Neoliberal Conservation Flashcards
Define neoliberalism (with reference)
A political and economic philosophy and approach to economics and policy that seeks to reduce state intervention and embrace the free market (Mackinnon and Cumbers, 2011)
Define capitalism (with reference)
Capitalism is a particular mode of production, based on private (as opposed to state) ownership of the means of production (Mackinnon and Cumbers, 2011)
What did Buscher et al. (2012) say about defining neoliberalism?
That we need to recognise neoliberalism as complex - it is a process rather than a thing, that means different things in different places and times It is a “broad political ideology”
Castree, 2010
Commentators often homogenise assumptions about both neoliberalism and conservation - treating them as one entity, whereas they are both very complicated and made up of lots of facets
Dear, 2000
A market is any structure that allows buyers and sellers to exchange any type of goods, services or information
What did conservation used to be seen as (in relation to capitalism)?
Was anti-neoliberal Was often seen in protest e.g. chaining themselves to fences outside big oil offices However some have argued that this has now markedly changed, wherein neoliberalism has entered conservation practice
What process is conservation undergoing?
It is being commoditised
Outline the commoditisation of conservation?
Capitalism sees conservation as a new frontier for capital accumulation - a new market that it can open up into In this way conservation is no longer an impediment to growth, but works as an opportunity - protecting nature is becoming a product to be sold on the market (Fairhead et al., 2012)
Why is the commoditisation of conservation inherently problematic?
It is inherently problematic as capitalism is at the heart of dramatic ecological changes and crises unleashed within the last two centuries (Buscher et al., 2012)
Fine, 2009
The values infusing conservation are those of neoliberal capitalism 1) It relies on implicit assumptions that people are rational maximisers of economic opportunity 2) it places emphasis on investment, profit, (natural) capital, growth etc.
Thrift, 2005
Capitalism is rarely mentioned explicitly Instead actors speak about engendering conservation through “economics”, “markets”, “payments” The language of neoliberal economics has become the common linguistic current - this frames interventions in specific directions, towards market and technological innovation
What sorts of things fall under “neoliberal” conservation?
PES Biodiversity off-setting Certification of “natural” products Eco-tourism Carbon markets Private protected areas
What is the history between conservation and capital?
Many of the schemes listed as “neoliberal” have been around long before the neoliberal turn of the 1980s
Hingston, 1931
National parks were an opportunity for commercialisation through tourism As exemplified by Yosemite Lodge, which opened in 1857
Brockington and Scholfield, 2010
Conservation was never a domain separate and set apart from capitalism
If conservation was never separate from capital, what makes neoliberal conservation new?
1) Mainstream conservation has now internalised the logic of capitalism to a historically unprecedented extent - increase in intensity and variety of capitalist conservation (Neumann, 2015) 2) Many more players, who are more deeply embedded in capitalist networks (Fairhead et al., 2012) 3) Shift towards the spectacularising of nature, to open new conservation spaces for capitalist expansion, whilst simultaneously masking the ecological and social contradictions (e.g. the fact that capitalism often leads to environmental degradation) (Buscher et al., 2012)
McAfee (1999)
Neoliberal conservation is an amalgamation of ideology and techniques that are informed by the premise that natures can only be “saved” through their submission to capital “Selling nature to save it”
Bryant and Bailey, 1997
Big International NGOs in the global south invoke both moral and scientific authority
Adams, 2001
The end of formal colonialism heightened the importance of transnational governance institutions like UNESCO and IUCN, who funnelled money, expertise and knowledge to support nature conservation in newly-independent states
Neumann, 2002
Organisations like UNESCO and IUCN subsequently supported the development of what would eventually become som of the largest NGOs, e.g. World-Wide Fund for Nature (WWF)
Igoe et al. (2010)
By the early 21st century, several BINGOs were able to annually distribute hundreds of millions of dollars to support nature conservation around the world as they internalised the logical of neoliberalisation: 1) partnerships with multinational corporations 2) Filling their leadership positions from the ranks of corporate CEOs 3) increasingly corporate organisational structures and cultures
Harvey, 2003, 2005
Accumulation by dispossession Builds on Marx’s theory of primitive accumulation Key part of neoliberalism - claims that ownership of capital becomes concentrated in the hands of those already holding capital through privatisation, financial inaction, management and manipulation of crises and state redistribution’s (e.g. neoliberal state favours business interests)
Benjaminsen et al., 2013
Conservation matches with accumulation by dispossession as it is carried out by the exclusion of groups, and the concentrating of wealth in the hands of a few However, in contrast to neoliberal literature, political ecology studies have suggested that this exclusion often comes from the state (e.g. the creation of National Parks - and is therefore inherently not neoliberal
Neumann, 2015
Despite reforms and movements towards private ownership, sovereignty in the Global South nevertheless remains largely located in state centres Non-state institutions benefit from the legitimacy that states bestow upon them in the name of nature conservation
Mackinnon and Cumbers, 2011
The role of the state is often “invisible”, yet still even present even in the most laissez-faire economy
Polanyi (1944)
Fictitious commodities Land, labour and money These were termed fictitious because they will always have to come from and/or be controlled by the state, yet capitalist actors often portrayed them as coming from markets E.g. creating viable currency, introducing policies that influence the in-migration and out-migration, and environmental planning
What are the theoretical arguments for neoliberal conservation? (3)
1) People respond to economic incentives 2) The “hidden hand of the market” will find the right price and increase efficiency (Smith, 1776) 3) There must be profit in “nature saving” otherwise there is little incentive for rational actors to pursue it, and the only solution to environmental problems is to bring in markets and private investment (Brigs et al., 2009)
What is the pragmatic argument for neoliberal conservation?
1) It’s about getting a seat at the table - nobody paid attention to conservation when it was anti-business and anti-markets 2) The basic question of funding - funding for conservation is often delivered from private philanthropists and businesses as opposed to from the state
Sandel, 2012
That neoliberal conservation is morally wrong - it is wrong to put a price on nature This is a biocentric, preservationalist argument
What are the practical objections to neoliberal conservation?
1) Ecosystems are complex and unpredictable - this makes them “reluctant” commodities e.g. fires and disease outbreaks 2) Markets can be unstable and irrational, something which led to the global financial crisis - thus may not be a good model - Minsky’s 1992 theory of economic instability - boom-bust cycles - nature needs something stable 3) Biodiversity may be outcompeted by artificial alternatives - following neoliberal theory, they would then lose - e.g. if a better method of carbon sequestration appeared we wouldn’t need forests? - therefore gets rid of all intrinsic value
O’Connor, 1988
Capitalism is inherently unsustainable and created our environmental problems The second contradiction of capitalism Capitalist dynamics chew up resources on which they depend
Fairhead et al., 2012 (on political objections to neoliberal conservation)
Many markets are less so markets and more social and political deals, with economic transactions embedded in contested politics, social relations and cultural imagery Green markets can often be monopolistic or oligopolistic, involving collusive behaviour by insiders with privileged knowledge THUS NOT REALLY NEOLIBERAL
Buscher et al. (2012) - on objections to neoliberal conservation
1) Neoliberal conservation is framed as a win-win - saying that it’s primary aim is to conserve nature, and that the best way to achieve this is through capitalist interventions - but this ignores the fact that capitalist interventions are often harmful 2) Green-washing - e.g. promotion from the African Wildlife Fund to save African wildlife by donating an old cell phone cancels the socio-environmental impacts of lithium mining from cell-phone batteries in Central Africa, whilst also reminding people it’s time to get a new phone (reminiscent of Apple GiveBack Scheme) 3) Neoliberal conservation allows consumers to believe (or behave like they believe) that all they need to do is consume to conserve 4) Manufactured conservation landscapes are accompanies by a myriad of local displacement and everyday structural violence e.g. forced evictions
Walker et al. (2008)
Conclude that viable biodiversity barter and meaningful biodiversity protection are mutually exclusive
Peterson et al. (2009)
Efforts to commodity ecosystem functions as ecosystem services to humanity may be deleterious to biodiversity conservation in some cases
Redford (2011)
Talks about diversity of opinion within the community of conservation practitioners and how there is a tendency to assign the entire conservation community the opinions of a few passionate individuals
What is the New Conservation debate?
New Conservation argues that we must recognise the Anthropocene - there is no such thing as “pristine nature” and markets and capitalism are a viable conservation option - conservation needs to deliver goods for people Traditional Conservation - argues that there are important near-pristine areas - strongly against working with capitalism - biocentric rationale
The Future of Conservation Survey (launched 2017)
No real clear clusters - big split on the capitalism axis but mean position is slightly pro-people Views on neoliberal conservation were strongly divided on the conservation through capitalism axis, with >40% hostile to such an approach - this is striking given the growing hegemony of neoliberal conservation in the past two decades
