The environmental crises currently gripping the Earth have been codified in a new proposed geological epoch: the Anthropocene. This epoch, according to the Anthropocene Working Group, began in the mid-20th century and reflects the “great acceleration” that began with industrialization in Europe [J. Zalasiewicz et al., Anthropocene 19, 55–60 (2017)]. Ironically, European ideals of protecting a pristine “wilderness,” free from the damaging role of humans, is still often heralded as the antidote to this human-induced crisis [J. E. M. Watson et al., Nature, 563, 27–30 (2018)]. Despite decades of critical engagement by Indigenous and non-Indigenous observers, large international nongovernmental organizations, philanthropists, global institutions, and nation-states continue to uphold the notion of pristine landscapes as wilderness in conservation ideals and practices. In doing so, dominant global conservation policy and public perceptions still fail to recognize that Indigenous and local peoples have long valued, used, and shaped “high-value” biodiverse landscapes. Moreover, the exclusion of people from many of these places under the guise of wilderness protection has degraded their ecological condition and is hastening the demise of a number of highly valued systems. Rather than denying Indigenous and local peoples’ agency, access rights, and knowledge in conserving their territories, we draw upon a series of case studies to argue that wilderness is an inappropriate and dehumanizing construct, and that Indigenous and community conservation areas must be legally recognized and supported to enable socially just, empowering, and sustainable conservation across scale.

目前困扰地球的环境危机已被编入一个新的地质时代：人类世。根据人类世工作组的说法，这个时代始于 20 世纪中叶，反映了欧洲工业化开始的“巨大加速”[J. Zalasiewicz 等人，人类世19, 55–60 (2017)]。具有讽刺意味的是，欧洲保护原始“荒野”免受人类破坏的理想仍然经常被誉为解决这一人类引发的危机的解毒剂 [JEM Watson 等人, Nature , 563, 27–30 (2018) ]。尽管土著和非土著观察者进行了数十年的批判性参与，但大型国际非政府组织、慈善家、全球机构和民族国家在保护理想和实践中继续坚持原始景观作为荒野的概念。在这样做的过程中，占主导地位的全球保护政策和公众观念仍然未能认识到原住民和当地人民长期以来一直重视、使用和塑造“高价值”的生物多样性景观。此外，以荒野保护为幌子将人们排除在许多这些地方之外，已经恶化了这些地方的生态条件，并加速了一些高价值系统的灭亡。我们并没有否认原住民和当地人民在保护其领土方面的能动性、进入权和知识，而是利用一系列案例研究来论证荒野是一种不适当和非人性化的概念，原住民和社区保护区必须得到法律承认并支持实现社会公正、赋权和可持续的大规模保护。