Renegotiating species belonging in a changing world

Abstract

Globalizing forces keep creating new “alien” or “introduced” species, but what should be done about these new nonhuman neighbors is contested. Arguments about whether species belong often bundle together claims about what is and what should be, which can create an uneven playing field that overlooks the diversity of human relations with new neighbors. This paper aims to distinguish a constructive path forward by distilling four ways that species are deemed to belong. From the literature, we identify nativeness, wildness, contributions, and right relations as distinct registers of belonging. We elaborate on the values and worldviews that each register enfolds, and who typically benefits from these regimes. Drawing from case examples, we show how this conceptual framework can help to expose the wider meanings and effects of new neighbors, broaden decision-making beyond technocratic debates, and compose new alternatives for conservation and wildlife governance.