Equity trade-offs in conservation decision making

Conservation decisions increasingly involve multiple environmental and social objectives, which result in complex decision contexts with high potential for trade-offs. Improving social equity is one such objective that is often considered an enabler of successful outcomes and a virtuous ideal in its...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Law, Elizabeth A., Bennett, Nathan J., Ives, Christopher D., Friedman, Rachel, Davis, Katrina J., Archibald, Carla, Wilson, Kerrie A.
Format: Article
Published: Wiley 2017
Subjects:
Online Access:https://eprints.nottingham.ac.uk/46888/
_version_ 1848797419616075776
author Law, Elizabeth A.
Bennett, Nathan J.
Ives, Christopher D.
Friedman, Rachel
Davis, Katrina J.
Archibald, Carla
Wilson, Kerrie A.
author_facet Law, Elizabeth A.
Bennett, Nathan J.
Ives, Christopher D.
Friedman, Rachel
Davis, Katrina J.
Archibald, Carla
Wilson, Kerrie A.
author_sort Law, Elizabeth A.
building Nottingham Research Data Repository
collection Online Access
description Conservation decisions increasingly involve multiple environmental and social objectives, which result in complex decision contexts with high potential for trade-offs. Improving social equity is one such objective that is often considered an enabler of successful outcomes and a virtuous ideal in itself. Despite its idealized importance in conservation policy, social equity is often highly simplified or ill-defined and is applied uncritically. What constitutes equitable outcomes and processes is highly normative and subject to ethical deliberation. Different ethical frameworks may lead to different conceptions of equity through alternative perspectives of what is good or right. This can lead to different and potentially conflicting equity objectives in practice. We promote a more transparent, nuanced, and pluralistic conceptualization of equity in conservation decision making that particularly recognizes where multidimensional equity objectives may conflict. To help identify and mitigate ethical conflicts and avoid cases of good intentions producing bad outcomes, we encourage a more analytical incorporation of equity into conservation decision making particularly during mechanistic integration of equity objectives. We recommend that in conservation planning motivations and objectives for equity be made explicit within the problem context, methods used to incorporate equity objectives be applied with respect to stated objectives, and, should objectives dictate, evaluation of equity outcomes and adaptation of strategies be employed during policy implementation.
first_indexed 2025-11-14T20:03:35Z
format Article
id nottingham-46888
institution University of Nottingham Malaysia Campus
institution_category Local University
last_indexed 2025-11-14T20:03:35Z
publishDate 2017
publisher Wiley
recordtype eprints
repository_type Digital Repository
spelling nottingham-468882020-05-04T19:03:24Z https://eprints.nottingham.ac.uk/46888/ Equity trade-offs in conservation decision making Law, Elizabeth A. Bennett, Nathan J. Ives, Christopher D. Friedman, Rachel Davis, Katrina J. Archibald, Carla Wilson, Kerrie A. Conservation decisions increasingly involve multiple environmental and social objectives, which result in complex decision contexts with high potential for trade-offs. Improving social equity is one such objective that is often considered an enabler of successful outcomes and a virtuous ideal in itself. Despite its idealized importance in conservation policy, social equity is often highly simplified or ill-defined and is applied uncritically. What constitutes equitable outcomes and processes is highly normative and subject to ethical deliberation. Different ethical frameworks may lead to different conceptions of equity through alternative perspectives of what is good or right. This can lead to different and potentially conflicting equity objectives in practice. We promote a more transparent, nuanced, and pluralistic conceptualization of equity in conservation decision making that particularly recognizes where multidimensional equity objectives may conflict. To help identify and mitigate ethical conflicts and avoid cases of good intentions producing bad outcomes, we encourage a more analytical incorporation of equity into conservation decision making particularly during mechanistic integration of equity objectives. We recommend that in conservation planning motivations and objectives for equity be made explicit within the problem context, methods used to incorporate equity objectives be applied with respect to stated objectives, and, should objectives dictate, evaluation of equity outcomes and adaptation of strategies be employed during policy implementation. Wiley 2017-09-01 Article PeerReviewed Law, Elizabeth A., Bennett, Nathan J., Ives, Christopher D., Friedman, Rachel, Davis, Katrina J., Archibald, Carla and Wilson, Kerrie A. (2017) Equity trade-offs in conservation decision making. Conservation Biology . ISSN 1523-1739 (In Press) Environmental management ethical pluralism conservation planning conservation policy prioritization trade-offs. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/cobi.13008/abstract? doi:10.1111/cobi.13008 doi:10.1111/cobi.13008
spellingShingle Environmental management
ethical pluralism
conservation planning
conservation policy
prioritization
trade-offs.
Law, Elizabeth A.
Bennett, Nathan J.
Ives, Christopher D.
Friedman, Rachel
Davis, Katrina J.
Archibald, Carla
Wilson, Kerrie A.
Equity trade-offs in conservation decision making
title Equity trade-offs in conservation decision making
title_full Equity trade-offs in conservation decision making
title_fullStr Equity trade-offs in conservation decision making
title_full_unstemmed Equity trade-offs in conservation decision making
title_short Equity trade-offs in conservation decision making
title_sort equity trade-offs in conservation decision making
topic Environmental management
ethical pluralism
conservation planning
conservation policy
prioritization
trade-offs.
url https://eprints.nottingham.ac.uk/46888/
https://eprints.nottingham.ac.uk/46888/
https://eprints.nottingham.ac.uk/46888/