International Union for the Conservation of Nature

The IUCN has over 1,400 member organizations in 172 countries, with 46 offices in 40 countries. The IUCN has a global portfolio of 527 projects worth $917 million. More than half of the IUCN’s funding comes from government bodies, including the United States. ²

History

According to University of Toronto professor Kenneth Iain MacDonald, who is generally critical of the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN), the IUCN developed out of the Society for the Preservation of the Wild Fauna of Empire, a British organization primarily concerned with sustaining hunting game popular with Europeans. This assistance encouraged the formation of nature preserves with an “implicit racial bias” to restrict indigenous hunters in what were then imperial territories in favor of European hunters. Similarly-minded European conservation groups formed conferences in the 1940s until the International Union for the Protection of Nature, the first name of the IUCN, emerged in 1948 in Switzerland. The organization was formed soon after the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) and the two groups shared conferences, personnel, and ideological outlooks. ¹

According to MacDonald, the IUCN struggled during its early decades to decide whether to pursue pure conservation efforts or to pursue sustainability with continued human exploitation including hunting or resource extraction. In 1956, the International Union for the Protection of Nature became the International Union for the Protection of Nature and Natural Resources as a signal to potential government partners that the organization supported natural resource extraction within a sustainable framework. Throughout the 1950s, the organization primarily produced scientific research on species degradation for use by governments. ¹

In 1961, the IUCN formed the World-Wide Fund for Nature as the fundraising arm of the organization. The branch eventually spun-off as the World Wildlife Fund, one of the largest independent nonprofit conservationist groups in the world. ¹

In 1969, the IUCN’s received a $650,000 grant from the Ford Foundation. In 1972, the IUCN played a key role in the formation of the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) and the Convention on the International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES). ¹

In the 1970s, the IUCN moved away from independent research and toward managing development projects with local partners around the world. According to MacDonald, “IUCN began to resemble a standard development NGO, supporting government and donor approved projects and tailoring its actions to appeal to the funding requirements of donors and the willingness of governments to approve their work.” This shifted the importance and power within the organization away from its members and towards managers whose outreach efforts produced partnerships that financed the IUCN. ¹

Member Organizations

In 2021, the International Union for the Conservation of Nature had over 1,400 member organizations in 172 countries, including 354 members in Europe, 295 members in Asia, 258 members in Africa, 208 members in South America, and 178 members in North America. Most of IUCN’s members are “international non-governmental organizations.” ²

Marseilles Manifesto

In 2021, the International Union for the Conservation of Nature held a Congress in Marseilles, France, which produced the “Marseilles Manifesto,” a series of commitments to institute governmental and economic policy changes to combat climate change, halt biodiversity loss, fight the COVID-19 pandemic, increase the “agency” of indigenous populations, and coordinate global governments and international organizations to respond to ongoing crises. The Manifesto urges the global coordination to limit the global temperature rise to 1.5 degrees Celsius by 2050 by “decarbonizing” the economy through halting investments in conventional energy companies. ³

The Manifesto begins: “The climate and biodiversity emergencies are not distinct, but two aspects of one crisis. Unsustainable human activity continues to compound the situation, and threatens not only our own survival but the foundation of life on Earth […] Humanity has reached a tipping point. Our window of opportunity to respond to these interlinked emergencies and share planetary resources equitably is narrowing quickly. Our existing systems do not work. Economic “success” can no longer come at nature’s expense. We urgently need systemic reform.” ³

Specific policy commitments in the Manifesto include launching the “Great Blue Wall Initiative,” a massive network of protected territories in the Pacific Ocean. Another initiative is the “Global Indigenous Agenda for the Governance of Indigenous Lands, Territories, Waters, Coastal Seas and Natural Resources,” a global governing body of indigenous leaders tasked with implementing environmental conservation policies. ³

Funding

In 2021, the International Union for the Conservation of Nature had a budget of almost $164 million. Over 50 percent of funding came from government sources, 29 percent came from “multilaterals,” 6 percent came from philanthropic foundations, 3 percent came from for-profit corporations, and 3 percent came from NGOs. The single largest contributor was the government of Germany, which contributed over $25 million, followed by the Global Environment Facility, the Green Climate Fund, the government of Sweden, the European Commission, and the governments of France, the United States, Norway, Switzerland, and Denmark. ²

Criticism

Kenneth Iain MacDonald of the University of Toronto published IUCN: A History of Constraint, as a critique of the International Union for the Conservation of Nature. MacDonald argued that the IUCN is beholden to funding from external organizations (usually national or regional governments) that finance specific projects, more so than member organizations that make regular contributions: “IUCN projects are increasingly tailored to the agendas of donor agencies and shaping the direction provided by the Membership.” ¹

MacDonald has also criticized the IUCN for entrenching the power of large, well-funded transnational organizations over local organizations by funneling transnational funds into localized projects around the world. ¹

The IUCN has been criticized for displacing indigenous communities over environmental concerns. In the 1980s, the IUCN successfully spearheaded a plan to remove Maasai people from a region to form the Ngorongoro Conservation Area in Kenya. In 2004, the IUCN launched another campaign to evict Maasai to establish a preserve in the Naimina Enkiyio forest. An IUCN representative claimed their plan involved developing livestock as an alternative source of economic production for the Massai. ⁴

In 2021, a group of human rights NGOs, including Survival International and Minority Rights Group, held a counter-summit to the IUCN Congress in Marseilles. Participants claimed that the IUCN and its members were not properly respecting indigenous authority and priorities, mostly by establishing conservation preserves that excluded all economic activity.

The counter-summit denounced the IUCN’s call for governments to protect 30 percent of forests across the world, claiming it would harm the economic prospects of indigenous communities. ⁵ Its participants claimed, “Our conservation thinking is based on Tarzan: a white man in the jungle with animals and no people. But it’s actually possible to protect species without kicking people off the land. There is no way we can claim to protect biodiversity if we can’t protect human diversity.” ⁵

A 2015 article in the journal Global Ecology and Conservation found that IUCN preserves probably have a disproportionately negative impact on indigenous populations. ⁶

In 2007, IUCN launched a project to mitigate the environmental impacts of numerous projects managed by oil giant Shell, including an oil field in Scotland and a natural gas facility in Sweden. Many environmentalists accused the IUCN of helping “greenwash” Shell, a company with a history of environmental problems and collaborations with corrupt governments. ⁷