For decades, conservation aimed to protect nature from people. Now, a growing movement argues it must learn to protect nature with people.
A decade ago, a landmark study identified 100 priority questions for global biodiversity conservation. In 2018, Jucker and colleagues revisited these questions to assess progress. Their work sparked a critical response in 2021 that would challenge the very foundations of conservation science: a call for its decolonization 1 . This response argued that despite good intentions, conservation remained wedded to Western scientific paradigms that often excluded Indigenous knowledge and reinforced colonial power structures. The debate has since opened urgent questions about who gets to define conservation, what knowledge counts, and how we can build more just and effective approaches to protecting life on Earth.
Decolonizing conservation represents a paradigm shift in how we approach environmental protection. It begins with recognizing that modern conservation emerged alongside European colonialism, often treating Indigenous territories as "empty" wilderness to be protected by removing the very people who had stewarded those ecosystems for millennia 2 .
This requires "a radical shift in focus of conservation efforts toward the myriad of vibrant forms of living with and knowing the world" 3 .
At its core, decolonizing conservation involves:
Where settlers and their institutions control Indigenous lands and knowledge systems 2
Indigenous cultures, languages, self-determination, and relationships with land 2
Over Indigenous territories and respecting Indigenous sovereignty 2
The true and full inclusion of diverse ways of knowing as equally valid knowledge systems 4
| Element | Traditional Conservation | Decolonial Conservation |
|---|---|---|
| Knowledge Valued | Primarily Western science | Multiple knowledge systems including Indigenous knowledge |
| Power Structure | Top-down, external experts | Community-led, collaborative governance |
| Primary Goal | Biodiversity protection | Social-ecological justice and biodiversity |
| Relationship with Land | Land as resource to manage | Land as relative with whom we relate |
| Measurement of Success | Scientific indicators alone | Multiple indicators including community well-being |
The 2021 response to Jucker and colleagues' assessment served as a catalyst, pushing conservation science to confront its colonial legacy. While the details of the response are not publicly available in abstract form, the subsequent literature and discourse it inspired reveal several key critiques 1 :
The response likely highlighted how priority-setting in conservation has historically been dominated by Western institutions and researchers, overlooking questions relevant to Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities (IPLCs).
This exclusion perpetuates what feminist and postcolonial scholars call "epistemic injustice" - the systematic dismissal of certain types of knowledge and knowers.
Following this exchange, researchers have emphasized that diversifying priority-setting is essential for developing conservation strategies that are both effective and equitable 1 . This means not just including more diverse participants, but fundamentally reconsidering what counts as important conservation knowledge and action.
The movement to decolonize conservation has moved beyond critique to develop concrete practices and frameworks. These tools offer pathways toward more equitable and effective conservation.
A comprehensive paper published in Ambio identifies six key policy instruments that can help decolonize climate research and, by extension, conservation practice 4 :
Of Indigenous peoples and local communities
On projects affecting Indigenous territories
Governing traditional practices
For Indigenous knowledge
The right of Indigenous Peoples to govern data about their peoples, lands, and resources 6
Of Indigenous languages
"You do not enter partnerships with Indigenous Peoples unless you have a long-term commitment and you are giving, you're not just taking" 4 .
| Concept | Function/Purpose | Application in Conservation |
|---|---|---|
| Positionality | Acknowledging how one's identity and position power affect research | Researchers explicitly reflect on their standpoint and relationships to communities |
| Reciprocity | Ensuring exchange rather than extraction in research relationships | Planning for mutual benefit and giving back to communities 8 |
| Relationality | Understanding humans as part of ecological relationships rather than separate from nature | Recognizing conservation as relationship-building 5 |
| Data Sovereignty | The right of Indigenous peoples to govern collection and use of their data | Indigenous communities control how their knowledge is used 6 |
| Two-Eyed Seeing | Integrating Indigenous and Western knowledge systems without hierarchy | Conservation planning draws on multiple knowledge sources |
Around the world, conservation practitioners and communities are developing innovative approaches that put decolonial principles into practice.
The Land Back movement has emerged as a powerful conservation strategy. Contrary to misconceptions, Land Back isn't just about land transfer - it's about recognizing Indigenous jurisdiction and stewardship over traditional territories 2 .
This approach directly challenges what some scholars call "green colonialism" - the continued appropriation of Indigenous lands in the name of conservation.
Research shows that Indigenous stewardship supports biodiversity: though Indigenous peoples comprise only about 5% of the global population, their territories protect approximately 80% of the world's biodiversity 2 .
In Africa, scholars like Olusegun Steven Samuel are exploring the intersection of decolonial thought and Ubuntu philosophy in conservation practice 5 . Ubuntu's emphasis on relationality and interconnectedness - often summarized as "I am because we are" - offers an alternative to Western conservation models that separate humans from nature.
This approach situates conservation at the intersection of decolonial and Ubuntu lenses, emphasizing:
Decolonizing conservation is not a checklist to complete but an ongoing process of critical reflection and transformation 2 . It requires what Indigenous reviewer Kahsennóktha describes as iterative, cyclical, ever-deepening work 2 .
In research funding and priority-setting
On editorial boards of conservation journals 1
The continued dominance of Western scientific approaches
In academic and conservation institutions
Yet the transformative potential is immense. As Dr. Nelson notes:
"If we're going to be talking about Indigenous knowledge systems and local knowledge systems, we have to confront epistemic hegemony and epistemic justice and decolonization. Not just decolonizing climate policy, but really decolonizing the way we think about climate problems. We can't talk about solutions until we talk about how we frame the problems" 4 .
The response to Jucker et al. represents more than an academic debate - it's part of a growing movement to build conservation practices that are not only scientifically sound but also socially just, recognizing that the two are inextricably linked.
By embracing multiple ways of knowing and returning authority over lands to Indigenous stewards, conservation may finally move beyond its colonial past toward a more equitable and effective future.