The scope of empowerment for conservation and communities.

Conservationists increasingly position conservation that is mutually beneficial to people and biodiversity on the promise of empowerment of people through participatory discourse, metrics, processes, and outcomes. Empowerment represents multidimensional concepts and theories that permeate the interlinking levels of power, from the psychological to the political, and social scales in which conservation operates. The multifaceted nature of empowerment makes it challenging to understand, pursue, and evaluate as a central philosophical commitment and goal-oriented practice in conservation. Moreover, definitional and methodological uncertainty may disempower interested and affected groups because they can foster conceptual assumptions that reinforce institutionalized barriers to systemic changes. Despite these complexities, there are no targeted reviews of empowerment in conservation. We conducted a scoping review of the conservation literature to synthesize the meanings and uses of empowerment in the field. We reviewed 121 of the most cited conservation articles that invoked or assessed empowerment from 1992 to 2017 to document geographic, conceptual, and methodological trends in the scales and theories of empowerment deployed by conservationists. Research claiming or assessing empowerment through conservation often focused on communities in the Global South. Most studies relied on qualitative and mixed methods (78%) collected largely from male or non-Indigenous participants. Few studies (30%) defined the 20 types of empowerment they referenced. Fewer studies (3%) applied empowerment theories in their work. Our findings show that empowerment discourse of local and Indigenous communities permeates the discourse of people-centered conservation. Yet, overreliance on empowerment's rhetorical promise and minimal engagement with theory (e.g., postcolonial theory) risks disempowering people by obscuring empowerment's foundational value to conservation and communities and oversimplifying the complex realities of people-centered conservation. Lasting change could come from more meaningful engagement with empowerment, including coproducing definitions and measures with and for disempowered social groups to tackle widespread power disparities in conservation today.

El alcance del empoderamiento para la conservación y las comunidades Resumen Con frecuencia los conservacionistas posicionan a la conservación como benéfica para las personas y la biodiversidad mediante discursos, medidas, procesos y resultados participativos que prometen el empoderamiento de la gente. El empoderamiento representa conceptos y teorías multidimensionales que permean los niveles interconectados de poder, desde el psicológico al político, y las escalas sociales en las que opera la conservación. La naturaleza multifacética del empoderamiento complica que se entienda, se dé seguimiento y se evalúe como un compromiso filosófico central y una práctica orientada hacia las metas dentro de la conservación. Además, la incertidumbre metodológica y de definición pueden restar autoridad a los grupos interesados o afectados pues pueden promover suposiciones conceptuales que refuerzan las barreras institucionales de los cambios sistémicos. A pesar de estas complejidades, no existen revisiones focalizadas del empoderamiento en la conservación. Realizamos una revisión de alcance de la literatura de conservación para sintetizar los significados y usos de la palabra empoderamiento en este campo. Revisamos 121 de los artículos sobre conservación más citados que invocaron o evaluaron el empoderamiento entre 1992 y 2017 para documentar las tendencias geográficas, conceptuales y metodológicas en las escalas y teorías del empoderamiento usadas por los conservacionistas. La mayoría de los artículos que afirmaban o evaluaban el empoderamiento por medio de la conservación se enfocaron en comunidades del Sur Global. La mayoría de los estudios dependieron de métodos cualitativos y mixtos (78%) tomados principalmente de participantes masculinos o no indígenas. Pocos estudios (30%) definieron los 20 tipos de empoderamiento que referenciaron. Todavía menos estudios (3%) aplicaron las teorías de empoderamiento a su trabajo. Nuestros descubrimientos muestran que el discurso de empoderamiento de las comunidades locales e indígenas permea el discurso de la conservación centrada en la gente. Sin embargo, depender en exceso de la promesa retórica del empoderamiento e involucrarse en lo mínimo con la teoría (p. ej.: teoría postcolonial) arriesga que la gente se pierda autoridad al oscurecer el valor fundamental que tiene el empoderamiento para la conservación y las comunidades y simplificar sobremanera las realidades complejas de la conservación centrada en las personas. El cambio duradero podría venir de involucrarse de forma más significativa con el empoderamiento, lo que incluye la coproducción de definiciones y medidas con y para los grupos sociales no empoderados para resolver la disparidad de poder que existe hoy en día en la conservación.

Indigenous Participation and the Incorporation of Indigenous Knowledge and Perspectives in Global Environmental Governance Forums: a Systematic Review.

Global environmental governance (GEG) forums, such as those convened through the United Nations, result in the development of monumental guiding frameworks such as the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) Conference of Parties (COPs) Aichi and post-2020 targets. The ratification of policy frameworks by member and/or signatory states can result in major shifts in environmental policy and decision-making and has major implications for Indigenous communities. In this article, we present systematic review of the peer-reviewed literature on Indigenous participation in GEG forums, and focus on the specific questions: (1) what GEG forums include Indigenous participation and (2) how do Indigenous peoples participate in GEG forums, including how their perspectives and knowledges are framed and/or included/excluded within governance discussions, decisions, and negotiations. We provide a bibliometric analysis of the articles and derive seven inductively determined themes from our review: (1) Critical governance forums and decisions; (2) inclusion and exclusion of Indigenous voices and knowledge in GEG forums; (3) capacity barriers; (4) knowledge hierarchies: inclusion, integration, and bridging; (5) representation and grouping of Indigenous peoples in GEG; (6) need for networks among and between Indigenous peoples and other governance actors; and (7) Indigenous peoples influence on GEG decisions and processes. Our findings can be used to improve GEG forums by contributing to the development strategies that address the barriers and inequities to meaningful and beneficial Indigenous participation and can contribute to future research that is focused on understanding the experiences of Indigenous peoples within GEG forums.