Presentation short abstract

This paper examines how symbolic power shapes which knowledge systems and values of nature gain legitimacy in conservation governance. Using Bourdieu’s framework and a Japanese fisheries case, it shows how shifts in symbolic legitimacy open pathways beyond technocratic approaches.

Presentation long abstract

Conservation governance often privileges technocratic and positivist approaches that frame knowledge as quantifiable and neutral, marginalising other ways of knowing and valuing nature. This paper examines these dynamics through the lens of symbolic power—the capacity to define what counts as legitimate knowledge, rational policy, or moral order. Integrating Bourdieu’s analysis of symbolic power with Elder-Vass’s concept of socially endorsed beliefs, we advance a framework for examining how conservation institutions legitimise some values and knowledge systems while marginalising others. Symbolic power operates through recognition rather than coercion, stabilising dominant imaginaries of “objectivity” and “rationality” that underpin much of contemporary biodiversity governance. Yet legitimacy is not fixed. Shifts in symbolic legitimacy can occur through deliberative spaces or disruptive events that unsettle taken-for-granted assumptions and allow alternative epistemologies to emerge. Empirically, we illustrate this through the case of small-scale spiny-lobster fisheries in Japan, where cooperative norms and community deliberation have redefined what counts as responsible and legitimate management. By situating the politics of knowledge within broader structures of symbolic power, the paper shows that overcoming technocratic and reductionist governance requires not only epistemic pluralism but also transformations in the symbolic orders that legitimise certain ways of knowing while silencing others.