Modern conservation still bears colonial scars, new research shows how race and power shape environmental protection

A groundbreaking study published in Nature reveals that conservation’s biggest failures can’t be solved with better science alone—they require confronting uncomfortable truths about race, power, and historical exclusion that continue to influence environmental protection today.

The research, led by Moreangels Mbizah of Wildlife Conservation Action in Zimbabwe, traces modern conservation back to its colonial roots in the late 1800s. During this era, protected areas were often created by forcibly removing Indigenous peoples and rural communities from their ancestral lands, all in the name of preserving “pristine” wilderness. The underlying assumption was that land should be empty and people were merely obstacles to conservation goals.

While conservation practices have evolved significantly since then, the study argues these colonial patterns persist through what researchers call “path dependencies”—inherited institutional norms that still favor outside expertise over local knowledge and centralized control over community-based management. This means that despite good intentions, many conservation projects continue to exclude the very people who have sustainably managed landscapes for generations.

The paper doesn’t claim all conservation efforts are flawed or that injustice is universal across every project. Instead, it makes a focused argument: until the field honestly examines how its colonial origins continue to influence who makes decisions, whose knowledge is valued, and who bears the costs of environmental protection, many conservation efforts will continue to fall short of their goals. The researchers call for a fundamental shift toward more inclusive, equitable approaches that recognize local communities as partners rather than obstacles in protecting the natural world.