Go to the id21 home page   ID21 - communicating development research
Global Issues
 
Search the whole id21 database
 

Help page and other search methods
    id21 Global Issues
  Population change
  Food security
  Climate change
  Gender
  Poverty
  Human rights
  Global economy
  Governance
  Aid
  Conflict
and emergencies
  Tourism
 
    id21 Health
 
    id21 Education
 
    id21 Urban Development
 
    id21 Natural Resources
 
    id21 Rural Development
 
    id21 Home page
 
    Gender and Violence in African Schools
 
    id21 Publications
 
    id21 Viewpoints
 
    About id21
 
    Links
 
    Contact id21
 
    id21News
 
    id21 Insights
 
    id21 Media
 
     
Linking conservation and sustainable livelihoods

Poor communities are often closely connected to natural resources. Despite this, natural resource conservation efforts are separate from poverty reduction and livelihood programmes; conservation and development practitioners often work with different priorities. The Millennium Development Goals could provide a framework to integrate poverty reduction efforts and natural resource conservation. Yet, the current state of the Millennium Development Goals enhances this divide.

Many people still see environmental sustainability as a separate issue from development, despite recognition over 30 years ago of the need to integrate the two. Research from the International Institute for Environment and Development in the UK examines the links between natural resource conservation and poverty reduction in the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). MDG 7, which aims to ‘ensure environmental sustainability’, considers conservation in association with development but is not included in other goals. Within MDG 7 there are references to land covered by natural forests (indicator 25) and to biodiversity (indicator 26). However, these indicators refer to ‘quantity’, such as the area of land and the number of species. They do not consider the ‘quality’ of conservation indicators.

The research notes that:

  • The focus on quantity ignores their management and governance, the rights of the people living in and around them and the different costs and benefits of protected areas.
  • The indicators overlook the environmental value of many natural ecosystems, such as agricultural land and agro-forestry areas.
  • The focus on state-run conservation areas excludes other types of community conservation such as areas designated for protection by indigenous people and local communities and those under private ownership

Including conservation-related indicators only in MDG 7 reinforces the distinction between conservation and poverty reduction efforts. Given the high dependence of many poor communities on natural resources, combining conservation and poverty reduction efforts through the MDGs could strengthen both aims. The MDGs could better reflect this potential in several ways by:

  • Integrating environmental considerations into all MDGs.
  • Considering a wider range of land uses and resource types.
  • Including indicators that reflect local perceptions of the environment as well as global conservation and development priorities.
  • Indicators should focus less on quantity objectives and more on the quality of resources being conserved.
  • Encouraging different types of management structures such as community-conserved or co-managed areas which build on the knowledge and management practices of local communities.
  • considering local values and include local rights and responsibilities and involving indigenous and marginalised groups in state-run protected areas.

Poverty reduction and sustainable development are the main ideas behind the MDGs. Ensuring environmental sustainability is vital to achieving these aims. This will require integrated action by both conservation and development communities. The expansion of the MDG indicators to link conservation and poverty concerns explicitly would provide a framework that could achieve both aims.

Source(s):
‘The MDGs and natural resources management: reconcilling sustainable livelihoods and resource conservation or fuelling the divide?’ The MDGs and local processes, International Institute for Environment and Development, 2004 Full document.

Funded by: International Institute for Environment and Development, UK

id21 Research Highlight: 24 February 2005

Further Information:
Dilys Roe
International Institute for Environment and Development
3 Endsleigh Street
London WC1H 0DD, UK

Tel: +44 (0) 20 7388 2117
Fax: +44 (0) 20 7388 2826
Contact the contributor: dilys.roe@iied.org

International Institute for Environment and Development, UK

Other related links:
'Mainstreaming participation in global conservation'

'Buying and selling wildlife conservation in Kenya'

The MDGs and IIED

UN Millennium Development Goals

World Bank - Development Goals

Views expressed on these pages are not necessarily those of DFID, IDS, id21 or other contributing institutions. Unless stated otherwise articles may be copied or quoted without restriction, provided id21 and originating author(s) and institution(s) are acknowledged.

Copyright © 2007 id21. All rights reserved.

Week beginning Monday 6th October 2008
FREE Information Delivery services from id21:
Get updates by email: id21 news
Insights: research digests
Contact id21

 

 

Go to the International Institute for Environment and Development, UK site.