Tailoring social safeguards in conservation to reflect the local context and level of risk

The conservation community recognizes that the costs of conserving nature for current and future generations should not fall, disproportionately, on those least able to afford themnor on those least responsible for causing the degradation of nature and the loss of biodiversity in the first place. Social safeguards (i.e., a set of mutually reinforcing processes that are designed to respect and protect the rights of people whose lives may be impacted by development or conservation decisions and actions) have emerged as one mechanism for identifying and putting measures in place to avoid and mitigate adverse social impacts that may occur through conservation policy and practice. Safeguards are also essential to ensure that people engaged in conservation activities do not suffer harm. Social safeguards have long been an element of decision-making regarding development projects (Dann & Riegner, 2019) but increasingly, grant makers are requiring social safeguards be put in place as a condition for grantees to receive funds for conservation. The development sector (IFC, 2015; The World Bank, 2017) and REDD+ (Reduce Emissions from Deforestation and forest Degradation) sector (McDermott et al., 2012; Tegegne et al., 2017) have advocated for implementation of safeguards to minimize the risk of adverse social impacts associated with externally designed and financed projects. Several authors (Humphrey, 2016; Lederer, 2012; Schwarte, 2010) have noted that there will probably not be a one-size-fits-all set of practices to address social safety as project objectives and approaches differ as widely as do risks to projectaffected communities. Wildlife Conservation Society (WCS) acknowledges the importance of conducting social impact assessments and putting in place locally appropriate social safeguards Received: 20 July 2021 Revised: 18 April 2022 Accepted: 23 May 2022