Series note: This article is part of Rare’s Rethinking Conservation series, which highlights people-centered solutions to the biodiversity and climate crises. As global attention turns from COP30 in Brazil, Rare President Caleb McClennen, Ph.D., speaks with Kevin Green, Senior Vice President for Global Solutions at Rare, and Rachel Neugarten, Executive Director of Conservation Planning at the Wildlife Conservation Society (WCS), about a new partnership to better understand where community capacity and biodiversity value align — and why that matters for the future of conservation investment and impact.
***
Caleb McClennen: Thanks to you both for taking the time to explore this topic together.
Lately, I’ve been encouraged to see a groundswell of interest in community-led conservation. From policy shifts to philanthropy to scientific discussions, there’s a growing recognition that the most durable conservation outcomes come from the frontlines. It got me wondering…
1. As we talk about community-led conservation, do we actually know where community capacity and biodiversity value overlap, and how that understanding could shape investment and impact?
Kevin Green: Great question, and the short answer is not really…or at least, not yet. We’ve seen many conservation planning tools and assessments that identify biodiversity priorities. And most rightly acknowledge the role of local people and Indigenous communities in successful, durable conservation outcomes. You recently shared a great article in the Stanford Social Innovation Review that makes the case for funding biodiversity where it matters most — but we don’t have a map, or even a consistent methodology, for where the enabling conditions exist for community-led conservation to succeed. That’s a real gap. It leaves philanthropists and policymakers flying blind when they want to invest in durable, people-powered approaches.
Rachel Neugarten: That’s exactly the problem our partnership is trying to solve. We’re building on existing biodiversity prioritization frameworks, many of which already agree on key areas of ecological importance. What’s missing is the social dimension: a way to overlay those with a framework for assessing community capacity for collective action.
Together, we’re developing a first-of-its-kind global assessment. Essentially, it’s a map, with data down to the subnational level, showing where strong community capacity aligns with critical biodiversity. We’re bringing together data on governance, land tenure, social trust and other enabling conditions to model where community-led conservation is most viable. Of course, the global picture is only the start. Country-level assessments will need much more granular, contextual analysis, including qualitative insights that can’t be captured by spatial data alone.
The goal is to give decision-makers, from funders to practitioners, a more rigorous, informed foundation for where and how to support community-led conservation.
Caleb: This is very exciting! It’s clear there is an increased demand to provide financial resources to community-led conservation. But for good reasons, the process of resource allocation requires long and tedious processes.
2. How will these analyses help funders, organizations, governments and communities themselves in their path to 30×30?
Kevin: These analyses give the global community something we’ve never really had before: clarity. With a sharper picture of where investments can have the greatest impact, funders and governments can move faster and with more confidence. And they’ll need to. Reaching 30×30 won’t happen through big land deals or exclusionary approaches alone, and in many places, those approaches aren’t practical or ethical anyway.
The data are finally catching up with what many have long known: The future of conservation must be community-led, and outcomes that last will depend on the people whose lives and livelihoods are intertwined with nature.
3. From a conservation science perspective, what excites you most about this frontier?
Rachel: For me, it’s about bringing rigor to something we’ve long known is important but haven’t measured systematically. Conservation science has historically focused on ecological potential. This project brings social potential into the equation. It’s an opportunity to redefine how we plan and invest in conservation.
Kevin: And it’s central to Rare’s new strategy. We’ve proven what’s possible in coastal systems through our community-based fisheries work, and now we’re extending that approach to land, starting where the right social and ecological conditions already exist. It’s about scaling conservation that succeeds because people and nature thrive together.
Caleb: It’s inspiring to see how this collaboration expands what conservation science can do. As Rare charts the course toward our 2030 strategy and 2040 vision, it reminds us that great conservation doesn’t just protect places; it empowers people. Knowing where and how to support communities ready to lead is one of the greatest opportunities before us.
Thanks for sharing your perspectives and taking on this vital work. Looking forward to seeing where we land.
Follow Caleb McClennen on LinkedIn for more insights into Rethinking Conservation.