The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Selling Nature to save It? Biodiversity and Green Developmentalism
Abstract
New supranational environmental institutions, including the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) and the ‘green’ World Bank, reflect attempts to regulate international flows of ‘natural capital’ by means of an approach I call ‘green developmentalism’. These institutions are sources of eco-development dollars and of a new ‘global’ discourse, a postneoliberal environmental-economic paradigm. By the logic of this paradigm, nature is constructed as a world currency and ecosystems arc recoded as warehouses of genetic resources for biotechnology industries. Nature would earn its own right to survive through international trade in ecosystem services and permits to pollute, access to tourism and research sites, and exports of timber, minerals, and intellectual property rights to traditional crop varieties and shamans' recipes. I contend that green developmentalism, with its promise of market solutions to environmental problems, is blunting the North-South disputes that have embroiled international environmental institutions. But by valuing local nature in relation to international markets—denominating diversity in dollars, euros, or yen—green developmentalism abstracts nature from its spatial and social contexts and reinforces the claims of global elites to the greatest share of the earth's biomass and all it contains. Meanwhile, the CBD has become a gathering ground for transnational coalitions of indigenous, peasant, and NGO opponents of ‘biopiracy’ and the patenting of living things, and advocates of international environmental justice. They have begun to put forward counterdiscourses and alternative practices to those of green developmentalism.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Green Grabbing: a new appropriation of nature?
Fairhead, J., Leach, M., & Scoones, I. (2012) · The Journal of Peasant Studies · doi:10.1080/03066150.2012.671770 · Cited by 1,928
New frontiers of land control: Introduction
Peluso, N. L., & Lund, C. (2011) · Journal of Peasant Studies · doi:10.1080/03066150.2011.607692 · Cited by 1,181
Ecosystem services: From eye-opening metaphor to complexity blinder
Norgaard, R. B. (2010) · Ecological Economics · doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2009.11.009 · Cited by 1,011
Sustainable development (1987–2005): an oxymoron comes of age
Redclift, M. (2005) · Sustainable Development · doi:10.1002/sd.281 · Cited by 951
Who Sustains Whose Development? Sustainable Development and the Reinvention of Nature
Banerjee, S. B. (2003) · Organization Studies · doi:10.1177/0170840603024001341 · Cited by 785
Metadata
- Authors
- McAfee, K.
- Venue
- Environment and Planning D: Society and Space
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 1999-04
- Volume
- 17
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 133-154
- ISSN
- 0263-7758 (ISSN-L)
- 1472-3433
- OpenAlex
- W1975580813
- Cited by
- 753
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 32.86
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Selling Nature to save It? Biodiversity and Green Developmentalism. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1068/d170133
- The paper
- McAfee, K. (1999). Selling Nature to save It? Biodiversity and Green Developmentalism. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space. https://doi.org/10.1068/d170133
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.