Failing Forward: The Rise and Fall of Neoliberal Conservation

Failing Forward explores how neoliberal conservation has failed to address biodiversity loss, despite promoting market-based instruments. It argues that a concerted program of degrowth grounded in post-capitalist principles is the only viable alternative to achieve environmental sustainability and social equity.

Format: Paperback / softback
Length: 318 pages
Publication date: 14 March 2023
Publisher: University of California Press

Failing Forward delves into the global emergence of neoliberal conservation as a response to biodiversity loss, shedding light on its persistent failure despite its ineffectiveness. At its core, neoliberal conservation advocates for market-based instruments aimed at reconciling environmental preservation and economic development by leveraging preservation as a source of both conservation finance and capital accumulation. Robert Fletcher traces the evolution of this project over the past several decades, along with the growing network of organizations and actors that have rallied around its promotion. Drawing on Lacanian psychoanalysis, Fletcher delves into the allure of this strategy, despite its significant shortcomings, captivating states, nongovernmental organizations, international financial institutions, and the private sector alike. Ultimately, Fletcher argues that neoliberal conservation should be viewed as an unsuccessful endeavor to sustain global capitalism in the face of its escalating social and ecological contradictions. Consequently, the only viable alternative capable of achieving both environmental sustainability and social equity is a comprehensive program of degrowth rooted in post-capitalist principles.

The rise of neoliberal conservation as a response to biodiversity loss is a complex and multifaceted phenomenon that warrants careful examination. In this essay, we will explore the origins, principles, and shortcomings of neoliberal conservation, and consider its implications for environmental sustainability and social equity.

Neoliberal conservation emerged in the late 20th century as a response to the growing recognition of the devastating impact of human activities on the natural world. The approach was characterized by a belief in the free market and the privatization of natural resources, and it aimed to promote economic development and environmental preservation through market-based instruments.

One of the key principles of neoliberal conservation was the idea that preservation itself could be a source of both conservation finance and capital accumulation. This was achieved by creating conservation markets, where private investors could invest in conservation projects and receive financial returns in the form of carbon credits, biodiversity credits, or other environmental benefits. The theory was that by incentivizing private investors to invest in conservation, governments and nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) would be able to secure the funding they needed to protect natural resources.

However, the reality of neoliberal conservation has been far from ideal. Despite the promise of market-based instruments, neoliberal conservation has failed to achieve its goals in several key ways.

Firstly, neoliberal conservation has often been driven by short-term economic interests rather than long-term environmental sustainability. The emphasis on market-based instruments has led to the commodification of natural resources, with conservation efforts being prioritized based on their potential financial returns rather than their ecological importance. This has resulted in the destruction of habitats, the loss of biodiversity, and the degradation of ecosystems.

Secondly, neoliberal conservation has been criticized for its lack of accountability and transparency. Conservation projects are often managed by private companies or investors, who are not held accountable for their actions or the environmental impact of their projects. This has led to concerns about the effectiveness of conservation efforts and the potential for corruption and fraud.

Thirdly, neoliberal conservation has failed to address the root

The rise of neoliberal conservation as a response to biodiversity loss is a complex and multifaceted phenomenon that warrants careful examination. In this essay, we will explore the origins.

Neoliberal conservation emerged in the late 20th century as a response to the growing recognition of the devastating impact of human activities on the natural world. The approach was characterized by a belief in the free market and the privatization of natural resources, and it aimed to promote economic development and environmental preservation through market-based instruments.

One of the key principles of neoliberal conservation was the idea that preservation itself could be a source of both conservation finance and capital accumulation. This was achieved by creating conservation markets, where private investors could invest in conservation projects and receive financial returns in the form of carbon credits, biodiversity credits, or other environmental benefits. The theory was that by incentivizing private investors to invest in conservation, governments and nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) would be able to secure the funding they needed to protect natural resources.

However, the reality of neoliberal conservation has been far from ideal. Despite the promise of market-based instruments, neoliberal conservation has failed to achieve its goals in several key ways.

Firstly, neoliberal conservation has often been driven by short-term economic interests rather than long-term environmental sustainability. The emphasis on market-based instruments has led to the commodification of natural resources, with conservation efforts being prioritized based on their potential financial returns rather than their ecological importance. This has resulted in the destruction of habitats, the loss of biodiversity, and the degradation of ecosystems.

Secondly, neoliberal conservation has been criticized for its lack of accountability and transparency. Conservation projects are often managed by private companies or investors, who are not held accountable for their actions or the environmental impact of their projects. This has led to concerns about the effectiveness of conservation efforts and the potential for corruption and fraud.

Thirdly, neoliberal conservation has failed to address the root causes of biodiversity loss, such as climate change, deforestation, and overfishing. The approach has focused on individual conservation projects and policies, rather than addressing the root

The rise of neoliberal conservation as a response to biodiversity loss is a complex and multifaceted phenomenon that warrants careful examination. In this essay, we will explore the origins.

Neoliberal conservation emerged in the late 20th century as a response to the growing recognition of the devastating impact of human activities on the natural world. The approach was characterized by a belief in the free market and the privatization of natural resources, and it aimed to promote economic development and environmental preservation through market-based instruments.

One of the key principles of neoliberal conservation was the idea that preservation itself was a source of both conservation finance and capital accumulation. This was achieved by creating conservation markets, where private investors could invest in conservation projects and receive financial returns in the form of carbon credits, biodiversity credits, or other environmental benefits. The theory was that by incentivizing private investors to invest in conservation, governments and nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) would be able to secure the funding they needed to protect natural resources.

However, the reality of neoliberal conservation has been far from ideal. Despite the promise of market-based instruments, neoliberal conservation has failed to achieve its goals in several key ways.

Firstly, neoliberal conservation has often been driven by short-term economic interests rather than long-term environmental sustainability. The emphasis on market-based instruments has led to the commodification of natural resources, with conservation efforts being prioritized based on their potential financial returns rather than their ecological importance. This has resulted in the destruction of habitats, the loss of biodiversity, and the degradation of ecosystems.

Secondly, neoliberal conservation has been criticized for its lack of accountability and transparency. Conservation projects are often managed by private companies or investors, who are not held accountable for their actions or the environmental impact of their projects. This has led to concerns about the effectiveness of conservation efforts and the potential for corruption and fraud.

Thirdly, neoliberal conservation has failed to address the root causes of biodiversity loss, such as climate change, deforestation, and overfishing. The approach has focused on individual conservation projects and policies, rather than addressing the root causes of biodiversity loss, such as climate change, deforestation, and overfishing.

In conclusion, neoliberal conservation has failed to achieve its goals in several key ways. The emphasis on short-term economic interests, lack of accountability and transparency, and failure to address the root causes of biodiversity loss have all contributed to the failure of this approach. The only viable alternative capable of simultaneously achieving both environmental sustainability and social equity is a concerted

The rise

The rise of neoliberal conservation as a response to biodiversity loss is a complex and multifaceted phenomenon that warrants careful examination. In this essay, we will explore the origins.

Neoliberal conservation emerged in the late 20th century as a response to the growing recognition of the devastating impact of human activities on the natural world. The approach was characterized by a belief in the free market and the privatization of natural resources, and it aimed to promote economic development and environmental preservation through market-based instruments.

One of the key principles of neoliberal conservation was the idea that preservation itself could be a source of both conservation finance and capital accumulation. This was achieved by creating conservation markets, where private investors could invest in conservation projects and receive financial returns in the form of carbon credits, biodiversity credits, or other environmental benefits. The theory was that by incentivizing private investors to invest in conservation, governments and nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) would be able to secure the funding they needed to protect natural resources.

However, the reality of neoliberal conservation has been far from ideal. Despite the promise of market-based instruments, neoliberal conservation has failed to achieve its goals in several key ways.

Firstly, neoliberal conservation has often been driven by short-term economic interests rather than long-term environmental sustainability. The emphasis on market-based instruments has led to the commodification of natural resources, with conservation efforts being prioritized based on their potential financial returns rather than their ecological importance. This has resulted in the destruction of habitats, the loss of biodiversity, and the degradation of ecosystems.

Secondly, neoliberal conservation has been criticized for its lack of accountability and transparency. Conservation projects are often managed by private companies or investors, who are not held accountable for their actions or the environmental impact of their projects. This has led to concerns about the effectiveness of conservation efforts and the potential for corruption and fraud.

Thirdly, neoliberal conservation has failed to address the root causes of biodiversity loss, such as climate change, deforestation, and overfishing. The approach has focused on individual conservation projects and policies, rather than addressing the root causes of biodiversity loss, such as climate change, deforestation, and overfishing.

In conclusion, neoliberal conservation has failed to achieve its goals in several key ways. The emphasis on short-term economic interests, lack of accountability and transparency, and failure to address the root causes of biodiversity loss have all contributed to the failure of this approach. The only viable alternative capable of simultaneously achieving both environmental sustainability and social equity is a concerted program of degrowth grounded in post-capitalist principles.

Weight: 448g
Dimension: 228 x 153 x 22 (mm)
ISBN-13: 9780520390690