Received: 8 March 2023 | Accepted: 18 January 2024

DOI: 10.1002/pan3.10600

RESEARCH ARTICLE

Not in it for the money: Meaningful relationships sustain

voluntary land conservation initiatives in Peru

Rocío López de la Lama1,2 | Nathan Bennett2,3,4 | Janette Bulkan5 |

Santiago de la Puente6,7 | Kai M. A. Chan1
1
Institute of Resources, Environment, and Sustainability—IRES, The University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada; 2School of Public
Policy and Global Affairs, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada; 3Global Science, World Wildlife Fund, Washington, USA/Global Oceans Practice,
World Wildlife Fund for Nature, Gland, Switzerland; 4People and the Ocean Specialist Group, Commission on Environmental, Economic and Social Policy,
International Union for the Conservation of Nature, Gland, Switzerland; 5Faculty of Forestry, Forest Sciences Centre, The University of British Columbia,
Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada; 6Institute for the Oceans and Fisheries—IOF, The University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
and 7Norwegian Institute of Water Research—NIVA, Oslo, Norway

Correspondence
Rocío López de la Lama
Email: rocio.lopezdelalama@ubc.ca
Funding information
Consejo Nacional de Ciencia, Tecnología
e Innovación Tecnológica del Perú
(CONCYTEC)
Handling Editor: Rachelle Gould
Abstract
1. Voluntary land conservation, including privately protected areas (PPAs), is a key
component of enabling the future of biodiversity on Earth. Accordingly, the ques-
tion of motivations has preoccupied conservation social science. True motivations
are difficult to ascertain, however, even for ourselves.
2. Accordingly, we explore a novel narrative elicitation approach to ask: what fea-
tures of the land and landowners' relationships with the land encourage and
sustain their commitment to voluntary conservation? What value framings are
conveyed by landowners when sharing their origin stories and the reasons for
sustaining such efforts?
3. We conducted semi-­structured interviews with 32 landowners of PPAs across
Peru. Interviews were designed to elicit landowners' origin stories and on-
going relationships with the land, as well as the values they hold about those
relationships.
4. This paper challenges the current perception that PPAs are driven by wealthy and
foreign landowners in the Peruvian context. Instead, this paper showcases PPAs
as the manifestation of local visions for conservation that align with the landown-
ers' longstanding relationships with the land. Here we identified 15 different re-
lational values that landowners have with nature, non-­human and human beings
that underlie their voluntary conservation efforts.
5. The paper highlights the importance of taking a relational perspective (recogniz-
ing that our existence is enabled and shaped by the relationships we have with
others and with nature) when studying land conservation, emphasizing how PPAs
are the reflection of landowners' intention to maintain, protect and restore the
multiple relationships embedded in the land they strive to conserve.

This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium,
provided the original work is properly cited.
© 2024 The Authors. People and Nature published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of British Ecological Society.

People and Nature. 2024;00:1–15.  wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/pan3 | 1

 |
2 LÓPEZ de la LAMA et al.
KEYWORDS
Peru, privately protected areas, relational values, relationships with nature, socio-­ecological
systems, voluntary land conservation
1 | I NTRO D U C TI O N
The ability to meet global goals for conservation depends on
nations' ability to foster voluntary land conservation (Bingham
et al., 2017). Sole reliance on government-­led efforts in public
lands is insufficient for ensuring ecosystems that are both well-­
connected and resilient (Stolton et al., 2014). For that reason,
many nations are increasingly turning to private land conserva-
tion strategies, such as conservation easements, conservation
covenants and privately protected areas (PPAs) (Fitzsimons &
Carr, 2014; Mitchell et al., 2018). These initiatives are largely
managed by a diverse array of stakeholders, including citizens,
local communities, for-­p rofit entities and non-­p rofit institutions
(Mitchell et al., 2018). Engaging such a broad spectrum of par-
ticipants in conservation efforts is crucial for nations aiming to
achieve the target of protecting 30% of terrestrial land by 2030,
an objective endorsed in the recently ratified Global Biodiversity
Framework (Convention on Biological Diversity, 2022).
Efforts to understand how to enable and promote voluntary con-
servation have focused on motivations (Farmer et al., 2011; Kabii
& Horwitz, 2006; Selinske et al., 2015), often presupposing that
landowners are primarily motivated by economic incentives (Jack
et al., 2008; Levine et al., 2015; Muradian, 2013). This assumption
was structural for the payment for ecosystem services literature,
which posited that monetary incentives drive conservation prac-
tices (Anderson, 2000; Rode et al., 2015). Yet, emerging research on
private land conservation suggests that many landowners are more
motivated by relational values, including care, responsibility and
non-­material benefits (Chan et al., 2017; Chapman et al., 2019;
Kosoy et al., 2007). These studies challenge the notion that financial
support serves purely as an incentive, proposing instead that it can
offset costs for landowners to engage in activities that they were
already planning to do (Chan et al., 2017; Selinske et al., 2017; Yasué
& Kirkpatrick, 2020). Despite these insights, a focus on relational
values within the context of voluntary land conservation remains
scarce (Cortés-­C apano et al., 2019).
Environmental values provide insight into people's priorities
towards nature. While values have traditionally been classified
into intrinsic (ecological) and instrumental (social and economic)
categories, this dichotomy has limited our understanding of the
different human–nature relationships and motivations behind
people's actions and commitments (Chan et al., 2016; Tadaki
et al., 2017). Relational values strive to challenge such dichotomy
by exploring the desired relationships that people want to pro-
tect and sustain with nature (Chan et al., 2016; Tadaki et al., 2017).
Relational values, in particular, are defined as ‘preferences, prin-
ciples, and virtues associated with relationships’ (Chan et al., 2016).
These shed light on the meaningful relationships associated with
25758314, 0, Downloaded from https://besjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/pan3.10600, Wiley Online Library on [09/02/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
a good life and those relationships that derive from people's re-
sponsibilities towards the land and nature (Chan et al., 2018; Jax
et al., 2018; Schröter, 2020; West et al., 2018). Encompassing con-
cepts like sense of place, legacy and stewardship, relational values
largely challenge the commonly portrayed dichotomy of intrinsic
(ecological) and instrumental (social and economic) values (Himes
& Muraca, 2018; Tadaki et al., 2017).
Human cognition research has made it clear that our motiva-
tions are difficult to know, even to ourselves. When asked, we can
provide discrete answers of motivations, but these post-­h oc ratio-
nalizations cannot perfectly represent cognitive decision-­m aking
that often occurs more rapidly than possible through reasoned
deliberation (Kahneman, 2011). This difficulty in understand-
ing is particularly relevant for land conservation, which is much
more multifaceted and enduring than most pro-­e nvironmental
behaviours, despite being classified as such (Eyster et al., 2022;
Naito et al., 2022). Perhaps we can better understand the com-
plex suite of underlying reasons people have for engaging in life-­
consuming endeavours like voluntary conservation by eliciting
rich narratives.
Here we propose that researchers can improve their under-
standing of what genuinely motivates conservation actions through
narratives about landowners' history and engagement in land con-
servation, analysed through a value-­based lens. With that approach,
we ask: what features of the land and landowners' relationships with
the land encourage and sustain their commitment to voluntary con-
servation? What value framings are conveyed by landowners when
sharing their origin stories and the reasons for sustaining such ef-
forts? What were landowners' motivations for setting up and man-
aging a PPA? We present a case study of voluntary engagement in
PPAs in Peru. The results reveal a strong relational value framing
underlying voluntary land conservation efforts, the recognition of
interactions between relationships that fostered and enabled new
and additional types of relationships and the contribution of mean-
ingful relationships towards landowners' commitment to their volun-
tary land conservation initiative.
2 | M E TH O D S
Our analysis is rooted in 32 interviews with landowners of 32 PPAs
in Peru, exclusively those owned and managed by individuals and
families. Interviews were designed to elicit landowners' origin stories
and ongoing relationships with the land, as well as the values they
hold about those relationships. Interviews were analysed through
a grounded theory approach. The following subsections detail the
geographic context, landowner recruitment, interview design and
analysis process.

LÓPEZ de la LAMA et al.
2.1 | Case study: PPAs in Peru
Privately protected areas, which Stolton et al. (2014) define as
protected areas under private governance, are experiencing global
expansion both in terms of their number and total area each year
(Bingham et al., 2021). Numerous studies shed light on the poten-
tial and effectiveness of voluntary conservation as a mechanism
to reduce deforestation when compared to both non-­p rotected
lands and government-­p rotected lands (Delgado et al., 2021;
Palfrey et al., 2021; Schleicher et al., 2017; Shanee et al., 2015).
Management of a PPA involves landowners voluntarily dedicating
all or part of their land to conservation, usually foregoing economic
opportunities and engaging in different management activities,
such as reforestation or restoration (Campos et al., 2022; Stolton
et al., 2014).
Peru has a national system of government-­led protected areas
dedicated to protecting biodiversity, in which PPAs are stipulated
as complementary efforts (SERNANP, 2014). PPAs were legally
recognized in 2001 and are defined as ‘private property that spans
over critical ecosystems for nature conservation, which are being
voluntarily protected by their owners’ (SERNANP, 2014). A PPA
can be implemented through individual (i.e. individuals, families,
businesses and institutions) or collectively led (i.e. Indigenous
Peoples and local communities) initiatives. As of October 2022,
Peru had 147 PPAs that protected 388,230 ha (López de la Lama
et al., 2023).
The primary requirement for establishing a PPA is land own-
ership, necessitating proof of property rights for either individ-
ual or collective landowners. Therefore, we refer to ‘landowners’
rather than ‘landholders’ since the managers of the PPA are its
owners. Other requirements include a technical report detailing
the primary ecological and biological features of the area to jus-
tify designation from an ecological standpoint (SERNANP, 2014).
The Ministry of the Environment is the governmental authority
in charge of processing landowners' requests and granting formal
recognition to PPAs.
Under the current legal framework, PPAs need to be created
for a minimum of 10 years, and landowners must limit their eco-
nomic and productive activities to those compatible with nature
conservation. Thus, ecotourism, environmental education, sci-
entific research and organic agriculture are the most suggested
economic activities for landowners (Monteferri, 2019). Otherwise,
the current legal frameworks do not specify any incentives or
support mechanisms for the adequate management and defence
of their PPAs (López de la Lama et al., 2023). Incentives used in
other countries include direct payments (e.g. for carbon, ecosys-
tem services or biodiversity), tax exemptions, access to low-­r ate
credits and capacity-­b uilding opportunities (Bingham et al., 2017;
Selinske et al., 2017). However, as Peru lacks government-­p rovided
incentives or support mechanisms for PPAs (López de la Lama
et al., 2023), it presents a unique scenario where motivations for
creating a PPA are not necessarily influenced by official support
mechanisms.
|
25758314, 0, Downloaded from https://besjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/pan3.10600, Wiley Online Library on [09/02/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
3
2.2 | Landowners' recruitment and
interview process
We conducted 32 semi-­structured interviews with landowners of
individual and family-­led PPAs in Peru. We focused exclusively on
PPAs owned and managed by individuals and families, in contrast
to those managed by communities or organizations, as the practices
and decision-­making processes pertaining to the PPA are directly
decided and implemented by the interviewees. PPAs owned by indi-
viduals and families represent 51% of Peru's 147 PPAs (as of October
2022) (López de la Lama et al., 2023).
Participants were selected through purposive and conve-
nience sampling. Landowners were purposively sampled based
on specific criteria (location, type of ecosystem, extension of
PPAs), and then convenience drove the final sample. Our main
focus was on individuals with access to the Internet or cell phone
reception, as interviews were conducted between October and
December 2020, when Peru was under a full lockdown because
of the COVID-­19 pandemic. The lead author conducted all semi-­
structured interviews over Zoom, WhatsApp call or Skype. All
interviews were conducted in Spanish, the native language of all
participants (but two), and each lasted between 45 and 150 min.
Interviews were audio-­recorded with participants' consent. We
stopped conducting further interviews upon reaching data satu-
ration, which Newing (2011) defines as the stage where collecting
additional data yields minimal new or useful information essential
for understanding the topic in question. This project was approved
by UBC's ethics committee and followed all pertinent human re-
search ethics guidelines, including best practices for online in-
terviews (Behavioural Research Ethics Board approval number
H18-­0 3000).
2.3 | Interview design
The interview guide had the following sections: (1) values and re-
lationships with the land being protected; (2) motivations and the
process through which the land became a PPA; (3) activities and
practices that take place within the PPA; (4) external factors that
support or undermine landowners' capacity to achieve the PPA's
goals; and (5) demographic characteristics (see Appendix S1 for the
interview guide).
Within those sections, we limited our coding for this paper to
the following three questions that were essential for elucidating the
diversity of values landowners have with and within their land:
1. As someone who cannot be there right now, please describe to
me what you can see when closing your eyes and imagining that
you are walking through your PPA.
2. Which are the aspects of the PPA that you value or cherish the most?
Why?
3. Could you please tell me what is the story behind your land and the
creation of the PPA?
 |
4 LÓPEZ de la LAMA et al.
2.4 | Identification and coding of intrinsic,
instrumental and relational values
Interviews were conducted, transcribed and coded using NVivo
V12. As interviews were conducted in Spanish, coding was also
done in Spanish. Following Newing's recommendation, we re-
frained from translating to preserve valuable nuances within the
narratives (Newing, 2011). Original Spanish quotes, used to illus-
trate relational values, are provided as footnotes. We engaged in
an iterative process of open coding (when the researcher reads
through the data and allows codes to emerge) and axial coding
(organizing different types of codes), guided by overarching value
categories (Creswell, 2015).
Focusing solely on responses to our three guiding questions, we
coded intrinsic values when participants provided statements about
nature's right to exist, nature's value independent of people or when
landowners mentioned something of scientific importance about
the discovery or existence of a species. Similarly, instrumental val-
ues were identified every time a landowner talked about a benefit
for themselves or others, either explicitly or implicitly, that related to
profits or ecosystem services. Finally, relational values were coded
when participants expressed a type of valuable relationship be-
tween themselves and nature, humans or other non-­human beings
within the context of the PPA. We used definitions of value types,
not predetermined categories of intrinsic, instrumental or relational
values, for the coding process.
It is important to note that overlap between different types of val-
ues may be expected, as they refer to different aspects of deeply in-
tertwined human–nature relationships (Himes & Muraca, 2018). In that
sense, co-­occurrence of instrumental and relational values is possible,
such as when people's appreciation of a benefit provided by nature,
for instance, fertile land for agriculture, is entangled with people's ap-
preciation of the land in terms of their identity and well-­being (Chan
et al., 2018). Co-­occurrence pertaining to intrinsic and relational values
may also be expected, as when people hold intrinsic values about na-
ture's rights to exist, that co-­occur with the relational values of respon-
sibility, awe and wonder and care for nature (Chan et al., 2018).
2.5 | Notes on positionality
The first author—who was primarily responsible for designing,
conducting and analysing the research—is a middle-­class female
Peruvian scholar who grew up in Peru's capital (Lima) and who
has extensively travelled throughout the country. These travels
have allowed her to cultivate multiple relationships with nature
and her own thoughts and ideas about people's relationships with
nature. The lead author is educated in both Peruvian and inter-
national university settings—in the following areas: conservation
science, capacity development and social sciences. This posi-
tionality influenced how the first author designed the research,
conducted the interviews and coded and analysed the data. The
co-­authors include three male and one female Canadian, Peruvian
25758314, 0, Downloaded from https://besjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/pan3.10600, Wiley Online Library on [09/02/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
and Guyanese scholars whose lifelong commitment to the duel
causes of biological conservation and social justice have inevitably
influenced their feedback and input into the research process and
outputs.
3 | R E S U LT S
3.1 | Profile of landowners
The 32 landowners we interviewed were spread across 10 regions
of Peru (Figure 1). Two-­thirds of them were local to the region where
their PPA was located (63%), while others were migrants from Peru's
capital city (31%) or foreign nationals (6%). In terms of education,
65% of landowners had a university degree (31% had also completed
postgraduate degrees), while 31% completed high school educa-
tion (Table 1). This level of post-­secondary education is significantly
higher than the national average, as only 25% of Peruvians were
enrolled in or graduated from a post-­secondary institution in 2020
(INEI, 2023).
Based on Peruvian standards, 91% of the landowners in this
study belong to the middle class, as determined by their average
monthly income (Table 1) (IPSOS, 2020). The classifications are:
high class (over $1800 for Level A), middle class ($1800 USD for
Level B and $1030 USD for Level C), emergent population ($640
USD for Level D) and low income ($330 USD for Level E). Local
landowners are mainly middle class (85%), with the rest being emer-
gent (5%) or low income (10%). In contrast, all migrant landowners,
those from the capital city, are middle class. Notably, people in our
sample are relatively better off than the broader Peruvian popu-
lation. For comparison, only 37.5% of Peruvians are middle class,
with 26.2% being emergent and 35.3% low-­income (IPSOS, 2020).
All landowners are required to engage in economic activities,
either within or outside the PPAs, to financially support both their
conservation initiative and themselves. For instance, ecotourism ac-
tivities are undertaken by 44% of the interviewed landowners, with
some relying on their PPAs as their primary source of livelihood.
Additionally, 12% of the landowners are in the process of initiating
their own ecotourism ventures. Only a small minority, constituting
two landowners (6%), are small-­scale farmers who depend exclu-
sively on farming for their livelihoods.
3.2 | Profile of PPAs
Our study reveals that PPAs are safeguarding a diverse range of
ecosystems in Peru. A significant proportion of these PPAs (44%)
are dedicated to the preservation of the Amazon Rainforest. Over
a third of PPAs are conserving the cloud forest (38%), located in
the transitional area between the Peruvian Andes and the Amazon
Rainforest. Additionally, 13% of the PPAs protect the highly vulner-
able Peruvian dry forest, while a smaller percentage focuses on the
Peruvian Tropical Andes (Figure 2).

LÓPEZ de la LAMA et al.
F I G U R E 1 Geographical distribution of
interviewed PPA landowners across Peru.
The map highlights the names of the 10
regions where participating landowners
were located.
In terms of size, PPAs are predominantly small. The majority of
landowners (63%) oversee PPAs less than 50 ha in size, the smallest
being five hectares. A smaller group (19%) manages PPAs ranging
from 50 to 100 ha. There are a few larger PPAs, constituting 18%,
with sizes varying from 120 to 3350 ha. In terms of duration, the
most common commitment to these PPAs is 10 years (59%), followed
by commitments ranging between 20 and 50 years (22%). Notably,
six PPAs are established in perpetuity, representing 19% of the total.
3.3 | Frequency and diversity of values
In this study, we employed a coding methodology to identify, define
and quantify the various types of values that landowners associate
|
25758314, 0, Downloaded from https://besjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/pan3.10600, Wiley Online Library on [09/02/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
5
with their protected lands. Throughout 32 interviews, we discerned
intrinsic, instrumental and relational values, each exhibiting differ-
ent levels of diversity. Specifically, participants acknowledged two
types of intrinsic values, five types of instrumental values and 15
types of relational values (Figure 3).
Of the 32 interviews conducted, intrinsic values emerged in
25 (80%), and instrumental values were mentioned in 20 (63%).
However, relational values were referenced in all interviews.
Relational values were not only more frequent but also more diverse
compared to intrinsic or instrumental values. Typically, landowners
identified only one type of intrinsic or instrumental value. In con-
trast, they expressed, on average, eight different types of relational
values. This marked difference highlights the significant role that re-
lational values play for the participating landowners.
 |

25758314, 0, Downloaded from https://besjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/pan3.10600, Wiley Online Library on [09/02/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
6 LÓPEZ de la LAMA et al.

TA B L E 1 Descriptive summary of
Total = 32,
interviewed landowners (n = 32).
Descriptor Categories n (%)

Age class 20 and 30 years old 1 (3%)

30–40 years old 3 (9%)
40–50 years old 7 (22%)
50–60 years old 10 (31%)
60–70 years old 9 (28%)
70+ years old 2 (6%)
Gender Man 21 (66%)
Woman 11 (34%)
Highest level of completed education High School 10 (31%)
University—Bachelor's 11 (34%)
Postgraduate studies 10 (31%)
No response 1 (3%)
Socioeconomic status Level A 0
Level B 18 (56%)
Level C 11 (34%)
Level D 1 (3%)
Level E 2 (6%)
Occupation Professionals 26 (81%)
Farmers 3 (9%)
Retired 3 (9%)
Background Local 20 (63%)
Migrant 10 (31%)
Foreigner 2 (6%)

F I G U R E 2 Photographs showcasing the different types of ecosystems currently protected through privately protected areas in Peru. All
pictures belong to the first author (R.L.).

3.4 | Intrinsic values features of the area, mentioning the ecosystems and species present
in their land (Figure 3). This led to conveying the intrinsic values they
As already mentioned, a majority of landowners (80%, n = 25) started hold towards the landscape and species. For instance, landowners
the interview by acknowledging the key ecological and biological stated that the Amazon rainforest needs to be protected as it has a

LÓPEZ de la LAMA et al.
F I G U R E 3 Percentage of landowners that expressed intrinsic, instrumental and relational values.
value of its own. To illustrate this: ‘On a trip, I made to Brazil, where I
saw so much deforestation, I realized how important it is to protect our
forest… because it is important on its own. On that trip, I learned how
important it is to value this place and to protect the species that inhabit
1
it’ (Male landowner, 52 years old). Others mentioned the intrinsic
values of species, mainly based on the premise that some of them
are rare, endemic and play a key ecological role. Others seemed to
express intrinsic values by listing different species they know are
being protected in their PPA. For instance, ‘This place is one of the last
remaining cloud forests in the area, a place home to many endangered
species, many of which have not even been described by science. Here
we can see the howler monkey, seven species of endemic birds, wood-
tailed kite…’2 (Female landowner,
peckers, toucans, the swallow-­
38 years old).
3.5 | Instrumental values
Over half of landowners (62.5%, n = 20) mentioned instrumental val-
ues when sharing their origin story and the reasons they decided to
engage and sustain their PPA (Figure 3). Categories of instrumen-
tal values include aesthetics of the landscape (mentioned by three
landowners), regulating ecosystem services (one landowner), provi-
sioning ecosystem service of water supply (eight landowners), pro-
ductive activities (i.e. agriculture, aquaculture and cattle ranching)
1
‘En un viaje que hice a Brasil, donde vi tanta deforestación, me di cuenta de lo
importante que es proteger nuestros bosques…porque son importantes por sí mismos.
En ese viaje, aprendí lo importante que es valorar este lugar y proteger las especies que
lo habitan’.
2
‘Este lugar es uno de los últimos bosques nubosos que quedan en la zona, es hogar de
muchas especies en peligro de extinción, muchas de las cuales ni siquiera han sido
descritas por la ciencia. Aquí podemos ver el mono aullador, siete especies de aves
endémicas, pájaros carpinteros, tucanes, el elanio tijereta…’.
|
25758314, 0, Downloaded from https://besjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/pan3.10600, Wiley Online Library on [09/02/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
7
(nine landowners) and tourism (seven landowners). For instance, one
landowner mentioned that the main reason behind their parents
buying the land was to secure a piece of land for their agricultural
activities. Other landowners said that their land has been the tradi-
tional place for their family where they can raise alpacas and vicuñas
to sell the wool. Finally, another landowner shared that the land she
is protecting is where her father has been carrying out aquaculture
for the last 20 years.
3.6 | Relational values
Landowners described three types of relational values. First, most
landowners described relationships with nature in the abstract.
For example, many spoke of care or love for the forest, landscape
or environment: ‘The forest is something that teaches me, inspires
me… I'm happy when I'm in the forest3’ (Male landowner, 38 years
old). Second, many also spoke of relationships with animals and
plants, either individual (e.g. an old tree or a cow that comes fre-
quently to visit their house) or species (e.g. spectacled bears or
macaws). Finally, many landowners discussed relationships with
family members, either specific people or unnamed ancestors or
descendants (future generations). For instance, ‘Since our ances-
tors, our grandparents, we have been protecting this area as a family.
However, due to terrorism [back in the 80s to mid-­90s] we lost an im-
portant part of the forest and now we mainly protect the watershed
area… This place was owned by my great-­grandparents and grandpar-
ents, they left it to my father and his sister, and when my father passed
away, all 9 siblings decided to keep protecting this place. Our family
3
‘El bosque es algo que me enseña, me inspira…soy feliz cuando estoy en el bosque’.
 |
8 LÓPEZ de la LAMA et al.
taught us not to cut down trees, rather to protect nature’4 (Male land-
owner, 66 years old).
All landowners (100%) expressed at least one type of relational
value, with an average of eight relational values mentioned by
each (see Table 2 for the full list of relational values). Fifteen types
of relational values were featured in the interviews, which can be
grouped further into three categories (Figure 4). The first group
includes those relational values that evidence a personal connec-
tion with nature. Here, the relationships of stewardship, responsi-
bility, place attachment, sacrifice and spirituality are included.
This type of connection tends to be strong and long lasting, pro-
viding valuable information on the reasons why landowners en-
gage in voluntary land conservation. For instance, the following
landowner expressed her sense of stewardship when sharing her
family's conviction to restore their forest after it was harmed by
outsiders: ‘When people invaded our land, there was a tremendous
deforestation of the area. But shortly after my dad started reforest-
ing… and now it is all forest again. Everything, where my father planted
trees, is now restored, and about 20 hectares have been recovered.
Today we are reforesting again, and nature is starting to heal in those
new places5’ (Female, 38 years old).
The second group pertains to relationships that arise from feel-
ings expressed when in nature. These include the relational values of
gratitude, love and care; pride and discovery; curiosity and learning;
as well as awe and wonder. These feelings tend to emerge when
landowners remember their experiences or encounters when in na-
ture. For instance, one of the female landowners shared her love for
hummingbirds and how they make her feel happy and inspired every
time she sees one: ‘I die for hummingbirds. When I see one, I cry! For
me, hummingbirds are the best. I love when they come to say hi to me. So
now I have made a small terrace next to my office, so every time one
comes by, I can see it while working. For me hummingbirds represent
love, they are God's messengers of love’6 (Female, 50 years old).
Another landowner expressed his gratitude to be able to experience
nature so closely and frequently within his PPA: ‘It is a wonderful ex-
perience. The other day I went walking for 5 hours – I went up and down
the mountain, and when I reached the tree that I was looking for, it was
like I had not walked at all! I had no fatigue or tiredness. I'm 55 years old,
I have broken my leg once, and it was like that didn't matter. If you are
4
‘Desde nuestros ancestros, nuestros abuelos, hemos estado protegiendo esta área
como familia. Sin embargo, debido al terrorismo perdimos una parte importante del
bosque y ahora principalmente protegemos la zona de la cuenca… Este lugar pertenecía a
mis bisabuelos y abuelos, ellos se lo dejaron a mi padre y a su hermana, y cuando mi
padre falleció, los 9 hermanos decidimos seguir protegiendo este lugar. Nuestra familia
nos enseñó a no cortar árboles, sino a proteger la naturaleza’.
5
‘Cuando fue la invasión hubo una deforestación tremenda del área, pero en esos
tiempos, ya pasados, mi papá me enseña todo lo que cortaron para invadir, y ahora es
bosque. Entonces se restauró todo, alguna parte que mi papá también trabajó, no muy
bien zonificadas, ahora están en recuperación, tenemos bastante por lo menos unas 20
hectáreas en recuperación, y está ahí recuperándose naturalmente también’.
6
‘Muero por los colibrís. Cuando veo un colibrí, lloro. Me encanta verlos cuando vienen y
me dicen hola. He hecho mi oficina en mi terraza, he recuperado unos espacios, y he
sembrado aquí al costado para verlos mientras trabajo. Entonces sí los colibríes, además
de hermosos, son transmisores de buenas noticias, de mensajes de amor. Para mí son
enviados de Dios’.
25758314, 0, Downloaded from https://besjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/pan3.10600, Wiley Online Library on [09/02/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
thirsty in the forest, you drink water from a branch or the creek, and it's
ok. You don't get tired. You can rest whenever and wherever… my kids
also love it. Everyone likes it there really’7 (Male, 55 years old).
Finally, the third group is one that suggests social identity and a
sense of community with nature. Expressed relational values that are
part of this group include identity, sense of community, family proj-
ect (the PPA is regarded as a project done together as a family), leg-
acy and heritage. This category shows the blurred boundaries
between human and non-­human communities, with many landown-
ers expressing the notion that all living beings are part of nature. The
following landowner shared his connectedness with animals through
the following quote: ‘We are part of this project. We know we do this
because of our love for nature. It is a different type of feeling; we can
even understand animal languages. This experience helps us to under-
stand why birds and animals behave the way they do. For us, animals
express clearly what they need and want from the PPA8’ (Male, 50 years
old).
Overall, the most frequently expressed relational values by land-
owners were (1) stewardship, (2) responsibility, (3) care and love and
(4) place attachment (Table 2). Landowners often expressed multiple
relational values within the same quote. For instance, the following
landowner shared how he came to be responsible for the land he is
currently protecting. Here he expressed the relational values of awe
and wonder, care and love, heritage, as well as place attachment: ‘My
mom, when I was about 15 years old, saw that I really liked this land. I
was amazed when I saw a butterfly, a dragonfly, I liked it… even the ants,
and bees, and all inspired a sense of awe in me. I loved coming here with
my mom and living here with my four brothers. One day she brought me
here and told me: Look, son, I want you to protect this land. I will leave it
to you but never sell it. I want this to be yours for all your life. After she
told me that, I thanked her 9’ (Male, 60 years old).
4 | DISCUSSION
This paper expands the understanding of PPAs by shedding light
on less-­explored reasons that encourage and sustain landowners'
participation in voluntary land conservation. In particular, this is
achieved through narrative elicitation, which allowed us to uncover
7
‘Es algo lindo, el otro día que me he ido, he caminado 5 horas, he caminado, subido,
bajado el cerro y cuando he llegado al sitio pareciera que no hubiera caminado, no tenía
cansancio no tenía nada. Yo tengo 55 años, me he roto la pierna, tengo clavos en la pierna
y normal. Tú vas a un sitio y tomas agua normal nomas, si tienes sed y arrancas una soga
de una de gato y te viene el agua, te tomas el agua y rico y te vas. Así es. No te cansas. Te
sientas en un sitio, arrancas tus hojas y descansas… y a mis hijos también les encanta…
todo es lindo, a todos les gusta’.
8
‘Somos parte de este proyecto, sabes que lo que hacemos lo hacemos por amor a la
naturaleza, es otro tipo de sentimientos cuando nos involucramos con la naturaleza,
hasta podemos entender el lenguaje de los animalitos, esta experiencia nos permite, nos
ayuda, a entender el comportamiento de las aves, los animales…a los animalitos solo les
falta hablar, porque podemos comunicarnos los unos con los otros’.
9
‘Cuando tenía 15 años mi mamá vio que a mí me gustaba mucho el terreno, a mi
asombraba ver una mariposa, una libélula, me gustaba…hasta las hormigas, las abejas, y
todo para mí era un asombro. Y me encantaba, disfrutaba viendo aquí con mi mamá y
vivir con mis cuatro hermanos. Así que me dijo, hijo sabes que, me llevó al lugar y me dijo,
mira quiero que lo conserves. Te lo voy a dar a ti, pero nunca lo vendas. Quiero que esto
sea algo para toda la vida, y le dije gracias, mamá’.
 TA B L E 2 Compendium of relational values expressed by landowners.
Relational values Definitions
Stewardship Entails a practice of protection/
restoration that is an expression of
care and concern for the land and its
species
Responsibility Ascription of responsibility. Commitment Personal connection
to protect the land and carry on
despite challenges
Care & love Strong emotional bond with nature
and its species. Expressed either
positively or negatively
Sense of place Connection to the land, personal ties
with place. Self-­identification with
the land they are protecting
Gratitude of being in Positive emotions and feelings when in
nature, personal nature, thankful for being able to live
fulfilment within nature
Pride and discovery Being proud about their land and what it Feelings when in
holds (e.g. endemic species, species
new to science). Excited and willing to
share their land with more people
Legacy Contribution for posterity. A mission that Social identity
needs to continue even after they are
gone, usually passed to their children
or grandchildren
Awe & wonder Fascination and admiration for nature or
non-­human beings. An experience
that goes beyond them
25758314, 0, Downloaded from https://besjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/pan3.10600, Wiley Online Library on [09/02/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
Category Quotes Percentage (%)
Personal connection Where there is a tree missing, I will plant two or three. My goal has always been to 84%
with nature reforest. Reforest my small property with native species. I don't like species like pine
trees as they are not from here. Native trees are so beautiful, that as I have the chance
to reforest with them, I will carry on. Even more, I only feel at ease after I have planted
LÓPEZ de la LAMA et al.
a couple of trees by the end of the day (Male, 64 years)
I have received many threats by people that know me…and they also know my father, 81%
with nature mainly because I went to the police to denounce them as they were burning the forest.
The forest kept burning for like a month. I swear that it hurt me so much to see how
the forest burnt, and I told them not to do it again, but they didn't listen to me. So, I
brought the prosecutors here, and luckily, they explained to them that it is a felony to
burn the forest. However, people don't like me because of that. Nonetheless, we keep
protecting the forest (Female, 38 years)
Feelings when in When I see my neighbors deforesting, and you see that every year that road that we use 78%
nature for getting to the area has less and less forest cover … you do not have to be the most
hippie in the world to feel sorry for what a second ago, weeks ago was forest and
now is burning. Then, you see that they have planted papaya, you see that they are
fumigating x2 per week, you see the degradation of the soil… For me, it is something
that I feel personally… (Male, 38 years)
Personal connection Most of the dry forests of Peru are degraded, it is quite dramatic. I'm from here, and my 66%
with nature habitat is the dry forest really, although I like all nature, I'm from here and I have always
enjoyed the dry forest. So, I told myself that something needed to be done in order to
help its conservation (Male, 74 years)
Feelings when in It is so comforting to be in there (the forest). For me it is a joy, a gift to be able to 63%
nature experience God's creation so up close. To know that we are protecting such an
important landscape that gives us clean oxygen, day by day, it is something that
continues to astonish me and fills me with energy to carry one (Male, 51 years)
When I got back here, the first thing that I did was to buy the land that was completely 53%
nature degraded. Before us, it was used as a place to grow coca. So, to see it today, what we
have managed to accomplish, it is enough reason to make us proud (Female, 49 years)
With our current political scenario…I'm not sure what I'm leaving my kids with, I hope that 53%
and sense of they are still able to protect and restore the land, fight for it. I also want for them to
community keep up with reforestation, it is important that we have more aguajales here. Also, little
people know about this place, I know it well as I have been working on it for a while…so
I really hope that they are able to keep protecting it (Male, 52 years)
Feelings when in I have found some amazing things in the PPA. Once we found a green worm that had 53%
nature like a peacock tail, simply incredible! There is even a tree that we managed to rescue,
because it was a bit sick, and that is a tree that lights up at night. It is like you are
watching the Avatar movie. Spider webs, red and orange, coming out of it from
everywhere, making like a fabric of different colors, it is just amazing to watch (Female,
55 years)
| 9
(Continues)
 10

TA B L E 2 (Continued)
|

Relational values Definitions Category Quotes Percentage (%)

Curiosity and learning Desire to learn more about an ecosystem Feelings when in
or species, related to scientific
research. Excitement for being able to
experience nature
Family project An existing project or new venture that is Social identity
done jointly with family members
Identity A sense of belonging, relationships that
shape who they are or where they
belong to
Sacrifice Forego of a potential benefit (either
material or non-­material) in benefit of
nature conservation
Heritage A mission trusted to them by their
ancestors / family members.
Important past events that are
reminded through the land they are
protecting
Spirituality Nurtures the spirit, allows land managers
to feel closer to God or divine forces.
Spiritual peace
Being part of a Seeing their land as home to other living
biological beings, sharing a sense of place with
community them
When scientists from Edinburgh's botanical garden came to the PPA, they found a plant 47%
nature that has orange flowers. When they first saw it, they drop their things and went
running towards it. I did not realize what was going on at the moment, but then I asked
them. Apparently, it is a plant that its last scientific registry is from 1912 by a German
botanist that came to this area. These scientists were so excited to realize that the tree
was not extinct…which was the idea until then. Luckily, there is a whole bunch of them
here! (Male, 57 years)
It is hard to do a family project. We are committed, as my mom said, to make it work as 41%
and sense of a family. However, how do we ensure that our efforts are long lasting? We need to
community have a business approach so we can make sure that our efforts are sustainable. We do
have some business people in the family, but we are also ecologists at heart (Female,
46 years)
Social identity The nogal (a species of tree) is one of the species that we are lucky enough to have in our 34%
and sense of land, and I strongly identified with it. We even wanted to do a research project on it
community but couldn't get the funds in the end (Male, 60 years)
Personal connection Of course, we will keep on protecting this land! Some friends tell me that if I sold the land, 34%
with nature I would be the richest man here. We have a huge sand bank that would sell so fast, and
surely it would be enough money for me and my children to live off. It would solve all
of my troubles…However, it is not up for sale (Male, 46 years)
Social identity For me, all the forest is wonderful. I have lived there since I was born and every sound, 31%
and sense of every bird song, is simply…well, my father was a taxidermist. His collections are in
community the biggest museums of the world. So, since I am able to remember, I have been lucky
enough to follow his footsteps. He would let me go to the forest with him, get to know
the sounds of birds, experience nature, be in nature. Thus, for me every time I'm in the
forest, is like a reunion with nature and with him (Male, 60 years)
Personal connection Since that time, nature has nurtured my soul thanks to its mysticism. Since I was a kid, I 22%
with nature have spoken with nature thanks to its energy. For me, I saw energy fields that a regular
person cannot see. As a child, I realized that nature has its own language and we need
to protect it, because that's how it expresses itself (Female, 61 years)
Social identity We should always think that we are guests in this land, and that we need to co-­exist with 19%
and sense of the real owners, the animals. However, people don't think like that, they don't care.
community So, we try to teach people, but it's difficult. We see animals as our teachers for our
ecosystem restoration projects, as they tell us what do they like and works for them.
Every day is a learning experience, and you need to speak the same language as nature
to be able to work with it, no? (Male, 55 years)

Note: Each relational value is defined based on landowners' answers, for which a quote is used as an example. The percentage of landowners that expressed each relational value is shown in the table.
LÓPEZ de la LAMA et al.

25758314, 0, Downloaded from https://besjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/pan3.10600, Wiley Online Library on [09/02/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License

LÓPEZ de la LAMA et al.
F I G U R E 4 Categorization of relational
values as expressed by landowners.
multiple values that landowners ascribe to nature. By setting up
PPAs, landowners aim to protect and maintain the diverse values
they hold regarding nature and other living beings, with relational
values being particularly prominent. These findings suggest that
PPAs are more than just conservation efforts; they are long-­term
commitments embedded in landowners' connections to the land and
their ancestors. This relational perspective shows the intricate bonds
between people and nature, providing a nuanced understanding of
the historical intricacies surrounding PPAs' establishment and on-
going management. Although landowners also express intrinsic and
instrumental values, relational values are the ones most frequently
and richly described. We will delve deeper into these observations
in the following paragraphs.
4.1 | PPAs as initiatives led by local people
We consider it important to reflect on the fact that a large fraction
of PPAs in Peru are managed by local landowners themselves. The
prevailing representation in literature and media portrays landown-
ers of PPAs as predominantly affluent, often foreign individuals,
potentially engaging in land-­grabbing activities (Gooden & ‘t Sas-­
Rolfes, 2020; Holmes, 2014; Louder & Bosak, 2019). Such depictions
are common in studies of PPAs in regions like Chile, South Africa and
Canada (Clements et al., 2020; Gooden, 2019; Serenari et al., 2017).
Contrary to this, our research indicates that is not the case for Peru.
Landowners involved in our study were predominantly local, middle-­
income individuals, managing small-­scale PPAs, with a strong sense
of personal and ancestral connection to the land.
This finding underscores the role of intrinsic motivation in the
establishment and management of PPAs. In the Peruvian context,
where the government offers no incentives or support for PPAs,
landowners' commitment is driven primarily by a desire to conserve,
nurture and foster deep connections with their land. Despite its im-
portance, this aspect of PPAs has been insufficiently explored in ac-
ademic literature and lacks adequate governmental focus (Bingham
et al., 2021; Cortés-­C apano et al., 2019; Palfrey et al., 2021).
Addressing this gap is particularly critical in the context of meet-
ing global conservation goals, such as the 30 × 30 targets set by the
Convention on Biological Conservation in 2022. Empowering local
communities and individuals in conservation efforts through PPAs is
essential to achieving these ambitious goals.
|
25758314, 0, Downloaded from https://besjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/pan3.10600, Wiley Online Library on [09/02/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
11
In contrast to state-­led protected areas, which can be perceived
as external impositions (Serenari et al., 2017), PPAs in Peru embody
the local vision for conservation. The diverse stewardship practices
implemented by landowners within their PPAs reflect a deep-­seated
respect for nature, their families and all beings on their land (López
de la Lama et al., in prep.). While our research sheds light on the di-
verse values motivating landowners to voluntarily protect their land,
it also raises questions about their pursuit of official recognition
through a PPA. The motivations for seeking this formal acknowl-
edgement are complex and merit further investigation.
4.2 | Exploring the value-­laden dimensions of
voluntary land conservation through narrative
elicitation
Why are people setting up PPAs? Why do they persist despite a lack
of support and hardships? These are perhaps the main questions that
academics and practitioners strive to elucidate within the context
of voluntary land conservation (Merenlender et al., 2004; Mitchell
et al., 2018). Private land conservation literature has mainly followed
a motivational lens, which is one way of looking at reasons people
might have for engagement and commitment (Brenner et al., 2013;
Cooke et al., 2012; Gooden & Grenyer, 2019). Past research on mo-
tivations has produced a surface-­level understanding of why land-
owners set up PPAs.
Narrative elicitation has proven to be helpful for understanding
less-­explored reasons that engage and sustain people's efforts per-
taining to voluntary land conservation. When we asked open-­ended
questions about relationships with the land, this produced rich nar-
ratives into the deeper underlying values and rationales (Chapman
et al., 2019; Fish et al., 2022; Gould & Schultz, 2021). By allowing
landowners to share their personal stories and experiences, multi-
ple types of values that co-­occurred with each other emerged in a
cohesive way.
A focus on relationships reveals a common co-­occurrence of
intrinsic, instrumental and relational values, which is crucial for a
holistic understanding of voluntary land conservation. In this study,
intrinsic and instrumental values were expressed by most land-
owners (80% and 62.5%, respectively), while all landowners spoke
of multiple kinds of relational values (on average, each landowner
expressed eight relational values). As previously identified in the
 |
12
literature, intrinsic values pertain to nature's inherent worth or
right to exist, independent of its worth to people (Arias-­Arévalo
et al., 2017; Pascual et al., 2017). For instance, when landowners
articulated intrinsic values about the species they are protecting,
this was often expressed together with awe and wonder, as well as
pride and discovery. On the other hand, instrumental values per-
tain to the provision and protection of ecosystem services. When
landowners mentioned instrumental values, these were almost im-
mediately followed by relational statements that brought the focus
back to the different relationships between nature and landown-
ers enabled by ecosystem services or productive activities that are
carried out within the PPA (Knippenberg et al., 2018). Recognizing
that all three categories of values stem from human relationships
with nature helps explain the difficulty of drawing clear boundaries
between those different values (Kreitzman et al., 2022). Therefore,
separating the intrinsic or instrumental values from the meaningful
relationships that all landowners expressed would be problematic.
Without understanding the interwoven nature of these three cat-
egories of values, it would seem impossible to make sense of why
landowners perceive the intrinsic and instrumental values that they
do.
4.3 | The diversity of relational values surpasses
intrinsic and instrumental values
The identification of different types of relational values uncovered
meaningful and complex relationships. For instance, landowners
acknowledged relationships that span generations and the bounda-
ries of their land, including both human and non-­human beings that
are deeply meaningful to them (Chapman et al., 2019; Kreitzman
et al., 2022; Matilainen et al., 2019). Further, in contrast to both
instrumental and intrinsic values, which force a separation of the
subject and object of values, relational values were sometimes ex-
pressed in ways that entangled self, family, wildlife and plants, na-
ture and the land. This entanglement is evident when landowners
expressed multiple relational values within the same quote. As such,
landowners express blurred boundaries between themselves and
non-­human beings within nature, shedding light on a different type
of understanding about how humans are responsible and account-
able to nature (Descola & Lloyd, 2013; Turner et al., 2022).
Relational values can evolve and enable further relationships that
could explain landowners' long-­term commitment to the PPA. Some
of the meaningful relationships identified here preceded the cre-
ation of the PPA, while others emerged after the PPA was created.
The capacity of relational values to evolve and enable new relation-
ships with the same or different meaningful others implies an expan-
sion of the responsibilities that landowners take on through the PPA
(Chapman et al., 2019; Jones & Tobin, 2018; Kreitzman et al., 2022;
Riechers et al., 2020). The diversity of responsibilities that landown-
ers assume pertaining to their families, wildlife and plants, as well as
nature encompassed within the PPA implies they feel accountable
not only to themselves but to all those who would benefit from their
25758314, 0, Downloaded from https://besjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/pan3.10600, Wiley Online Library on [09/02/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
LÓPEZ de la LAMA et al.
actions (Drescher, 2014; Gill et al., 2010). Therefore, if landowners
fail to fulfil their duties pertaining to the PPA, they might perceive
that the relationships they strive to protect and restore within the
PPA are jeopardized.
Landowners have had frequent encounters and meaningful
experiences that might explain the diversity and dynamism of re-
lational values. Local landowners (63% of all participants) have a his-
torical relationship with the land, which on average started 30 years
before making it a PPA. For those who are migrants or foreigners
(37% of all participants), the PPA represents their home or a place
they can access quite easily and quickly, which encourages multiple
encounters and experiences within the PPA. Both scenarios foster
direct and reciprocal experiences with and within nature, which en-
able relationships such as those of stewardship, responsibility, love
and care and place attachment (Drescher, 2014; Turner et al., 2022;
West et al., 2018).
Our focus on landowners' relationships portrays PPAs as the
mechanism through which landowners aim to protect and restore
long-­term and meaningful relationships that they hold dear. Hence,
rather than presenting PPAs as individual action that requires in-
centives for landowners to remain engaged in conservation or
stewardship behaviours, here we present PPAs as the outcome of
landowners' long-­term commitment to protecting their land and re-
lated values. The strength of various motivations, of course, might
differ substantially across contexts and thus should be explored
further.
4.4 | Limitations
The current study presents some limitations that are key to ac-
knowledge. First, interviews were conducted remotely due to the
COVID-­19 pandemic. In situ interviews might expand the under-
standing of landowners and how they relate to the land they are pro-
tecting. Second, landowners who own a PPA in Peru as an individual
or family are a relatively homogeneous group in terms of their socio-
economic status (as discussed in Monteferri, 2019). Thus, although
we managed to interview 43% of all landowners that manage a PPA
as individuals or as a family, this group might be different from land-
owners in other countries. Hence, the set of values identified here
could be different from potentially other values expressed by a dif-
ferent profile of landowner elsewhere. Finally, it is important to note
that this paper specifically focuses on instrumental, intrinsic and re-
lational values, as these are the types of values currently recognized
at the international and policy decision-­making levels (IPBES, 2022).
5 | CO N C LU S I O N S
Voluntary land conservation, explored here through PPAs, repre-
sents a complex and relational phenomenon that facilitates valu-
able interactions with nature (Gilliand, 2021). Landowners in Peru
involved in these initiatives do more than just commit to short-­term

LÓPEZ de la LAMA et al.
pledges; they embark on a profound long-­term journey to protect,
restore and reciprocate their relationships with the land and other
living beings. This commitment defies the conventional intrinsic ver-
sus instrumental dichotomy, underscoring the co-­occurrence of rela-
tional values with both intrinsic and instrumental ones. PPAs emerge
as pivotal arenas where landowners actualize their sustainable vi-
sions for the land and amplify their responsibility towards all human
and non-­human beneficiaries of such protection. Their endeavours,
even as non-­Indigenous Peoples, highlight the significance of local
engagement in nature conservation. As important as these findings
are, there remains a need to understand the reasons behind land-
owners' decision to seek official recognition for their PPAs and the
challenges they encounter in their management.
AU T H O R C O N T R I B U T I O N S
Rocío López de la Lama, Nathan Bennett, Janette Bulkan and Kai
M. A. Chan conceived the ideas and designed methodology; Rocío
López de la Lama collected the data; Rocío López de la Lama and
Santiago de la Puente analysed the data; Rocío López de la Lama
led the writing of the manuscript; Kai M. A. Chan, Nathan Bennett,
Janette Bulkan and Santiago de la Puente revised the manuscript for
important intellectual content. All authors contributed critically to
the drafts and gave final approval for publication.
AC K N OW L E D G E M E N T S
The authors thank the 32 landowners of PPAs in Peru who shared
their stories and struggles throughout the interviews conducted for
this research. We also thank Conservamos por Naturaleza, an initia-
tive of Sociedad Peruana de Derecho Ambiental (SPDA), for their
help in identifying and contacting landowners. KMAC acknowledges
the Canada Research Chair program (CRC-­2020-­0 0183). We would
like to thank Rachelle Gould, Associate Editor, for her helpful feed-
back that contributed to the improvement of our manuscript. Finally,
we want to thank Niskar Peña for her contributions to the develop-
ment of the map featured in this paper.
C O N FL I C T O F I N T E R E S T S TAT E M E N T
Kai M. A. Chan is a lead editor at People and Nature. He did not have
any involvement with the peer review and decision-­making process
of this article.
F U N D I N G I N FO R M AT I O N
This research was funded by Consejo Nacional de Ciencia, Tecnología
e Innovación Tecnológica del Perú (CONCYTEC).
DATA AVA I L A B I L I T Y S TAT E M E N T
We have not made data publicly available, as individuals may be
identifiable in interview transcripts even if names were removed.
ORCID
Rocío López de la Lama https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6696-5401
Santiago de la Puente https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6189-9596
Kai M. A. Chan https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7804-3276
|
25758314, 0, Downloaded from https://besjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/pan3.10600, Wiley Online Library on [09/02/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
13
REFERENCES
Anderson, E. (2000). Beyond homo economicus: New developments in
theories of social norms. Philosophy & Public Affairs, 29(2), 170–200.
https://​doi.​org/​10.​1111/j.​1088-­​4963.​2000.​0 0170.​x
Arias-­Arévalo, P., Martín-­López, B., & Gómez-­Baggethun, E. (2017).
Exploring intrinsic, instrumental, and relational values for sustain-
able management of social-­ecological systems. Ecology and Society,
22(4), art43. https://​doi.​org/​10.​5751/​ES-­​09812​-­​220443
Bingham, H., Fitzsimons, J. A., Mitchell, B. A., Redford, K. H., & Stolton,
S. (2021). Privately protected areas: Missing pieces of the global
conservation puzzle. Frontiers in Conservation Science, 2, 748127.
https://​doi.​org/​10.​3389/​fcosc.​2021.​748127
Bingham, H., Fitzsimons, J. A., Redford, K., Mitchell, B. A., Bezaury-­Creel,
J., & Cumming, T. L. (2017). Privately protected areas: Advances
and challenges in guidance, policy and documentation. Parks, 23(1),
13–28. https://​doi.​org/​10.​2305/​IUCN.​CH.​2017.​PARKS​-­​23-­​1HB.​en
Brenner, J. C., Lavallato, S., Cherry, M., & Hileman, E. (2013). Land use de-
termines interest in conservation easements among private land-
owners. Land Use Policy, 35, 24–32. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​landu​
sepol.​2013.​03.​0 06
Campos, A., Guaita, L., Hennessey, B., & Hoogeslag, M. (2022).
Sustainable nature reserves: Guidelines for creating privately protected
areas. IUCN NL.
Chan, K. M., Gould, R. K., & Pascual, U. (2018). Editorial overview:
Relational values: What are they, and what's the fuss about? Current
Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 35, A1–A7. https://​doi.​org/​
10.​1016/j.​cosust.​2018.​11.​0 03
Chan, K. M. A., Anderson, E., Chapman, M., Jespersen, K., & Olmsted, P.
(2017). Payments for ecosystem services: Rife with problems and
potential—For transformation towards sustainability. Ecological
Economics, 140, 110–122. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​ecole​con.​
2017.​0 4.​029
Chan, K. M. A., Balvanera, P., Benessaiah, K., Chapman, M., Díaz, S.,
Gómez-­B aggethun, E., Gould, R., Hannahs, N., Jax, K., Klain, S.,
Luck, G. W., Martín-­L ópez, B., Muraca, B., Norton, B., Ott, K.,
Pascual, U., Satterfield, T., Tadaki, M., Taggart, J., & Turner, N.
(2016). Why protect nature? Rethinking values and the envi-
ronment. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the
United States of America, 113(6), 1462–1465. https://​d oi.​o rg/​10.​
1073/​p nas.​15250​02113​
Chapman, M., Satterfield, T., & Chan, K. M. A. (2019). When value con-
flicts are barriers: Can relational values help explain farmer par-
ticipation in conservation incentive programs? Land Use Policy, 82,
464–475. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​landu​sepol.​2018.​11.​017
Clements, H. S., Knight, M., Jones, P., & Balfour, D. (2020). Private rhino
conservation: Diverse strategies adopted in response to the poach-
ing crisis. Conservation Letters, 13(6). https://​doi.​org/​10.​1111/​conl.​
12741​
Convention on Biological Diversity. (2022). Kunming-­Montreal global bio-
diversity framework. Convention of the Parties to the Convention on
Biological Diversity.
Cooke, B., Langford, W. T., Gordon, A., & Bekessy, S. (2012). Social con-
text and the role of collaborative policy making for private land
conservation. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management,
55(4), 469–485. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1080/​09640​568.​2011.​608549
Cortés-­C apano, G., Toivonen, T., Soutullo, A., & Di Minin, E. (2019). The
emergence of private land conservation in scientific literature: A
review. Biological Conservation, 237, 191–199. https://​doi.​org/​10.​
1016/j.​biocon. ​2019.​07.​010
Creswell, J. W. (2015). A concise introduction to mixed methods research.
Sage Publications.
Delgado, E., Meza Mori, G., Barboza, E., Rojas Briceño, N. B., Torres
Guzmán, C., Oliva-­Cruz, M., Chavez-­Q uintana, S. G., Salas López,
R., López de la Lama, R., Sevillano-­Ríos, C. S., & Sarmiento, F. (2021).
Efectividad de áreas de conservación privada comunal en bosques
 |
14
montanos nublados del norte de Perú. Pirineos, 176, e067. https://​
doi.​org/​10.​3989/​pirin​eos.​2021.​176006
Descola, P., & Lloyd, J. (2013). Beyond nature and culture. The University
of Chicago Press.
Drescher, M. (2014). What is it like to take care of the land? Toward an
understanding of private land conservation. Rural Society, 23(2),
117–132. https://​doi.​org/​10.​5172/​rsj.​2014.​23.2.​117
Eyster, H. N., Satterfield, T., & Chan, K. M. A. (2022). Why people do
what they do: An interdisciplinary synthesis of human action the-
ories. Annual Review of Environment and Resources, 47(1), 725–751.
https://​doi.​org/​10.​1146/​annur​ev-­​envir​on-­​02042​2-­​125351
Farmer, J. R., Knapp, D., Meretsky, V. J., Chancellor, C., & Fischer, B. C.
(2011). Motivations influencing the adoption of conservation ease-
ments: Adopting conservation easements. Conservation Biology,
25(4), 827–834. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1111/j.​1523-­​1739.​2011.​01686.​
x Knippenberg, L., de Groot, W. T., van den Born, R. J., Knights, P., &
Fish, R., Chan, K. M. A., Maller, C., Hails, R. S., Aimé, E., & Gaston, K. J.
(2022). People and nature: The emerging signature of a relational
journal. People and Nature, 4(3), 592–595. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1002/​
pan3.​10339​
Fitzsimons, J. A., & Carr, C. B. (2014). Conservation covenants on private
land: Issues with measuring and achieving biodiversity outcomes in
Australia. Environmental Management, 54(3), 606–616. https://​doi.​
org/​10.​1007/​s0026​7-­​014-­​0329-­​4
Gill, N., Klepeis, P., & Chisholm, L. (2010). Stewardship among lifestyle
oriented rural landowners. Journal of Environmental Planning and
Management, 53(3), 317–334. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1080/​09640​
56100​3612890
Gilliand, C. (2021). Experiencing values in the flow of events: A phenome-
nological approach to relational values. Environmental Values, 30(6),
715–736. https://​doi.​org/​10.​3197/​09632​7121X​16141​6 4228​7692
Gooden, J., & ‘t Sas-­Rolfes, M. (2020). A review of critical perspectives
on private land conservation in academic literature. Ambio, 49(5),
1019–1034. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​s1328​0 -­​019-­​01258​-­​y
Gooden, J., & Grenyer, R. (2019). The psychological appeal of owning
private land for conservation. Conservation Biology, 33(2), 339–350.
https://​doi.​org/​10.​1111/​cobi.​13215​
Gooden, J. L. (2019). Cultivating identity through private land conser-
vation. People and Nature, 1(3), 362–375. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1002/​
pan3.​32
Gould, R. K., & Schultz, P. W. (2021). Challenges to understanding non-
material dimensions of human-­nature connections, and how to
address them. Ecology and Society, 26(3), art14. https://​doi.​org/​10.​
5751/​ES-­​12604​-­​260314
Himes, A., & Muraca, B. (2018). Relational values: The key to pluralistic
valuation of ecosystem services. Current Opinion in Environmental
Sustainability, 35, 1–7. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​cosust.​2018.​09.​
005
Holmes, G. (2014). What is a land grab? Exploring green grabs, conser-
vation, and private protected areas in southern Chile. The Journal
of Peasant Studies, 41(4), 547–567. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1080/​03066​
150.​2014.​919266
INEI. (2023). Estimaciones y proyecciones de poblacion. Instituto
Nacional de Estadistica e Informatica. https://m.​inei.​gob.​p e/​
estad​i stic​a s/​i ndic​e -­​temat​i co/​p opul​a tion​- ­​estim​a tes-­​and-­​proje​
ctions/​
IPBES. (2022). Summary for policymakers of the IPBES global assessment
report on biodiversity and ecosystem services. IPBES.
IPSOS. (2020). Características de los niveles socioeconómicos en el Perú.
https://​w ww.​ipsos.​com/​es-​pe/​c arac​teris​ticas-​de-​los-​nivel​es-​socio​
econo​micos-​en-​el-​peru
Jack, B. K., Kousky, C., & Sims, K. R. E. (2008). Designing payments
for ecosystem services: Lessons from previous experience with
incentive-­based mechanisms. Proceedings of the National Academy
of Sciences of the United States of America, 105(28), 9465–9470.
https://​doi.​org/​10.​1073/​pnas.​07055​03104​
25758314, 0, Downloaded from https://besjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/pan3.10600, Wiley Online Library on [09/02/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
LÓPEZ de la LAMA et al.
Jax, K., Calestani, M., Chan, K. M., Eser, U., Keune, H., Muraca, B.,
O'Brien, L., Potthast, T., Voget-­Kleschin, L., & Wittmer, H. (2018).
Caring for nature matters: A relational approach for understand-
ing nature's contributions to human well-­being. Current Opinion in
Environmental Sustainability, 35, 22–29. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​
cosust.​2018.​10.​0 09
Jones, K., & Tobin, D. (2018). Reciprocity, redistribution and relational
values: Organizing and motivating sustainable agriculture. Current
Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 35, 69–74. https://​doi.​org/​
10.​1016/j.​cosust.​2018.​11.​0 01
Kabii, T., & Horwitz, P. (2006). A review of landholder motivations and
determinants for participation in conservation covenanting pro-
grammes. Environmental Conservation, 33(1), 11–20. https://​doi.​
org/​10.​1017/​S0376​89290​6002761
Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking fast and slow. Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
Muraca, B. (2018). Relational value, partnership, eudaimonia: A
review. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 35, 39–45.
https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​cosust.​2018.​10.​022
Kosoy, N., Martinez-­Tuna, M., Muradian, R., & Martinez-­Alier, J. (2007).
Payments for environmental services in watersheds: Insights from
a comparative study of three cases in Central America. Ecological
Economics, 61(2–3), 446–455. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​ecole​con.​
2006.​03.​016
Kreitzman, M., Chapman, M., Keeley, K. O., & Chan, K. M. A. (2022). Local
knowledge and relational values of Midwestern woody perennial
polyculture farmers can inform tree-­crop policies. People and
Nature, 4(1), 180–200. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1002/​pan3.​10275​
Levine, J., Chan, K. M. A., & Satterfield, T. (2015). From rational actor to
efficient complexity manager: Exorcising the ghost of Homo eco-
nomicus with a unified synthesis of cognition research. Ecological
Economics, 114, 22–32. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​ecole​con.​2015.​
03.​010
López de la Lama, R., Bennett, N., Bulkan, J., Boyd, D., & Chan, K. M.
(2023). A legal assessment of private land conservation in South
America: Committed landowners yet unsupportive governments.
Conservation Biology, 37, e14068. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1111/​cobi.​
14068​
Louder, E., & Bosak, K. (2019). What the gringos brought: Local perspec-
tives on a private protected area in Chilean Patagonia. Conservation
and Society, 17(2), 161. https://​doi.​org/​10.​4103/​c s.​c s_​17_​169
Matilainen, A., Koch, M., Zivojinovic, I., Lähdesmäki, M., Lidestav, G.,
Karppinen, H., Didolot, F., Jarsky, V., Põllumäe, P., Colson, V.,
Hricova, Z., Glavonjic, P., & Scriban, R. E. (2019). Perceptions
of ownership among new forest owners—A qualitative study in
European context. Forest Policy and Economics, 99, 43–51. https://​
doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​forpol.​2018.​06.​0 02
Merenlender, A. M., Huntsinger, L., Guthey, G., & Fairfax, S. K. (2004).
Land trusts and conservation easements: Who is conserving what
for whom? Conservation Biology, 18(1), 65–76. https://​doi.​org/​10.​
1111/j.​1523-­​1739.​2004.​0 0401.​x
Mitchell, B., Stolton, S., Bezaury-­Creel, J., Bingham, H., Cumming, T.,
Dudley, N., Fitzsimons, J., Malleret-­King, D., Redford, K., & Solano,
P. (2018). Guidelines for privately protected areas (C. Groves, Ed.; 1st
ed.). IUCN, International Union for Conservation of Nature. https://​
doi.​org/​10.​2305/​IUCN.​CH.​2018.​PAG.​29.​en
Monteferri, B. (Ed.). (2019). Áreas de conservación privada en el Perú:
Avances y propuestas a 20 años de su creación (Primera edición).
Sociedad Peruana de Derecho Ambiental.
Muradian, R. (2013). Payments for ecosystem services as incentives for
collective action. Society & Natural Resources, 26(10), 1155–1169.
https://​doi.​org/​10.​1080/​0 8941​920.​2013.​820816
Naito, R., Zhao, J., & Chan, K. M. A. (2022). An integrative framework
for transformative social change: A case in global wildlife trade.
Sustainability Science, 17(1), 171–189. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​
s1162​5-­​021-­​01081​-­​z

LÓPEZ de la LAMA et al.
Newing, H. (2011). Conducting research in conservation. A social science
perspective (1st ed.). Routledge.
Palfrey, R., Oldekop, J., & Holmes, G. (2021). Conservation and social
outcomes of private protected areas. Conservation Biology, 35(4),
1098–1110. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1111/​cobi.​13668​
Pascual, U., Balvanera, P., Díaz, S., Pataki, G., Roth, E., Stenseke, M.,
Watson, R. T., Başak Dessane, E., Islar, M., Kelemen, E., Maris, V.,
Quaas, M., Subramanian, S. M., Wittmer, H., Adlan, A., Ahn, S., Al-­
Hafedh, Y. S., Amankwah, E., Asah, S. T., … Yagi, N. (2017). Valuing
nature's contributions to people: The IPBES approach. Current
Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 26–27, 7–16. https://​doi.​org/​
10.​1016/j.​cosust.​2016.​12.​0 06
Riechers, M., Balázsi, Á., Betz, L., Jiren, T. S., & Fischer, J. (2020). The
erosion of relational values resulting from landscape simplification.
Landscape Ecology, 35(11), 2601–2612. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​
s1098​0 -­​020-­​01012​-­​w
Rode, J., Gómez-­Baggethun, E., & Krause, T. (2015). Motivation crowd-
ing by economic incentives in conservation policy: A review of the
empirical evidence. Ecological Economics, 117, 270–282. https://​doi.​
org/​10.​1016/j.​ecole​con.​2014.​11.​019
Schleicher, J., Peres, C. A., Amano, T., Llactayo, W., & Leader-­Williams, N.
(2017). Conservation performance of different conservation gov-
ernance regimes in the Peruvian Amazon. Scientific Reports, 7(1),
11318. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1038/​s 4159​8-­​017-­​10736​-­​w
Schröter, M. (2020). Indicators for relational values of nature's contribu-
tions to good quality of life: The IPBES approach for Europe and
Central Asia. Ecosystems and People, 16(1), 50–69. https://​doi.​org/​
10.​1080/​26395​916.​2019.​1703039
Selinske, M. J., Coetzee, J., Purnell, K., & Knight, A. T. (2015).
Understanding the motivations, satisfaction, and retention of land-
owners in private land conservation programs: Landowner commit-
ment to conservation. Conservation Letters, 8(4), 282–289. https://​
doi.​org/​10.​1111/​conl.​12154​
Selinske, M. J., Cooke, B., Torabi, N., Hardy, M. J., Knight, A. T., & Bekessy,
S. A. (2017). Locating financial incentives among diverse motiva-
tions for long-­term private land conservation. Ecology and Society,
22(2), art7. https://​doi.​org/​10.​5751/​ES-­​09148​-­​220207
Serenari, C., Peterson, M. N., Wallace, T., & Stowhas, P. (2017). Private
protected areas, ecotourism development and impacts on local
people's well-­being: A review from case studies in southern Chile.
|
25758314, 0, Downloaded from https://besjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/pan3.10600, Wiley Online Library on [09/02/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
15
Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 25(12), 1792–1810. https://​doi.​org/​
10.​1080/​09669​582.​2016.​1178755
SERNANP. (2014). Areas de Conservacion Privada. Documento de Trabajo
N#10.
Shanee, N., Shanee, S., & Horwich, R. H. (2015). Effectiveness of locally
run conservation initiatives in north-­east Peru. Oryx, 49(2), 239–
247. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1017/​S0030​60531​3 001002
Stolton, S., Redford, K. H., & Dudley, N. (2014). The futures of privately
protected areas. IUCN.
Tadaki, M., Sinner, J., & Chan, K. M. A. (2017). Making sense of environ-
mental values: A typology of concepts. Ecology and Society, 22(1),
art7. https://​doi.​org/​10.​5751/​ES-­​08999​-­​220107
Turner, N. J., Cuerrier, A., & Joseph, L. (2022). Well grounded: Indigenous
Peoples' knowledge, ethnobiology and sustainability. People and
Nature, 4(3), 627–651. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1002/​pan3.​10321​
West, S., Haider, L. J., Masterson, V., Enqvist, J. P., Svedin, U., & Tengö, M.
(2018). Stewardship, care and relational values. Current Opinion in
Environmental Sustainability, 35, 30–38. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​
cosust.​2018.​10.​0 08
Yasué, M., & Kirkpatrick, J. B. (2020). Do financial incentives motivate
conservation on private land? Oryx, 54(4), 499–510. https://​doi.​
org/​10.​1017/​S0030​60531​8 000194
S U P P O R T I N G I N FO R M AT I O N
Additional supporting information can be found online in the
Supporting Information section at the end of this article.
Appendix S1: Interview guide.
How to cite this article: López de la Lama, R., Bennett, N.,
Bulkan, J., de la Puente, S., & Chan, K. M. A. (2024). Not in it
for the money: Meaningful relationships sustain voluntary
land conservation initiatives in Peru. People and Nature, 00,
1–15. https://doi.org/10.1002/pan3.10600