The Vortex of Nature and Culture

We need to move past false binaries amplifying the message of coexistence

- Asmita Kabra

Iam convinced that only by setting aside half the planet in reserve, or more, can we save the living part of the environment and achieve the stabilization required for our own survival."

The eminent American conservationist E. O. Wilson wrote this in the prologue to his hugely influential book Half-Earth: Our Planet's Fight for Life (2017). Mainstream conservation science believes that creating large contiguous peoplefree areas is the best way to save biodiversity. This is based on the nature-versus-culture binary-the idea that nature exists 'out there' in the wild and pristine places uninhabited by humans.

Earth is presently undergoing its sixth mass extinction event, and the first human-induced one. In response, conservation has emerged as a global movement championed not just by scientists but also by celebrities, politicians and the urban elite. In 2010, signatories to the UN Convention on Biological Diversity resolved to bring 17 per cent of terrestrial and freshwater areas under formal area-based conservation measures by 2020. At COP-15 in 2022, this target was revised to 30 per cent by 2030 (the 30-by-30 target). Wilson's Half Earth proposal is an extension of this entrenched belief that pristine nature is critical for biodiversity.

The nature-culture binary has resulted in exponential growth of protected areas (PAs), especially in the global South. There are more than 3 lakh PAs in the world and the number is expected to rise to meet the 30-by-30 target. Enormous resources and technologies have been deployed worldwide to protect PAs from human disturbance. Traditional fortress conservation-implemented through fines and fences-has given way to stricter measures involving guns and guards. Now, militarised conservation is on the rise, with increasing use of "military or paramilitary logics, practices, technologies, and personnel" to protect biodiversity.