The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Waging a war to save biodiversity: the rise of militarized conservation
Open accessAbstract
This article examines the rise in militarized approaches towards conservation, as part of a new ‘war for biodiversity’. This is a defining moment in the international politics of conservation and needs further examination. The claims that rhinos and elephants are under threat from highly organized criminal gangs of poachers shapes and determines conservation practice on the ground. Indeed, a central focus of the 2014 London Declaration on the Illegal Wildlife Trade is the strengthening of law enforcement, and recent policy statements by the US government and the Clinton Global Initiative also draw the link between poaching, global security and the need for greater levels of enforcement. Such statements and initiatives contribute substantially to the growing sense of a war for biodiversity. This article offers a critique of that argument, essentially by asking how we define poachers, and if militarized approaches mean conservationists are becoming more willing to engage in coercive, repressive policies that are ultimately counterproductive. Further, this article examines how the new war for biodiversity is justified and promoted by referring to wider debates about intervention in a post-Cold War era; notably that the international community has a responsibility towards wildlife, especially endangered species, and that military forms of intervention may be required to save them.
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
Beyond Markets and States: Polycentric Governance of Complex Economic Systems
Ostrom, E. (2010) · American Economic Review · doi:10.1257/aer.100.3.641 · Cited by 4,529
Climate not to blame for African civil wars
Buhaug, H. (2010) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1005739107 · Cited by 429
Cited by
Half-Earth or Whole Earth? Radical ideas for conservation, and their implications
Büscher, B., Fletcher, R., Brockington, D., Sandbrook, C., Adams, W. M., Campbell, L., Corson, C., Dressler, W., Duffy, R., Gray, N., et al. (2017) · Oryx · doi:10.1017/s0030605316001228 · Cited by 312
Self-citationThe Politics of Sustainability and Development
Scoones, I. (2016) · Annual Review of Environment and Resources · doi:10.1146/annurev-environ-110615-090039 · Cited by 308
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
Conflicting securities: contributions to a critical research agenda on climate security
Lamain, C. (2022) · Globalizations · doi:10.1080/14747731.2022.2057093 · Cited by 14
Political ecology of security: tackling the illegal wildlife trade
Duffy, R. V., & Brockington, D. (2022) · Journal of Political Ecology · doi:10.2458/jpe.2201 · Cited by 9
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- DUFFY, R.
- Venue
- International Affairs
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2014-07
- Volume
- 90
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 819-834
- ISSN
- 0020-5850 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2095102289
- Cited by
- 387
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 20.40
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
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: Waging a war to save biodiversity: the rise of militarized conservation. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/1468-2346.12142
- The paper
- DUFFY, R. (2014). Waging a war to save biodiversity: the rise of militarized conservation. International Affairs. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2346.12142
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.