Security Shaping Sustainability: The Difference Between Securitized and Community-Based Conservation in Benin

Abstract

As global conservation efforts intensify, balancing environmental protection with social sustainability has become increasingly urgent. This study employs a comparative case study approach to examine two natural resource management interventions in northern Benin: one led by African Parks in an insecure zone, and another by TMG Research in a relatively stable area. Drawing on the sustainable livelihoods framework, the analysis integrates data from qualitative interviews, project documents, and previous surveys to assess how these interventions influence local livelihoods, social cohesion, and governance. Although both adopt similar conservation models, outcomes differ significantly. TMG's community-driven, culturally grounded approach enhances food security, self-governance, and knowledge-sharing through “social debt.” Conversely, African Parks' securitized, top–down intervention, despite investing in community projects, yields mixed results and limited trust-building. Our findings show that the social sustainability of conservation efforts depends not only on policy design but also on local conflict dynamics and institutional legitimacy. We argue that successful interventions must account for the sociopolitical context, particularly in fragile environments, to achieve equitable and lasting outcomes.