Conflict sensitivity at the World Conservation Congress

Conflict sensitivity is becoming increasingly prominent in discussions around how to ensure that conservation work can be tailored for diverse and changing contexts and have as wide a positive impact as possible. 

IUCN Congress has adopted a motion on ‘Ensuring conflict-sensitive conservation and protection of the environment in fragile and conflict situations’ that, amongst other things, urges members to recognise the relationship between nature, peace and security and to develop nature protection strategies appropriate to fragile and conflict-affected settings. All governments and Indigenous groups voted in favour of the motion. 

In recognition of these objectives, and others in the motion, this webpage provides a brief explanation of conflict sensitivity and why it is relevant for conservation practice and policy.

With more ongoing conflicts than at any point since World War II, and with states recently agreeing ambitious targets to address and reverse global biodiversity loss, it is increasingly important that no regions are left behind. Yet research shows that situations or armed conflict or insecurity can be a barrier to effective conservation and that globally, many hotspots for biodiversity are exposed to both. For these regions, conflict sensitivity tools offer promise in not only allowing vitally important conservation activities to take place, but also in enabling the conditions where conservation programmes can contribute towards peacebuilding. 

What does conflict-sensitive conservation mean?

Conflict sensitivity enables greater understanding of the interactions between conservation activities and the contexts in which they are delivered. In practice, it is a set of tools and approaches that can help those involved in conservation to navigate the complexity of working in and across very different and changing contexts. At its core, conflict sensitivity is about building an understanding of a context, understanding how a conservation intervention or action might interact with that context, and seeking to tailor and adapt that action to achieve the best possible impact in any given context. Applying conflict sensitivity can help those involved in conservation to minimise the risk that initiatives/projects may unintentionally contribute to negative consequences or cause harm. For example:

• Conservation practice or action may increase the risk of conflict over resources if there is insufficient understanding of political and social dynamics and when elites exploit projects for their own interests or financial gain, for example through corrupt management of funding for conservation projects or using a conservation mandate to control access to natural resources;

• Interactions around Protected Area management may exacerbate negative community attitudes towards conservation if it results in human rights violations and disregards traditional and Indigenous land rights, if community members feel shut out of decisions and feel their livelihoods are being taken away from them, or if it increases the likelihood that they may be displaced from their traditional lands;

• Policy decisions taken in global conservation forums can inadvertently sustain or impose structures that perpetuate inequality. For example if pressure to implement commitments on the 30x30 target (Target 3 of the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework, KMGBF) are interpreted as rationale for ‘fortress conservation’ approaches*, or if biodiversity finance opportunities are only accessible for those in contexts that are perceived as stable, thus further disadvantaging those in fragile or conflict-affected settings. 

On the other hand, conflict sensitivity can also help to identify how an action can support positive results beyond the original intention of the intervention, for example by contributing to social and economic benefits and strengthening cooperation and cohesion and opportunities for peace – simultaneously generating co-benefits and building support for conservation. For example:

• The establishment of genuine community conservancies can provide opportunities to address root causes of conflict and resolve disputes, for example by providing a platform for cross-community coordination and cooperation on pasture/fisheries management, thus achieving both sustainable natural resource management and increased social cohesion. They can also support gender equality by focusing on the role of women in such processes.

• Designing conservation programmes in ways that respect Indigenous knowledge and management practices and also support livelihoods or address the impact of conflict, for example, training ex-combatants to work as park managers or in eco-tourism can help to strengthen livelihoods and disincentivise participation in military groups or armed conflict.

• Biodiversity policies that take the needs of conflict-affected countries into account when shaping the biodiversity funding landscape, and which clarify what constitutes good practice in such settings, can support the uptake of conflict sensitivity, helping conservation actors deliver better solutions.

More specific examples are available in the Institute for Sustainable Development’s and Global Youth Biodiversity’s (GYBN) manual on Conflict Sensitive Conservation. Leading conservation actors have developed a free online training on conflict sensitive conservation which will launch in October 2025 on the IUCN Academy Platform**.

While conflict sensitivity is particularly useful for navigating the specific challenges of working in fragile and conflict-affected settings, its application is relevant across all contexts; every context has existing systems, histories, and relationships that can result in either contention or collaboration, and any action or intervention will interact with these dynamics in different ways. Put simply, applying conflict sensitivity helps to minimise the chance of exacerbating harmful dynamics and maximises the potential to contribute to positive impacts, including peaceful relations.

Why is conflict sensitivity important for conservation?

1. Many biodiversity hotspots are located in areas that experience conflict, instability, or weak governance, hindering and making holistic conservation more difficult to achieve. While these hotspots have increasingly been seen as important for global biodiversity, they represent challenging operating environments where conservation actors face concrete security risks (including of physical violence), heightened sensitivities and greater probability that decisions and actions may have unforeseen negative consequences. 

2. Conflict-sensitive good practices can help conservation organisations achieve and embed areas that have already been identified as extremely important for the future of conservation, including community-based conservation.

3. The implementation of multilateral biodiversity agreements will be more successful where these processes are better informed about the relationship between conflict and biodiversity and the reality of operating in fragile and conflict-affected settings; they are also more likely to be able to provide targeted assistance to affected states.

Practical steps for applying conflict sensitivity

There are a growing number of tools and detailed guidance for conflict sensitivity that are specialised for specific technical areas, geographic contexts, and stages of an intervention or policy. Besides this, here are some examples of steps that may enable more conflict-sensitive conservation action: 

1. Building conflict sensitivity into the design of interventions/projects from the outset, including integrating conflict analysis and in-depth stakeholder engagement into existing assessments, programme adaptation, and monitoring, evaluation, and learning (MEL) processes;

2. Integrating conflict sensitivity into organisational policies and processes, including supporting training, guidance and spaces for shared learning on staff experiences of managing conflict in their conservation work, to uncover good practices as well as pro-actively anticipate and manage context challenges that might affect conservation outcomes;

3. Ensuring a system-wide change through clear global policy commitments, integrating conflict sensitivity into multilateral environmental agreements (MEAs) and international environmental forums, and ensuring conflict-sensitive conservation is implemented on ground through existing agreements.

Policy implications for conflict sensitivity

Conflict sensitivity should be integrated into discussions about implementation of MEAs such as the CBD KMGBF, UNFCCC, UNESCO World Heritage Convention, Ramsar Convention, and addressed by bodies such as the World Conservation Congress and UNEA. Key linkages include:

• The 2025 World Conservation Congress: Join the conflict-sensitive conservation conversation at special sessions devoted to the topic, and raise conflict sensitivity in other sessions, including on people-focused and inclusive conservation. Build moment on the motion ‘Ensuring conflict-sensitive conservation and protection of the environment in fragile and conflict situations’.

• From COP16 towards COP17: “Peace with Nature” was the overarching theme of the 16th meeting of the Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity in 2024, including the “Peace with Nature” declaration. Looking towards COP17, such focus on peace and conflict aspects of nature preservation should be maintained. 

• UNEA: Follow the conversation on conflict sensitivity at the next United Nations Environment Assembly, will take place from 8 to 12 December 2025.

More thinking on policy implications can be found in this statement on addressing peace and insecurity during the implementation of the Global Biodiversity Framework, this blog post on ‘why conservation NGOs must speak out on biodiversity and conflicts’, and the below resources on this page.

* Fortress conservation assumes that biodiversity protection is best achieved by creating protected areas where ecosystems can function free from human disturbance. The exclusion of people from protected areas is associated with social conflict.

** The course has been developed by PeaceNexus, in collaboration with African Wildlife Foundation (AWF), World Wildlife Foundation (WWF), the International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD), Conservation International (CI), International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN)'s CEESP theme, the Environmental Law Institute (ELI), and the Environmental Peacebuilding Association (EnPAx).