How to acknowledge time when making conservation decisions

Apr 17 / Adam Barlow

Quick answer

Acknowledging time in conservation decision-making means recognising that every dilemma exists within a history, is shaped by present conditions, and will have consequences for the future. It is one of six guiding principles in the Ethical Decision-Making for Wildlife Conservation approach and helps you avoid repeating past injustices, address urgent needs without sacrificing long-term vision, and make decisions that future generations of both people and wildlife can build on.

Source: WildTeam. (2026). Ethical Decision-Making for Wildlife Conservation v1. WildTeam UK, Cumbria, UK.

All WildTeam best practices are grounded in an extensive review of the relevant scientific and professional literature and are peer-reviewed by conservation experts from across the sector to ensure accuracy, practicality, and global applicability.

You can dwnload this best practice when you access the course.

UNLOCK OUR FULL BEST PRACTICES AND GET CERTIFIED CONSERVATION SKILLS

Ready to go deeper? Build practical skills for wildlife conservation by exploring our expert-led courses designed to help you apply what you’ve learned in real-world contexts. From career development to technical conservation tools, our training is built to support your next step.

Contents

  • Why time matters in conservation decisions
  • What the acknowledge time principle involves
  • How to apply the acknowledge time principle
  • Common acknowledge time mistakes and how to avoid them
  • Applying this principle in practice
  • Key takeaways
  • FAQ

    Why time matters in conservation decisions

    Conservation dilemmas do not appear from nowhere. They emerge from decades or centuries of ecological change, policy decisions, economic pressures, and relationships between people and land. A community that opposes a conservation intervention may be drawing on a history of displacement. A government agency that resists long-term habitat protection may be responding to immediate political and economic pressures. A landscape that appears degraded may have once been managed sustainably under practices that were suppressed or ignored. When conservationists overlook this history, they risk making decisions that misread the situation entirely. They may propose solutions that have already been tried and failed. They may inadvertently repeat injustices that eroded trust in conservation in the first place. And they may focus so heavily on present conditions that they foreclose the ecological and cultural possibilities that future generations will depend on. The acknowledge time principle addresses this directly. It asks you to hold past, present, and future in mind simultaneously when working through any conservation dilemma, and to let that awareness shape the options you consider and the decisions you reach.

      What the acknowledge time principle involves

      The purpose of the acknowledge time principle is to guide you in making decisions that honour historical contexts, address present needs, and safeguard future possibilities. This principle helps you understand past relationships between people and landscapes, respond to current ecological and social conditions, and maintain options for future generations of both humans and wildlife. When this principle is overlooked, conservation may inadvertently erase important histories, fail to address urgent present needs, or foreclose future ecological and cultural possibilities.

      In practice, this principle works across three time horizons. The past means understanding how historical events, relationships, and decisions have shaped the current situation and the positions of each stakeholder. The present means responding to urgent ecological and social conditions without losing sight of longer-term commitments and vision. The future means protecting possibilities for future generations of both humans and wildlife, not just optimising for what is most achievable now.

        How to apply the acknowledge time principle

        There are three ways to apply the acknowledge time principle when working through a conservation dilemma.

        Research the historical context:         Before evaluating options, invest time in understanding the ecological and cultural history of the situation. This means going beyond data and scientific literature to include oral histories, traditional knowledge, and the lived experiences of communities with longstanding relationships to the landscape. For example, when deciding on peatland restoration approaches, planners who include oral histories about traditional flood regimes and harvest zones passed down by elders gain a more accurate picture of what the landscape was like before degradation, and what restoration could realistically achieve. That history is not just context. It is evidence. Historical research also helps you understand why stakeholders hold the positions they do. A community's resistance to a proposed intervention often makes far more sense once you understand what happened the last time outside organisations tried to manage their land.

        Acknowledge past injustices:         Many conservation landscapes carry histories of displacement, exclusion, and broken agreements. Communities have been removed to create protected areas. Traditional management practices have been criminalised. Promises made during the establishment of conservation projects have gone unfulfilled. These histories do not disappear because they are inconvenient. They shape how stakeholders interpret current proposals and whether they are willing to engage. Acknowledging past injustices does not mean assigning blame or relitigating history. It means including this context honestly in your decision-making and considering how current decisions can either perpetuate or begin to address those wrongs. For example, when deciding how to interpret a protected area's history, managers who choose to build memorial signage and invite public acknowledgement of communities displaced at the area's founding are not just making a symbolic gesture. They are creating a foundation for the trust that effective conservation depends on.

        Balance immediate and long-term needs:         Conservation dilemmas often involve tension between what is urgently needed now and what will be needed in ten or fifty years. Addressing that tension well requires holding both time horizons at once, rather than sacrificing one for the other. For example, when deciding on coastal erosion responses, a project that plants both fast-growing grasses for immediate soil stabilisation and slow-growing trees for future coastal stability is not doing twice the work. It is making a single coherent decision that takes time seriously. An approach that only addressed the immediate problem might achieve short-term results while leaving the landscape more vulnerable in the long run. This balancing act applies equally to the social dimensions of conservation. Decisions that address urgent community needs while protecting long-term ecological vision are more likely to build the lasting support that makes conservation sustainable.

          Common acknowledge time mistakes and how to avoid them

          Mistake 1: Treating the present as the starting point
          Problem: The dilemma is analysed only in terms of current conditions, without any investigation into how the situation came to be. Stakeholder positions are taken at face value rather than understood in historical context.
          Solution: Make historical research a formal part of documenting how the dilemma has emerged, not an optional extra. Ask each stakeholder group: how did we get here?

          Mistake 2: Acknowledging history in words but not in decisions
          Problem: Past injustices are mentioned in project documents as background context but do not actually influence which options are considered or how they are assessed. The acknowledgement is performative rather than substantive.
          Solution: Ask explicitly at each stage of the decision-making process: does this option repeat a historical pattern that caused harm? Does this option create an opportunity to begin addressing a past wrong?

          Mistake 3: Prioritising the urgent over the important
          Problem: Pressure to show results quickly leads to decisions that address immediate needs but foreclose long-term possibilities. Fast wins are chosen over durable solutions.
          Solution: When assessing options, explicitly evaluate their long-term as well as short-term consequences. Ask: what possibilities does this option keep open for future generations, and what possibilities does it close down?

          Mistake 4: Ignoring the future interests of wildlife
          Problem: Future generations of both humans and wildlife should be considered in conservation decisions, but wildlife's long-term interests are often absent from the framing. Decisions are optimised for current population metrics rather than future ecological conditions.
          Solution: Include wildlife's future interests explicitly when predicting the results of each option. Ask: what ecological possibilities does this decision protect or foreclose for future wildlife populations?

            Applying this principle in practice

            The acknowledge time principle is relevant at every stage of the ethical decision-making process, not just at the beginning. It shapes how you frame the dilemma, whose beliefs, values, and morals you seek to understand, which options you consider worth assessing, and ultimately which decision you select and justify.

            It does not require a complete historical study before any decision can be made. For urgent decisions made under time pressure, even a brief and honest consideration of historical context and long-term consequences is better than none. The principle scales to the situation. 

            It is also worth noting that this principle does not require agreement about history. Different stakeholders will often have different accounts of past events. The goal is not to settle those disagreements before proceeding. It is to document them honestly, treat them as relevant, and let them inform the decision rather than be set aside in the interests of efficiency.

              Key takeaways

              Every conservation dilemma has a history. Understanding it is not optional context. It is part of understanding the dilemma itself.

              Past injustices shape present positions. Stakeholders who resist conservation proposals often have very good historical reasons to do so. Acknowledging this honestly is the first step toward building the trust that conservation depends on.

              Urgent and important are not the same thing. Decisions that sacrifice long-term vision for short-term results may solve the immediate problem while creating larger ones later.

              Future generations cannot speak for themselves. Both humans and wildlife have a stake in decisions being made now. Holding that in mind is part of what ethical decision-making requires.

              This principle applies throughout the process. Acknowledging time is not a preliminary step to be completed and set aside. It is a lens to apply at every stage of working through a conservation dilemma.

                ONE PAYMENT, FULL ACCESS, MAXIMUM VALUE.

                Project Management | Project Planning | Grant Writing | Stakeholder Engagement | Monitoring and Evaluation

                Unlock unlimited learning with the WildTeam Annual Membership. For £290/year, you get full access to every course in our school, including all current courses and all future courses released during your membership. Individual courses cost £190 each. With 7 courses already available, buying them separately would cost £1330. Membership gives you access to all of them, plus future releases, for less than the price of two.

                FAQ

                How far back does historical research need to go?

                There is no fixed answer. The relevant history is whatever has shaped the current situation and the positions of the stakeholders involved. For some dilemmas, the relevant history goes back decades. For others, it may go back centuries, particularly where Indigenous land rights or colonial displacement are at stake. The practical test is whether understanding a particular historical context would change how you frame the dilemma or assess the options. If it would, it is relevant.

                What if stakeholders disagree about what happened in the past?

                This is common and does not need to be resolved before proceeding. The goal is not to establish a single agreed historical narrative but to document multiple perspectives on how the dilemma emerged and treat them all as relevant. Different accounts of the past often reflect different experiences of the same events. Documenting that honestly is more useful than trying to arbitrate between competing versions.

                Does acknowledging past injustices mean taking sides?

                No. Acknowledging that historical wrongs have shaped the current context is not the same as assigning blame or declaring one stakeholder's position correct. It means including that context in your decision-making honestly, considering how current decisions interact with that history, and asking whether there are ways to address past harms rather than perpetuate them. This is consistent with treating all stakeholder perspectives fairly.

                How do you balance urgent present needs with long-term vision when resources are limited?

                This is one of the most common tensions in conservation work and there is no formula for resolving it. What the acknowledge time principle asks is that both time horizons are explicitly considered when assessing options, rather than one being assumed to take priority. In some situations the urgent need will legitimately outweigh longer-term concerns. In others it will not. Making that judgment consciously and being able to explain it is what matters.

                Is this principle only relevant for projects working in areas with complex colonial histories?

                No. The acknowledge time principle applies whenever historical context, present conditions, and future consequences are relevant to a decision, which is almost always. Even a relatively recent and localised dilemma will have a history that shapes how stakeholders understand it and what options are realistic. The principle is more pressing in some contexts than others, but it is never irrelevant.

                  Latest from our blog

                  Related articles

                    ABOUT

                    Our team
                    Our plan
                    Our impact
                    Our partners
                    Get in touch
                    Community
                    Newsletter

                    EXPLORE

                    Success stories
                    Blog
                    Courses
                    Bursaries
                    Best practices
                    Team membership
                    Conservation Trainers Network

                    LEGAL

                    Terms and conditions
                    Cookies
                    Privacy Policy
                    Annual report
                    CPD

                    JOIN THE CONVERSATION

                    EMPOWERING CONSERVATIONISTS TO RESTORE NATURE

                    We give conservationists worldwide the knowledge, the skills, and the community support they need to design and deliver conservation projects that have more impact.
                    WILDTEAM is a registered charity in England and Wales. Number 1149465. © 2026 by WildTeam