity and ecosystem services of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services. Brondizio, E. S., Settele, J., Díaz, J. S., Ngo, H. T. (ed). IPBES secretariat. https://doi.org/10.5281/ zenodo.3831673 (2019).
  2. Brockington, D. & Duffy, R. (ed.). Capitalism and Conservation (Wiley- Blackwell, 2011).
  3. Spash, C. L. Conservation in conflict: Corporations, capitalism and sustainable development. Biol. Conserv. 269, 109528 (2022).
  4. Chowdhury, F. D. Theorising patriarchy: the Bangladesh context. Asian J. Soc. Sci. 37, 599-622 (2009).
  5. Hartmann, H. Capitalism, patriarchy, and the subordination of women. In Social class and stratification: Classic statements and theoretical debates (ed. Levine, R.) 183-192 (Rowman & Littlefield, 2006).
  6. Patil, V. From patriarchy to intersectionality: A transnational feminist assessment of how far we've really come. Signs 38, 847-867 (2013).
  7. de Sousa Santos, B. The end of the cognitive empire: The coming of age of epistemologies of the South (Duke university Press, 2018).
  8. Merchant, C. (1980). The Death of Nature: Women, Ecology, and the Scientific Revolution.
  9. Rocheleau, D., Thomas-Slayter, B. & Wangari, E. Feminist political ecology: Global issues and local experience. Routledge, (2013);
  10. Springer, S., Mateer, J., Locret-Collet, M. & Acker, M. eds. (2021). Undoing Human Supremacy Undoing Human Supremacy: Anarchist Political Ecology in the Face of Anthroparchy. Rowman & Littlefield
  11. Shefer, T., Sabelis, I. & Wels, H. (2022). Challenging patriarchal, colonial patronage in anthropocentric engagements with 'Nature Conservation': Narratives of white male game rangers in Southern Africa. In Posthumanism and the Man Question (pp. 99-112)
  12. Mellström, U. & Pease, B. (Eds.). (2022). Posthumanism and the man question: Beyond anthropocentric masculinities. Taylor & Francis.
  13. Castañeda Camey, I., Sabater, L., Owren, C. Boyer, A. E. (ed). Gender- based violence and environment linkages: The violence of inequality (ed. Wen, J..) (IUCN, 2020).
  14. Mushonga, T. Work can be a violent experience for Zimbabwe's forest rangers. The Conversation (2021).
  15. Seager, J. Gender and illegal wildlife trade: Overlooked and underestimated https://wwfint.awsassets.panda.org/downloads/ gender_iwt_wwf_report_v9.pdf (2021).
  16. Seager, J. (2021). Towards Gender Equality in the Ranger Workforce: Challenges and Opportunities. Universal Ranger Support Alliance. https://www.ursa4rangers.org/ursa4rangers-resources/ (2021).
  17. Seager, J., Bowser, G. & Dutta, A. Where are the women? Towards gender equality in the ranger workforce. Park Stewardship Forum. 37/ 1, https://escholarship.org/uc/psf; https://escholarship.org/uc/item/ 6k01x8g6 (2021).
  18. WildAct. WildAct report: attitude towards sexual harassment in Vietnam's conservation sector. http://www.wildact-vn.org/news/ gbvvietnam (2020).
  19. Cyr, EmilyN. et al. "Mapping social exclusion in STEM to men's implicit bias and women's career costs." Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. 118.40, e2026308118 (2021).
  20. Jones, M. S. & Solomonm, J. Challenges and supports for women conservation leaders. Conserv. Sci. Pract. 1, e36 (2019).
  21. Fisher, J. R. B. Gender bias and inequity holds women back in their conservation careers. Front. Environ. Sci. 10, 1056751 (2023).
  22. Ross, M. et al. Women are credited less in science than men. Nature 608, 135-145 (2022).
  23. Mukherjee, T. Conservation biology needs diversity among its practitioners to succeed. BioScience 73, 549-555 (2023).
  24. James, R. et al. Gender and conservation science: Men continue to out-publish women at the world's largest environmental conservation non-profit organization. Conserv. Sci. Pract. 4, e12748 (2022).
  25. Lundberg, A. K. A. Gender equality in conservation management: reproducing or transforming gender differences through local participation? Soc. Nat. Resour. 31, 1266-1282 (2018).
  26. Costello, K. & Hodson, G. Exploring the roots of dehumanization: The role of animal-human similarity in promoting immigrant humanization. Group Process. Intergroup Relat. 13, 3-22 (2009).
  27. Taylor, S. Beasts of burden. Animal and disability liberation (The New Press, 2017).
  28. Gambert, I. & Linné, T. From rice eaters to soy boys: Race, gender, and tropes of 'plant food masculinity'. Anim. Stud. J. 7, 129-179 (2018).
  29. Soulé, M. What is conservation biology? BioScience 35, 727-734 (1985).
  30. Adams, C. J. & Donovan, J. Animals And Women. Feminist Theoretical Exploitations. (Duke University Press, 1995).
  31. Batavia, C., Nelson, M. & Wallach, A. The moral residue of conservation. Conserv. Biol. 34, 1114-1121 (2020).
  32. Wallach, A. et al. Summoning compassion to address the challenges of conservation. Conserv. Biol. 32, 1255-1265 (2018).
  33. Coghlan, S. & Cardilini, A. A critical review of the compassionate conservation debate. Conserv. Biol. 36, e13760 (2020).
  34. Keulartz, J. Future directions for conservation. Environ. Values 25, 385-407 (2016).
  35. Sandbrook, C., Fischer, J. A., Holmes, G., Luque-Lora, R. & Keane, A. The global conservation movement is diverse but not divided. Nat. Sustain. 2, 316-323 (2019).
  36. Birke, L. Unnamed Others. How Can Thinking about "Animals" Matter to Feminist Theorizing? NORA -Nord. J. Fem. Gend. Res. 20, 148-157 (2012).
  37. Harding, S. Sciences from below: Feminisms, postcolonialities, and modernities (Duke University Press, 2008).
  38. Lloyd, G. The man of reason:" Male" and" female" in Western philosophy. (Routledge, 2002)
  39. Merchant, C. The death of nature: Women, ecology, and the scientific revolution (Harper & Row, 1980).
  40. Shiva, V. Monocultures of the mind: Perspectives on biodiversity and biotechnology (Palgrave Macmillan, 1993). https://doi.org/10.1038/s44185-024-00072-4
  41. James, R. O. B. Y. N. et al. Conservation and natural resource management: where are all the women? Oryx 55, 860-867 (2021).
  42. Schuster, R., Germain, R. R., Bennett, J. R., Reo, N. J. & Arcese, P. Vertebrate biodiversity on indigenous-managed lands in Australia, Brazil, and Canada equals that in protected areas. Environ. Sci. Policy 101, 1-6 (2019).
  43. Sze, J. S. et al. Indigenous Peoples' Lands are critical for safeguarding vertebrate diversity across the tropics. Glob. Change Biol. 30, e16981 (2024).
  44. Fletcher, M. S., Hamilton, R., Dressler, W. & Palmer, L. Indigenous knowledge and the shackles of wilderness. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. 118, e2022218118 (2021).
  45. Bernazzoli, R. M. & Flint, C. From militarization to securitization: Finding a concept that works. Polit. Geogr. 8.28, 449-450 (2009).
  46. Enloe, Cynthia. The big push: Exposing and challenging the persistence of patriarchy. University of California Press, (2017).
  47. Duffy, R. Waging a war to save biodiversity: The rise of militarized conservation. Int. Aff. 90, 819-834 (2014).
  48. Duffy, R. et al. Why we must question the militarisation of conservation. Biol. Conserv. 232, 66-73 (2019).
  49. Duffy, R. Security And Conservation: The Politics Of The Illegal Wildlife Trade (Yale University Press, 2022).
  50. Masse, F., Lunstrum, E. & Holterman, D. Linking green militarization and critical military studies. Crit. Mil. Stud. 4, 201e221 (2018).
  51. Masse, F. & Lunstrum, E. Accumulation by securitization: Commercial poaching, neoliberal conservation, and the creation of new wildlife frontiers. Geoforum 69, 227-237 (2016). ISSN 0016-7185.
  52. Enloe, C. Twelve Feminist Lessons of War (University of California Press, 2023).
  53. Sandbrook, C. et al. Principles for the socially responsible use of conservation monitoring technology and data. Conserv. Sci. Pract. 3, e374 (2021).
  54. Crawford, Kate (2021): Atlas of AI -Power, Politics, and the Planetary Costs of Artificial Intelligence. Yale University Press.
  55. Piccolo, J. J. et al. Nature's contributions to people" and peoples' moral obligations to nature. Biol. Conserv. 270, 109572 (2022).
  56. Chami, R., Cosimano, T., Fullenkamp, C. & Oztosun, S. Nature's solution to climate change. Financ. Dev. Mag. 56, 34-38 (2019).
  57. World Bank Group (2023) Press release: World Bank report calls for a new development model for Brazil's Amazonian states. (2023).
  58. Maechler, S. & Boisvert, V. Valuing nature to save It? The centrality of valuation in the new spirit of conservation. Glob. Environ. Polit. 24, 10-30 (2024).
  59. Bekessy, S., Runge, M., Kusmanoff, A., Keith, D. & Wintle, B. Ask not what nature can do for you: A critique of ecosystem services as a communication strategy. Biol. Conserv. 224, 71-74 (2018).
  60. Büscher, B., Sullivan, S., Neves, K., Igoe, J. & Brockington, D. Towards a synthesized critique of neoliberal biodiversity conservation. Capital Nat. Social. 23, 4-30 (2012).
  61. Dunlap, A. & Sullivan, S. A faultline in neoliberal environmental governance scholarship? Or, why accumulation-by-alienation matters. Environ. Plan. E: Nat. Space 3, 552-579 (2020).

Related papers

Mapping the patriarchy in conservation Check for updates
Joni Seager, Leonie N . Bossert

npj | biodiversity, 2024

It is essential to ensure the effectiveness of current conservation efforts to meet the interconnected crises of biodiversity loss, habitat degradation, and climate change. In this article, we discuss one aspect that undermines conservation’s effectiveness while at the same time being underexplored in the academic and political discourse on conservation: patriarchal norms and structures. We argue that these norms and structures, which promote male supremacy and inequality, are central to driving environmental destruction. Many conservation programs unintentionally reinforce patriarchal thinking, thereby undermining their effectiveness. We provide examples of how patriarchy influences conservation, such as the precarious position of women (Working Conditions for Women in Conservation), the treatment of animals (Violence against animals), the suppression of particular forms of knowledge (Science and knowledge production), militarization trends in conservation (Securitization and militarization of conservation enforcement), and the financialization of nature (The monetary valuation of nature). We conclude that patriarchal norms and structures within conservation must be questioned and dismantled to make conservation more effective and just.

View PDFchevron_right
New Times for Women and Gender Issues in Biodiversity Conservation and Climate Justice
Simone Lovera

Development

Despite early recognition of women's vital role in biodiversity conservation and increased resilience to climate change at the international policy level, only recently the Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biodiversity has taken some concrete steps to mainstream gender in different biodiversity policies. It is expected that this increased recognition will lead to new policy approaches to enhance women's participation in tackling biodiversity loss and climate change. Such approaches can contribute to climate justice by supporting financial and other forms of support to community-driven, ecosystembased climate change mitigation and resilience initiatives that foster women's rights, needs, roles and aspirations.

View PDFchevron_right
Understanding and Improving Gender Equity in Conservation
Suzanne L . Davis

Journal of the American Institute for Conservation, 2019

This paper examines data from two AIC/FAIC compensation surveys to look at evidence for pay disparities between men and women in conservation. In addition to identifying widespread and pervasive gender-based gaps in earnings, it also highlights and discusses evidence for two additional types of inequity, the glass ceiling and glass escalator effects. To explain how these types of inequity are created and maintained, three decades of research in the fields of sociology, labor economics, and business management are summarized, and special attention is given to the mechanisms of gender discrimination in occupations dominated by women. To provide context for understanding the gender composition of conservation in the United States, the paper also explores how fields become sex-segregated and how the same biases that lead to occupational sex-segregation contribute to devaluing the work of women. To conclude, it summarizes evidence-based research into strategies for combatting gender inequities in workplaces.

View PDFchevron_right
Applying a gender lens to biodiversity conservation in High Asia
Nadia Mijiddorj

Frontiers in conservation science, 2023

Community-based conservation efforts represent an important approach to facilitate the coexistence of people and wildlife. A concern, however, is that these efforts build on existing community structures and social norms, which are commonly dominated by men. Some biodiversity conservation approaches may consequently neglect women's voices and deepen existing inequalities and inequities. This paper presents two community case studies that draw upon the knowledge and experience gained in our snow leopard conservation practice in pastoral and agro-pastoral settings in Mongolia and India to better understand women's roles and responsibilities. In these settings, roles and responsibilities in livestock management and agriculture are strongly differentiated along gender lines, and significant gaps remain in women's decision-making power about natural resources at the community level. We argue that context-specific and gender-responsive approaches are needed to build community support for conservation actions and leverage women's potential contributions to conservation outcomes.

View PDFchevron_right
Women and Plants: Gender Relations in Biodiversity Management and Conservation
Patricia Howard

Journal of Ethnobiology, 2005

This major work is very important, and will be widely read. Since it deals in detail with traditional strategies for managing plant and animal resources, every ethnobiologist will need to know something about it, both because of its contributions and because so many students and colleagues will read it. Diamond covers several cases of societies that collapsed because of, or partly because of, ecological reasons. He also tells a number of success stories. The title is thus misleading: the famous ''collapses'' of history, from those of the Roman Empire and Assyria to the more recent implosions of the USSR and Yugoslavia, receive no attention, while much of the book is devoted to societies that did not collapse in spite of major ecological problems. The collapses in question are Easter Island, Pitcairn and Henderson Islands, the Anasazi, the central lowland Classic Maya, and the Norse settlements in Greenland. Easter Island is compared with Tikopia, another small Polynesian island but one that kept itself in business by strong social controls. The Greenlanders are matched with the Icelanders, who survived in a less marginal environment. The Maya are less closely comparable with Japan, but Tokugawa Japan serves as a model case of a traditional society that rebuilt its ecosystem after devastation. New Guinea's highlands are considered for their traditional agroforestry practices. The book then shifts to two modern collapses-Rwanda and Haiti-where we know much more about the actual complexity of the political and economic situations lying behind the civil meltdowns. Haiti begs for, and receives, comparison with the Dominican Republic-a relative success story on the same island. All the collapses were in rather marginal and fragile environments. Often, climate change-the Little Ice Age in Greenland, drought in the Anasazi and Maya cases-gave a coup de grace. The successes were, in general, better off ecologically. But the record is fairly clear: political will was a more important consideration. The Greenlanders refused to learn from the Inuit when the Little Ice Age made Norwegian-style farming less viable. The Maya were torn by wars between petty kings, and thus failed to get it together to meet the challenge. The Rwandan and Haitian situations had deep roots in colonial and neocolonial politics. Diamond discusses at length the lessons of these societies. Runaway population growth, depletion of resources that could have been used sustainably, and refusal to see and confront obvious problems appear to be his greatest concerns. He is rather upbeat and describes himself as ''a cautious optimist'' (p. 521). Clearly, today's world has far more resources, far more knowledge, and far more political options than the Greenlanders or Easter Islanders. To be sure, we also have more problems, including chemical pollution, giant multinational extractive firms, and rapidly increasing luxury consumption; but Diamond recounts a number of enlightened initiatives by industry, even the usually retrograde mining and oil-dril

View PDFchevron_right

Related topics

  • Gender Studies
  • Environmental Education
  • Women's Studies
  • Conservation
  • Environmental Studies
  • Environmental Sustainability
  • Women and the Environment
    • 580 California St., Suite 400
    San Francisco, CA, 94104
    © 2025 Academia. All rights reserved