Introduction: Rethinking the Boundaries of Conservation NGOs

  • Peter Bille Larsen
  • Dan Brockington
Part of the Palgrave Studies in Anthropology of Sustainability book series (PSAS)


As debates rage on about changes required to build a different future for the planet, the role of conservation nongovernmental organisations (NGOs) as the global watchdogs of sustainability is increasingly prominent, but also questioned, in the public sphere. Vigorous debates about the role and effects of conservation NGOs call for independent analysis and examination of contemporary challenges and solutions. This book aims to showcase and challenge some of the latest engagements between critical social science and conservation NGOs. The authors have sought to do this partly because they believe it to be fundamentally important. Through such engagements it is possible to learn more about the consequences and politics of conservation policy, the way in which organisations function, and the interactions between various epistemologies and epistemic communities. This is a productive and insightful area for both researchers and practitioners. The chapters that constitute this book showcase and debate some of the approaches that demonstrate these insights.


  1. Bateson, G. 1973. Steps to an Ecology of Mind: Collected Essays in Anthropology, Psychiatry, Evolution and Epistemology. London/Toronto: Paladin Granada Publishing.Google Scholar
  2. Brosius, P. 2006. Common Ground Between Anthropology and Conservation Biology. Conservation Biology 20 (3): 683–685.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Carr, A., and R. Wilkinson. 2005. Beyond Participation: Boundary Organizations as a New Space for Farmers and Scientists to Interact. Society & Natural Resources 18 (3): 255–265.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Chapin, M. 2004. A Challenge to Conservationists. World Watch Magazine, November/December 2004.Google Scholar
  5. Colchester, M. 2003. Salvaging Nature: Indigenous Peoples, Protected Areas and Biodiversity Conservation. Montevideo: World Rainforest Movement and Forest Peoples Programme.Google Scholar
  6. Duffy, R. 2014. Waging a War to Save Biodiversity: The Rise of Militarized Conservation. International Affairs 20 (4): 819–834.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Ferraro, P.J., and S.K. Pattanayak. 2006. Money for Nothing? A Call for Empirical Evaluation of Biodiversity Conservation Investments. PLoS Biol 4 (4): e105. doi: 10.1371/journal.pbio.0040105.
  8. Frank, D.J., et al. 2007. World Society, NGOs and Environmental Policy Reform in Asia. International Journal of Comparative Sociology 48 (4–5): 275–295.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Guston, D.H. 2001. Boundary Organizations in Environmental Policy and Science: An Introduction. Science, Technology, & Human Values 26 (4): 399–408.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Kraft, M.E. 2001. Influence of American NGOs on Environmental Decisions and Policies: Evolution over Three Decades. In The Role of Environmental NGOs: Russian Challenges, American Lessons: Proceedings of a Workshop, 145–160. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
  11. Lewis, D. 2016. Anthropologists’ Encounters with NGOs: Critique, Collaboration, and Conflict. In Cultures of Doing Good: Anthropologists and NGOs, ed. A. Lashaw, C. Vannier, and S. Sampson. Tuscaloosa: University of Alabama Press.Google Scholar
  12. Lunstrum, E. 2014. Green Militarization: Anti-Poaching Efforts and the Spatial Contours of Kruger National Park. Annals of the Association of American Geographers 104 (4): 816–832.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. MacDonald, K. 2003. IUCN: A History of Constraint. Text of an Address Given to the Permanent Workshop of the Centre for Philosophy of Law Higher Institute for Philosophy of the Catholic University of Louvain (UCL), Louvain-la-neuve.Google Scholar
  14. Matulis, B.S., and J.R. Moyer. 2016. Beyond Inclusive Conservation: The Value of Pluralism, the Need for Agonism, and the Case for Social Instrumentalism. Conservation Letters: n/a-n/a.Google Scholar
  15. McDonald, M. 2016. Bourdieu, Environmental NGOs, and Australian Climate Politics. Environmental Politics 26 (6): 1058–1078.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Miller, S. 2007. An Environmental History of Latin America. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. O’Mahony, S., and B.A. Bechky. 2008. Boundary Organizations: Enabling Collaboration Among Unexpected Allies. Administrative Science Quarterly 53 (3): 422–459.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Ortner, S. 2016. Dark Anthropology and Its Others: Theory Since the Eighties. Journal of Ethnographic Theory 6 (1): 47–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Pallas, C. 2013. Transnational Civil Society and the World Bank: Investigating Civil Society’s Potential to Democratize Global Governance. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Perez, A.C., et al. 2015. Evolution of the Environmental Justice Movement: Activism, Formalization and Differentiation. Environmental Research Letters 10 (10): 105002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Pyhälä, A., et al. 2016. Protected Areas in the Congo Basin: Failing Both People and Biodiversity? London: Rainforest Foundation UK.Google Scholar
  22. Ruysschaert D. 2013. Le rôle des organisations de conservation dans la construction et la mise en oeuvre de l’agenda international de conservation d’espèces emblématiques: le cas des orangs-outans de Sumatra. PhD Thesis, University of Toulouse. Available through:
  23. Winer, N., et al. 2007. Conservation, Protected Areas and Humanitarian Practice. Policy Matters 15: 232–240.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Peter Bille Larsen
    • 1
  • Dan Brockington
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of AnthropologyUniversity of LucerneLucerneSwitzerland
  2. 2.Institute for International DevelopmentUniversity of SheffieldSheffieldUK

Personalised recommendations