There is a growing trend with how conservation is shared with the world. This is not new. Narratives around catastrophism are often the entry point into storytelling, and while there is often an element of truth in this, it can sometimes miss the opportunity for vital lesson sharing when anxiety is the feeling that follows a shocking headline.
Decline in wildlife populations and ecosystem pressures remain the dominant entry point into most conservation news stories. While crisis frames the tone and urgency shapes the direction of the message, conservation is often presented as a condition of continuous deterioration, even in contexts where the evidence is actually pointing to progress. This approach has become familiar and widely accepted, yet it does not account for the range of important lessons that may be observed. Catastrophism grabs attention but it rarely profiles a solution. And in conservation, we need to be learning from the highly localised solutions implemented within communities that can be scaled into a broader reach. Communication can support the sharing of solutions by showing how local conservation efforts work and how they can be applied elsewhere.
If you move beyond the headlines and executive summaries into full reports and field observations, you encounter progress that is not often reflected in public conservation narratives particularly across media coverage, advocacy campaigns and global reporting frameworks. In some reserves, wildlife populations are recovering in ways that can be measured across multiple ecological corridors. In some regions, protected areas are being expanded through community, state and private sector partnerships. Community conservancies are also generating income through sustainable biodiversity economy initiatives. These developments are recorded through monitoring systems and reflected in programme reports, which confirms that they form part of the current conservation reality. However, public facing communication often presents an entry point through an ecological crisis.
Why conservation communication leans toward catastrophism
Messages that emphasise risk tend to travel faster across media platforms because they also align with advocacy efforts that rely on urgency to mobilise attention. In funding environments where resources are limited, these messages provide a clear justification for support. This creates a strong incentive to lead with threat, since it consistently attracts attention within existing platforms.
At an institutional level, progress is often communicated cautiously. Positive developments can be interpreted as a reduced need for intervention. This creates hesitation in how they are presented. As a result, progress is placed further into the narrative, while crisis remains the primary frame. Communication often opens with decline, establishes urgency and closes with a call for continued action.
What this framing is doing
The effects of this approach are becoming more obvious, particularly in how audiences respond to conservation messaging. Repeated exposure to these types of narratives reduces attention because the message becomes familiar without offering new understanding. And engagement begins to drop as a result.
There are also implications for credibility, especially in contexts where people have direct experience of conservation systems. In many parts of Africa, individuals and communities living alongside protected areas observe changes in wildlife populations and ecosystem. They also experience shifts in tourism activity. In some cases, local economic conditions improve alongside these changes. When communication continues to describe only decline, a gap is created between what is communicated and what is observed. This gap introduces doubt and trust with local stakeholders because the narrative does not align with lived experience.
In addition, the current framing obscures the work that supports conservation. Conservation outcomes are produced through ongoing effort. Governance arrangements between communities, state and the private sector determine how land is managed. Monitoring systems track changes over time. When communication remains focused on crisis, these processes are not clearly explained. This makes it difficult to understand how conservation functions in practice and why outcomes differ across locations. This limits how conservation is understood within broader development discussions, particularly where decisions depend on evidence of impact.
Reworking conservation storytelling
If conservation communication is to reflect reality more accurately, its structure needs to change in ways that respond directly to evidence.
It becomes important to begin with demonstrated outcomes, since these provide a clear reference point for understanding what conservation looks like in practice. From there, communication can move into an explanation of how those outcomes were produced. This includes the institutional arrangements that define governance and lead to specific outcomes. It should also include the day-to-day practices that maintain conservation systems.
Integrating economic narratives allows conservation to be understood in relation to livelihoods, particularly where tourism and local enterprise play a role. When data is used, it needs to be presented with clarity and linked to specific places, so that audiences understand what is being measured. Recognising the individuals and institutions involved in conservation provides a clearer account of how outcomes are achieved. This approach shows conservation as work that is actively carried out through coordination and ongoing effort.
Implications for sustainability communication
For communication practitioners, this requires closer engagement with evidence and with the systems through which conservation operates, since accurate storytelling depends on a clear understanding of both.
It also requires alignment between communication and monitoring processes, so that storytelling reflects what is being measured and observed. There is also an opportunity to position conservation within broader economic discussions, particularly as the biodiversity economy receives increased attention across the continent.
The task is to represent conservation in a way that reflects areas of pressure alongside areas where progress is taking place. At SUSCO, this approach informs how communication strategies are developed, with a focus on what is being observed, how it is interpreted and how detailed information is translated into communication that different audiences can practically engage with, not just consume.