Search

Internationale Geldgeber haben die Finanzierung für den Schutz tropischer Wälder erhöht, um der globalen Herausforderung von Klima, Biodiversität und Nachhaltigkeit zu begegnen. Allerdings fehlen subnationale Informationen darüber, wo und wie die Gelder verteilt werden, welche Faktoren die Finanzierung beeinflussen und wie sie mit der Dynamik der Wälder und geschützten Gebiete korrelieren. Diese Thesis beabsichtigt, diese Fragen zu beantworten, indem sie sich mit drei Jahrzehnten internationaler Naturschutzfinanzierung in den Hauptabholzungsgebieten Südamerikas auseinandersetzt. Mithilfe gemischter Methoden habe ich die Interessen der Geldgeber thematisch und geografisch kartiert, räumliche Determinanten der Mittelvergabe identifiziert und Schwankungen der Finanzierung über Standorte und Zeit hinweg mit der Dynamik der Waldbedeckung und geschützten Gebiete verknüpft. Die Ergebnisse zeigten, dass die internationale Naturschutzfinanzierung eine Mischung aus global relevanten Interessen und bilateralen Interessen darstellt, ermöglicht durch sozioökonomische und biophysikalische Verbindungen zwischen den spendenden und empfangenden Regionen. Trockenwaldökosysteme mit hoher Abholzungsrate waren besonders unterfinanziert und gefährdeten die Ökosysteme, Arten und die lokale Bevölkerung. Die Verknüpfung von Schutzgebieten und Finanzierung mit dem Konzept der Landnutzungsdynamik enthüllte weitere Nuancen und half, kontextspezifische Empfehlungen zu identifizieren. Diese Studie präsentierte die erste subnationale Analyse der internationalen Naturschutzfinanzierung auf kontinentaler Ebene, zeigte Übereinstimmungen und Diskrepanzen zwischen den zugeteilten Ressourcen und den Naturschutzbedürfnissen und beleuchtete die komplexe und dynamische Landschaft der Finanzierungsmöglichkeiten, mit der andere Akteure umgehen müssen., International donors have increased funding for tropical forest conservation to address the global challenge of climate, biodiversity, and sustainability. However, subnational information on where and how funds are allocated, factors influencing funding, and its correlation with forest dynamics and protected areas is lacking. This thesis aims to answer these questions by delving into three decades of international conservation funding in South America’s major deforestation areas. Using mixed methods, I mapped donor interests thematically and geographically, identify spatial determinants of funding allocation, and link funding variations across locations and time with forest cover and protected areas dynamics. Results found that international conservation funding carried a mix of globally relevant interests and bilateral interests enabled by socio-economic and biophysical connections between the donating and receiving regions. Dry forest ecoregions with high deforestation rates have been particularly underfunded, threatening the ecosystems, species, and local people depending on them. Dedicated global biodiversity fund, raising attention to drier ecosystems, targeting highly threatened areas, and making funding more accessible to local actors for local conservation needs, may help address the gap. This study presented the first subnational level analysis of international conservation funding at the continental scale, revealed the matches and mismatches between the allocated resources and the conservation needs, and shed light on the complex and dynamic landscape of funding opportunities that other actors need to navigate in.

Increased conservation action to protect more habitat and species is fueling a vigorous debate about the relative effectiveness of different sorts of protected areas. Here we review the literature that compares the effectiveness of protected areas managed by states and areas managed by Indigenous peoples and/or local communities. We argue that these can be hard comparisons to make. Robust comparative case studies are rare, and the epistemic communities producing them are fractured by language, discipline, and geography. Furthermore the distinction between these different forms of protection on the ground can be blurred. We also have to be careful about the value of this sort of comparison as the consequences of different forms of conservation for people and nonhuman nature are messy and diverse. Measures of effectiveness, moreover, focus on specific dimensions of conservation performance, which can omit other important dimensions. With these caveats, we report on findings observed by multiple study groups focusing on different regions and issues whose reports have been compiled into this article. There is a tendency in the data for community-based or co-managed governance arrangements to produce beneficial outcomes for people and nature. These arrangements are often accompanied by struggles between rural groups and powerful states. Findings are highly context specific and global generalizations have limited value.

Global commodity flows between distally connected social-ecological systems pose important challenges to sustainability governance. These challenges are partly due to difficulties in designing and implementing governance institutions that fit or match the scale of the environmental and social problems generated in such telecoupled systems. We focus on the spatial dimension of governance fit in relation to global commodity flows and telecoupled systems. Specifically, we draw on examples from land use and global agricultural commodity governance to examine two overarching types of governance mismatches: boundary mismatches and resolution mismatches. We argue that one way to address mismatches is through governance rescaling and illustrate this approach with reference to examples of three broad types of governance approaches: trade agreements, due diligence laws, and landscape approaches to supply chain governance. No single governance approach is likely to address all mismatches, highlighting the need to align multiple governance approaches to govern telecoupled systems effectively.