Review Articles on Ecological Resettlements: Insights, Gaps, and Pathways

Hari Prasad Pandey (), Tek Narayan Maraseni, Armando Apan and Han Zhang
Additional contact information
Hari Prasad Pandey: Institute of Life Sciences and the Environment (ILSE), University of Southern Queensland, Toowoomba, QLD 4350, Australia
Tek Narayan Maraseni: Institute of Life Sciences and the Environment (ILSE), University of Southern Queensland, Toowoomba, QLD 4350, Australia
Armando Apan: Institute of Life Sciences and the Environment (ILSE), University of Southern Queensland, Toowoomba, QLD 4350, Australia
Han Zhang: College of Economics and Management, Northwest Agriculture and Forestry University, No. 3, Taicheng Road, Yangling, Xianyang 712100, China

Sustainability, 2025, vol. 17, issue 9, 1-17

Abstract: Systematically synthesizing existing knowledge on ecological resettlements (ERs) is crucial for shaping future research and conservation strategies. We conducted a systematic literature review (SLR) using the Web of Science and Scopus databases, analyzing 63 research articles in the review domain of ER. Most reviewed articles emphasize people’s welfare in ERs but adopt traditional review approaches, hindering the identification of specific research gaps. This review identifies and focuses on four cross-cutting themes: anthropocentric notions and social equity, parks–people relationships, political ecology and biodiversity conservation, and connecting nature with people for harmonious coexistence. Further, the review highlights key themes in ER and conservation, emphasizing social equity, political ecology, and human–nature relationships. It underscores the need for social justice, the recognition of displaced communities’ rights, and the promotion of participatory decision making. Conservation efforts should prioritize minimizing displacement and respecting local rights, with a focus on co-management models. Case studies, particularly from India and African countries, reveal the impacts of conservation-induced displacement on marginalized communities and ecosystems. Further, we identified 45 key areas across 15 thematic dimensions for future review and research gaps, which will inform decision making in the discipline. We call for long-term assessments of resettlement to address ecological and social consequences, bridging the gap between social scientists and biologists for balancing conservation and human welfare. Finally, we discuss our findings and propose future research directions to inform conservation policies for the harmonious coexistence of humans and non-human beings on a shared planet.

Keywords: coexistence; conservation-led displacement; ecological sustainability; review article; social justice (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: O13 Q Q0 Q2 Q3 Q5 Q56 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2025
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/9/4094/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/9/4094/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:17:y:2025:i:9:p:4094-:d:1647735

Access Statistics for this article

Sustainability is currently edited by Ms. Alexandra Wu

More articles in Sustainability from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().