‘They are healthy because they are free’: Conservation borders and more-than-human autonomy in West Tanzania

This paper addresses rumours and other discourse concerning conservation policy in Katavi region, Tanzania. I explore these discourses as reflecting an emphasis on the importance of autonomy for more-than-human wellbeing rather than separating human and natural spaces. Central to these discourses is the notion that organisms need not be protected from human presence – as in the wilderness ideal of mainstream conservation – but need to be free to eat, self-medicate and grow in their own ways. These rumours, I argue, also express social grievances over loss of forest access due to the expansion of protected areas. I suggest that these discourses offer critical reflections relevant to broader debates about conservation policy. The paper aligns itself with critics who point to protected areas’ limited effect on the root drivers of biodiversity collapse and often-adverse impacts on vulnerable populations. Drawing on these critical discourses, I suggest that a more viable way forward for conservation is to consider how to allow for the autonomy that more-than-human communities require to thrive in landscapes of which humans are part.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Environmental Values
Published
2025-11-14
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/09632719251334414
Primary Topic
Conservation, Biodiversity, and Resource Management
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

‘They are healthy because they are free’: Conservation borders and more-than-human autonomy in West Tanzania

Emelien Devos
Environmental Values
Conservation, Biodiversity, and Resource Management
article

‘They are healthy because they are free’: Conservation borders and more-than-human autonomy in West Tanzania

Emelien Devos
article en

Abstract

This paper addresses rumours and other discourse concerning conservation policy in Katavi region, Tanzania. I explore these discourses as reflecting an emphasis on the importance of autonomy for more-than-human wellbeing rather than separating human and natural spaces. Central to these discourses is the notion that organisms need not be protected from human presence – as in the wilderness ideal of mainstream conservation – but need to be free to eat, self-medicate and grow in their own ways. These rumours, I argue, also express social grievances over loss of forest access due to the expansion of protected areas. I suggest that these discourses offer critical reflections relevant to broader debates about conservation policy. The paper aligns itself with critics who point to protected areas’ limited effect on the root drivers of biodiversity collapse and often-adverse impacts on vulnerable populations. Drawing on these critical discourses, I suggest that a more viable way forward for conservation is to consider how to allow for the autonomy that more-than-human communities require to thrive in landscapes of which humans are part.

Environmental ValuesVol. 34(6)
Institute for Anthropological Research (HR)
Openalex Percentile: Top 68%
Conservation, Biodiversity, and Resource Management
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.