[en] Critical development research keeps receiving renewed momentum as a response to the increasing awareness of the challenges related to project interventions in the global South, often facilitated by transnational and international actors. A vast amount of research documenting problems with participation and conservation outcomes of such development interventions mirrors a situation of limited improvement or status quo. From a critical realist standpoint and based on data from fieldwork, qualitative interviews, and literature review, this thesis explores new ways to illuminate the causes behind this phenomenon using a telecoupling lens and focusing on Integrated Conservation and Development Projects (ICDPs). Specifically, the research asks: How can telecoupling be operationalized to shed new light on the management and sustainability of ICDPs? How are actors positioned to influence the design of ICDPs? And which logic dominates among the actors who have the power to define the design of ICDPs? I answer these questions in the following manner. First, I introduce three collective writings, including two collective reports and a book chapter, which jointly review and expand the theoretical framework of telecoupling while serving the preparation and development of research articles 1, 2, and 3. The two collective reports highlight knowledge gaps in actor identification and causal analysis, while the book chapter illustrates how the telecoupling framework can improve by integrating an environmental justice approach. Building on these insights, I demonstrate how such theoretical integration, together with a direct empirical application, represents the most significant potential for telecoupling to improve causal attribution in Land System Science (LSS). The analysis shows how telecoupling has the potential to support an integrated analysis of various sustainability challenges and cause-effect relationships over distance. Next, I show how this potential can be applied to shed new light on an apparent status quo of Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities' (IPLCs) role in development interventions, specifically in ICDPs. This discussion unfolds by examining the institutional structure of project actors' roles and responsibilities in a case study of a World Bank-financed Forest and Community project in Salta, Argentina. The research demonstrates that project actors are relatively detached and operate in different design and implementation systems, resulting in a limited engagement with and participation of IPLCs in the project. Third, and motivated by the last remark, I test the hypothesis that an analysis of the institutional logic of development professionals working in some of the top international development banks and aid agencies can contribute to explaining why IPLCs do not form part of key decision-making processes. The thesis concludes by highlighting key scientific contributions and by suggesting future research avenues in the field of telecoupling research and international conservation and development.

[es] La investigación crítica para el desarrollo sigue recibiendo un impulso renovado como respuesta a la creciente conciencia de los desafíos relacionados con las intervenciones de proyectos en el Sur global, a menudo facilitada por actores transnacionales e internacionales. Una gran cantidad de investigaciones que documentan problemas con la participación y los resultados de conservación de tales intervenciones de desarrollo reflejan una situación de mejora limitada o status quo. Desde un punto de vista realista crítico y basado en datos de trabajo de campo, entrevistas cualitativas y revisión de literatura, esta tesis explora nuevas formas de iluminar las causas detrás de este fenómeno utilizando una lente de telecoupling y centrándose en Proyectos Integrados de Conservación y Desarrollo (ICDPs). Específicamente, la investigación pregunta: ¿Cómo se puede hacer operativo el telecoupling para arrojar nueva luz sobre la gestión y sostenibilidad de los ICDPs? ¿Cómo se posicionan los actores para influir en el diseño de los ICDPs? ¿Y qué lógica domina entre los actores que tienen el poder de definir el diseño de los ICDPs?