Abstract Signatories of global conservation treaties have pledged to support Indigenous peoples' rights and roles in maintaining biodiversity and ecosystems. Movements embracing biocultural concepts (e.g. Indigenous ecological knowledge, cultural ecosystem services) and governance approaches (e.g. sacred natural sites, biosphere reserves) have provided important impulses, but existing frameworks offer limited insight into the complex interplay between Indigenous communities, ecosystems, and conservation policy. A complementary approach that centres the analysis on ‘doing’ biocultural heritage, the processes that constitute and unsettle it, and the broader context to which it connects can offer new pathways for informing conservation policy. This article introduces such an approach through the concept of everyday environmental heritage (EEH). We define EEH as an inherently intangible and unstable process of producing and transmitting culture through artefacts, spaces and practices in a way that creates direct and indirect links to people's local ecosystems. Its main analytical value derives from (1) engaging with the communal processes and external contextual factors that shape contemporary heritage expressions; (2) interrogating their intrinsic value and instrumental functions; and (3) exploring the behavioural, social, and political systems to which they connect. We illustrate a subset of the possibilities of the EEH concept in an exploratory case study of forest management by Indigenous communities in northern Thailand. Data were collected using participatory ethnographic methods in two Pgaz K'Nyau (Karen) and two Hmong villages in Chiang Mai province from 03/2022 to 05/2024, which involved 75 Indigenous participants and eight community consultations. Through inductive thematic analysis, we highlight three key manifestations of EEH: intrinsically valued practices without direct links to external conservation stakeholders, instrumental practices for contesting state conservation policies and land‐use restrictions, and emerging practices with the potential to stabilise into one of the first two types. Local social and institutional networks were key to support EEH practices. We discuss how varied expressions of EEH, their political antecedents, and their systemic consequents can help identify and promote sustainable and Indigenous‐led conservation approaches. We conclude that future work should systematically explore conservation effect mechanisms and bottom‐up policy design process models centred on the concept of EEH. Read the free Plain Language Summary for this article on the Journal blog.
Abstract Human–wildlife conflict (HWC) affects not only agricultural production but also how farming households adjust access to and use of land. Existing research has focused largely on welfare losses and land‐use responses, while little is known about whether ecological risk is associated with the governance arrangements through which farmland is transferred Drawing on risk and uncertainty theory, we examine the relationship between HWC and informal farmland transfer (IFT) using survey data from 921 land‐transferring households drawn from 3213 surveyed households in Asian elephant range areas of Yunnan Province, China (2022–2024). We employ Probit, Heckman two‐step and IV‐Probit models for analysis. HWC is significantly associated with greater participation in IFT among land‐transferring households. Specifically, HWC increases both the probability and area of informal transfer‐out, but has no significant effect on informal transfer‐in. The effect is context‐dependent: Informal transfer‐out increases among households both near and far from nature reserves and is concentrated among small‐scale farmers, whereas reductions in informal transfer‐in are observed only in specific subgroups, namely households near reserves and households whose head is employed in the public sector. These findings suggest that ecological risk is associated with asymmetric land adjustment, primarily through informal transfer‐out, and that informal arrangements remain an important channel through which households reorganize land commitments under uncertainty. The study extends relational perspectives on HWC by showing that wildlife‐related risk is associated not only with individual land‐use responses but also with socially embedded forms of land reallocation. Policies in ecologically vulnerable regions should improve the flexibility and accessibility of formal land‐transfer institutions and strengthen coordination with wildlife damage compensation and agricultural insurance to support more secure and adaptive land adjustment. Read the free Plain Language Summary for this article on the Journal blog.
Abstract Urban nature supports mental health in cities, with benefits including reduced stress and anxiety, enhanced positive emotions and increased social connection. However, most evidence concerns dominant communities in high‐income countries, neglecting marginalised groups such as migrants, refugees, sexual minorities and neurodivergent individuals. Given the more than 280 million international migrants worldwide, it is essential to understand whether, and how, urban nature supports their well‐being. We conducted a systematic literature review, following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis framework, of quantitative, qualitative and mixed‐methods articles on urban nature interactions and the well‐being of migrant communities, identifying 39 studies. We found impacts of urban nature through four well‐being domains (intrapersonal, interpersonal, cultural and place‐related) and seven types of well‐being. Positive impacts outweighed negative impacts, and included enhanced positive emotions, social interaction and sense of belonging. Negative impacts included feelings of alienation, perceptions of unsafety and conflict with dominant groups. Major barriers were maintenance issues and a lack of information about safety and social norms in green spaces. The cultural domain is a novel contribution to the current frameworks linking nature and well‐being benefits. It enables migrants to maintain cultural practices while shaping new identities. Also, a critical geographical gap was identified, with only five articles focused on the Southern Hemisphere. These results can inform strategies to create inclusive urban green spaces that overcome barriers and enhance the benefits of urban nature for migrants and host communities. Broader research across underrepresented regions may also deepen understanding of how nature and culture are valued and interrelated across diverse worldviews. Read the free Plain Language Summary for this article on the Journal blog.
Abstract While biodiversity conservation has had its local success, worldwide biodiversity loss continues rapidly. Despite the push towards more inclusive and equitable approaches, conservation practices often reinforce existing conceptualizations of biodiversity, excluding other ways of knowing and valuing nature. This paper explores the process of assessing biodiversity among a group of habitat experts. Our study contributes to the literature with empirical understanding of the tension between objective and more pluralistic, relational understandings of biodiversity among a group of experts. We conducted semi‐structured interviews and applied the values, rules and knowledges framework to explore the decision contexts of habitat experts. By outlining, analysing and comparing experts' perceptions of biodiversity, we identified two distinct groups. Group 1 promoted objectivity, intrinsic and ecological values and natural scientific knowledge and was reluctant to discuss socio‐economic aspects. Group 2 aimed for societal impact by integrating values, knowledges, socio‐economic and regulatory perspectives. Groups agreed on ecological principles and rules for measuring biodiversity and the drivers of biodiversity loss. Groups have different ontological assumptions about nature and views of the role conservation experts should play in society. These differences are connected to relational models with respect to goals and practices for biodiversity conservation. Group 1 preferred to provide decision‐making with scientific insight, while Group 2 promotes active participation and knowledge brokering as a part of expert work. To halt biodiversity loss, societal changes sparked by socio‐economic aspects are needed. A pluralistic approach to decision‐making complemented by active expert engagement and knowledge weaving supports societal transformation. Read the free Plain Language Summary for this article on the Journal blog.
Abstract Repairing the human–nature relationship is one of the century's defining tasks. In this paper, we were interested in whether nature‐based nostalgia was a significant and unique predictor of higher nature connectedness as a key operationalisation of the human–nature relationship. This work builds upon extant research showing that nostalgia is an emotion many readily understand and one that is causally associated with both increased social connectedness and higher feelings of growth and meaning in life (core components of eudaimonia). We conducted three online studies in independent samples. In Study 1 ( n = 201), US university students completed baseline measures of affect and nature connectedness, reflected on a previous nature experience of their choosing and then re‐completed these same measures after the reflection. In Study 2 ( n = 266), US adults completed baseline nature connectedness, reflected on either nostalgia or a control reflection and completed these measures again. In Study 3 ( n = 338), UK adults completed baseline measures of eudaimonia (meaning, personal growth and authenticity) and hedonia (pleasure, happiness and fun) before reflecting on a nostalgic nature experience of their choosing. They then completed these measures again. In Study 1, results revealed that the reflections were associated with increased nature connectedness and that this was uniquely explained by the effect of the reflection on nostalgia when controlling for positive and negative affectivity. In Study 2, nostalgic reflection resulted in increased nature connectedness (relative to the control). In Study 3, nostalgic reflection was associated with increased nature connectedness, in part, due to both increased eudaimonia and increased hedonia. Overall, results indicated that nostalgic reflections about nature are associated with, and may causally lead to, higher nature connectedness, making it a worthwhile target for nature connectedness and well‐being interventions. Read the free Plain Language Summary for this article on the Journal blog.
