Search

Copyright of People & Nature is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Privately protected areas (PPAs) are a potentially innovative conservation tool. Legal recognition is necessary for their success, especially where there are institutional challenges to nature conservation, such as in South America. Although PPAs have increased in South America since the early 2000s, there is a critical information gap pertaining to their legal frameworks. We analyzed the level of landowner commitment to and governmental support for PPAs across countries in South America that officially recognize PPAs. We analyzed the legal framework governing PPAs and reviewed literature on them. This process was done in English and Spanish. The information we gathered was validated by 16 conservation experts from 10 South American countries. Because Peru is 1 of only 2 South American countries where local communities create and manage PPAs, we studied Peruvian PPAs in more detail by examining official creation documents and interviewing 13 local conservation professionals. We found inadequate minimum duration of PPAs and vague guidelines for conducting economic activities within them and a lack of governmental support (e.g., financial and technical support) for PPAs. Support was limited to the exemption from rural property taxes, which are relatively low compared with countries outside South America. In Peru, PPAs run by individuals and communities needed different legal frameworks because they were created with different objectives and had different sizes and duration of commitments. The prompt improvement of legal frameworks across South America is necessary for PPAs to achieve their aim of being places for enduring nature conservation in the region. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Improving small-scale fishers' wellbeing is a core policy objective in efforts to achieve just, equitable and sustainable futures. Nonetheless, fishers' wellbeing is rarely assessed or monitored over time using quantitative indicators. We evaluated the socio-economic performance and evolution of two small-scale fishing communities of northern Peru using the Sustainable Livelihoods Approach. Quantitative indicators were used to characterize fishers financial, human, natural, physical, and social capitals. We also developed a simple, yet novel, composite index to quantify fishers' Unsatisfied Basic Needs. This approach allowed us to grasp changes in the material and relational dimensions of fishers' wellbeing over time. Fishers in these communities had: (i) low human and financial capital assets, (ii) strong social capital assets, and (iii) experienced improvements in their physical capital assets whilst reporting declines in their natural capital assets. Although fishers mainly use highly selective, low-impact fishing methods, their target stocks and incomes are declining. People's wellbeing in these communities was highly vulnerable to external environmental (e.g., El Niño) and economic (e.g., access to markets) drivers as well as poor governance (e.g., weak rule of law, low institutional fit, corruption). Our results suggest that small-scale fishers of these two sites are currently in a social-ecological trap, with many points of entry and few ways out. We discuss potential avenues for escaping the trap and improving their wellbeing based on commonly suggested livelihoods strategies found in the literature. • The Sustainable Livelihoods Approach was used to assess fisher's wellbeing in Peru. • Novel indicators were developed to characterize fishers' capital assets. • Small-scale fishers in Peru are caught in a social-ecological trap. • Fishers' livelihoods are not sustainable, yet they mostly use selective fishing gears. • Improving fishers' wellbeing requires broadening the scope of fisheries research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]