The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Arrested Development? The Promises and Paradoxes of “Selling Nature to Save It”
Abstract
Mainstream environmentalism and critical scholarship are abuzz with the promise and perils (respectively) of what we call for-profit biodiversity conservation: attempts to make conserving biodiverse ecosystems profitable to large-scale investment. But to what extent has private capital been harnessed and market forces been enrolled in a thoroughly remade conservation? In this article we examine the size, scope, and character of international for-profit biodiversity conservation. Despite exploding rhetoric around environmental markets over the last two decades, the capital flowing into market-based conservation remains small, illiquid, and geographically constrained and typically seeks little to no profit. This marginal character of for-profit conservation suggests that this project continues to underperform as a site of accumulation and as a conservation financing strategy. Such evidence is at odds with the way this sector is commonly portrayed in mainstream environmental conservation literature but also with some critical geographical scholarship. We present a more puzzling situation: Although for-profit conservation has long been promoted as a logical, easy fix to ecological degradation, it remains negligible to and largely outside of global capital flows. We argue that this project has important consequences, but we understand its effects in terms of how it reaffirms narrowed, antipolitical explanations of biodiversity loss, instills neoliberal political rationalities among conservationists, and forecloses alternative and progressive possibilities capable of resisting status quo logics of accumulation.
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
Cites
Harvey, D. (2003) · doi:10.1093/oso/9780199264315.001.0001 · Cited by 7,037
The performance and potential of protected areas
Watson, J. E. M., Dudley, N., Segan, D. B., & Hockings, M. (2014) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature13947 · Cited by 2,397
Biodiversity Conservation: Challenges Beyond 2010
Rands, M. R. W., Adams, W. M., Bennun, L., Butchart, S. H. M., Clements, A., Coomes, D., Entwistle, A., Hodge, I., Kapos, V., Scharlemann, J. P. W., et al. (2010) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1189138 · Cited by 1,180
Shmelev, S. (1998) · Journal of Political Ecology · doi:10.2458/v5i1.21397 · Cited by 885
Cited by
Crisis conservation and green extraction: biodiversity offsets as spaces of double exception
Le Billon, P. (2021) · Journal of Political Ecology · doi:10.2458/jpe.2991 · Cited by 63
Metadata
- Authors
- Dempsey, J., & Suarez, D. C.
- Venue
- Annals of the American Association of Geographers
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2016-04-06
- Volume
- 106
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 653-671
- ISSN
- 2469-4452 (ISSN-L)
- 2469-4460
- OpenAlex
- W2332634440
- Cited by
- 197
- References
- 4
- FWCI
- 18.76
- 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: Arrested Development? The Promises and Paradoxes of “Selling Nature to Save It”. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1080/24694452.2016.1140018
- The paper
- Dempsey, J., & Suarez, D. C. (2016). Arrested Development? The Promises and Paradoxes of “Selling Nature to Save It”. Annals of the American Association of Geographers. https://doi.org/10.1080/24694452.2016.1140018
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.