Abstract
Abstract
Effective governance of natural areas is central to conserving biodiversity and Earth’s life support systems, including climate regulation and food and water provisioning. Understanding the relative effectiveness of different governance options is thus critical. We conducted a global meta-analysis of 409 cases in 42 countries, comparing ecological outcomes over time in areas governed by Indigenous Peoples and local communities versus conventional governance approaches. Outcomes in community-governed areas matched those in conventional fully protected areas and exceeded those in partially protected and unprotected areas. Communities with legal land title had better outcomes than communities without title. We provide the strongest evidence to date that ecological outcomes of Indigenous and community governance meet or exceed those of other area-based conservation approaches and that titling strengthens these outcomes.