Insights into Ecological Resettlements and Conservation-led Displacements: A Systematic Review.

IF 2.7 3区 环境科学与生态学 Q3 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES
Hari Prasad Pandey, Tek Narayan Maraseni, Armando Apan
{"title":"Insights into Ecological Resettlements and Conservation-led Displacements: A Systematic Review.","authors":"Hari Prasad Pandey, Tek Narayan Maraseni, Armando Apan","doi":"10.1007/s00267-024-02097-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>A systematic literature review (SLR) on ecological resettlements and conservation-led displacements (hereafter 'ER') is essential for guiding future research and conservation strategies, yet it has not been conducted. We performed a comprehensive two-stage review-a review of reviews and a review of empirical articles from Web of Science and Scopus-using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P). We extracted and analyzed data from 164 research articles, revealing three key themes in ER research: publication trends and geographical distribution, methodological approaches and data types, and thematic focus with associated governance and equity indicators. Notably, we found no systematically reviewed articles on ER, underscoring the pioneering nature of this study. Empirical articles publications began in 2001, despite ER practices dating back to the nineteenth century, covering 108 journals, and reflecting the discipline's diversity. The articles involved authors from 28 countries, addressing cases in 52 nations, predominantly led by academic institutions (>90%), and featuring diverse cross-institutional collaborations (n = 332). The research examined 96 unique Indigenous and local communities displaced from 12 ecosystem types (both terrestrial and marine) and conservation initiatives globally. A wide range of methodologies was employed, including interviews, field observations, focus groups, and ethnography, with over 80% using a combination of these methods. While 15 data collection tools were explored, the focus mainly targeted human-centric aspects such as livelihoods, cultural shifts, and access limitations (>90%), leaving ER's other dimensions and institutional aspects underexplored. Government-led ER initiatives (n = 149) were prevalent, but concerns regarding informed consent, participatory decision-making, human rights, and forced evictions were frequently reported (>90%), indicating global governance challenges in conservation. The thematic analysis highlighted social inequalities related to livelihoods, rights, and governance, including employment loss and compensation fairness. Eco-environmental challenges explored deforestation, habitat degradation, climate change, and biodiversity impacts, emphasizing the need to enhance ecological value while balancing development and conservation. The publication trend of ER-related articles aligns with international policy discourses on human rights, poverty alleviation, governance, and sustainable development post-2000, suggesting these issues must be considered in global policy discourses. We discuss critical findings and outline future research pathways and conservation strategies that strive for balanced coexistence between humans and nonhuman entities through an equity, justice, and sustainability lens in a pluralistic approach for the Anthropocene and beyond.</p>","PeriodicalId":543,"journal":{"name":"Environmental Management","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Environmental Management","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-024-02097-8","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

A systematic literature review (SLR) on ecological resettlements and conservation-led displacements (hereafter 'ER') is essential for guiding future research and conservation strategies, yet it has not been conducted. We performed a comprehensive two-stage review-a review of reviews and a review of empirical articles from Web of Science and Scopus-using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P). We extracted and analyzed data from 164 research articles, revealing three key themes in ER research: publication trends and geographical distribution, methodological approaches and data types, and thematic focus with associated governance and equity indicators. Notably, we found no systematically reviewed articles on ER, underscoring the pioneering nature of this study. Empirical articles publications began in 2001, despite ER practices dating back to the nineteenth century, covering 108 journals, and reflecting the discipline's diversity. The articles involved authors from 28 countries, addressing cases in 52 nations, predominantly led by academic institutions (>90%), and featuring diverse cross-institutional collaborations (n = 332). The research examined 96 unique Indigenous and local communities displaced from 12 ecosystem types (both terrestrial and marine) and conservation initiatives globally. A wide range of methodologies was employed, including interviews, field observations, focus groups, and ethnography, with over 80% using a combination of these methods. While 15 data collection tools were explored, the focus mainly targeted human-centric aspects such as livelihoods, cultural shifts, and access limitations (>90%), leaving ER's other dimensions and institutional aspects underexplored. Government-led ER initiatives (n = 149) were prevalent, but concerns regarding informed consent, participatory decision-making, human rights, and forced evictions were frequently reported (>90%), indicating global governance challenges in conservation. The thematic analysis highlighted social inequalities related to livelihoods, rights, and governance, including employment loss and compensation fairness. Eco-environmental challenges explored deforestation, habitat degradation, climate change, and biodiversity impacts, emphasizing the need to enhance ecological value while balancing development and conservation. The publication trend of ER-related articles aligns with international policy discourses on human rights, poverty alleviation, governance, and sustainable development post-2000, suggesting these issues must be considered in global policy discourses. We discuss critical findings and outline future research pathways and conservation strategies that strive for balanced coexistence between humans and nonhuman entities through an equity, justice, and sustainability lens in a pluralistic approach for the Anthropocene and beyond.

生态重新安置和保护导向的迁移:系统回顾。
系统的文献综述(SLR)对指导未来的研究和保护策略至关重要,但尚未开展。我们使用系统评价和元分析方案的首选报告项目(PRISMA-P)进行了全面的两阶段综述——综述综述和来自Web of Science和scopus的实证文章综述。我们从164篇研究文章中提取并分析了数据,揭示了ER研究的三个关键主题:出版趋势和地理分布,方法方法和数据类型,以及相关治理和公平指标的主题重点。值得注意的是,我们没有发现关于急诊室的系统综述文章,这强调了本研究的开创性。尽管急诊实践可以追溯到19世纪,但实证文章的出版始于2001年,覆盖了108种期刊,反映了该学科的多样性。这些文章涉及来自28个国家的作者,涉及52个国家的病例,主要由学术机构领导(约占90%),并具有不同的跨机构合作(n = 332)。该研究调查了从12种生态系统类型(陆地和海洋)和全球保护举措中流离失所的96个独特的土著和当地社区。采用了广泛的方法,包括访谈、实地观察、焦点小组和民族志,其中80%以上使用了这些方法的组合。虽然研究了15种数据收集工具,但重点主要集中在以人为中心的方面,如生计、文化转变和获取限制(bbb90 %),而对急诊室的其他维度和制度方面的探索不足。政府主导的环境保护倡议(n = 149)很普遍,但关于知情同意、参与性决策、人权和强制驱逐的担忧也经常被报道(bbb90 %),这表明了保护方面的全球治理挑战。专题分析强调了与生计、权利和治理相关的社会不平等,包括失业和补偿公平。生态环境挑战探讨了森林砍伐、栖息地退化、气候变化和生物多样性的影响,强调了在平衡发展和保护的同时提高生态价值的必要性。与er相关的文章的出版趋势与2000年后人权、扶贫、治理和可持续发展的国际政策话语一致,表明这些问题必须在全球政策话语中加以考虑。我们讨论了重要的发现,并概述了未来的研究路径和保护策略,通过公平、公正和可持续性的视角,在人类世及以后的多元方法中努力实现人类和非人类实体之间的平衡共存。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Environmental Management
Environmental Management 环境科学-环境科学
CiteScore
6.20
自引率
2.90%
发文量
178
审稿时长
12 months
期刊介绍: Environmental Management offers research and opinions on use and conservation of natural resources, protection of habitats and control of hazards, spanning the field of environmental management without regard to traditional disciplinary boundaries. The journal aims to improve communication, making ideas and results from any field available to practitioners from other backgrounds. Contributions are drawn from biology, botany, chemistry, climatology, ecology, ecological economics, environmental engineering, fisheries, environmental law, forest sciences, geosciences, information science, public affairs, public health, toxicology, zoology and more. As the principal user of nature, humanity is responsible for ensuring that its environmental impacts are benign rather than catastrophic. Environmental Management presents the work of academic researchers and professionals outside universities, including those in business, government, research establishments, and public interest groups, presenting a wide spectrum of viewpoints and approaches.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信