The scope of empowerment for conservation and communities

Abstract

AbstractConservationists 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.