Coastal management and conservation initiatives frequently encounter trade-offs between ecological and social objectives. However, evidence suggests that equitable and inclusive resource management leads to better outcomes for both society and the environment. Gender significantly influences how individuals interact with and depend on coastal resources and spaces. Despite this, there's limited understanding of how coastal management affects men and women differently. This knowledge gap hinders the creation of effective and equitable initiatives. The study aims to address this by analyzing gender differences in perceptions of the impacts of coastal management and conservation on human well-being across diverse contexts. This understanding is crucial for enhancing the legitimacy of conservation efforts and promoting gender equity within global biodiversity conservation.

Existing literature highlights the influence of gender on the use and dependence on coastal resources. However, studies focusing on gender differences in the outcomes of coastal management and conservation are scarce. While some research acknowledges the unequal distribution of costs and benefits based on gender, there's a lack of comprehensive understanding of how gender equality intersects with management outcomes. This research gap emphasizes the need to incorporate social equity and gender equity into global biodiversity conservation efforts. The review also discusses existing coastal management approaches, some of which incorporate traditional gendered practices, but few explicitly address gender equity issues in their frameworks. The study underscores the significance of understanding gendered perceptions to improve the perceived legitimacy and success of conservation initiatives and to inform social safeguard policies.

The study employed household surveys conducted between 2017 and 2019 across 76 coastal communities in six countries: Fiji, Papua New Guinea, Solomon Islands, Indonesia, Kenya, and Madagascar. These communities were selected based on their reliance on coral reef fisheries and involvement in various management approaches (locally, co-, or government-managed). A total of 3063 individuals (1239 women and 1824 men) participated. Households were systematically sampled, with a stratified approach to ensure representation of men and women. Surveys were conducted in local languages by trained interviewers. The survey included questions on whether respondents perceived impacts of management at individual and community levels, open-ended questions about the types of impacts, and Likert-scale questions about the degree of impact. Data analysis involved chi-square tests to assess the relationship between gender and the perception of impacts, and Cochran-Armitage tests for analyzing the degree of impact. Qualitative data from open-ended questions were analyzed using NVivo software, categorized into six human well-being domains (cultural, economic, environmental, governance, health, and social), and analyzed by gender to identify differences.

Approximately half of the respondents (51%) perceived community-level impacts of management, and 42% perceived individual-level impacts. Significant gender differences existed in whether impacts were perceived, with 37% of women and 46% of men perceiving individual-level impacts, and 47% of women and 54% of men perceiving community-level impacts. However, the degree of impact (positive or negative) did not significantly differ by gender. Qualitative analysis revealed gendered differences in the types of impacts described. Women more frequently mentioned income from the sea as a benefit and decreased income as a cost of management, particularly in Indonesia, Kenya, Madagascar, and the Solomon Islands. Women also mentioned health benefits more often than men at both individual and community levels. Men more often reported a lack of trust in leadership and restricted fishing access as negative impacts. Gender differences were most pronounced in the economic, governance, and health domains of human well-being.

The findings highlight the need for a more nuanced approach to coastal management and conservation, considering gendered perceptions and experiences. The discrepancy in the perception of impacts itself – with more women reporting community-level impacts and more men reporting individual-level impacts – suggests that current management might prioritize activities involving men. The study underscores the limitations of assuming fishing is solely a male activity, emphasizing the need to consider women's roles and experiences. Gender risk assessments are recommended as a tool to identify and mitigate risks associated with management, ensuring that women's concerns are addressed in project design and planning. The diverse types of impacts across the human well-being domains show the complexity of the issue, highlighting the need for targeted interventions. The significant variation in response across different countries emphasizes the importance of context-specific solutions.

The study reveals significant gender differences in the perception of the impacts of coastal management and conservation. While the degree of perceived impact did not differ significantly by gender, the types of impacts articulated did, particularly within the economic, governance, and health domains. This research underscores the urgent need for gender-responsive approaches in coastal management and conservation. Future research should employ case studies and qualitative methods to delve deeper into the drivers of gendered differences. The study recommends building capacity for gender-sensitive analysis, co-designing programs with diverse perspectives, and developing targeted interventions based on context-specific understandings of gender dynamics.

The study's reliance on a large-scale existing dataset, while providing a unique opportunity for multi-country analysis, limited the depth of investigation into the underlying drivers of gender differences. The focus on women and men, excluding other gender identities, represents a limitation. The study also acknowledged variations in management approaches and gender dynamics at the community level, suggesting that a more granular approach may reveal additional insights. Finally, the significant percentage of respondents indicating no impact from management warrants further exploration to better align community needs and management activities.