In the name of the people: The populist redefinition of nature conservation in post-crisis Spain

摘要

The global surge of right-wing populism and its impact on environmental policies are attracting the attention of political ecologists. However, little of this debate has reached the nature conservation literature. In this paper, I explore the emergence of populist logics in conservation as a result of the entrenchment of neoliberalism after the 2008 economic crisis. On the one hand, neoliberalism has incited the roll-back of public institutions that hitherto monopolised the management of protected areas (PAs), as well as the roll-out of market-based and network-based forms of PA governance. At the same time, it has also had a significant impact on rural communities, imposing austerity policies that have caused a great deal of social and economic precarity and vulnerability, generating feelings of abandonment, dispossession and disenfranchisement. To illustrate how these two phenomena intersect and motivate the surge of right-wing populism in conservation, this paper dissects a number of parliamentary debates on a recent policy reform that seeks to decentralise the management of PAs in Asturias, a region in the north of Spain. These debates brought together stakeholders and members of several rural groups with different political orientations and views, including public administrators and policy-makers, farmers and livestock breeders, farmers' unions, landowners, tourism business owners, hunters and academics. I analyse how right-wing populist discourses framed this policy change, scapegoated the public management of conservation for all the problems suffered in rural areas, and co-opted popular demands of rural communities, reducing them to the economic interest of private landowners. I will also describe the various attempts made to negotiate a left-wing, progressive democratic alternative that hinges on the recognition of the social complexity of rural communities and the diversity of problems that affect them. The paper ends with a reflection on the lessons that the critical studies of conservation and public participation can learn from this negotiation.