Sleeping with the enemy? Biodiversity conservation, corporations and the green economy

Abstract

This article explores the surprising closeness and apparent warmth of the relations between biodiversity conservation organisations and corporations. It argues that in this paradoxical engagement, conservationists are exhibiting an extreme form of pragmatism -a willingness to 'sleep with the enemy.' The article considers the implications of these arrangements using the metaphor of a Faustian Bargain, a deal with the devil to acquire power in exchange for the soul. It considers the lure to conservationists of the logics underlying collaboration in the forms of market-based neoliberal conservation and the green economy in the light of the long-standing tradition of opposition in the face of the destructive engagement between capitalism and nature. It considers the benefits of conservation of its Faustian bargain, and explores its consequences. Key Words: biodiversity conservation, neoliberal conservation RésuméCet article explore la proximité surprenante et la chaleur apparente des relations entre les organismes de conservation de la biodiversité et les entreprises. Il fait valoir que dans cet engagement paradoxal, les conservateurs présentent une forme extrême de pragmatisme -une volonté de «dormir avec l'ennemi». L'article considère les implications de cette relation en utilisant la métaphore d'une négociation faustienne, un accord avec le diable pour acquérir le pouvoir en échange de l'âme. Elle considère l'attrait pour les conservateurs des logiques qui sous-tendent la collaboration dans les formes de conservation néolibérale basée sur le marché et l'économie verte, compte tenu de la longue tradition d'opposition face à l'engagement destructeur entre le capitalisme et la nature. Il considère les avantages de la conservation de cette négociation faustienne et en explore les conséquences. Mots clés: conservation de la biodiversité, conservation néolibérale, économie verte ResumenEste artículo explora la inesperada cercanía y aparente calidez, en las relaciones entre las corporaciones y las organizaciones dedicadas a la conservación de la biodiversidad. Se argumenta que en esta paradójica relación, los conservacionistas muestran una forma extrema de pragmatismo -una disposición de 'dormir con el enemigo'. El artículo considera las implicaciones de esta disposición a través del uso de la metáfora del 'pacto faustiano', un pacto con el diablo para adquirir poder a cambio del alma. Se toma en cuenta el atractivo que para los conservacionistas representa la lógica de una colaboración en la conservación neoliberal basadas en el mercado y una economía verde. Esto, a la luz de una larga tradición de oposición frente a la destructiva relación entre capitalismo y naturaleza. Se consideran los beneficios en cuanto a conservación de este pacto faustiano, y se exploran además sus consecuencias. Palabras clave: conservación con base en mercado, neoliberalismo, economía verde

Biodiversity means business: Reframing global biodiversity goals for the private sector

“…We acknowledge unease by some researchers and practitioners that increased involvement in initiatives tackling biodiversity loss will merely see businesses seeking to minimize obligations to reform operations, or even redefining goals to suit their own ends (e.g., Adams, ; Robinson, ). Even assuming “what is measured gets managed,” businesses setting their own goals risks actions achieving marginal improvements for biodiversity, rather than contributing to substantive changes required to reverse biodiversity loss (Mace et al., ).…”

“…We acknowledge unease by some researchers and practitioners that increased involvement in initiatives tackling biodiversity loss will merely see businesses seeking to minimize obligations to reform operations, or even redefining goals to suit their own ends (e.g., Adams, 2017;Robinson, 2012).…”

The Ebb and Flow of Indigenous Rights Recognitions in Conservation Policy

“…This is not, in and of itself, our concern, especially given that claims to environmental sustainability are sometimes true and that long-term power disparities appear to be rather entrenched: consider the recent escalation of rights violations in conservation contexts (e.g. Adams, 2017;MacDonald and Corson, 2012). Adams, 2017;MacDonald and Corson, 2012).…”

Political ecology, variegated green economies, and the foreclosure of alternative sustainabilities

“…This is visible, for instance, in the ways in which the management of state conservation enclaves are increasingly co-managed with both international NGOs such as the Worldwide Fund for Nature (WWF) or the African Wildlife Foundation (AWF), as well as private firms in the extractive industry sector (Seagle 2012). Taking a broader view of these partnerships between conservationists and corporations, Adams (2017) describes such engagements as a kind of "Faustian bargain" in which what might first appear to conservationists as a pragmatic alliance, may in fact undermine conservation and livelihood objectives. Furthermore, these partnerships will also perhaps 'mutate' in both form and content as they interact with modes of governing such as those resembling Mbembe's (2001) notion of 'private indirect government' in different empirical localities.…”

“…2003: 169-180) -"co-revolutionary theory", which would identify points of synergy between counter-movements oriented around degrowth, eco-socialism, and environmental justice, as well as around more locally-rooted or place-based struggles. Likewise, Adams (2017) shows how a longstanding environmentalist discourse on the alternative valuation of nature -one centred on its intrinsic, nonfinancial worth -appears to have been captured and increasingly extinguished by the "extreme pragmatism" evinced in corporate-NGO partnerships in the conservation sector, wherein well-worn NGO critiques of extractive industry and other environmentally damaging businesses are increasingly scarce in their own right among the sector's largest organizations. Collectively, while these studies and analyses of green economy initiatives and various reactions to them do not yield easy generalizations about the future trajectories of struggles over either the former or the latter, they do open up space for a range of salient new research questions and avenues of inquiry.…”