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

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.