Suchergebnisse

Introduction : the truth about nature? -- Truth tensions -- Sharing truths and natures -- Between platforms, post-truth and power -- Conservation 2.0 (the politics of co-creation) -- Elephant 2.0 (the politics of platforms) -- Kruger 2.0 (the politics of distinction) -- Rhino 2.0 (the politics of hysteria) -- Conclusion : speaking truth to power

Amidst the many socio-ecological crises facing the world today, the biodiversity crisis is considered one of the most foundational. According to scientists, we have entered yet another mass extinction event in the history of the planet, though the first triggered by the impacts of the combined, uneven actions of one species. This introductory paper to a Special Section on the "Political ecologies of extinction" frames this crisis through political ecology, and explores what political ecologies of extinction could look like and focus on in the 21st century. Building on emerging literatures and the author contributions, it agrees that extinction is much more than the endpoint of a long and rocky road of the decline of a species. It is an uneven, historical process that conjoins political, geographical, socio-ecological, and other factors. Most of all, a political ecology of extinction highlights the intertwined forces of political economy, power and ecology whereby I argue that a special focus should be on how biological diversity and our understanding of it has changed over time, especially the last two centuries. The capitalist intensification of pressures on biological diversity combined with changing perceptions of the value of diversity during this time have led to a moment where extinction decisively moves from a biological endpoint to a political inflection-point. How to relate these two 'points' to historical and contemporary, local and global forces of political economy and power is central to political ecologies of extinction, as exemplified by the articles in this Special Section. This introductory article lays out their core themes, and derives from them further pointers and questions for developing this field.

Conservation news from Africa generally seems to exude crisis. Over the last decade,especially, we have witnessed the increasingly visible decline of charismatic species such as the rhino, elephant, cheetah, lion, giraffe and others, coupled with an ongoing defaunation of many forested areas. What is much less visible is that in certain areas an important countertrend is also occurring: the growth of wildlife species, most notably through the stocking of private lands and initiatives to develop broader wildlife economies. This article explores these two trends and shows that they are key in understanding conservation in sub-Sahara Africa and its rapidly changing political economy more generally.Focusing on South Africa, especially the booming wildlife economy in the Greater Kruger area, the article argues that the private possession or commodified management of conservation spaces and its (over)stocking of species actually benefits from an overall decline of charismatic species. As the number of charismatic species declines across the continent, it increases the value of well-stocked, privately conserved lands, providing their owners with unique sources of profit and revenue. The result is an intensification of uneven wildlife geographies across Africa.

ABSTRACTThis article argues that Horner and Hulme's call for moving towards 'global development' to do justice to changing 21st century development geographies neither contributes to advancing our understanding of contemporary development challenges nor helps articulate realistic responses to tackle them. A key problem is that they try to explain several general trends in the geography of development with reference to mainstream statistics without appropriate critical reflection or adequate theorization. Focusing specifically on the environmental and conservation aspects of development, this article contends that these omissions not only confuse the debate on the current state and geographies of development, they risk something more serious, namely the reinforcement of a generic development narrative which will intensify 21st century development challenges. The article concludes that what we need is not global development but revolutionary development.

Web 2.0 and social media applications that allow people to share, co-create and rate online content are crucial new ways for conservation organizations to reach audiences and for concerned individuals and organizations to be (seen as) 'green'. These dynamics are rapidly changing the politics and political economy of nature conservation. By developing the concept of 'nature 2.0' and building on empirical insights, the article explores and theorizes these changes. It argues that online activities stimulate and complicate the commodification of biodiversity and help to reimagine ideas, ideals and experiences of ('pristine') nature. By exploring the implications of these arguments in relation to several key themes in new media studies, the article aims to provide building blocks for further investigations into the world of nature 2.0 and the effects of new media on human–nature dynamics more broadly.

This forum reviews and comments on other papers in this special issue on CEE. While CEE is a promising and innovative methodology, it would be strengthened by thinking through and taking into account two important points: first, how CEE can help to understand structural power, particularly as it relates to the intersection between neoliberal capitalism and the environment; and second, how authors could "translate" nuanced CEE findings into a politics that confronts the structural power of neoliberal capitalism.