New spaces for nature: the re‐territorialisation of biodiversity conservation under neoliberalism in theUK

Abstract

Biodiversity conservation is a fundamentally spatial practice. For more than a century, conservation's leading strategy has been the establishment of protected areas. Governance by the state has been central to conservation's claim to territory. In the UK, the established approach to biodiversity conservation concentrated on spatial strategies of territorialization to secure particular outcomes in relatively small pieces of land, set aside as protected areas. However, this strategy has begun to change, and conservation's expanding territorial claims have been expressed through new models of large-scale conservation. A series of projects developed by non governmental conservation organisations seek to extend conservation management over larger areas of land. In this paper we consider these developments as a form of reterritorialisation, a reframing and extension of conservation's spatial claims. We describe how conservation's ambitions have been reformed and extended and discuss evidence on the growth of large-scale biodiversity conservation projects in the UK. We then consider the implications of these changes in the light of the neoliberalization of conservation.

Short-Term Projects versus Adaptive Governance: Conflicting Demands in the Management of Ecological Restoration

“…In the UK, large-scale conservation initiatives are being developed by a range of organisations in response to growing concern for landscape-scale ecological patterns and processes and interest in ecological restoration as a conservation strategy [1,2]. The shift of emphasis towards a larger scale has been promoted by the recognition in ecological thinking of the importance of the interconnectedness of areas of habitat at the landscape level.…”

“…The report argued that "we need a step-change in our approach to wildlife conservation, from trying to hang on to what we have, to one of large-scale habitat restoration and recreation, under-pinned by the re-establishment of ecological processes and ecosystem services, for the benefits of both people and wildlife". This has led to a greater emphasis on projects aiming to implement ecological restoration at a larger scale than in the past [2]. This paper focuses on the contradictory demands on ecosystem restoration practitioners in light of a survey of restoration projects and the literature on New Public Management and projectification.…”

Governance structures for social-ecological systems: Assessing institutional options against a social residual claimant

“…It is not intended to offer a template for governance but rather to point to the process whereby 23 governance may address the complex factors interacting in unique and largely unpredictable ways 24 within particular localities. It responds to the outcomes of the multitude of governance processes 25 26 that have impacts within their particular local area, as well as identifying gaps where governance is the area is impacted by external forces.…”

“…However, for those physically present within the defined space, incentives will be established by 23 external agencies and institutions in order to influence local actions that have wider consequences.…”

“…There should be 38 some independent audit process to ensure that an organisation follows good practice. territorial planning decisions are determined at a local level by local government authorities, subject 23 to central government principles, guidance and appeals but local government has relatively little 24 influence over the ways in which undeveloped land is used. In respect of hydrological processes 25 26 local authorities have a role in flood protection (working with the govern e t s Environment arrangements such as ad hoc catchment groups (Benson, et al, 2013).…”