The article discusses the political ecology of biodiversity conservation, focusing on the establishment of protected areas (PAs). It highlights the political nature of conservation efforts, emphasizing the interactions between environmental action and politics. The paper explores the implications of the idea of pristine nature, the social impacts of PA establishment, and the allocation of benefits and costs. It considers three key political issues in international conservation policy: the rights of indigenous people, the relationship between biodiversity conservation and poverty reduction, and the arguments for returning to conventional PAs that exclude people. The article discusses the historical development of PAs, their social impacts, and the displacement of people from these areas. It notes that the establishment of PAs has often involved the displacement of local communities, particularly indigenous people, and raises concerns about the unequal distribution of benefits and costs. The paper also addresses the political economy of conservation benefits, highlighting the need for equitable distribution and the role of indigenous people in conservation efforts. The article emphasizes the importance of understanding the political and social dimensions of conservation policy, as well as the need for inclusive approaches that consider the rights and needs of local communities. It argues that conservation should not be viewed solely in ecological and financial terms but also in social and political contexts. The paper calls for a more integrated approach to conservation that recognizes the complex relationships between people, nature, and conservation. It also highlights the need for greater attention to the rights of indigenous people and the challenges of balancing conservation with poverty alleviation.The article discusses the political ecology of biodiversity conservation, focusing on the establishment of protected areas (PAs). It highlights the political nature of conservation efforts, emphasizing the interactions between environmental action and politics. The paper explores the implications of the idea of pristine nature, the social impacts of PA establishment, and the allocation of benefits and costs. It considers three key political issues in international conservation policy: the rights of indigenous people, the relationship between biodiversity conservation and poverty reduction, and the arguments for returning to conventional PAs that exclude people. The article discusses the historical development of PAs, their social impacts, and the displacement of people from these areas. It notes that the establishment of PAs has often involved the displacement of local communities, particularly indigenous people, and raises concerns about the unequal distribution of benefits and costs. The paper also addresses the political economy of conservation benefits, highlighting the need for equitable distribution and the role of indigenous people in conservation efforts. The article emphasizes the importance of understanding the political and social dimensions of conservation policy, as well as the need for inclusive approaches that consider the rights and needs of local communities. It argues that conservation should not be viewed solely in ecological and financial terms but also in social and political contexts. The paper calls for a more integrated approach to conservation that recognizes the complex relationships between people, nature, and conservation. It also highlights the need for greater attention to the rights of indigenous people and the challenges of balancing conservation with poverty alleviation.