000			02308nab a2200217 4500
003			OSt
005			20230924151418.0
007			cr aa aaaaa
008			230924b |||||||| |||| 00| 0 eng d
100			_aChambers, Josephine _958111
245			_aWhy joint conservation and development projects often fail: _bAn in depth examination in the Peruvian Amazon/
260			_bSage, _c2020.
300			_aVol. 3, Issue 2, 2020 ( 365–398 p.)
520			_aConservation projects commonly claim to convert local people into long-term environmental stewards and improve their well-being. Yet, evidence frequently contradicts these win-win claims. The “multiple environmentalities” framework outlines distinct approaches that projects often use to foster environmental motivation and behavior: (1) neoliberal: constructing material incentives, (2) sovereign: imposing protective laws, and (3) disciplinary: fostering norms and values. We use a mixed method approach to examine how combinations of these environmentalities shape the land use motivations and behavior of 270 families living in 15 project settings in the Peruvian Amazon. We identify four direct reasons why these projects often fail to achieve their intended outcomes, regardless of the environmentalities employed: (1) self-selection of like-minded individuals, (2) limited ability of extrinsic motivators (i.e. material incentives and protective laws) to reduce reported deforestation behaviors, (3) limited internalization of motivations for conservation, and (4) ignored broader economic drivers of deforestation. We argue that these challenges stem from the typical external design of conservation projects based on fixed and limited interpretations of human motivation. Our findings point to the importance of deliberative processes that can support local and external actors to navigate and reframe competing motivations to co-design approaches to conservation governance at local and broader scales.
700			_aMejia, Margarita Del Aguila _958112
700			_aReategui, Raydith Ramirez _958113
700			_aSandbrook, Chris _958114
773	0		_012446 _917117 _dLondon: Sage Publication Ltd, 2019. _tEnvironment and Planning E: Nature and Space/ _x 25148486
856			_uhttps://doi.org/10.1177/2514848619873910
942			_2ddc _cEJR
999			_c14765 _d14765