Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40937832›Full record

ArticleConservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology2026

Diagnosing scaling bottlenecks in 10 community conservation initiatives in southern and eastern Africa.

Thomas Pienkowski, Matt Clark, Arundhati Jagadish, Aklei Albert, Mohanjeet Brar, Tarn Breedveld, Linda Chinangwa, Deepali Gohil, Deziderius Irumba, Ramzy Kanaan and 30 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Diagnosing scaling bottlenecks in 10 community conservation initiatives in southern and eastern Africa.Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology · 2026
    Article
  2. Conservation abandonment is a policy blind spot.Nature ecology & evolution · 2026
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

40 authors.

Thomas PienkowskiCentre for Environmental Policy, Imperial College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-3803-7533
Matt ClarkCentre for Environmental Policy, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Arundhati JagadishNature Conservation Foundation, Mysore, India.
Aklei AlbertIndependent, Dodoma, Tanzania.
Mohanjeet BrarGamewatchers & Porini Camps, Nairobi, Kenya.
Tarn BreedveldIndependent, Maasai Mara, Kenya.
Linda ChinangwaWeForest Malawi, Mulanje, Malawi.
Deepali GohilConverge, Nairobi, Kenya.
Deziderius IrumbaDIFONA Vision for Nature Limited, Kampala, Uganda.
Ramzy KanaanTetra Tech, Lilongwe, Malawi.
Rose Peter KicheleriSokoine University of Agriculture, Morogoro, Tanzania.
Phillip KihumuroWWF Uganda, Kampala, Uganda.
Wilhelm Andrew KiwangoThe University of Dodoma, Dodoma, Tanzania.
Mathew Bukhi MabeleThe University of Dodoma, Dodoma, Tanzania.
Paul MatikuNature Kenya, Nairobi, Kenya.
Gimbage MbeyaleSokoine University of Agriculture, Morogoro, Tanzania.
Musingo Tito E MbuviKenya Forestry Research Institute (KEFRI), Nairobi, Kenya.
Arthur MugishaNkoba Foundation, Kampala, Uganda.
Stanley MwangoBioCarbon Partners, Lusaka, Zambia.
Iddi MwanyokaThe University of Dodoma, Dodoma, Tanzania.
Robson NyirendaAfrica Community Project Ltd, Lusaka, Zambia.
Geoffrey OulaAfrican Wildlife Foundation, Kampala, Uganda.
Jón Geir PéturssonEnvironment and Natural Resources, University of Iceland, Reykjavik, Iceland.
Taddeo RusokeMountains of the Moon University, Fort Portal Tourism City, Uganda.
Nelson TuryahabweMakerere University, Kampala, Uganda.
Moses KazunguSocial Sciences in Landscape Research Group, Research Unit Economics and Social Sciences, Swiss Federal Institute for Forest, Snow and Landscape Research WSL, Birmensdorf, Switzerland.
Lessah MandolomaDepartment of Environmental Science and Management, Lilongwe University of Agriculture and Natural Resources (LUANAR), Lilongwe, Malawi.
Charles MeshackTanzania Forest Conservation Group, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania.
Kaala B MoombeCenter for International Forestry Research (CIFOR), Lusaka, Zambia.
Francis MoyoNelson Mandela African Institution of Science and Technology, Arusha, Tanzania.
Victor K MuposhiBotswana University of Agriculture and Natural Resources, Gaborone, Botswana.
Amos OchiengMakerere University, Kampala, Uganda.
Edwin SabuhoroPenn State University, University Park, Pennsylvania, USA.
Anna SpenceleyUniversity of Johannesburg, Johannesburg, South Africa.
Emmanuel SulleArusha Climate and Environmental Research Centre, Aga Khan University, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania.
David Mwesigye TumusiimeMakerere University, Kampala, Uganda.
Paulo WilfredThe Open University of Tanzania, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania.ORCID 0000-0002-8581-9618
Peadar BrehonySustain East Africa, Arusha, Tanzania.
Elias Damtew AssefBetty and Gordon Moore Center for Science, Conservation International, Washington DC, USA.
Morena MillsCentre for Environmental Policy, Imperial College London, London, UK.

Funding

Leverhulme TrustResearch England's Expanding Excellence in England (E3) FundRPG-2021-440UK Research and Innovation
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Scaling area-based conservation, including initiatives led or comanaged by Indigenous Peoples and local communities, is a flagship goal of the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework. Conservationists often aspire to scale initiatives, but this is rarely achieved in practice. Identifying and addressing factors that limit initiative adoption (i.e., bottlenecks) could improve scaling strategies. We used insightsfrom 84 expert surveys to identify potential risk factors and bottlenecks to scaling 10 community, area-based initiatives in southern and eastern Africa. The number of reported potential risk factors and bottlenecks varied among initiatives. However, unfair benefit sharing, unequal decision-making, inflexible rules, and top-down leadership were frequently identified as bottlenecks. Although adopting initiatives had costs (e.g., increased local conflicts, reduced local access to natural resources and cropland), most experts believed these costs were offset by other benefits and thus did not constitute bottlenecks. Our results did not capture local perspectives, but they suggest scaling strategies that strengthen environmental governance may support more socially just and durable approaches to meeting area-based conservation goals.

Indexed as

BiodiversityConservation of Natural ResourcesAfrica, EasternAfrica, Southern30 by 3030 para el 3030x30adopciónadoptionand scaling deepcommunity‐based conservationcommunity‐based natural resource managementconservación comunitariaengagementescalada de cuellos de botellaescala verticalgestión comunitaria de los recursos naturaleshorizontal y profundaOECMsother effective area‐based conservation measuresotras medidas efectivas de conservación basada en el áreaparticipaciónscaling bottlenecksscaling outscaling up其他有效区域保护措施(OECMs)参与基于社区的保护基于社区的自然资源管理扩大、缩小和加深扩大范围的瓶颈采用

Identifiers

PMID40937832
PMCPMC13036310

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.