Markets, Nature, Neoliberalism, and Conservation through Private Protected Areas in Southern Chile

Abstract

A vibrant literature has emerged in recent years exploring moves towards neoliberal forms of conservation, with a reduced role for the state and an enhanced role for markets and private and civil society actors. Yet there is a need for studies which explore how and why this trend has emerged, and what impact it has on both people and nature. The author provides a detailed examination of private protected areas, which are often associated with neoliberal approaches to conservation, in Chile—a country which has had a long and deep engagement with neoliberalism. It is found that private protected areas demonstrate a broad range of attitudes towards the use of markets in conservation, from enthusiasm to hostility. Yet all have been made possible, indeed incentivised, by Chile's liberalised property markets and individualistic political culture—products of earlier neoliberal reforms within Chile's society and economy. As such, they provide only a limited challenge to the social and environmental consequence of the integration of southern Chile's natural resources into global neoliberal economic chains. The author emphasises the importance of considering how broader neoliberal economic, political, and social reforms have allowed certain forms of conservation to emerge and thrive.

Private Protected Areas in Latin America: Between conservation, sustainability goals and economic interests. A review

“…Alderman dealt with the Within their studies of Biosphere Reserves and the Regional Geography of Colombia, Borsdorf, Marchant and others adressed the topic of privately owned protected areas and discussed their legal status (Borsdorf 2011; Borsdorf & Mergili 2011;Borsdorf et al 2011;Borsdorf et al 2013;Borsdorf & Marchant 2013a, b;Marchant & Borsdorf 2013;Borsdorf 2016). Initial overviews of the Chilean experience ware given by Sepúlveda and García (1997), Maldonado (1999), and Holmes (2014Holmes ( , 2015. Hora and Marchant (2015) showed how a private park (the Oncol Park) may support the local economy; Sánchez (2016) demonstrated the value of a community-owned protected area to protect ancestral lands.…”

“…Traditionally nature protection, conservation and regional development have been the concern of public authorities , as normally the implementation of protected areas needed public financing and was not regarded as a business. However, the privatization trend reached nature conservation in the late 1980s (Holmes 2015). In many countries, private actors declared land as a protected area, bought land to create such sites, or even took over the control of former national parks.…”

Plantaciones forestales en Chile: ¿hacia un modelo más sustentable?

“…Basta ver la política ambiental de la multinacional ARAUCO que incluye: i) no deforestar el bosque nativo que posee y establecer modelos de áreas protegidas privadas (e.g. Parque Oncol), tema que ha sido tratado con relación a los acaparamientos verdes y las reservas privadas como formas de apropiar la naturaleza (Holmes, 2015); y ii) realizar una actividad forestal 'certificada y sostenible', mediante eco-etiquetado certificado por empresas independientes como FSC (ARAUCO, s.f.). El tema de las certificaciones ha recibido bastante atención igualmente.…”

Meeting the Aichi targets: Pushing for zero extinction conservation

“…the Douglas Tompkins’ Pumalín Park in Chile. Community and private parks are, however, also exposed to risks such as a change of ownership, social-environmental conflicts and issues inherent to the tragedy of the commons (Holmes 2014, 2015). A recent analysis has shown that all types of area protection are powerful when applied in a regional mix of approaches (Leménager et al 2014).…”