Conservation violence: Paradoxes of making live and letting die in anti-poaching practices

Wildlife poaching has been and continues to be of significant concern to environmental sustainability. While descriptions of poaching often include vivid details about the animal victims and the heroics of those fighting to conserve biodiversity, ambiguity still surrounds 'the poacher.' Clarifying the identity of a poacher is necessary to expose a societal tendency to enforce stereotypes on others that perpetuate violence and inequality. Without knowing the identity of a poacher, it becomes easy for society to impose unsubstantiated beliefs upon them that legitimize unjust and violent policies. This research examines how (1) the media and (2) conservation actors construct the identity and context of the poacher to understand how and why violent protected area policies like shoot-to-kill have become accepted conservation strategies. Through a systematic analysis of news articles and primary interviews with conservation actors, we demonstrate how poachers are anonymized, dehumanized, and placed in a space of exception to become legitimate and justifiable targets of violence. We conclude by examining a central paradox that emerges from the state's biopolitical use of violent anti-poaching policies: how does a form of authority that is fundamentally justified in its claims to protect life condone the use of deadly force on its own subjects?

Automated summary

This research examines how the identity and context of the poacher are constructed by the media and conservation actors, in order to understand why violent protected area policies have become accepted conservation strategies. Through a systematic analysis of news articles and interviews, the study demonstrates how poachers are dehumanized and legitimized as targets of violence. It also explores the paradox of a state that justifies its authority to protect life but condones the use of deadly force on its own citizens.