Using lessons from criminal justice research to improve conservation law enforcement research and practice.

IF 5.2 1区 环境科学与生态学 Q1 BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION
Freya A V St John, Leejiah Dorward, Harriet Ibbett, Martina Feilzer
{"title":"Using lessons from criminal justice research to improve conservation law enforcement research and practice.","authors":"Freya A V St John, Leejiah Dorward, Harriet Ibbett, Martina Feilzer","doi":"10.1111/cobi.70094","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Urgency to save species from extinction has prompted increased investment in law enforcement in protected areas. To date, such law enforcement has largely focused on increasing costs and reducing opportunities for offending. However, these resource-intensive approaches are not always effective and can contribute to conflict between people and conservation authorities, undermining human well-being and conservation goals. Drawing on criminal justice research, we considered how procedural justice theory-which examines how fair process and the perceived legitimacy of rules and enforcers influence behavior- could enhance understanding of compliance dynamics and complement existing law enforcement approaches, particularly in addressing low-level noncompliance in protected areas. We also explored how principles of procedural justice have been incorporated in general policing and outlined challenges and opportunities to integrating this approach into conservation law enforcement. We considered key opportunity-based (e.g., routine activity theory) and actor-based frameworks (e.g., deterrence theory) underpinning most protected areaenforcement. We then focused on procedural justice theory and the role of legitimacy in encouraging compliance. Evidence from general policing shows that when enforcers treat citizens fairly, listen, and make decisions objectively, they gain trust and legitimacy. In turn, people are more inclined to comply with laws and cooperate with enforcers. Procedural fairness can be implemented during encounters by embracing 4 pillars: neutrality, voice, respect, and trustworthiness. Outlining challenges of integrating this approach in conservation law enforcement, we highlight the need to address limited public trust in state authority and other factors including working conditions of enforcers. Alongside ensuring the integrity and accountability of conservation law enforcement, we argue that embedding principles of procedural fairness into interactions between enforcers and citizens could reduce low-level noncompliance. Success, however, requires conservation law enforcement to be reconceptualized by placing procedural fairness and legitimacy on a more equal footing with deterrence in research and practice.</p>","PeriodicalId":10689,"journal":{"name":"Conservation Biology","volume":" ","pages":"e70094"},"PeriodicalIF":5.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7617914/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Conservation Biology","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.70094","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Urgency to save species from extinction has prompted increased investment in law enforcement in protected areas. To date, such law enforcement has largely focused on increasing costs and reducing opportunities for offending. However, these resource-intensive approaches are not always effective and can contribute to conflict between people and conservation authorities, undermining human well-being and conservation goals. Drawing on criminal justice research, we considered how procedural justice theory-which examines how fair process and the perceived legitimacy of rules and enforcers influence behavior- could enhance understanding of compliance dynamics and complement existing law enforcement approaches, particularly in addressing low-level noncompliance in protected areas. We also explored how principles of procedural justice have been incorporated in general policing and outlined challenges and opportunities to integrating this approach into conservation law enforcement. We considered key opportunity-based (e.g., routine activity theory) and actor-based frameworks (e.g., deterrence theory) underpinning most protected areaenforcement. We then focused on procedural justice theory and the role of legitimacy in encouraging compliance. Evidence from general policing shows that when enforcers treat citizens fairly, listen, and make decisions objectively, they gain trust and legitimacy. In turn, people are more inclined to comply with laws and cooperate with enforcers. Procedural fairness can be implemented during encounters by embracing 4 pillars: neutrality, voice, respect, and trustworthiness. Outlining challenges of integrating this approach in conservation law enforcement, we highlight the need to address limited public trust in state authority and other factors including working conditions of enforcers. Alongside ensuring the integrity and accountability of conservation law enforcement, we argue that embedding principles of procedural fairness into interactions between enforcers and citizens could reduce low-level noncompliance. Success, however, requires conservation law enforcement to be reconceptualized by placing procedural fairness and legitimacy on a more equal footing with deterrence in research and practice.

利用刑事司法研究的经验教训来改进保护执法的研究和实践。
拯救濒临灭绝物种的紧迫性促使在保护区的执法方面增加了投资。迄今为止,此类执法主要集中在增加成本和减少犯罪机会上。然而,这些资源密集型方法并不总是有效的,而且可能导致人们与保护当局之间的冲突,破坏人类福祉和保护目标。在刑事司法研究的基础上,我们考虑了程序正义理论——它考察了公平程序以及规则和执法者的感知合法性如何影响行为——如何增强对合规动态的理解,并补充现有的执法方法,特别是在解决保护区低级违规行为方面。我们还探讨了如何将程序正义原则纳入一般警务,并概述了将这种方法纳入保护执法的挑战和机遇。我们考虑了支持大多数保护区执法的关键基于机会(例如,常规活动理论)和基于参与者的框架(例如,威慑理论)。然后,我们将重点放在程序正义理论和合法性在鼓励遵守方面的作用上。来自一般警务的证据表明,当执法者公平对待公民、倾听并客观地做出决定时,他们就会获得信任和合法性。反过来,人们更倾向于遵守法律并与执法者合作。程序公平可以通过四个支柱来实现:中立性、发言权、尊重和可信度。我们概述了将这种方法纳入保护执法的挑战,强调需要解决公众对国家权威的有限信任和其他因素,包括执法人员的工作条件。除了确保保护执法的完整性和问责制外,我们认为将程序公平原则嵌入执法人员和公民之间的互动中可以减少低级别的不合规行为。然而,要想成功,就需要重新定义保护执法,将程序的公平性和合法性与研究和实践中的威慑放在更加平等的基础上。
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
Conservation Biology
Conservation Biology 环境科学-环境科学
CiteScore
12.70
自引率
3.20%
发文量
175
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: Conservation Biology welcomes submissions that address the science and practice of conserving Earth's biological diversity. We encourage submissions that emphasize issues germane to any of Earth''s ecosystems or geographic regions and that apply diverse approaches to analyses and problem solving. Nevertheless, manuscripts with relevance to conservation that transcend the particular ecosystem, species, or situation described will be prioritized for publication.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信