Nature protected areas are hailed as an institutional solution to the global biodiversity crisis. However, conservation entails local economic costs for some communities and benefits for others. We propose that the establishment of protected areas in Africa follows an ethno-political logic which implies that governments distribute protected areas such that their ethnic constituencies are shielded from their costs but enjoy their benefits. We test this argument using continent-wide data on ethnic groups’ power status and protected area establishment since independence. Difference-in-differences models show that political inclusion decreases nature protection in groups’ settlement areas. Yet, this effect is reversed for protected areas that plausibly generate tourism income. We also find that ethno-political inclusion is linked to legal degradation of protected areas. Our findings on the ethno-political underpinnings of nature protection support long-voiced concerns by activists that politically marginalized groups carry disproportional costs of nature conservation.