The Conservation Revolution: Radical Ideas for Saving Nature Beyond the Anthropocene

by Bram Büscher, Robert Fletcher

A post-capitalist manifesto for conservation

Conservation needs a revolution. This is the only way it can contribute to the drastic transformations needed to come to a truly sustainable model of development. The good news is that conservation is ready for revolution. Heated debates about the rise of the Anthropocene and the current ‘sixth extinction’ crisis demonstrate an urgent need and desire to move beyond mainstream approaches. Yet the conservation community is deeply divided over where to go from here. Some want to place ‘half earth’ into protected areas. Others want to move away from parks to focus on unexpected and ‘new’ natures. Many believe conservation requires full integration into capitalist production processes.

Building a razor-sharp critique of current conservation proposals and their contradictions, Büscher and Fletcher argue that the Anthropocene challenge demands something bigger, better and bolder. Something truly revolutionary. They propose convivial conservation as the way forward. This approach goes beyond protected areas and faith in markets to incorporate the needs of humans and nonhumans within integrated and just landscapes. Theoretically astute and practically relevant, The Conservation Revolution offers a manifesto for conservation in the twenty-first century—a clarion call that cannot be ignored.

Genres: Nonfiction, Science, Politics, Nature, Environment, Climate Change, Conservation

224 pages, Paperback

Published February 11, 2020

About the author

Bram Büscher is Professor and Chair of the Sociology of Development and Change group at Wageningen University and holds visiting positions at the University of Johannesburg and Stellenbosch University. He is the author of Transforming the Frontier: Peace Parks and the Politics of Neoliberal Conservation in Southern Africa. He is one of the senior editors of the open-access journal Conservation & Society.

Reviews

[Aine · Rating 3 out of 5]

Buscher and Fletcher are not impressed with the state of mainstream conservationism but they don’t see that supposedly ‘radical’ alternatives providing a coherent and logical set of principles to move beyond that mainstream as they fail to confront capitalism. They say that “the failure of fictitious conservationism via financialisation may be seen to be largely responsible for the rise of green militarisation and it’s attendant violence. Consequently, the main strategies prescribed by our two radical positions in the Anthropocene conservation debate - natural capital valuation for new conservation, expanded protected area enforcement for neoprotectionism - might be seen not as diametrically opposed but rather as two sides of the capitalist conservation coin.”

The authors aim to bring together the various progresssive forms of conservationism, describe the principles they can work towards, and place them within the context of overall societal transformation. As such, the authors do admit that the debate on protected areas which spawned new conservationism and neoprotectionism at least opens up a political space where alternatives can be considered. Their alternative is ‘convivial conservation’. The elements of this are to move from ‘protected’ areas to promoted areas, from saving nature to to celebrating human and non-human nature, from ‘touristic voyeurism’ to engaged visitation, from an idealised, ‘spectacular’ environment to an everyday one, and from privatised, expert technology to common democratic engagement. The concrete recommendations are historic reparations, conservation basic income, rethinking relations with corporations, a Convivial Conservation Coalition, integrating conservation landscapes, introducing democratic governance, and finding alternative funding mechanisms.

While I definitely found the method of thinking about conservation is relation to capitalism very useful, it must be admitted that this was a difficult book to read. From the beginning, every sentence is caveated with indications that it isn’t fully true and that the authors are aware of the myriad arguments for and against every statement to the point where it is overwhelming. For example, the discussion on convivial conservation and the state flips between the positions, saying Foucault said this about the State but Harvey said that, and in the end it will really depend. Who does that actually help?

The commitment to moving beyond critiquing is to be admired but it’s difficult to see the connection between the elements of convivial conservationism and the concrete recommendations.

I would recommend to a friend who had a lot of experience in academic writing, Marxist thought, and conservation.

[Dallin Kohler · Rating 2 out of 5]

This book falls far short of being the manifesto of the 'revolution' it proclaims in the title.
The authors take the first 180 or so pages to state the shortcomings of modern conservation biology thought (especially with its ties to capitalism) in an overly redundant fashion.
The final 30ish pages are devoted to their 'radical new idea' of convivial conservation biology.
Their writing wasn't overly entertaining or engaging, but my biggest critique is that they should have spent 30 pages pointing out flaws of other approaches and the other 180 pages trying to make a well reasoned, evidence-based case for their approach.

[Leif · Rating 3 out of 5]

Interesting but also highly schematic, and better on the recap of the field debate than on presenting original contentions - I'm afraid I don't think that "convivial conservation" will catch on, but I am an outsider to the field. Most disheartening was the admission in the final pages that Büscher and Fletcher did only the most cursory work engaging with the huge community of conservation practitioners. Surely "radical ideas" should be in touch with the roots of that community - I would hope. Büscher and Fletcher also spend little time discussing the wave of co-managed state-indigenous conservation areas, which is occurring more and more in Canada and in the Arctic, with prominent calls for Pikialasorsuaq an excellent investigative case.

[Ezmee · Rating 4 out of 5]

super insightful book, great comprehensive background of the conservation debate; their idea of ‘convivial conservation’ is interesting, but i’m not sure it is as fleshed out as it could be

[Ana Ferreira · Rating 4 out of 5]

I recommend this book to the conservation community because it provides a good understanding about the actual state of the conservation debate, the diversity of perspectives that co-exist today and why a different, more radical approach is necessary. Despite I found the writing a bit difficult to follow I still think the book deserves a read.

[Luuk · Rating 5 out of 5]

As a graduate in Forest & Nature Conservation this book is up my alley. Although political considerations were no central element throughout my studies, Büscher and Fletcher have made a strong case for why political considerations are important and can (/should) be overarching to how we do conservation and, ultimately, organise our economic system.

The book begins with a thorough explanation of the current field of nature conservation, highlighting the various sides present in the academic conservation debate.

The main chunk of the book goes deeper into the two main camps within the conservation debate (neoprotectionsts and new conservationists). This chunk explains the basis of each sides' convictions, namely, the human-culture dichotomy versus the economic (capitalist) growth as paths to successful nature conservation, respectively. In this, they skilfully deconstruct the paradoxical position each side occupies.

Finally, they present Convivial Conservation, which, honestly, enthralled me. What Büscher and Fletcher present here is a vision that dares to dream. I understand people may see chinks in their arguments because the story is unfinished. However (!), the story is unfinished not because they do not want to finish it, but because they attest to the space individual creation requires within the larger frame of nature conservation in order to truly create a world wherein humans can live with (con-vivre conservation) nature. This is gonna take many forms. Büscher and Fletcher simply lay out a framework that dares to look beyond the one in which we have operated for the past ~600 years. Nevertheless, they give clear and workable paths which we should venture on to explore the validity of convivial conservation (or, at least, explore new ways of including nature into our current political and economic society).

In my opinion, a great book written on conservation that dares to dream whilst having both feet firmly planted in the reality of where conservation and the world at large stands today. 5 stars for making us dream again.

[Neha · Rating 3 out of 5]

The authors of this book want us to dream of a better, more effective, more convivial conservation field. It doesn’t exist yet but they tell us we have to dream, we have to get there. The biggest barriers? The intertwining of conservation and capitalism, and the nature/culture dichotomy. I’m convinced there needs to be a change in conservation but I don’t yet think the authors are clear on what it is. As academics, they’re limited on application so it’s up to practitioners to test their ideas.

Though the writing was a bit repetitive, often difficult to decipher and full of qualifiers, the context behind and the argument for a new “convivial conservation” was useful. As someone who’s been in the conservation field for several years and worked for BINGOs, it was a key book to understand the fallacies of the different phases of conservation and how they relate to community and capitalism. Would recommend for anyone in the conservation or environmental field.

[Marianne · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is a really vital critique of mainstream conservation and two main contemporary responses to its failures. The authors' proposal of convivial conservation as a new way forward is inspiring as well although maybe not as strong as their criticism of existing forms of conservation. It's rightfully not too detailed, but provides 5he broad strokes of what convivial conservation could do as one prominent part of a larger environmental movement. The most salient point I think is the authors' emphasis on making political struggle am essentially part of conservation and ecology. I would give this 5 stars except that the prose is incredibly dry and academic, which made it kind of tough to get through in spite of the very compelling argument

[Daphne]

A very good overview of the current challenges for nature conservation, weighing the pro's and con's of the current two alternatives that conservationists offer: new conservationists vs. neoprotectionists. Offering an alternative perspective to right the wrongs of conservation, by moving beyond alliances with capitalism and beyond the human-nature dichotomy. Encourages the envisioning of a future where humans and nature (all nonhuman organisms) are able to live together (convivial) by promoting different ways of conservation governance, spatial planning, degrowth and dealing with the hegemony of neoliberalism/capitalism. Can recommend :)

[Becca Stuttard · Rating 4 out of 5]

Interesting introduction to the 'great conservation debate' for me. Mainly a critique, explaining how mainstream conservation and capitalism co-produce each other. Also shows how the two more modern forms of conservation, neoprotectionism and new conservation, don't go far enough, reinforcing the harmful nature-dichotomy and capitalist extractivism. I was left unsure of what their theory of change, convivial conservation, would look like, as it is blitzed over in the final couple of short chapters.

[Lily Bennion · Rating 4 out of 5]

Sound critique of capitalism and environmental conservation. Useful principles for post capital convivial comservation.

[Sydney Rittershaus · Rating 5 out of 5]

Anyone who cares about conservation and future solutions needs to read this book.

[Shameera Nair Lin · Rating 3 out of 5]

3.5 stars

[Heather · Rating 4 out of 5]

Good academic introduction to the topic.

[Isobel · Rating 2 out of 5]

Not many radical ideas and whole lot of overly academic writing about what’s wrong with conservation.

[Andreu Escrivà · Rating 4 out of 5]

Una anàlisi excepcional i una proposta insuficient. Tot i això, un llibre imprescindible a la matèria.

[Margherita S · Rating 5 out of 5]

It helped me to navigate the current conservation debate. It helps you framing your own mindset about capitalism and conservation relationship and who should lead it.

[janna · Rating 1 out of 5]

dnf