Integrating development with conservation: A means to a conservation end, or a mean end to conservation?

This article proposes that there are three options for integrating human socio-economic development into its conservation work: (1) have an integrated mix of conservation and development ends, (2) use development means in service of strict conservation ends, and (3) explicitly link the project’s conservation ends to broader development ends. The essay argues that  careful articulation of the theories of change behind conservation strategies reveals that option 1 is often the worst choice. Project teams ultimately have to select either conservation or development goals, or risk achieving neither, especially in cases in which there is minimal linkage between the goals.