Neoliberalising Nature: Processes, Effects, and Evaluations

Abstract

IntroductionThis paper, together with its predecessor (Castree, 2008), comprises a systematic review of new research by critical geographers on the neoliberalisation of relations with the nonhuman world. This research focuses on`actually existing neoliberalism', and its volume is fast growing, posing a perennial challenge for those wishing to draw upon it in their own teaching and research: namely, the challenge of identifying`signals in the noise'. Making sense of the new critical geographic research on nature's neoliberalisation is no mean feat, such is the diversity of biophysical resources, geographical scales, places, and actors focused upon in case-study research. In light of this fact, I have organised my review around four fundamental questions, as follows: why are human interactions with otherwise different nonhuman phenomena being neoliberalised in many parts of the world?; what are the principal ways in which nature's neoliberalisation operates?; what are the outcomes of nature's neoliberalisation?; and how should we evaluate this process? Answering these questions systematically can give us a handle on the why and how of nature's neoliberalisation (causality), as well as real purchase on what the process does (effects) and how we might evaluate the phenomenon (normative judgment). Given the apparent hegemony of neoliberal thought and practice in many environmental policy domains worldwide, it is arguably important to take stock of the emerging critical research literature and identify lessons learnt to date and tasks for future research.

Conservation and concealment in SpeciesBanking.com, USA: an analysis of neoliberal performance in the species offsetting industry

“…Neoliberal policies are critically transforming environmental conservation through creating markets in commoditized forms of environmental health and damage, with both biophysical and societal outcomes (Castree 2008b;Norgaard 2010). Through reliance on profit maximization they may 'crowd out' other motives for conservation including altruism, empathy and a sense of ethical responsibility .…”

Lessons from community-based payment for ecosystem service schemes: from forests to rangelands

“…Holders of property rights are incentivized to provide an ecosystem service through their property in exchange for payment [47,48]. This market-based view of environmental services has been critiqued for oversimplifying complex ecological systems, for inadequately addressing the social and institutional determinants that control land use and management decisionmaking and for being paradoxical by considering that capitalist markets are the answer to their own ecological contradictions [49][50][51][52]. When a PES project is community-based rather than centred on individual ownership rights, further principles need to be incorporated around community empowerment, capacity building and sound local-level governance [53].…”

Eco-frontier in the mountainous borderlands of Central Europe

“…as isolated reserves, but as integral parts of the complex economic, social, and ecological relationships of the region in which they exist" (Fall, 2002). That geo-economy of the ecofrontier is very powerful, and the eco-conquest works as a new economic appropriation of the world (Castree, 2008). For instance, the cross-frontier/cross-border protected areas linked to environmental networks supported by globally operated NGOs are central to this new geopolitical reality linking nature and space (Fall, 2002).…”