Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Comment
  • Published:

Conservation practice must catch up with commitments to local people for 30 × 30 success

Nature Reviews Biodiversity volume 1, pages 84–85 (2025)Cite this article

Subjects

Despite commitments to community rights and livelihoods, evidence of positive social outcomes from protected areas in developing countries remains scant. Bridging this gap demands a cultural shift that commits to community rights, robust evaluation and substantially increased financing to ensure that the 30 × 30 target is achieved through resilient and socially just conservation.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on SpringerLink
  • Instant access to the full article PDF.

USD 39.95

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

References

  1. Adams, V. M., Pressey, R. L. & Naidoo, R. Opportunity costs: who really pays for conservation? Biol. Conserv. 143, 439–448 (2010).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Roe, D., Mohammed, E. Y., Porras, I. & Giuliani, A. Linking biodiversity conservation and poverty reduction: de-polarizing the conservation-poverty debate. Conserv. Lett. 6, 162–171 (2013).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Langhammer, P. F. et al. The positive impact of conservation action. Science 384, 453–458 (2024).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Pullin, A. et al. Human well-being impacts of terrestrial protected areas. Environ. Evid. 2, 19 (2013).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Naidoo, R. et al. Evaluating the impacts of protected areas on human well-being across the developing world. Sci. Adv. 5, eaav3006 (2019).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Kandel, P., Pandit, R., White, B. & Polyakov, M. Do protected areas increase household income? Evidence from a meta-analysis. World Dev. 159, 106024 (2022).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Poudyal, M. et al. Who bears the cost of forest conservation? PeerJ 6, e5106 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Fisher, B. & Christopher, T. Poverty and biodiversity: measuring the overlap of human poverty and the biodiversity hotspots. Ecol. Econ. 62, 93–101 (2007).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Shyamsundar, P. & Kramer, R. A. Tropical forest protection: an empirical analysis of the costs borne by local people. J. Environ. Econ. Manage. 31, 129–144 (1996).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Brauman, K. A. et al. Global trends in nature’s contributions to people. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 117, 32799–32805 (2020).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Waldron, A. et al. The costs of global protected-area expansion (target 3 of the post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework) may fall more heavily on lower-income countries. Preprint at bioRxiv https://doi.org/10.1101/2022.03.23.485429 (2022).

  12. Rakotonarivo, O. S. et al. Resolving land tenure security is essential to deliver forest restoration. Commun. Earth Environ. 4, 179 (2023).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Milner-Gulland, E. J. Now is the time for conservationists to stand up for social justice. PLoS Biol. 22, e3002657 (2024).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Nedopil, C., Yue, M. & Hughes, A. C. Are debt-for-nature swaps scalable: which nature, how much debt, and who pays? Ambio 53, 63–78 (2024).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Ferraro, P. J. et al. Create a culture of experiments in environmental programs. Science 381, 735–737 (2023).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We acknowledge the UKRI International Science Partnerships Fund, and the European Union grant (Grant no. DCI-PANAF/2020/420-028) through the African Research Initiative for Scientific Excellence (ARISE) pilot programme. ARISE is implemented by the African Academy of Sciences with support from the European Commission and the African Union Commission.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. École Supérieure des Sciences Agronomiques, University of Antananarivo, Antananarivo, Madagascar

    O. Sarobidy Rakotonarivo

  2. Global Science, The Nature Conservancy, Arlington, VA, USA

    Priya Shyamsundar

  3. Nicholas School of Environment, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA

    Randall Kramer

  4. School of Environmental and Natural Sciences, Bangor University, Bangor, UK

    Neal Hockley

Authors
  1. O. Sarobidy Rakotonarivo
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Priya Shyamsundar
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Randall Kramer
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Neal Hockley
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to O. Sarobidy Rakotonarivo.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Rakotonarivo, O.S., Shyamsundar, P., Kramer, R. et al. Conservation practice must catch up with commitments to local people for 30 × 30 success. Nat. Rev. Biodivers. 1, 84–85 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1038/s44358-025-00021-4

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Version of record:

  • Issue date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s44358-025-00021-4

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing