Conservation standards

The document establishes a framework of 14 conservation standards to prevent human rights abuses during site-based conservation interventions. It argues that while states are primary duty bearers, non-state actors—including NGOs and philanthropic foundations—have a 'responsibility to respect' human rights. The standards are divided into rights most likely to be directly infringed (such as self-determination, free, prior and informed consent, and land rights) and those indirectly infringed (such as education and non-discriminatory employment). The authors emphasize that these standards should serve as minimum requirements for all conservation activities to avoid forced evictions, cultural deterioration, and the marginalization of indigenous governance systems.

• Conservation interventions can lead to direct human rights abuses, including the "denial of free, prior and informed consent; lack of engagement with indigenous institutions; eviction; unjust resettlement; destruction of property and livelihoods; denial of access and use of natural resources; intimidation and physical harm; and exploitative employment."
• International human rights responsibilities extend beyond states to include non-state entities such as "international organisations, non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and philanthropic foundations".
• The 'responsibility to respect' human rights for non-state actors is a baseline standard requiring them to "avoid infringing on the human rights of others and should address adverse human rights impacts with which they are involved."
• Indigenous peoples have a right to free, prior and informed consent (FPIC), which is often infringed when they are "not being invited to participate in decision making; participating but not being given the information they need to make an informed decision; or not being afforded the right to provide or withhold free, prior and informed consent."
• Forced evictions and the enlargement of protected area boundaries can violate rights to lands, territories, and resources, often involving a "lack of due process" and the destruction of "dwellings, belongings, livelihoods, trees and crops."
• Exclusionary conservation can indirectly infringe rights to cultural and linguistic heritage, leading to the erosion of "linguistic diversity" and the disruption of "local or traditional educational systems".
• Indigenous peoples may face "exploitative" and "discriminatory conditions of labour" when seeking employment in connection to conservation interventions, such as with tourism groups, after being evicted from their lands.
• The proposed standards are intended to be integrated into existing frameworks, such as the "IUCN Green List of Protected and Conserved Areas", the "Conservation Initiative on Human Rights (CIHR)", and the "Whakatane Mechanism".

APA

Jonas, H., Makagon, J., & Roe, D. (2016). Conservation standards. Natural Justice. https://naturaljustice.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/Conservation-Standards.pdf

Chicago

Jonas, Harry, Jael Makagon, and Dilys Roe. Conservation standards. Natural Justice, 2016. https://naturaljustice.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/Conservation-Standards.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |last1=Jonas |first1=Harry |last2=Makagon |first2=Jael |last3=Roe |first3=Dilys |title=Conservation standards |publisher=Natural Justice |date=August 2016 |url=https://naturaljustice.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/Conservation-Standards.pdf |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{jonas2016conservation, author = {Jonas, Harry and Makagon, Jael and Roe, Dilys}, title = {{Conservation standards}}, institution = {Natural Justice}, year = {2016}, month = aug, url = {https://naturaljustice.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/Conservation-Standards.pdf}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }