Paper short abstract:

Building from Tilly’s (1989) framing of protection and eight months of ethnographic research at a Ugandan National Park, I ask how does the state redefine its role, relationships, and logics of rule via conservation? How can we reconceptualize the notion of the state as it functions in these spaces?

Paper long abstract:

Drawing from eight months of ethnographic research, this paper argues that in seeking a monopoly on protection over Mount Elgon National Park, the Ugandan state has also sought to legitimize their control and authority over populations. However, departing from Tilly (1985), what is being controlled, protected, and claimed are not citizens, but environmental resources. Using Tilly’s framing that protection is a factor in state-making I ask—In prioritizing the environment over citizens in spaces of environmental protection, how is the state redefining its role, relationships, and logics of rule? Furthermore, how can we reconceptualize the notion of ‘the state’ as it functions in these spaces? How does it look and act? What does the state protect and what threatens claims to control and authority? How is protection imposed in the course of claiming, policing, and governing these spaces? And, if environmental protection is rationalized by the state as being in the best interests of the people, what is the justification for violence against people neighboring parks? Findings reveal that state logics operate differently in spaces of environmental protection. Instead of seeking to protect citizens, resources are prioritized in protective efforts and citizens are often perceived as threats to authority and control. Through the lens of environmental governance, I argue that we can reassess pre-defined rationales and logics assigned to the state and interrogate their validity. If spaces of environmental protection truly operate outside normal state logics—how can we more accurately define and conceptualize the state in these spaces?