Heritage, Poverty and Landscape-Scale Biodiversity

Poverty, wealth and conservation

HHeritage,eritage, povertypoverty andand landscape-scalelandscape-scale biodiversitybiodiversity cconservation:onservation: anan alternatealternate perspectiveperspective fromfrom thethe AAmazonianmazonian frontierfrontier JJanisanis B.B. Alcorn,Alcorn, CarolCarol Carlo,Carlo, JulioJulio Rojas,Rojas, DavidDavid Rothschild,Rothschild, AlakaAlaka Wali,Wali, aandnd AAlejolejo ZarzyckiZarzycki

Abstract. Rights-based initiatives offer governments, donors and NGOs a new path forward, giving new meaning to old words like poverty, heritage, and landscape-scale conservation. The conventional conservation perspective holds that people in high biodiversity areas are impoverished and therefore destroy biodiversity to meet their needs. Under this view, people are seen as a threat to be removed, restricted, or to be given “alternative livelihoods” means that do not depend on their traditional natural resources. The poverty-alleviation-based approach to conservation, which is politically acceptable to the status quo, persists within policy and project implementation even if it has often been discredited as unsustainable. Aware of the large investments made in rural development and conservation projects without positive results, rural people have become increasingly anti-conservation and suspicious of NGOs that make their living off communities with development and conservation projects that are not effective. The rights-based approach holds that the root causes of poverty and resource degradation can be addressed only by addressing political relationships that govern access to resources and equitable justice.

We offer a perspective gained by valuing the strengthening of the rights-based approach to incorporate the cultural concept of dynamic heritage as a means for “balancing the scale” when collaborating with communities for achieving conservation objectives in the landscape. In 2003, we initiated a regional heritage mobilization process in an anti-conservation atmosphere in the Amazonian frontier of Pando, Bolivia– a high biodiversity region the size of Costa Rica, which remains 90 percent forested. As a result, in 2004, the people of western Pando chose to declare their two municipios (1.5 million hectares) as a protected area under local government control, united under the motto “Conservation with Development– Our Decision.” This success arose from a strategy that used an assessment vehicle to engage the political actor groups into engagement around shared interests, leveraged local energies through group reﬂ ection on key issues, and promoted public deliberation at various levels leading to landscape scale decisions. This paper describes the details of the process, the design principles, and its results.

Resumen. Se considera que los derechos basados en las iniciativas de la población y las autoridades de un determinada área, ofrecen a los gobiernos centrales, a los donantes y a las organizaciones no-gubernamentales, una nueva senda para transitar, dando un nuevo signiﬁ - cado a las viejas palabras pobreza, patrimonio y conservación a escala territorial. Las per- spectivas convencionales de la conservación, sostienen que las personas que viven en sitios de alta biodiversidad son pobres y en consecuencia destruyen la biodiversidad. Desde este punto de vista, la población es vista como una amenaza que debe ser expulsada, a la que se le deben ﬁ jar restricciones y a las que se le deben dar alternativas de vida que no dependan del uso tradicional de los recursos naturales. El alivio de la pobreza sobre la base de criterios 272 …if initiativesThe intertwined embraceLLivelihoodsivelih rootso rights,od…buts ofandan poverty,dconservationsecure Conservationconservationconse accessr vwealthatio cann to— canand resources alsoaargumentsr g endenvironmentalu providem upen and tenhancingsPolicy livelihoodsshaping hrealapi nthatparticipation degradationg thet benefits… poverty...hmatterse debatedebate!

de conservación, es políticamente aceptable a un nivel de dejar las cosas como están (status quo) permaneciendo entre las políticas y la implementación de proyectos que al ﬁ nal por lo general son desechados por insostenibles. Por la gran cantidad de dinero que se invierte en los conceptos y proyectos de desarrollo rural sin o con éxito relativo, la población rural desconfía de las organizaciones no gubernamentales, las que hacen su vida de las comunidades—ejecutando proyectos que no son efectivos. Los derechos basados en aproximaciones para la conservación y el manejo de los recursos naturales, se muestran como una alterna- tiva viable para la conservación. Es mas, el enfoque basado en los derechos, sostiene que las raíces que causan la pobreza y la degradación de los recursos pueden ser controlados man- teniendo relaciones políticas que deﬁ nan y ejerzan gobierno en el acceso a los recursos de manera equitativa y justa.

En este documento se ofrece una perspectiva ganada por ver el valor de la ampliación del enfoque basado en los derechos, con un intento para incorporar el concepto cultural de la dinámica del patrimonio como una manera de “balancear la ecuación” colaborando con las comunidades para alcanzar objetivos de conservación a una escala territorial. Es así que en el año 2003 se inicio un proceso para la movilización del patrimonio en una atmósfera anti- conservacionista, en una de las fronteras amazónicas en el departamento de Pando, Bolivia, una región de alta biodiversidad del tamaño de Costa Rica, la cual permanece aun en un 90 por ciento bajo bosque. Como resultado de este esfuerzo, en el año 2004 la población del Oeste del departamento Pando decidió declarar dos municipios (aproximadamente 1.5 mil- lones de hectáreas) como área protegida bajo tuición del gobierno local, bajo el tema “Con- servación con Desarrollo– Nuestra Decisión”. El éxito de la experiencia deviene de una es- trategia que usó el relevamiento de información como vehiculo para acercar a los grupos de actores políticos involucrándolos entorno de intereses compartidos, resaltando la energía de la herencia local a través de la reﬂ exión en grupos locales sobre los asuntos claves, con la promoción de la deliberación pública entre los grupos de actores a varias escalas llevando a decisiones a nivel del paisaje. Los detalles de este proceso, los principios de su diseño y los resultados logrados se describen a continuación.

Map 1. Pando is located in the northern- most Amazonian part of Bolivia, bordering Peru and Brazil. Inset shows the loca- tion of Bolpebra and Filadelﬁ a municipios. (map adapted by Juan Carlos , Fundación Yangareko)

he traditional conservation perspec- Ttive holds that people in high biodiversity areas are impoverished and therefore destroy biodiversity. Under this view, people are seen as a threat to be removed from high biodiversity areas, or restricted in their access to it, or to be given alternative livelihood means, which do not depend on traditional uses of natural resources. Remov- ing people from biodiversity has even

273 Poverty, wealth and conservation

been hailed as a form of eco-fascism, ble to community members. And it an- yet the phenomenon is well alive. The ticipates that rights-based approaches poverty alleviation based approach to will build resilience for sustaining con- conservation also servation throughout expected political TThehe ppovertyoverty allevia-allevia- persists within turbulence during the consolidation of ttion-basedion-based aapproachpproach toto policy and project democracy.5 It privileges rights and cconservationonservation isis po-po- implementa- politics over more traditional strategies tion, because it for incorporating attention to social as- lliticallyitically convenient,convenient, is politically con- sets in community-based conservation aalthoughlthough oftenoften dis-dis- venient, although projects. ccreditedredited aass ssimplisticimplistic often discredited as simplistic and Some have subsumed the rights-based aandnd uunsustainablensustainable unsustainable.1 approach within a more general orien- Similarly, landscape-scale conservation tation termed the “assets-based ap- has largely been an expert driven exer- proach to poverty reduction” using a cise, criticized for lack of concrete ap- defi nition of pov- plication. Even the community-based erty that includes TThehe rrights-basedights-based ap-ap- conservation advocates acknowledge low income, lack pproachroach promotespromotes con-con- that effective conservation needs to be of assets, lack of sservationervation andand devel-devel- implemented at a scale larger than a access to social oopmentpment throughthrough civilcivil single village.2 services, and lack of voice in gov- rrights,ights, humanhuman rights,rights, Rights-based approaches to conserva- ernment.6 The aandnd cculturalultural rights.rights. tion and natural resource management assets-based ap- have risen as a possible alternative.3 proach assists the poor to build physi- The rights-based approach holds that cal capital, fi nancial assets, community the root causes of poverty and resource organizations and institutions, social degradation can be addressed only by capital, access to natural resources affecting the political relationships that and the ability to infl uence policies. govern access to It acknowledges the great value that TThehe rrights-basedights-based natural resources social assets play in providing resilience aapproachpproach holdsholds thatthat and justice. The to the poor. A rights-based approach, tthehe rootroot causescauses ofof rights-based ap- however, differs in that it involves proach promotes moving beyond providing venues for ppovertyoverty andand resourceresource conservation participation by the poor to giving over ddegradationegradation cancan bebe and develop- leadership and decision-making roles to aaddressedddressed oonlynly byby ment through the poor.7 aaffectingffecting thethe politi-politi- civil rights, human rights, and In this paper, we offer an example il- ccalal relationshipsrelationships thatthat cultural rights.4 lustrating the value of amplifying the ggovernovern accessaccess toto Concerns for rights-based approach to incorporate nnaturalatural resourcesresources transparent and the cultural concept of heritage as a accountable gov- concrete means for “balancing the aandnd jjustice.ustice. ernance fl ow nat- scale” when collaborating with com- urally from the rights-based approach. munities to achieve conservation objec- It seeks mechanisms by which govern- tives at landscape scale. We will sug- ment agencies are held accountable to gest that a focus on heritage makes it rural communities, and by which local possible to realize rights-based ideas. community leaders are held accounta- 274 …if initiativesThe intertwined embraceLLivelihoodsivelih rootso rights,od…buts ofandan poverty,dconservationsecure Conservationconservationconse accessr vwealthatio cann to— canand resources alsoaargumentsr g endenvironmentalu providem upen and tenhancingsPolicy livelihoodsshaping hrealapi nthatparticipation degradationg thet benefits… poverty...hmatterse debatedebate!

Heritage and its conservation on heritage can take the rights-based value approaches from their sometimes ab- What is heritage? Although there is no stract and legal realm into a self-sus- formally recognized “heritage-based taining implementation on the ground. approach” to conservation, heritage is We suggest fl ipping the conservation a concept frequently applied in tradi- heritage lever on its head – spurring a tional conservation discourse. World fl owering of local WWee ssuggestuggest fflippinglipping heritage that im- Heritage, biodiversity heritage, global tthehe conservationconservation herit-herit- heritage and cultural heritage, for ex- proves conserva- ample, are common labels used to pro- tion as well as the aagege lleverever onon itsits head…head… mote and raise funds for conservation. livelihoods, resil- sspurringpurring a floweringflowering The use of the term heritage does not ience and dignity ooff locallocal heritage…heritage… necessarily, however, imply a linkage of the rural poor, with rights-based approaches. To the instead of spurring the ossifi cation of contrary, these terms are often used in local heritage into “global heritage” for ways that deny the dynamic heritage of national and international consumption. local people.8 Hence it is important to clarify the meaning of heritage used in To illustrate this approach, we offer the this paper. example of an asset assessment used in Amazonian Bolivia that enabled local As thoughtfully analyzed by Erve leaders to step forth and rely on their Chambers (2005), heritage can be de- own heritage to create a new protected fi ned in two ways – one associated with area and construct a new institution history and brokered by professionals that has the potential to democratize into a representational public heritage local government as well as manage de-linked from private lives, and the the area. In the process, a strong other associated with culture and linked Pandino Amazonian heritage has be- to the past, the present and the future come visible and activated in what was of the communities and persons who previously viewed by outsiders and are the holders of a private heritage. policy makers as an impoverished fron- The latter is linked to obligations, rela- tier without social cohesion. tionships, and personal responsibilities to the past and the present. The peo- Poverty and biodiversity in the ple linked to private heritage have the Bolivian Amazon– case setting power to modify that heritage; private Pando (Bolivia) is known as one of the heritage is vulnerable to alienation by poorest regions of one of the poor- being transformed into public heritage est countries in Latin America.10 Over over which the communities no longer eighty percent of the population is clas- have control. “[We] might begin to sifi ed as living in PPandoando iiss knownknown aass view heritage not as lessons taught us poverty.11 Pando by duly recognized keepers of the past has a relatively oonene ooff thethe poorestpoorest but as heritable obligations, responsi- small population rregionsegions ofof oneone ofof thethe bilities, and privileges that are expe- of indigenous ppoorestoorest countriescountries inin rienced and repeated in the culture of peoples.12 A everyday life.”9 small group of LLatinatin AmericaAmerica … voluntarily isolated Pacahuara people is How can incorporation of heritage rumored to persist in the most remote “balance the scale” for collaboration in area of Santos Mercado in an area be- conservation? We propose that a focus ing considered for national park status 275 Poverty, wealth and conservation

in Federico Roman province in eastern Poor roads, lack of labour and depend- Pando. A small population of Yamina- ence on the Brazil nut economy has hua and Machineri peoples shares one restricted capital- recognized territory (TCO) in the north- intensive exploi- ……9090 ppercentercent ffor-or- west corner of Pando, and Esse Ejja, tation of the area, eestedsted WWesternestern PPandoando Tacana and Cavineño peoples in south but uncontrolled central Pando share another “multi- development is hharborsarbors thethe highesthighest ethnic” territory.13 The total resident now threatening ffreshwaterreshwater ddiversityiversity population of Pando is approximately it. Road improve- kknownnown iinn tthehe Ama-Ama- 14 52,500 people; some municipios ments, spontane- zzonon basinbasin andand isis (counties15) have less than 400 people. ous colonization, deforestation, re- hhomeome toto 1414 speciesspecies ofof Pando, with an area larger than the source extraction pprimates,rimates, overover 700700 country of Costa Rica (63,000 km2) without govern- bbirdird sspeciespecies andand a and a population density of less than ment or commu- one person per km2, is one of the last nity controls, and vveryery highhigh diversitydiversity ofof bastions of intact tropical lowland for- border encroach- aamphibians,mphibians, reptilesreptiles est in the Upper Amazon basin. The ments from Peru, aandnd pplants.lants. dark green block of Pando (Figure 1), are among the stands out in sharp contrast to the de- threats to this fragile area. Local insti- forested patchworks across the borders tutions are weak, yet are essential to in Madre de Dios, Peru, and in Acre and control these threats in the immediate Rondonia, Brazil where road and colo- and long-term. nization projects have brought deforestation and cattle ranching. Besides Over the past decade, rural residents being 90 percent forested, Western soundly rejected initiatives to establish Pando harbors the highest freshwater more national protected areas. Power- diversity known in the Amazon basin, ful holders of inactive timber conces- and is home to 14 species of primates, sions overlain over community and over 700 bird species and a very high individual lands rejected a conservation diversity of amphibians, reptiles and concession deal offered by northern plants.16 Pando forests produce 80 NGOs. The leaders of the Yaminahua- percent of the world’s Brazil nuts. Machineri indigenous territory refused a biodiversity inventory offer in 1999. In 2000, the campesino federation of rural residents (FSUTCP) won a political victory demanding that communities be granted title to 500 hectares per family instead of the 50 hectares specifi ed in the land reform law,17 thus giving campesinos political control over vast areas in Pando. Powerful individuals who had claimed vast extensions of forest (up to 100,000 hectares), some Picture 1. Pando is seen as a green island in of whom had been courted for conser- these composite satellite images from 2000- vation agreements, were offered legal 2001. More recent images show deforestation title to only 50 hectares. Meanwhile, occurring along the Peruvian side of the border Brazilian capital fi nanced commercial with Pando. (Composite Land-Sat image cre- over-fi shing and gold mining in Pando. ated by Sergio Rabiela, The Field Museum) Peruvian capital fi nanced illegal logging 276 …if initiativesThe intertwined embraceLLivelihoodsivelih rootso rights,od…buts ofandan poverty,dconservationsecure Conservationconservationconse accessr vwealthatio cann to— canand resources alsoaargumentsr g endenvironmentalu providem upen and tenhancingsPolicy livelihoodsshaping hrealapi nthatparticipation degradationg thet benefits… poverty...hmatterse debatedebate!

and sending a small stream of “mules” ing at a density of less that one person carrying coca paste across western per square kilometer in an area of 1.5 Pando into Brazil. million hectares (3.4 million acres). Approximately one quarter of the area Yet in 2003, a coalition of local, na- is a national wildlife reserve— Ma- tional and international organizations18 nuripi—which was ofﬁ cially reduced to were willing to half its original size after deforestation [[InIn BBolivia]olivia] proactiveproactive gamble that, be- on its eastern side in the Puerto Rico nnationalational landland reformreform neath the public municipio. Manuripi was already oc- image of Pando cupied by communities and Brazil nut ooffersffers communalcommunal as a backward barracas22 at the time of its establish- ttenureenure aass wwellell aass impoverished ment in 1973. The experience of these iindividualndividual titles.titles. frontier for the people with inequitably applied restric- taking, lay a dif- tions served to stimulate strong local ferent reality. They believed that the anti-conservation attitudes. people living in the forest of Pando would take the initiative to act together to manage their Amazonian ecosystem if given the opportunity, despite the anti-conservation atmosphere.

The policy framework was in place to support such an initiative. Unlike its neighbor Peru, Bolivia has laws and policies that provide the territorial basis for a vision of active citizen engagement both in local government and in biodiversity management at landscape scale.19 Proactive national land reform offers communal tenure as well as indi- Picture 2. Expert skill is required to crack open vidual titles.20 Decentralization policies Brazil nuts. Pandino rural people were inden- encourage local government to assert tured rubber tappers and Brazil nut gatherers its rights to manage local affairs and on barracas estatales until the latter part of the implement Bolivian environmental poli- 20th century. Today they harvest Brazil nuts cies, which are among the world’s most four months of the year. Most of the world’s advanced.21 Brazil nuts come from Pando, transported on people’s backs from the forest to loading points along rivers or seasonal roads. (Courtesy Pedro A rights-based approach to Sarmiento, Fundación Yangareko) landscape-scale conservation in Western Pando In April 2003, Zarzycki and Alcorn initi- Our collaborative, rights-based effort ated a new approach by interviewing a was implemented in two municipios range of rich and poor players and in- (counties) in far west Pando. These stitutions to ascertain attitudes and op- municipios function as an important portunities for applying a rights-based intact element in the large scale biodi- approach that would nurture existing versity corridor arc joining the Upper strengths to build collaboration among Amazon to the Gran Chaco. Bolpebra all parties. The Field Museum of Chica- and Filadelﬁ a municipios are home to a go was still prepared to support an as- population of some 5,500 people liv- 277 Poverty, wealth and conservation

set-mapping exercise23 although it had cept the Field Museum offer with modi- previously been rejected by local orga- ﬁ cations. Basically, local people want- nizations, because it was seen as “just ed a process under participant control another study” in a region suspicious that would lead towards democratic of NGOs, which are seen as parasites deliberation on an option to create a earning money by carrying out studies grassroots-established and managed that beneﬁ t no rural people at all. Dur- protected area or ANMI (Area Natural ing the rapid assessment, discussions de Manejo Integral, Natural Area under with the campesino federation, local Integrated Management). government, local university and local NGOs resulted in an agreement to ac-

Box 1. Principles to Facilitate a Rights-based Approach to Landscape Conservation (A rights based approach assumes leadership by local people and organizations, not by the project managers. For a more detailed discussion of these principles and their application see Alcorn et al., 2006.)

1. Nurture natural cross-scale links. 5. Be inclusive. 2. Be transparent. 6. Commit to clear roles and responsibilities. 3. Celebrate values. 7. Maintain and nurture resilience. 4. Integrate planning.

The modifi ed asset-mapping tool was The RIPUI included focus groups, land named RIPUI (Relevamiento de Infor- use mapping and planning, interviews, mación sobre Potencialidades y Usos community-wide discussions and sub- Integrales), an acronym that in Quech- regional discussions, and was guided ua means, “Go!” The RIPUI-ANMI ini- by a key set of rights-based approach tiative used the asset-mapping assess- principles (See Box 1).24 Community ment vehicle to bring the political actor deliberations were private in the sense groups into an engagement around that project staff was not present and shared interests. It also leveraged lo- was only provided with the information cal energies through group refl ection that communities decided to give to the on key issues, and promoted public de- project team. The facilitators were as- liberation among various constituencies sisted by monitors (seguidores, see up to landscape scale decisions. The Figure 3) from the campesino federa- municipio governments of Bolpebra and tion. During the training, the facilita- Filadelfi a sponsored the activity, and a tors and seguidores were uncertain core project management team was in- about assuming responsibility as they stalled at the University of the Amazon had never been involved in anything of Pando through a collaborative rela- like this before, but the trainer encour- tionship with Fundación Yangareko and aged them: “This is a shared adventure The Field Museum of Chicago. The op- where you will make decisions as you portunity for participation was offered collaborate.” To include the 169 private to all 36 communities, out of whom 29 landowners in the process, the RIPUI chose to participate. Each participat- team also hired fi ve interviewers who ing community elected a “facilitator” traveled to remote areas to interview who was responsible for managing the barraqueros. process in his/her community.

278 …if initiativesThe intertwined embraceLLivelihoodsivelih rootso rights,od…buts ofandan poverty,dconservationsecure Conservationconservationconse accessr vwealthatio cann to— canand resources alsoaargumentsr g endenvironmentalu providem upen and tenhancingsPolicy livelihoodsshaping hrealapi nthatparticipation degradationg thet benefits… poverty...hmatterse debatedebate!

the new ANMI partnership.

Heritage assets revealed What did the RIPUI reveal? The RIPUI26 revealed that Pandinos are not so impoverished.27 Their low levels of income do not directly correspond to their level of wellbeing. They rely on their abundant natural resources (see Figure 4), which includes 82 species of ﬁ sh, 31 species of animals, 80 species of plants, 6 species of commercially high value timber, in addition to brazil nuts, and deeply appreciate their natural environment for its clean water, Picture 3. The 29 communities who participated clean air, medicines, food, and recrea- in the RIPUI were connected by “monitors” from tional opportunities.28 Their collective the campesino federation, who created a living communication network and assisted facilitators vision for the future emphasized the in each community. They were recognizable by need for planned management of their their right yellow backpacks, RIPUI caps, and natural resources for improving their credentials from the municipio government, and lives while conserving their resources served as a visible symbol of the discussions and cultural identities. Two thirds of in which community members were engaged the communities voluntarily partici- beyond the community level. (Courtesy Alejo pated in land use planning as part of Zarzycki, Fundación Yangareko) the RIPUI.29 Their main development At the end of the RIPUI, the participat- concerns were centered on improved ing communities asserted their inter- access to health care and post-primary ests and defended the proposal for education services, followed by a desire the ANMI against opposing elements for improved roads for marketing their so that municipio ordinances declaring products. the ANMI were approved by community vote in August 2004. This is the ﬁ rst case of ANMIs covering the entire territory of municipios being declared unilaterally (out- TThehe RRIPUIIPUI rrevealedevealed side national tthathat PandinosPandinos areare notnot processes).25 The ssoo impoverished.impoverished. TheirTheir county executives distributed llowow levelslevels ofof incomeincome the resulting land ddoo nnotot directlydirectly use maps and ccorrespondorrespond toto theirtheir reports for each community at a llevelevel ofof wellbeing…wellbeing… large public cer- emony after the ANMI had been de- Picture 4. Fish are abundant in Pando’s many clared, satisfying communities’ desire rivers. Pandinos depend on their natural en- for transparency and concrete results, vironment for food, medicine, materials, and and maintaining public momentum for recreation. (Courtesy Gonzalo Calderon, CIPA, University of the Amazon of Pando) 279 Poverty, wealth and conservation

Their heritage assets were revealed to or two families may remain on a com- be impressive. While the terms herit- munity’s lands as the others engage age and community might imply time- in migrant labor before the agricul- less, abstract local societies bound to tural season begins and families return their lands and lo- home to work their land. ……thethe RRIPUIIPUI rrevealedevealed cal relations, the tthehe ruralrural residentsresidents asas RIPUI revealed Communities were awarded title to iindependent,ndependent, sself-reli-elf-reli- the rural resi- a quarter of the land area of Bolpe- dents as mobile bra and Filadelﬁ a in 2003;30 few have aant,nt, andand ppoliticallyolitically and adaptable. developed common property rules for aactivective peoplepeople whosewhose so-so- They are inde- managing their newly awarded lands ccialial linkslinks areare prima-prima- pendent, self-reli- collectively, and most have not yet es- rrilyily regionalregional ratherrather ant, and political- tablished any internal rules and regula- ly active people tions for governing themselves. The tthanhan communal.communal. whose social links strongest community level organization are primarily regional rather than com- (outside of kinship networks) is the munal. Sixty-two percent of communi- OTB or Sindicato (the political associa- ties were founded between 1956 and tions that legally represent a commu- 1983, by ex-indentured workers for nity to government). rubber tapping and Brazil nut barracas who had settled in a dispersed settle- Virtually all adults in communities ment pattern. Many of the remaining belong to the Pando-wide campesino communities were recently formalized federation, which fought for their land by dispersed rural families and families rights. Seventy percent of communi- living in Pando’s capital city Cobija, in ties boast a soccer club, which serves order to claim land. In Bolpebra, 20 as a link to other communities, and a percent claim local indigenous herit- parent-teacher association which links age, and in both municipios the major- the community to outside services in ity claims to originate from the Amazon general. Half of the individual land- tri-national area owners belong to their regional Brazil VVirtuallyirtually allall adultsadults of Peru, Brazil and nut producers’ association. iinn communitiescommunities Bolivia – with less than ten percent Land use in communities and by indi- bbelongelong toto thethe Pando-Pando- having roots in vidual landowners wwideide ccampesinoampesino fed-fed- the Andes. This is forest-based TThehe RRIPUIIPUI nnurturedurtured eeration,ration, whichwhich foughtfought goes against the with very small ccollectiveollective identityidentity fforor theirtheir landland rights.rights. grain of the popu- areas for agricul- tthroughhrough encouragingencouraging lar impressions of tural production the frontier as being overrun by An- (generally less eeachach communitycommunity toto dean people who lack ecological knowl- than four percent ddrawraw iitsts ownown sshieldhield edge to manage the lowland tropical of the land area), … wwhichhich celebratecelebrate tthehe environment. While generally having although a few been categorized as “Brazil nut gath- communities and nnaturalatural resourcesresources onon erers,” the local people dedicate only individuals have wwhichhich thethe peoplepeople de-de- 1/3 of their year to Brazil nut gathering cleared extensive ppendend – ffish,ish, wildlife,wildlife, (December to March), spending 1/3 as areas for cat- fforest,orest, rivers,rivers, andand migrant labor in the tri-national area, tle-raising along and 1/3 on agricultural activities. Be- the main road BBrazilrazil nuts.nuts. tween March and September, only one (including inside the Manuripi Reserve 280 …if initiativesThe intertwined embraceLLivelihoodsivelih rootso rights,od…buts ofandan poverty,dconservationsecure Conservationconservationconse accessr vwealthatio cann to— canand resources alsoaargumentsr g endenvironmentalu providem upen and tenhancingsPolicy livelihoodsshaping hrealapi nthatparticipation degradationg thet benefits… poverty...hmatterse debatedebate!

where a previous reserve manager enous people, can feel an obligation to made a deal to promote cattle ranching care for their resource base according inside the reserve). Individual land- to principles gained while depending on owners, who have title to 4 percent their resources for generations. Just of the area but have control and his- as indigenous peoples in the Canadian toric claims to 70 percent of the lands, North seek to maintain their heritage produced sketch maps demonstrating through ecotourism and nontraditional their mental plans for managing their commercial forestry,31 these Amazonian resources, and included forest reserves rural residents (indigenous and non-in- as did the communities. They are digenous) seek to understand ways to creating their own museum to put on use the market in ecotourism, environ- display objects from the rubber tapping mental services and conservation con- and Brazil nut boom eras. cessions to maintain their cultural and natural heritage. Western Pandinos are using their private heritage as self-reliant individuals knowledgeable of their environment to invent community and regional public identities. The RIPUI nurtured this strengthening of collective identity through encour- ……ruralrural rresidentsesidents wwhoho aging each com- ddoo nnotot claimclaim indige-indige- munity to draw its own shield nnousous iidentitydentity cancan feelfeel (Figure 5), in aann oobligationbligation toto a region where ccareare fforor theirtheir resourceresource the municipio’s bbasease aaccordingccording toto governments don’t even have pprinciplesrinciples gainedgained shields. All the wwhilehile dependingdepending onon shields celebrate ttheirheir resourcesresources forfor the natural re- ggenerationsenerations sources on which the people depend – fi sh, wildlife, forest, rivers, and Brazil nuts. These are people who have lived and thrived in the forest Picture 5. Each community created its without external services. They have a own shield as a symbol of its identity as high level of local knowledge necessary part of the RIPUI process. Bolpebra’s for sustainable management of natural shield is typical as it celebrates life on the resources and ecological monitoring. river with fi sh, birds, rubber, and Brazil They also have a desire to patrol and nuts with a motto “progress on the fron- protect their forests from new colonists tier.” Bolpebra was founded by people and outsiders who would gladly exploit from Tarija in extreme southern Bolivia, their forests and waters illegally. And and celebrates its frontier heritage with a they want to apply their knowledge and name created by putting together the fi rst few letters of each country Bolivia, Peru, heritage to the future. This illustrates and Brazil, as it is located at the trina- the fact that rural residents who do not tional corner of Pando. (Courtesy Pedro claim indigenous identity, like indig- Sarmiento, Fundación Yangareko) 281 Poverty, wealth and conservation

The results— heritage decision.”33 mobilization What happened post-RIPUI? The At this early stage, in 2006, the UAFB rights-based initiative has taken on its is fragile, linking communities by fragile own life. In August 2004, after much threads. Commu- debate and efforts by illegal loggers to nities are begin- WWhyhy diddid thethe RIPUIRIPUI undermine passage of the ordinances ning the process lleadead toto declarationdeclaration ofof which they recognized would threaten of consolidating their own internal a pprotectedrotected areaarea fromfrom to curtail their activities, community a ggrassrootsrassroots thatthat waswas representatives (OTBs) voted to de- regulations for clare both municipios as ANMI under managing their ppreviouslyreviously opposedopposed toto the management of a new mancomuni- resources while pprotectedrotected areas?areas? dad32 (Union Amazónica Filadelfi a-Bol- the mancomuni- pebra – UAFB). The objectives of the dad is seeking to zone the ANMI and ANMI and UAFB include, among others: establish regulations and decision-making criteria for future projects34. Much zoning to include landscape level • work remains to be done. The manco- conservation within land use plan- munidad faces many challenges as it ning; competes with powerful outside inter- • improved management of natural ests for the control of decisions about resources based on local knowledge; the future, as many converge upon • protection of water; Pando to capitalize upon the frontier • encouragement of scientifi c study resources or to take advantage of the to provide improved information for existence of UAFB as a vehicle for ex- monitoring the environment; ternally driven conservation projects. • local management regulations in accord with national norms; and Conclusion • the strengthening of local enforce- Why did the RIPUI lead to declaration ment against environmental crimes. of a protected area from a grassroots that was previously opposed to pro- The UAFB mancomunidad board con- tected areas? The RIPUI was effective sists of the elected municipio executive because it was designed to mobilize and council members of both muni- heritage obligations by depending on cipios, laying the basis for democratic voluntary networking among individu- participation and the application of als and by strengthening their links local heritage in future development to decision-making in municipio and decisions. Communities watch over Pando state government, rather than the mancomunidad through a sepa- by manipulating individuals to imple- rate UAFB oversight committee that ment conservation activities according demands accountability from the lo- to project plans. RIPUI nurtured the cal governments. In February 2005, energy of regional human relations, the UAFB and ANMIs survived the and thereby avoided a common conser- fi rst complete turnover of municipio vation mistake of designing work with governments, when the OTBs again communities as though they existed in unanimously voted their confi dence in isolation from one another and larger continuing the path they had chosen, society – a mistake which undermines demonstrating their commitment to rural residents’ initiative. We were “conservation with development – our committed to the idea that this was not going to be another backroom deal 282 …if initiativesThe intertwined embraceLLivelihoodsivelih rootso rights,od…buts ofandan poverty,dconservationsecure Conservationconservationconse accessr vwealthatio cann to— canand resources alsoaargumentsr g endenvironmentalu providem upen and tenhancingsPolicy livelihoodsshaping hrealapi nthatparticipation degradationg thet benefits… poverty...hmatterse debatedebate!

made between a conservation organi- meaning to the old words – poverty, zation and a national government. To heritage, and landscape-scale conser- mobilize regional energies, we embed- vation. ded the application of the RIPUI tool in a communication strategy35 that gen- Janis B. Alcorn ([email protected]) is an independent consultant and Program Advisor at The erated and shared clear information as Garfi eld Foundation, Marion, MA, USA. Carol Carlo a means for uniting people into discus- ([email protected])() is Director of Planning sions;36 built strategic alliances among for the Department of Pando Prefectura, Cobija, Bolivia. Julio Rojas ([email protected]) is Director, CIPA, disparate actors; promoted public Universidad Amazonica del Pando, Cobija, Bolivia. David deliberation among constituencies; and Rothschild ([email protected]) is moved toward a common decision. Ac- Program Offi cer at the Goldman Environmental Foundation San Francisco, CA, USA. Alaka Wali ([email protected]) is tivities included a local art competition, Director, Center for Cultural Understanding and Change, the results of which were used to pro- The Field Museum, Chicago, IL, USA. Alejo Zarzycki ([email protected]) is Executive Director, Fundación mote awareness of the ANMI’s purpose, Yangareko, Santa Cruz, Bolivia. We thank the people of and a video documentary, which was Bolpebra and Filadelfi a municipios for inviting us to work made midstream in the process to pro- with them, and the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation and the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation for mote broad participation in the debate their fi nancial support. The opinions expressed herein do and decisions yet to be made as the not necessarily represent the views of the funding agencies process proceeded.37 or the policies of any of the institutions with which the authors are affi liated. Given existing power relations, long- term landscape-scale conservation success in Pando Notes [[RatherRather tthan]han] an-an- or elsewhere 1 Alcorn, 2005. 2 e.g., Molnar, Scherr and Khare, 2004. ootherther backroombackroom dealdeal does not so much 3 Glenze,r 2005. depend upon mmadeade bbetweenetween a ccon-on- 4 Rights-based approaches have sometimes been sservationervation organiza-organiza- whether poor short-circuited to avoid human and environmental rural residents rights issues by narrowing to focus on property ttionion andand a nationalnational rights – as for example in rights-based approaches have a commit- to marine fi sheries management and genetic re- ggovernment…overnment… RRIPUIIPUI ment to conser- source management. mmobilizedobilized locallocal herit-herit- vation as it does 5 Alcorn et al., 2003. aagege oobligations…bligations… upon on whether 6 USAID, 2004. large conserva- 7 Glenzer, 2005, Alcorn and Zarzycki, 2005 a nnewew ppathath … ggivingiving tion NGOs, local 8 A case in point would be the recent situation in Guatemala where local Mayan communities who nnewew mmeaningeaning ttoo NGOs, multilat- are sustainably managing their forests are resist- ooldld words…words… eral development ing efforts by a World Heritage foundation to cast banks, bilateral them as environmental villains and force changes in national policy to cancel their legal rights to the projects, regional governments and forests. According to the public heritage symbols, private businesses can set aside their Mayans are extinct peoples, not modern poor peasants sustainably logging the forests around own individual interests, and collabo- the ancient ruins of their ancestors. Modern Ma- rate together to follow a rights-based yans’ rights are threatened because tourism pro- approach to sustainable conservation moters fear that incorporating this modern Mayan that relies on the cross-scale strengths image would damage tourist markets in the Peten. 9 Chambers, 2005, p.6. and energy of living heritage. Rights- 10 World Bank, 1996. based initiatives are occurring in vari- 11 UNICEF, 2005. ous forms around the world, in accord 12 The indigenous population of Pando is estimated at with local policy and cultural conditions. less than 1000 people. They show governments, donors, and 13 In addition, a few, small indigenous communities NGOs a new path forward giving new opted to be recognized as campesino communities instead of taking the more diffi cult route of claim- 283 Poverty, wealth and conservation

ing territories. of the tool was christened MUF (Mapeo de Usos y 14 Terceros, 2004. Fortalezas – mapping of natural resource uses and strengths). These prior FM modifi cations of the 15 A municipio is a subunit of territory under muni- social asset mapping tool were designed for use by cipio government control, similar to a county level project teams in alliance with government agen- in USA, or a district or taluka in other countries. cies. Further discussion of social asset mapping The municipio is the local government unit that is available at http://www.fi eldmuseum.org/calu- has been strongly empowered under Bolivia’s de- ment/assetmap.html centralization policies. Municipios together form a “department” (in this case Pando), which functions 24 Alcorn et al., 2006. similarly to a province or state level government 25 Other ANMIs, declared by the national government in other countries, although Bolivia’s departments in Bolivia, have generally been nonfunctional buf- function primarily as administrative units for cen- fer zones with “paper” status. tral government and have very limited authority of 26 Carlo, 2004. their own. 27 Discussion of poverty measures is beyond the 16 The Field Museum, 1999. scope of this paper. Defi nitions of poverty often 17 Terceros, 2004. use measures related to consumption of items 18 The core institutions that have been involved in for sale, and cast poverty alleviation as increas- this effort include the University of the Amazon of ing income for purchases (e.g., World Bank 1996) Pando, the Fundación Yangareko, the municipio and devalue direct production of necessities. governments of Filadelfi a and Bolpebra, and The When linked to protected areas management, Field Museum of Chicago. A wider circle of col- the poverty alleviation approach has been popu- laborators has included SERNAP (Bolivian National larly criticized in Bolivia as being tantamount to a Protected Areas Agency), Fundación Pando, the globalization strategy to force rural people off their federation of campesinos (FSUTCP), local asso- lands so they add their numbers to the population ciations of Brazil nut producers, and other civil of consumers/buyers and serve as low paid labor society and government actors that comprise the for production of consumer goods. trinational MAP (Madre de Dios-Acre-Pando) initia- 28 This RIPUI fi nding confi rms the level of depen- tive. dence on biodiversity described in Zapata et al. 19 Alcorn et al., 2006. (2003) study of a single Filadelfi a community inside Manuripi Wildlife Reserve. 20 Land titling in Bolivia is the responsibility of the National Institute of Agrarian Reform (INRA), 29 The remainder of the communities did not partici- which functions according to the Law of National pate in land use planning (POP-COM) because they Service of Agrarian Reform. The INRA Law catego- were disputing the borders granted in their initial rizes rural properties into several categories one of titles and wanted to wait until they had resolved which is community property, which is inalienable, their title issues. indivisible, and collectively owned. Community 30 The land of communities ranges in size from sev- property is governed by an assembly of heads of eral thousand hectares to over twenty thousand household. This Assembly creates and enforces hectares. As part of the RIPUI, most communities statutes and regulations. Within a given com- took advantage of the RIPUI initiative’s offer to as- munity, individual property is recognized. Titles sist communities to carry out their POP-COM land for Tierras Comunitarias de Origen (TCO) are use mapping and planning required by the Super- awarded to indigenous territories. Three other title intendencia of Agriculture for consolidating the categories cover “individual landowners” under title. Once the POP-COM is in place, the commu- which title which is awarded to an individual or a nity has consolidated its rights to its forest and can company. expel state-sponsored logging concessions from 21 Steinberg, 2001. its territory should they attempt to activate their earlier rights. Some communities also established 22 Barraca estates (barraqueros) historically exploited “private reserves” on their lands – biodiversity labor by locking local communities into a patron- reserves which belong to them and are registered client relationship – “comunidades cautivas” - for with the state as their property, enabling them to ensuring labor on the remote barraca for Brazil nut call upon the state to defend their reserves against collecting, rubber tapping and cattle care. outsiders if it were to become necessary and 23 The Field Museum (FM) was interested in con- eventually to be eligible to apply for assistance for servation of Pando’s biodiversity because it had managing their reserves, to possibly participate in carried out several rapid biological inventories in payments for environmental services agreements, Pando in the 1990s, and wanted to secure the etc. long term future of biodiversity in Pando with 31 Chapeskie et al, 2005; Also see http://www.white- funds from the Gordon and Betty Moore Founda- featherforest.com/ tion. FM fi rst modifi ed the sociological tool “social asset mapping” to celebrate cultural diversity and 32 A mancomunidad under Bolivian law joins two or identify local organizational strengths for conser- more municipio governments into a parastatal that vation activities in the Calument area of Chicago, can receive external funding in addition to govern- Illinois, USA. Subsequently, Alcorn, Macedo and ment funding to achieve particular objectives. Wali modifi ed the tool to be more participatory 33 The motto “Conservation with development – Our for application in the buffer zone of Cordillera Decision” was chosen for the UAFB mancomuni- Azul National Park, Peru, in 2002. This version dad and ANMI appears on their logo— a form of 284 …if initiativesThe intertwined embraceLLivelihoodsivelih rootso rights,od…buts ofandan poverty,dconservationsecure Conservationconservationconse accessr vwealthatio cann to— canand resources alsoaargumentsr g endenvironmentalu providem upen and tenhancingsPolicy livelihoodsshaping hrealapi nthatparticipation degradationg thet benefits… poverty...hmatterse debatedebate!

public heritage created from private heritage. It and Chesapeake Bay Musings, Maryland Sea Grant emphasizes their understanding that sustainable Program Monograph, University of Maryland, College conservation is the priority as the basis of sustain- Park (Maryland), 2005. able development appropriate to the region and its Chapeskie, A., J., M. O’Flaherty, A. Peters and N. Quill, culture. The White feather Forest Initiative: Indigenous Wis- 34 In late 2005, UAFB negotiated with WWF to begin dom guiding a new community forestry opportunity ANMI zoning, as part of a trinational project with in the boreal forest of Canada, Proceedings of the Dutch government support. At the same time, Sharing Indigenous Wisdom – An International Dia- Fundación Yangareko, with MacArthur Foundation logue on Sustainable Development, College of the support, initiated project COSAMA with UAFB, to Menominee Nation, Menominee (Wisconsin), 2005. consolidate UAFB as an institution and jointly work http://sharingindigenouswisdom.org/ with communities and SERNAP to improve conser- Glenzer, K., Rights based approaches (RBA) to devel- vation of the Manuripi Wildlife Reserve. opment in CARE USA, Paper presented at “Parks 35 Alcorn et al., 2006. and People: Social and Legal Issues When Establish- 36 The use of satellite imagery and maps from geo- ing And Expanding Protected Areas” meeting of the graphic information system (GIS) were key for Africa Biodiversity Collaborative Group and Commu- creating shared information as a basis for discus- nity Conservation Coalition, World Wildlife Fund-US, sion and planning. Washington DC, 2005. 37 The Spanish language video is available upon Molnar, A., S., J. Scherr and A. Khare, Who Conserves request from the lead author or from Alonzo Zar- the World’s Forests? Community-Driven Strate- zycki, [email protected] gies to Protect Forests and Respect Rights, Forest Trends, Washington DC, 2004. Steinberg, P.F., Environmental Leadership in Develop- References ing Countries: Transnational Relations and Biodi- Alcorn, J. B., “Dances around the fi re: Conservation versity Policy in Costa Rica and Bolivia, MIT Press, organizations and community-based resource man- Cambridge (Massachusetts), 2004. agement”, in Brosius, J.P., C. Zerner and A. Tsing, Terceros, E., “Evaluación del Saneamiento de las (eds.), Representing Communities: Histories and Comunidades Campesinas de Pando”, Artículo Politics of Community Based Resource Management, Primero Separata No. 13. CEJIS and FSUTCP, Santa Altamira Press, Walnut Creek, CA, 2005. Cruz (Bolivia), 2001. Alcorn, J. B., C. Carlo, J. Rojas, D. Rothschild, P. The Field Museum, Rapid Biological Inventory – West- Sarmiento, A. Wali, A. Zarzycki and A. Zarzycki, ern Pando, Tahuamanu, The Field Museum, Chicago “Marcos alternativos para la conservación de la (Illinois), 1999. biodiversidad con comunidades y gobiernos munici- UNICEF, Bolivia-Situation of poverty in the country, pales: El caso de Pando, Bolivia”, in Merino L. and UNICEF, 2005. http://www.unicef.org/bolivia/en/ J. Robson (eds.), La Conservación de la Biodiversi- imagines.pobreza.htm dad y la Propiedad Colectiva, INE/UNAM (Instituto USAID, Asset-Based Approach to Poverty Reduction: a Nacional de Ecología de la Universidad Autónoma Policy Brief, United States Agency for International Nacional de México), México, 2006. Development, Washington DC, 2004. Alcorn, J. B., J.Bamba, S. Masiun, I. Natalia and A. World Bank, Bolivia: Poverty, Equity, and Income: Royo, “Keeping ecological resilience afl oat in cross- Selected Policies for Expanding Earning Opportuni- scale turbulence: An Indigenous social movement ties for the Poor, Report No. 15272-BO, World Bank, navigates change in Indonesia”, pp: 299-327 in Washington DC, 1996. Folkes, C., F. Berkes & J. Colding (eds.), Navigat- ing Nature’s Dynamics, Cambridge University Press, Zapata, D.M.O., L.A. González, J.F. Larrea, B. Cambridge (UK), 2003. González, E. Silva, A. Arellanos, S. Meo y W. de Jong, Luz de América: Comunidad y Biodiversidad Alcorn, J.B., and A. Zarzycki. Collective grassroots Amazónica,CIFOR, Bogor (Indonesia), 2003. institutions arising in lowland Bolivia: ‘Conservation with development is our decision’- cases in Chuqui- saca and Pando. Paper presented at ¨Grassroots Innovations in the Worlds Forests¨ panel at the American Anthropological Association Annual Meet- ing, Washington DC 2005. Carlo, C., Diagnóstico Municipal Bolpebra, Resumen de los Resultados del Relevamiento de Información sobre Potencialidades y Usos Integrales (RIPUI), Mancomunidad de la Unión Amazónica Filadelfi a- Bolpebra, Cobija, Pando (Bolivia), 2004a. Carlo, C., Diagnóstico Municipal Filadelfi a, Resumen de los Resultados del Relevamiento de Información sobre Potencialidades y Usos Integrales (RIPUI), Mancomunidad de la Unión Amazónica Filadelfi a- Bolpebra, Cobija, Pando (Bolivia), 2004b. Chambers, E., Heritage Matters: Culture, History, 285 Poverty, wealth and conservation

SSecuringecuring indigenousindigenous rightsrights andand biodiversitybiodiversity cconservationonservation throughthrough partnershipspartnerships inin SibuyanSibuyan IIsland,sland, Romblon,Romblon, PhilippinesPhilippines EEdgardodgardo TongsonTongson andand ThomasThomas McShaneMcShane

Abstract. In the Philippines many large intact forests designated as protected areas coincide with the ancestral claims of indigenous peoples. There, security of tenure is essential to issues of conservation, development and fulﬁ lling indigenous peoples’ rights. This paper highlights the experience of non-government organizations that collaborated with government agencies and assisted the indigenous group Sibuyan Magyan Tagabukid of Sibuyan Island to secure tenure to their ancestral domain. We discuss the challenges we encountered and the emerging opportunities for co-management in the overlap areas between ancestral domain and protected areas. The paper highlights the importance of inter-organizational cooperation as demonstrated by the various actors– i.e., government, indigenous groups, non-government organizations and academia – which resulted in synergies instrumental in fulﬁ lling the provisions of a progressive law. Securing land tenure lays the foundation where local support for biodiversity conservation can be institutionalized and sustained.

Philippine’s Forestry Policy which ended up also engendering inef- The forest cover of the Philippines de- fectual governance, corruption and clined from 70 percent of the country’s illegal logging, contributing to the twin total land area of 30 million hectares in problems of forest degradation and 3 1900 to about 18.3 percent in 1999,1 upland poverty. With the dismantling of timber con- which represent just over 5 million ha IIndigenousndigenous peoplespeoples of residual and old-growth natural for- cessions, forests. Continuing upland migration, due est communities ((aboutabout 1122 mmillions)illions) to scarce economic opportunities in the asserted their aarere ffoundound iinn vvariousarious lowlands and high natural population rights to access fforest,orest, lowlandlowland forest resources growth rates, exacerbate forest denu- aandnd ccoastaloastal areasareas ofof dation and degradation. The lack of op- and manage the erational and effective on-site manage- same under a tthehe Philippines,Philippines, divid-divid- ment in many forest areas led to open Community-based eedd iintonto 110110 self-self- access to the forest commons. Only Forest Manage- ddefinedefined eethno-thno- ment (CBFM) 19 percent of the country’s 15.5 mil- llinguisticinguistic groupsgroups lion classiﬁ ed forest lands are covered framework. The by some kind of on-site management new forestry policy responded to clam- system.2 The intensity of degradation ors by civil society groups for greater suggests that de facto management participation, equity, empowerment, systems are inadequate to stem forest ecological sustainability, cultural integ- loss, especially in open access areas. rity and gender equity in the management of the forest resources. The state Social forestry evolved out of the fail- conferred tenure to forest communities ure of state forest governance. Pre- through 25-year Community-Based vious policies promoted centralized Forestry Management Agreements. management and logging concessions, 286 …if initiativesThe intertwined embraceLLivelihoodsivelih rootso rights,od…buts ofandan poverty,dconservationsecure Conservationconservationconse accessr vwealthatio cann to— canand resources alsoaargumentsr g endenvironmentalu providem upen and tenhancingsPolicy livelihoodsshaping hrealapi nthatparticipation degradationg thet benefits… poverty...hmatterse debatedebate!

Indigenous Peoples The National Integrated Protected Indigenous peoples, whose number has Areas System been reported in various ofﬁ cial docu- In 1992, the Republic Act 7586 sought ments as 12 million or about 18% of the establishment and management of the total population in the Philippines, the National Integrated Protected Areas are found in various forest, lowland and System (NIPAS). coastal areas, and are divided into 110 The NIPAS law TThehe IIPRAPRA eestablishesstablishes self-deﬁ ned ethno-linguistic groups.4 creates a network pproceduresrocedures forfor recog-recog- These are among the poorest and most of protected areas nnitionition ofof individualindividual disadvantaged social groups in the in the country. country. The indigenous peoples have Multi-stakeholder aandnd ccommunalommunal oown-wn- long suffered from economic marginali- structures such eershiprship ofof “ancestral“ancestral zation, socio-cultural displacement, and as Protected Area ddomains”omains” andand “ances-“ances- political disenfranchisement. A variety Management ttralral lands”.lands”. of factors are called to explain this, in- Boards provide cluding the lack of a vision about devel- roles for civil society organizations and opment for and by indigenous peoples; indigenous groups. The law recognizes the absence of mechanisms on proce- the claims and rights of indigenous dures of consultation with the peoples communities over ancestral areas concerned; pressure on ancestral lands found within protected areas and pro- by economic and political development; motes partnership in formulating and and lack of consensus among indig- implementing plans and policies. Ten- enous peoples themselves about their ured migrants living within protected development priorities, strategies and areas are provided usufruct rights for alliances.5 sustainable livelihoods.

Today, the ancestral land claims cover The Indigenous Peoples Rights some 2.5 million hectares or 8% of the Act total land area in the Philippines, the The Indigenous Peoples Rights Act majority of which overlap with intact (Republic Act 8371)6 was enacted to forests widely recognized for their bio- recognize, promote and protect the diversity. Not surprisingly, most pro- rights of the indigenous peoples includ- tected areas prioritized for protection ing their right to ancestral domain and overlap with ancestral claims. lands, their right to self-governance and empowerment, their social justice and human rights and their right to cultural integrity. The IPRA establishes procedures for recognition of individual and communal ownership of “ancestral domains” and “ancestral lands”. The IPRA law (Sec 3 h.) defi nes indigenous peoples as: “a group of people or homogenous societies identifi ed by self-ascription and ascription by others, who have continuously lived as organized Picture 1. Members of the indigenous group community on communally bounded Sibuyan Mangyan Tagabukid. and defi ned territory, and who have (Courtesy Edgardo Tongson) 287 Poverty, wealth and conservation

under claim of ownership since time headed by a Chairman with six Com- immemorial, occupied, possessed missioners. The forerunner of the NCIP and utilized such territories, sharing dates as far back as the American pe- common bonds of language, cus- riod in the early 1900s. The pre-NCIP toms, traditions and other distinctive organizations were “integrationists” in cultural traits, or who have, through their approaches, whose main goal was resistance to political, social and to assimilate these groups into main- cultural inroads of colonization, non- stream society and alleviate their pov- indigenous religions and cultures, erty conditions. The offi ce dispensed became historically differentiated medicines, scholarships, relief goods from the majority of Filipinos.” and other material benefi ts to tribal members. Client groups were viewed In other words, the IPRA grants indig- as passive benefi ciaries of assistance. enous people the ownership and pos- session of their ancestral lands and Role of NGOs domains, and defi nes their extent. NGOs, on the other hand, serve as counterweight to traditional develop- National Commission on ment thinking Indigenous Peoples of their govern- AAss humanhuman rrightsights ad-ad- To carryout the IPRA Act, the National ments. From the vvocates,ocates, mostmost NGOsNGOs Commission on Indigenous Peoples standpoint of de- vviewiew ““development”development” (NCIP) was created (Sec 59, IPRA) velopment NGOs, merging the Offi ce of Northern Cultural the indigenous ffromrom aann aalternativelternative Communities and Offi ce of Southern peoples are not vviewiew ooff recognizing,recognizing, Cultural Communities: merely passive aattainingttaining andand ful-ful- “To carry out the policies herein benefi ciaries of ffillingilling thethe rightsrights ofof development but set forth, there shall be created iindigenousndigenous peoplepeople the National Commission on Indig- means and ends enous Peoples (NCIP), which shall of the development process. As human be the primary government agency rights advocates, most NGOs view “de- responsible for the formulation and velopment” from an alternative view of implementation of policies, plans and recognizing, attaining and fulfi lling the programs to promote and protect rights of indigenous people. the rights and well-being of the indigenous people and the recognition The role of NGOs in development of their ancestral domains as well as work was expanded during the Aquino their rights thereto”. presidency in 1986. The restoration of democratic space resulted in the rise The NCIP is tasked to process ances- of environmental NGOs responding to tral land claims into private collective forest degradation and poverty. The titles called Certifi cate of Ancestral strength of NGOs lies in working with Domain Title (CADT). In processing communities and ensuring that govern- these claims, the NCIP strictly applies ment programs conform to local condi- the requirements under IPRA including tions. NGOs facilitate the delivery of geodetic surveys, gathering of anthro- services for rural development; devel- pological records, proofs and testi- oping communities as stakeholders, monies and facilitation of community rather than mere recipients, initiating meetings to resolve confl icts. The NCIP new approaches for project develop- is staffed with 1,200 personnel and is ment at the community level and di- 288 …if initiativesThe intertwined embraceLLivelihoodsivelih rootso rights,od…buts ofandan poverty,dconservationsecure Conservationconservationconse accessr vwealthatio cann to— canand resources alsoaargumentsr g endenvironmentalu providem upen and tenhancingsPolicy livelihoodsshaping hrealapi nthatparticipation degradationg thet benefits… poverty...hmatterse debatedebate!

rectly contributing to capacity building.7 NGOs working for indigenous rights promote an alternative development paradigm, based on indigenous territorial autonomy, self-determination and “self-development” or “ethno-development”. For indigenous people, the fi rst condition for effective ethno-development is security of land tenure and local jurisdiction over natural resources within their territory. One of the most signifi cant developments in the past thirty years has been pro-active initiatives undertaken by indigenous peoples and supportive NGOs to map and demarcate their own lands.8 In the Picture 2. Upstream the Cantingas river, voted nd Philippines, these independent surveys, the 2 cleanest river in the Philippines. (Courtesy Edgardo Tongson) verifi ed by government surveyors, are accepted as a basis for land claims and Site description the registration of land titles. Situated 350 kilometers south of Ma- nila, Sibuyan is the second largest of In 1996, the WWF adopted a statement among the seven islands that comprise of Principles on Indigenous Peoples and Romblon Province in the Philippines and Conservation, is known as one of the few remaining FForor iindigenousndigenous people,people, which endorses centers of biodiversity and endemism tthehe firstfirst conditioncondition forfor the UN draft Dec- in the country. It has a land area of laration on the approximately 45,600 hectares, about eeffectiveffective ethno-devel-ethno-devel- Rights of Indige- seventy percent of which is covered oopmentpment isis securitysecurity ofof nous Peoples. The with forest. At the heart of Sibuyan llandand tenuretenure aandnd llocalocal statement accepts Island is the Mt Guiting-Guiting Natu- jjurisdictionurisdiction overover nat-nat- that construc- ral Park (MGGNP)— the only remaining tive engagement mountain in the Philippines with rela- uuralral rresourcesesources wwithinithin with indigenous tively intact habitats along its entire ttheirheir territory.territory. people must start elevation gradient. Mt. Guiting-Guit- with a recogni- ing’s plant and mammal biodiversity is tion of their rights, upholds the rights amongst the richest in the world.9 In of indigenous peoples to own, manage, the midst of this natural lushness, how- and control their lands and territories ever, live some 50,000 people, more and to benefi t from the application of than half of whom live well below the their knowledge. The premises con- government-defi ned poverty level. In tained in the WWF international state- terms of the Human Development In- ment of Principles helped develop the dex, Romblon province which includes partnership framework entered into by Sibuyan Island is ranked 64th out of the WWF-Philippines with the indigenous 77 provinces in the Philippines. The groups of Sibuyan Island and assisted majority of the Sibuyan population by indigenous advocate NGOs to secure engages in subsistence farming and tenure rights over their ancestral lands fi shing. Decades of unregulated and in Sibuyan Island. unsustainable use have taken a toll on the island’s natural resource base. 289 Poverty, wealth and conservation

Sibuyan Mangyan Tagabukid (pre-harvest ritual) denoting respect Residing in and around the interiors to the spirits that play an important and upland areas of the Mount Guit- role in Sibuyan Mangyan culture. Sev- ing-Guiting Natural Park (MGGNP) are eral generations of kin identifi ed to the Sibuyan Mangyan Tagabukid (SMT), have previously inhabited the area who managed to retain a culture and and improvements introduced by their tradition distinct from the lowland ancestors attest to the longevity of the Sibuyan culture. While there are no indigenous peoples in the area. The existing pre-historic data on Sibuyan ancestral domain of the SMT occupies and Mangyan Tagabukid, early Spanish an area of 7,900 hectares and strad- accounts in the 1700s reported a con- dles the mountain ranges of Sibuyan siderable population of mountain dwell- and the Mt. Guiting-Guiting Natural ers along the mountain ranges of the Park. Sibuyan Island to which present indigenous populations trace their ancestral Park establishment and related origins.10 ICDP In 1996, through the efforts of local The SMT are primarily engaged in government executives and a handful subsistence agriculture – making their of NGOs, Mt Guiting-Guiting Natural living through slash and burn farming Park was proclaimed under the National (a land preparation method used in Integrated Protected Areas System Act. tropical countries that involves clearing The Park covers some 16,000 hectares land by burning the vegetation before of strict protected area and an addi- the rain season begins), charcoal mak- tional 10,000 hectares of buffer zone. ing, gathering of minor forest prod- It straddles the island’s three munici- ucts such as rattans, resins, vines and palities of Magdiwang, San Fernando honey, and fi shing for freshwater fi sh and Cajidiocan. In the same year, Mt and shrimps in the numerous water Guiting-Guiting Natural Park was in- channels and tributaries on the moun- cluded in the European Union-funded tain.11 They practice rituals such as National Integrated Protected Areas paminhi (pre-planting ritual) and tugna Programme (NIPAP), a fi ve-year programme that aimed to establish protected areas in eight parks around the country. In 1997, with funding support from the Netherlands Government, WWF-Philippines implemented an integrated conservation and development project (ICDP) on the island to comple- ment park establishment and the protection efforts of the NIPAP project.

The overall goal of the ICDP was to protect the biodiversity of Mt. Guit- ing-Guiting Natural Park through the development of sustainable livelihoods. A major objective within this goal was Picture 3. Busay falls in the Panangcalan wa- to improve the tenure security of the tershed provides drinking water to the town of indigenous Sibuyan Mangyan Tagabukid San Fernando. (Courtesy Edgardo Tongson) poeple. Activities included strengthen- 290 …if initiativesThe intertwined embraceLLivelihoodsivelih rootso rights,od…buts ofandan poverty,dconservationsecure Conservationconservationconse accessr vwealthatio cann to— canand resources alsoaargumentsr g endenvironmentalu providem upen and tenhancingsPolicy livelihoodsshaping hrealapi nthatparticipation degradationg thet benefits… poverty...hmatterse debatedebate!

ing their social organization, culture Ancestral Domain Title (CADT) applica- and customary laws as well as assisting tion. them to become responsible stakeholders in the management of environ- Delineation and demarcation of mentally sensitive areas in which they ancestral domain live. The key premise of the project’s In 1998, WWF facilitated the deline- approach was that land tenure security ation of the ancestral domain as pre- coupled with development and natural scribed under the IPRA. WWF entered resource management interventions into partnerships with support NGOs for that are identifi ed, designed and im- indigenous peoples. PANLIPI—an NGO plemented by the indigenous commu- with legal orientation and skills— had nity-based organization, will ensure the responsibility of providing legal sustainability and responsible manage- resources and assistance to the SMT in ment of resources. WWF-Philippines, the delineation of their ancestral land in partnership with indigenous peoples and liaison work. AnthroWatch— an advocate NGOs such as Anthropological NGO comprised of anthropologists— Watch (AnthroWatch), Legal Assistance was tasked to do TThehe iindigenousndigenous mem-mem- Center for Indigenous Filipinos (PAN- the census of the LIPI) and the Philippine Association for indigenous peo- bbersers ppreparedrepared iindica-ndica- Intercultural Development (PAFID), ple, conduct ge- ttiveive mapsmaps perper clustercluster implemented a project to assist indig- nealogy research, enous communities affected by the es- vvillageillage thatthat werewere thenthen map indigenous aassembledssembled aandnd ttrans-rans- tablishment of the Mt. Guiting-Guiting territories and as- Natural Park in Sibuyan Island in 1996. sist in establish- pposedosed intointo techni-techni- ing and collecting ccalal maps.maps. TheThe mapsmaps Field activities proofs to substan- ddepictedepicted thethe extentextent ofof Field interventions consisted of anthro- tiate the petition ttheirheir domaindomain areasareas pological research and documentation, for delineation of participatory mapping and planning, ancestral domains of the SMT. PAFID capacity building, legal assistance, provided training in the use of Global farm support and joint ventures. The Positioning System (GPS) and in the procedures and steps in identifying preparation of 3-D maps and facilitated and delineating the ancestral domain the delineation activities. To hasten the and applying for a community title are processing of the ancestral claim, WWF, outlined in 13 steps under the IPRA AnthroWatch and PANLIPI entered into law, namely: 1) fi ling for petition for a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) delineation, 2) delineation proper, 3) with the NCIP. The MOA authorized the submission of proofs, 4) inspection by NGOs to delineate the ancestral lands NCIP representative, 5) evaluation and of the SMT for and in behalf of the appreciation of proofs, 6) survey and NCIP. For the NCIP, the collaboration preparation of survey plans, 7) identi- created an opportunity to pilot test GO- fi cation of boundary confl icts, 8) sub- NGO partnerships in processing ances- mission of NCIP investigation report, tral land claims. 9) map validation, 10) public notifi cation, 11) endorsement of claim to NCIP The members of the indigenous com- Ancestral Domains Offi ce, 12) review munity who participated in the deline- and endorsement by Ancestral Domains ation activity were identifi ed and au- Offi ce to NCIP board; and 13) approval thenticated. A population census was by NCIP board of the Certifi cate of conducted using genealogical mapping 291 Poverty, wealth and conservation

which put the number of legitimate were re-checked and appropriate cor- claimants at 315 households or 1,687 rections made. individuals. The population census was followed by the gathering of proofs and The delineation of the ancestral claim other documents to support the claim. started in September 1998. The indig- Various testimonials, written/historical enous peoples played an important role accounts of SMT customs and tradi- in facilitating the formation of delinea- tions, anthropological data and histori- tion teams that were tasked to properly cal accounts proving the existence of manage the delineation of the ances- the SMT in Sibuyan Island, pictures and tral domain. The teams came up with descriptive histories of traditional land- a strategy and detailed plans for the marks, write-up of names and places actual survey of the ancestral domain. derived from the native dialect of the Members of the communities, as well community, genealogy of elders, pho- as government agencies, were invited tocopies of Spanish and other histori- to participate in the survey. Two teams cal documents taken from the National were formed for the ﬁ eld delineation Archives and its English translation and demarcation activity. The teams were gathered. These proofs were later marked trees and used natural features submitted to NCIP Provincial Ofﬁ ce for such as stones and streams to demar- validation. cate the domain.12

The indigenous members prepared The council of elders convened to indicative maps per cluster village that identify the landmarks indicating the were then assembled and transposed boundaries of their ancestral domains into technical maps. The maps de- on a topographic 3-dimensional map. picted the extent of their domain areas. Sacred sites, burial areas, hunt- WWF and its partner NGOs assisted the ing, gathering, collecting and ﬁ shing SMTs in preparing the survey plans, grounds, swidden farms and residen- conducting the perimeter walk and tial areas were mapped. The process preparing ﬂ at maps with the necessary of 3-D mapping involved community technical descriptions. The resulting gatherings and trainings that provided maps were consequently validated with community members an opportunity the indigenous communities. Bounda- to chronicle their culture, economy, ries, markings and the names of places history and struggle as a distinct community. The map used local dialect and traditional place names which demonstrated the communities’ knowledge and predominant role as steward of the area.

The 3-D map was assembled and dis- played in their tribal hall for use by the members. A community resolution attesting to the veracity of delineation and the content of the map of the ancestral domain was likewise drafted. The ancestral domain maps were published in the provincial newspaper. Picture 4. Foothills leading to the ancestral domain. (Courtesy Edgardo Tongson) These maps were posted in prominent 292 …if initiativesThe intertwined embraceLLivelihoodsivelih rootso rights,od…buts ofandan poverty,dconservationsecure Conservationconservationconse accessr vwealthatio cann to— canand resources alsoaargumentsr g endenvironmentalu providem upen and tenhancingsPolicy livelihoodsshaping hrealapi nthatparticipation degradationg thet benefits… poverty...hmatterse debatedebate!

places within the locality such as mu- Under the ADSDPP, the indigenous peo- nicipal halls, barangay halls, and indig- ples agreed to ban logging (except for enous community centers. The proofs subsistence use), the cutting of trees together with the maps with the tech- within 25 meters from river banks and nical descriptions and notices of pub- streams, and the use of poison and/ lications were submitted to the NCIP or explosives in catching freshwater Provincial Offi ce for validation. In vali- wildlife— including but not limited to dating the claim, the NCIP Provincial shrimps, eels and fi sh. Offi ce conducted an inspection with the SMT, adjoining communities and other A community coordinator carried out affected entities to verify the land- organizational and institution-build- marks of the ancestral domain and the ing activities to revive non-functional physical proofs supporting the claim. tribal councils and federate them into a CADT-wide organization that would After validation, the NCIP Provincial Of- implement the ADSDPP. WWF and PAN- fi ce endorsed the LIPI organized paralegal training activi- TThehe ccouncilouncil ofof elderselders Ancestral Domain ties and orientation seminars on exist- cconvenedonvened ttoo identifyidentify Claim to the NCIP ing laws. The project sponsored study Regional Offi ce tours, cross visits and made it possible tthehe boundariesboundaries ofof for verifi cation. for SMT leaders to participate in meet- ttheirheir ancestralancestral After further re- ings, conferences and dialogues on in- ddomainsomains [which[which werewere view of the proofs digenous issues. SMT cultural practices and evidence, the were documented and customary laws llater]ater] publishedpublished inin claim was fi nally codifi ed. The project initiated small- tthehe provincialprovincial news-news- endorsed to the scale plantations (i.e. abaca, coffee, ppaperaper … aandnd ppostedosted Ancestral Domain tree seedlings) through joint venture iinn municipalmunicipal halls,halls, Offi ce (ADO) of arrangements with some of the mem- the NCIP. After bers. The SMT presented their plans bbarangayarangay hallshalls andand establishing and and concerns during consultation meet- iindigenousndigenous acknowledging ings with local government offi cials. ccommunityommunity centerscenters the veracity of the claim, the ADO endorsed the application to the NCIP Board for its favorable action.

Preparing a management plan The results of the delineation and research activities were fed into village workshops that led to the formulation of a comprehensive management plan, also known as the Ancestral Domain Sustainable Development and Protec- tion Plan (ADSDPP). The preparation of the ADSDPP was formulated through a series of community consultations at local community clusters and an island- Picture 5. Proposed weir site for a future 1 MW wide workshop. After its formulation, mini-hydroelectric project. the ADSDPP was presented and ex- (Courtesy Edgardo Tongson) plained in a community assembly. 293 Poverty, wealth and conservation

Results board and the indigenous community Socio-economic monitoring of sampled over jurisdiction in the protected area indigenous members show positive im- overlap, WWF facilitated close collabo- provements in the social, economic and ration between the indigenous people political conditions of the indigenous and the park rangers to combat illegal community. Results from focus-group logging and to monitor biodiversity discussions show perceived reductions resources. Both parties have planned in interpersonal confl icts, gambling, and executed joint operations to ap- wife-beating and alcohol drinking. Male prehend illegal loggers – a turnaround members are now more involved in from their previous engagement which planting root crops, i.e. gabi, camote. can be described as adversarial. bondo, and other productive ventures such as abaca (Manila hemp fi ber) Confl icts between the indigenous peo- farming supported by the project. The ple and the park authorities had their female members participated in en- beginnings in 1996 where initial ef- forcement actions and proved effective forts in park establishment led to the in dissuading mostly male poachers loss of access by indigenous people to from entering their territories. non-timber forest resources. The overlapping area consisting of old-growth In 2001, the NCIP approved the ap- forests had been the traditional source plication for a Certifi cate of Ancestral for non-timber forest products— rat- Domain Title covering some 7,905 hec- tan, honey, almaciga resins— for the tares that would indigenous community. The restric- ……newnew ffoundound rrightsights benefi t some 335 tions resulted in denial of their rights hhaveave encouragedencouraged thethe indigenous house- and created hostilities toward the park SSibuyanibuyan MangyanMangyan holds. With the authorities. Fortunately, the premises behind the recognition of ancestral TTagabukidagabukid ttoo bbecomeecome awarding of their ancestral domain, lands under both the NIPAS and IPRA mmoreore vvigilantigilant overover the indigenous laws are similar if not identical. Both ttheirheir domaindomain andand people of Sibuyan plans prepared by the park and the ttoo regulateregulate accessaccess emerged into a indigenous community highlight the importance of protecting the forests bbyy ooutsiders.utsiders. IllegalIllegal very powerful, position being found in the overlap area. However, lloggingogging inin thethe forestforest able to confront the difference lies in the SMT’s desire ooverlapverlap hashas beenbeen and negotiate to retain the rights of the indigenous ssignificantlyignificantly reducedreduced with other tra- people to access non-timber forest ditional power products which have been their tra- aass a result…result… wielders, e.g. ditional source of livelihoods. These loggers, parks, politicians, mining, convergences provided an opportunity hydroelectric power company and other for the indigenous people and the park interests. authority to develop a collaborative These new found rights have encour- or co-management framework where aged the Sibuyan Mangyan Tagabukid complementation instead of confl icts to become more vigilant over their could prevail. domain and to regulate access by outsiders. Illegal logging in the forest Discussion overlap has been signifi cantly reduced The IPRA law is considered a revolu- as a result. Despite institutional con- tionary law as it goes against existing fl icts between the park management power structures. The process involves 294 …if initiativesThe intertwined embraceLLivelihoodsivelih rootso rights,od…buts ofandan poverty,dconservationsecure Conservationconservationconse accessr vwealthatio cann to— canand resources alsoaargumentsr g endenvironmentalu providem upen and tenhancingsPolicy livelihoodsshaping hrealapi nthatparticipation degradationg thet benefits… poverty...hmatterse debatedebate!

the awarding of ancestral domain titles The institutional fi t between NCIP and to bona fi de indigenous communities; IPRA are still far from desirable. Under developing their capabilities and em- their new IPRA mandate, the NCIP bu- powering them to manage their ecosys- reaucracy has to deal with its prevailing tems and resources for self-sustenance mindset in order to shift from “integra- and self-governance, preserving their tionist” approaches to empowerment indigenous knowledge systems and tra- as the ends of development. Notwith- ditions, and protecting their rights and standing the mindset change, funding their culture. constraints hampered NCIP capacities to implement the law. The NCIP tar- Already, there have been violent inci- gets 56 more CADTs covering some 1.7 dents and deaths among indigenous million hectares for which it says it can communities who have crossed power- provide some funding and can imple- ful interests. The law seeks to tilt the ment or complete the titling process. power structures traditionally biased For 2004, the budget allocation of the toward mining, hydro-electric power, NCIP amounts to PhP 28 million. At a agro-industrial and environmental in- surveying cost of PhP 1,000 per hec- terests. Fulfi lling the provisions of the tare, the NCIP can only survey 28,000 IPRA would mean observing the oper- hectares or 1.6% of their target. Clear- ating principles ly, the resources of the NCIP are not ……thethe IIPRAPRA gguar-uar- of participation, enough to meet their targets. aanteednteed tthehe rrightight ofof equity and em- iindigenousndigenous peoplepeople toto powerment. Sev- Realizing the fruits from this initial col- ggiveive theirtheir freefree andand eral provisions in laboration in Sibuyan Island, the NCIP the IPRA implicitly now considers the Sibuyan experience ppriorrior informedinformed con-con- embody these as a template to guide processing of ssentent ttoo anyany develop-develop- principles. First, future land claims and engendered mmentent pprojectroject iinitiatednitiated the act promotes working relationships with civil society self-delineation, organizations and other “non-formal” bbyy ooutsidersutsiders withinwithin i.e. delineation of sectors.13 The IPRA provides the plat- ttheirheir ancestralancestral landland ancestral bounda- form upon which both government and ries by the indigenous people without NGOs can share the mandate and pool outside interference. Here, the domain their resources to implement the law. boundaries extended to the foraging In its seven years of existence, the areas, burial grounds, sacred places NCIP has granted 24 ancestral domain and swidden farms. This new defi nition titles representing 543,000 hectares, of ancestral territory covered larger of which titling for 106,000 hectares or areas unlike older tenure instruments one-fi fth of this area was supported by which only covered their houses and NGOs.14 farms. And, second, the IPRA guar- anteed the right of indigenous people Conclusion to give their free and prior informed The Sibuyan experience shows that consent to any development project partnerships between government and initiated by outsiders within their an- non-government organizations (and cestral land. Parks, mining interests, among NGOs) based on mutual coop- researchers, hydropower companies eration, respect and shared aspirations and bio-prospectors have to obtain can indeed achieve objectives beyond consent before they can operate within the means and capacities of any single the domain. organization.15 The support shown by 295 Poverty, wealth and conservation

the NGO, academia, government and 2 Guiang, 2000. international donors is cause to cele- 3 Porter & Ganapin, 1988; Repetto & Gillis; 1988, Kummer, 1992. brate, as it represents the social capital 4 NCIP, 2004. that is a vital resource to ensure the 5 World Bank, 1998. effective operationalization of the IPRA 6 IPRA, 1997. 16 law. 7 World Bank, 1998. 8 Colchester et al., 2001. To conservationists and development 9 Heaney and Regalado, 1998; Goodman and Ingle, planners worldwide, it has been postu- 1997; DENR, 1997. lated that the conservation of biologi- 10 Padilla, 2002; San Beda, 1925. cal diversity in the developing world 11 Tongson & Dino, 2004. will not succeed in the long term un- 12 De Guzman & Dinopol, 2002. less local people 13 Pasag, personal communication...... rrecognizing,ecognizing, perceive those 14 Padilla, personal communication. 15 cf. Barrett et al., 2001; McShane, 2003; McShane ffulfillingulfilling andand pro-pro- efforts as benefi - and Wells, 2004. ttectingecting thethe tradition-tradition- cial to their eco- 16 Dee, 2002. nomic and cul- aall rightsrights ofof indige-indige- tural well-being. References nnousous ppeopleseoples overover theirtheir By securing their Barrett, C.S., K. Brandon, C. Gibson, and H. Gjertsen, rresourcesesources aandnd uunlock-nlock- tenure rights, the “Conserving tropical biodiversity amid weak institu- foundation has tions”, Bioscience, 51:497-502, 2001. iingng theirtheir capacitiescapacities toto Colchester, M., F., MacKay, T., Griffi ths and Nelson J., been laid for the A Survey of Indigenous Land Tenure, Food and Ag- mmanageanage tthem…hem… long-term man- riculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), agement of the forest resources and Rome, 2001. its biodiversity. The example presented De Guzman, V. and D. Dinopol, “Partnerships for Development in Mt. Guiting-Guiting: Delineation in this paper highlights many of the of Ancestral Domains and Resources Management issues and challenges that link indig- Planning by the Mangyan Tagabukid of Sibuyan”, enous peoples and protected areas. By Ateneo Law Journal, 47 (3): 659-693, 2002. Dee, H., “Confronting the Challenge of Tomorrow”, recognizing, fulfi lling and protecting the Ateneo Law Journal. 47 (3): 835-837, 2002. traditional rights of indigenous peoples DENR (Department of Environment and Natural over their resources and unlocking their resources), Philippine Biodiversity: An Assessment capacities to manage them, indigenous and Plan of Action, Bookmark, Makati City (Philippi- nes), 1997. peoples can indeed become powerful ESSC (Environmental Science for Social Change), The allies in the fi ght to protect biodiversity. Decline of Philippine Forests, ESSC, Quezon City (Philippines), 1999. Edgardo Tongson ([email protected]) is Vice-Presi- dent for Programmes, World Wide Fund for Nature – Philip- Goodman, S., M. and N.R. Ingle, “Sibuyan Island in pines. He is a member of CEESP’s Theme on Governance, the Philippines – Threatened and in Need of Conser- Equity and Rights. Thomas McShane (tmcshane@wwfi nt. vation”, Oryx, 27 (3): 174-180, 1993. org) is Senior Conservation Advisor, WWF-International, Guiang E., Effi cacy of Removing Natural Forest from Gland, Switzerland. The authors thank the Royal Nether- Timber Protection as a Strategy for Conserving For- lands Government’s Directorate General for International ests in the Philippines, FAO, Bangkok, 2000. Cooperation (DGIS) for support; WWF International and Heaney, L.R. and J.C. Regalado Jr., Vanishing Treas- WWF Philippines, who have kept the project on a sound ures of the Philippine Rain Forest, Illinois: The Field administrative and fi nancial track. Special thanks also to Museum of Chicago, Chicago (Illinois),1998. their partners - Anthrowatch and Panlipi - for sharing their IPRA (Indigenous Peoples Rights Act), Implement- technical expertise; to the National Commission on Indig- ing rules and regulations. Administrative Order enous Peoples and the Local Governments of Cajidiocan No. 1 Manila: National Commission on Indigenous and San Fernando, for their political support, and to the Peoples, Republic of the Philippines, Quezon City Sibuyan Mangyan Tagabukid people for being an inspiration (Philippines),1997. to all indigenous peoples in the Philippines. Kummer, D., Deforestation in the Post War Philippines, Notes Ateneo de Manila University Press, Manila, 1992. 1 Environmental Science for Social Change (ESSC), McShane, T.,O., “The devil in the detail of biodiversity 1999. conservation”, Conservation Biology,17:1-3, 2003. 296 …if initiativesThe intertwined embraceLLivelihoodsivelih rootso rights,od…buts ofandan poverty,dconservationsecure Conservationconservationconse accessr vwealthatio cann to— canand resources alsoaargumentsr g endenvironmentalu providem upen and tenhancingsPolicy livelihoodsshaping hrealapi nthatparticipation degradationg thet benefits… poverty...hmatterse debatedebate!

McShane, T.,O. and M.P. Wells (eds.), Getting Biodi- Washington, D.C., 1988. versity Projects to Work: Towards More Effective Repetto, R. and M. Gillis, Public Policies and Misuse of Conservation and Development, Columbia University Forest Resources, Cambridge University Press, Cam- Press, New York (USA), 2004. bridge (UK), 1988. NCIP (National Commission on Indigenous Peoples), San Beda, Order of Saint Agustin Recollects, synopsis: URL address: http://www.ncip.gov.ph/mandate/ Historica dela Provincia de S. Nicolas de Tolentino ipra.htm, 2004. de las Islas Filipinas (1700). pp 502-503, 1925. NIPAS (National Integrated Protected Areas Program), Tongson, E. and M. Dino, Indigenous Peoples and Implementing rules and regulations, Administra- Protected Areas: The Case of Sibuyan Mangyan tive Order No. 25, Department of Environment and Tagabuki, pp:181-207 in McShane T.O. and M.P. Natural Resources, Quezon City, Manila, Philippines: Wells (eds.), Getting Biodiversity Projects to Work: 1992. Towards More Effective Conservation and Develop- Padilla, S., Surviving in a Changing World, WWF-Phil- ment, Columbia University Press, New York (USA), ippines Report (unpublished manuscript), 2002. 2004. Porter, D. and D. Ganapin, “Resources, Population World Bank, Philippine: Promoting Rural Equitable Ru- and the Philippines’ Future: A Case Study”, World ral Growth. http://www-wds.worldbank.org, 1998. Resources Paper No. 4. World Resources Institute,

TTigers,igers, peoplepeople andand participation—whereparticipation—where cconservationonservation andand livelihoodslivelihoods gogo handhand inin handhand AAshishshish KothariKothari andand NeemaNeema PathakPathak

ties were registered every year against “We are sharing power with the the villagers, large scale smuggling of communities, and becoming stronger sandalwood and poaching of wild ani- in the process”. These words of a for- mals was a common occurrence. As est offi cial kept ringing in our heads as one of India’s premier tiger reserves, we headed out of Periyar Tiger Reserve it had a substan- in Kerala, after a brief but eye-opening tial budget, and ““WeWe aarere ssharingharing visit. Over the four days we were there, a much larger ppowerower wwithith thethe com-com- we had seen living proof of the success staff than many that a participatory approach could less privileged mmunities,unities, aandnd bbecom-ecom- bring, and the transformation that can protected areas…. iingng strongerstronger inin thethe be achieved by a small dedicated group yet these were pprocess”rocess” of people. not adequate to stop the illegal activities. Conversely, Till about fi ve years back, Periyar was people who had lived in the area for faced with the same confl icts that decades and had a customary claim to plague most other wildlife protected ar- its resources for their livelihoods, faced eas in India. Relations between the Re- a constant battle to get access to such serve offi cials and local rural commu- resources because of wildlife and forest nities were tense, to say the least. At laws. Their alienation from the forest least a hundred cases of illegal activi- was undoubtedly partly responsible 297 Poverty, wealth and conservation

for their participation in poaching and of pepper, which was being sold at ex- wood theft. orbitant prices in the markets outside, was being cornered by middlemen. That was ﬁ ve years back. Today, for- Small landholdings and small returns est ofﬁ cials are greeted with smiles and were forcing farmers to convert most warmth in many of the villages, cases of their land to pepper with little or of poaching have dwindled to a trickle, no land left for growing food, increas- the communities seem to have much ing the dependence on the market for more secure livelihoods, and one does food. Starting with villages like Manna- not get the sense of tension that is so kudy and Paliyakkudy, the department palpable in many other protected ar- helped to pay off the debts, and elimi- eas. What explains this transformation? nate the middlemen. Villagers were And is it here to stay, or is the change then encouraged to channel some of short-lived? the increased remuneration to a Com- munity Development Fund, through the formation of Eco-development Com- mittees (EDCs). This Fund could then be used to pay off further outstanding debts, and to provide loans to poorer households to invest in seeds or other agricultural inputs. This also reduced dependence on illegal extraction of forest produce for income generation among the villagers.

To the eco-development staff it was clear, however, that income from such measures would not be adequate. ……officialsofficials offeredoffered toto Picture 1. Periyar Tiger Reserve is one of the In particular, of- ddroprop legallegal casescases filedfiled few protected areas in India where a participa- fi cials realised aagainstgainst thosethose whowho tory approach is being tried with full commit- that to off-set ment, breaking out of the mould of ‘guns and the income from aagreedgreed ttoo participateparticipate guards’ conservation. (Courtesy Ashish Kothari) “illegal” activi- iinn thethe eco-develop-eco-develop- Eco-development and ecotourism ties such as fuel mmentent aactivities.ctivities. ThisThis wood sale, poach- bbrokeroke ddownown tthehe In the late 1990s, using the opportu- ing, and so on, nity provided to them by a GEF-funded there was a need ssmugglingmuggling andand Eco-development Project, a set of of- for some viable ppoachingoaching network.network. fi cials set about on a series of unique alternatives. In steps. They held dialogues with the discussion with the villagers, the idea villages, and offered to help in solv- of using some of the revenues from ing some of their pressing problems. Periyar tourists, was hit upon. As one One of these was the severe indebted- of India’s most visited tiger reserves, ness that the villagers had got into, Periyar gets about 400,000 tourists with traders and moneylenders. This per year, and till the late 1990s all the was partly a result of poor returns from resulting income was being cornered their main agricultural crop, pepper. A by private or state tourism agencies, major part of the profi ts from the sale resorts, and shops in the nearby town 298 …if initiativesThe intertwined embraceLLivelihoodsivelih rootso rights,od…buts ofandan poverty,dconservationsecure Conservationconservationconse accessr vwealthatio cann to— canand resources alsoaargumentsr g endenvironmentalu providem upen and tenhancingsPolicy livelihoodsshaping hrealapi nthatparticipation degradationg thet benefits… poverty...hmatterse debatedebate!

of Kumili. those interested in wildlife, handled by the ex-poachers eco-development The eco-development team identifi ed committee. Also taken out are morning different groups of villagers dependent and evening walks for a small group on the Reserve’s resources: a group of people through a part of the for- dependent on extraction and sale of ests. These treks are managed by the cinnamon bark, another group engaged ex-cinnamon bark collectors and tribal in sandalwood and animal poaching, trekkers. The members of the eco-de- groups relying on the forests for graz- velopment committee take turns for ing, others dependent on forests for night patrolling of forests. The EDCs fi rewood. In addition there were daily also handle a small shop near the Tiger wage forest watchers for whom the Reserve gate, where they sell T-shirts government no longer had enough and material produced by villagers, and money to pay salaries. For a start, of- hire out binoculars. fi cials offered to drop legal cases fi led against those who agreed to participate The income generated through the in the eco-development activities. This above activities, goes into the ac- broke down the smuggling and poach- counts of the respective eco-developing network. Those who were earlier ment committees, from where each involved in illegal trade, knew the trade member of the committee receives a routes and people involved, hence their monthly salary as well as maintenance expertise proved extremely useful in and other costs. For the daily wage anti-poaching activities. forest watchers, the state government is able to provide only 12 days salary; After many deliberations with these the rest of the salary comes from the groups, user group based eco-devel- eco-development committee’s account. opment committees were established. This way the Department has been able Specifi c zones were identifi ed from to retain a few dozen staff that would where fuelwood could be collected and otherwise have had to be laid off. cattle could be grazed. A shop was established in Kumili town, where fresh Interestingly the areas where treks are chemical-free milk from these villages taken to or where the tourist activi- could be sold. ties are concentrated are also areas which are amongst those most prone to Prior to the eco-development pro- smuggling and poaching. According to gramme the tourists would mainly the Reserve offi cials, involvement of lo- come for a boat ride in the Periyar cal villagers in the protection activities Lake. Detailed community based tour- has freed some staff to move towards ism programmes were worked out, the the Tamil Nadu border, which remains a staff contacted the hotels in Kumili, and threatened and open boundary. requested them to include forest treks in the tourist itinerary. Aware of the Our discussions with the villagers negative impacts of large-scale tour- revealed that the overall income of ism, it was decided to strictly moni- the villagers after the initiation of the tor and control the number of tourists eco-development was less than from entering the PA. Also tourist activities smuggling and other illegal activities are deliberately kept to the tourism before. Yet the standard of living to- zone. The forest treks include a one day seemed better, where women felt night and two days programme for dignifi ed, men were not forever on the 299 Poverty, wealth and conservation

run from the police, and middlemen The people respond and moneylenders ceased to dominate. Three-four years into the initiative, Life, they said, was now more secure forest offi cials got a pleasant surprise and respectful. when, on 24th November 2002, a group of women from nearby villages started Another interesting body was called the patrolling the forests. They formed a Swamy Ayyap- tthehe overalloverall incomeincome “Vasant Sena” (which literally means pan Poonkavana the “Spring Army” but here signifi es ooff thethe villagersvillagers waswas Punarudharana or the army of women), with 6 women llessess thanthan before…before… bbutut EDC (the name volunteering to go on patrol every wwomenomen ffeltelt ddignified,ignified, Lord Ayyappan day, on rotation. They also began to Forest Regenera- mmenen wwereere nnotot fforeverorever maintain records of the fl ora and fauna tion Committee is they came across along with any illegal oonn thethe runrun ffromrom after a local de- activities, if any. A year later, when the tthehe police,police, andand mid-mid- ity— Ayyappan— 100-plus women of the Vasant Sena ddlemenlemen aandnd mmoney-oney- for whose worship met on 24th No- large numbers of vember 2003, ……sixsix wwomenomen vvolun-olun- llendersenders cceasedeased ttoo pilgrims come to they had kept up tteeredeered ttoo ggoo onon patrolpatrol ddominate.ominate. Life,Life, ttheyhey Sabarimala tem- the vigil every ssaid,aid, waswas moremore ssecureecure ple located within day for 365 days. eeveryvery day,day, onon rota-rota- the Tiger Reserve aandnd rrespectful…espectful… At this celebration ttionion … & beganbegan ttoo every year). of the fi rst an- mmaintainaintain recordsrecords ofof This EDC was created to handle two of niversary of this tthehe floraflora andand faunafauna the pilgrimage routes through Periyar unique initiative, to the intensely visited holy spot at they discussed ttheyhey camecame across…:across…: Sabarimala. This EDC provides alterna- how to continue ““wewe ddoo tthishis forfor ourour tive fuel source, waste management, the patrolling, cchildren…ifhildren…if thethe forestforest and other conservation-oriented facili- how they would ties to the pilgrims, who were earlier sustain them- ddoesoes notnot survivesurvive howhow rather destructive in their use of the selves, what sort wwee wwill?”ill?” forest they were walking through. of relations they wanted with the Forest Department. When asked what motivated the effort, the simple response was: “we do this for our children…if the forest does not survive how we will?” Offi cials, who were wondering if the initiative was taken to garner some funds from the government, are now convinced that it has nothing to do with the monetary or material considerations. When asked what they expected from the Forest Department the women said “only that you remain the friends that you have been”. The past history of tension and frequent harassment was probably still Picture 2. Patrolling team of the Vasant Sena (women’s forest conservation force), which fresh in their memory, and it was the sends out 5-6 women every day to monitor ac- end of this that seemed to matter more tivities in the forest. (Courtesy Ashish Kothari) than money. Nevertheless, to honour 300 …if initiativesThe intertwined embraceLLivelihoodsivelih rootso rights,od…buts ofandan poverty,dconservationsecure Conservationconservationconse accessr vwealthatio cann to— canand resources alsoaargumentsr g endenvironmentalu providem upen and tenhancingsPolicy livelihoodsshaping hrealapi nthatparticipation degradationg thet benefits… poverty...hmatterse debatedebate!

and encourage the initiative, the de- tions. As one trekker mentioned “when partment has provided a raincoat, cap, we were poaching it took us days to and backpack to each woman, for use fi nd one gaur, now that we are taking during the patrolling. the tourist around we fi nd them everywhere!” The Reserve offi cials also The quiet transformation in Periyar is assert that wildlife has signifi cantly manifest not only in the better relations benefi ted. amongst offi cials and villagers, and enhanced livelihood Can the initiative last? ““whenwhen wwee wwereere ppoach-oach- opportunities, but So what has made this transformation iingng itit tooktook usus daysdays also in the social take place, when in many other parts arena. Reported- ttoo findfind oneone gaur,gaur, nownow of India, eco-development initiatives ly, indebtedness have been either dismal failures or at tthathat wewe aarere ttakingaking to money lenders best inconsequential? It is not possible tthehe touristtourist aroundaround and heavy alco- to provide simple answers to this, and wwee ffindind tthemhem eevery-very- hol consumption perhaps there are many intangible fac- among men had wwhere!”here!” TThehe RReserveeserve tors that will never be discernible. One in the past led factor may be the generally high level oofficialsfficials alsoalso assertassert many women to of social mobilisation in Kerala com- tthathat wildlifewildlife hashas sig-sig- turn to prostitu- pared to most other states of India… nnificantlyificantly benefitedbenefited tion in the tourist and maybe also town of Kumili, the higher level of ...a.a ssetet ooff highlyhighly mo-mo- and the men to various ‘criminal’ ac- literacy. The suc- ttivated,ivated, innovative,innovative, tions. The availability of more digni- cessful recipe of fi ed opportunities in the last few years aandnd ddemocratically-emocratically- the Vasant Sena iinclinednclined forestforest offi-offi- had allowed people to move away from certainly seems such demeaning activities. to include such ccials….ials…. a team…withteam…with ingredients. But cconstantonstant discussionsdiscussions Another powerful example of how the one of the biggest aandnd ddeliberations,eliberations, initiative has helped create a stake in reasons seems to conservation, was recounted to us by have been a set rregularegular eexperimenta-xperimenta- two people from the adivasi (original of highly moti- ttion,ion, improvementimprovement settlers or Tribals) settlements. They vated, innovative, tthroughhrough feedback…feedback… spoke of how some social activists had and above all, oopen…pen… ssensitive…ensitive… come to them in the recent past, trying democratically- to incite them into encroaching into the inclined forest nnotot afraidafraid toto trytry boldbold Tiger Reserve as a legitimate adivasi offi cials. This wwaysays ofof achievingachieving claim on land. In both cases the villag- group of peo- llocalocal supportsupport … ers had refused, saying that they would ple could come continue to demand more land from together because the eco-develop- the government, but would not grab ment plan provided for an ecologist, forest land for the purpose. an economist, a sociologist and forest offi cials to form a team. This group How has this initiative affected the eventually became a small study circle ecosystem and the wildlife therein? with constant discussions and delibera- Our conversation with the members tions, regular experimentation, and of the eco-development committees improvement through feedback. They indicated that there has been substan- were open enough to try anything that tial increase in the wild animal popula- would work. They were sensitive to the 301 Poverty, wealth and conservation

people around them. In their relations tially faulty…. An equally, if not more, with the villagers, we found them more important focus should be on promot- like social activist NGO representa- ing the positive ……nono nneedeed ttoo rrelocateelocate tives than government offi cials… or relations of these rather, like what government offi cials people with the tthehe oneone villagevillage insideinside should be! They had the interests of forest, including tthehe PeriyarPeriyar Sanctu-Sanctu- wildlife conservation squarely in their their traditional aary,ry, asas itsits presencepresence isis sights, and often engaged themselves knowledge and nnotot onlyonly non-detri-non-detri- in lengthy discussions on impacts of practices of sus- people’s participation on wildlife, yet tainability. Finally, mmentalental ttoo conserva-conserva- they were not afraid to try bold ways of they expressed a ttionion objectives,objectives, butbut achieving local support and of putting clear preference aactuallyctually supportivesupportive people’s needs also as a central focus. for involving local One example stuck in our minds. Aware communities in ssinceince itit helpshelps toto checkcheck that the adivasis were dependent on the management iillegalllegal activitiesactivities byby fi sh from the Periyar Lake within the of the Reserve, ooutsiders…utsiders… reserve, but also that such fi shing may going beyond the be considered to be ‘illegal’, they con- current eco-development model of pro- tinued to permit fi shing. They simply viding biomass and livelihood needs. stated that the Tribals catch the exotic Interestingly, they felt that there was fi sh species that had entered the res- no need to relocate the one village that ervoir from an adjacent private estate. was inside the Periyar Sanctuary, as- The argument could then be made that serting that its presence was not only this activity was good for the indige- non-detrimental to conservation objec- nous species threatened by exotics (the tives, but actually supportive since it wildlife law permits activities that are helped to check illegal activities by out- for the benefi t of wildlife)! Indeed, the siders. All this fl ies in the face of con- argument is doubly valid, for not only ventional thinking on protected areas, does this help to reduce exotic popula- which has advocated a clear exclusion tions, but it also provides a continuing of local communities from any involve- stake amongst the villagers to protect ment with protected areas. the reserve.

But, we asked, is access to livelihood resources are not established as rights, are they not subject to the whims and fancies of the Reserve’s offi cials? The eco-development offi cers agreed, and said that one step towards this was the codifi cation of such access to resources within the eco-development micro-plans. The next would be to include the provision of this access in the management plan of the reserve. They also agreed that the basic premise of eco-development as promoted in the GEF project, of securing conserva- Picture 3. Community based tourism at Periyar has helped generate livelihoods for local tribal tion through reducing the ‘pressures’ people, and created a greater stake for conser- of local people on the forest, was par- vation. (Courtesy Ashish Kothari) 302 …if initiativesThe intertwined embraceLLivelihoodsivelih rootso rights,od…buts ofandan poverty,dconservationsecure Conservationconservationconse accessr vwealthatio cann to— canand resources alsoaargumentsr g endenvironmentalu providem upen and tenhancingsPolicy livelihoodsshaping hrealapi nthatparticipation degradationg thet benefits… poverty...hmatterse debatedebate!

Our next concern was: how would this mous agency was set up in late 2004 initiative be sustained? The GEF project by the state government, and has both was drawing to a close in early 2004, government offi cials and community what would happen after that? What if members in decision-making positions. resources dry up, but even more than This is an interesting and important ex- this, what if the current set of offi cials periment to watch, for other protected is transferred? This was a concern also areas in India to learn from. It fol- voiced by villagers, and by offi cials, lows an earlier important step towards who did not want to see fi ve years of greater sustainability, the formation of hard effort coming to naught if the a Confederation of Eco-development Reserve came under an insensitive set Committees, in early 2002. This Con- of offi cials. And so the Periyar team federation enables greater collective embarked on another innovative step, power, exchange of experience, and the formation of a Periyar Foundation confl ict resolution. (see Box 1 for details). This autono-

Box 1. Achievements of participatory approach at Periyar Tiger Reserve and creation of the Periyar Foundation Source: Promod Krishnan, Field Director, Periyar Tiger Reserve, Kerala, India, July 2005.

The India Eco Development Project, funded by the World Bank and the Global Environment Facility was implemented in the Tiger Reserve from 1996 onwards. The basic objective of the project was to reduce the impact of local people on forests by providing alternate and sustainable employment and involves them in forest protection activities. The project ended on 30.06.2004, after a period of seven years. Some of the achievements of this project in Periyar Tiger Reserve were: a. the protection of forests in Periyar Tiger Reserve improved signifi cantly with substantial reduction in illegal cutting of trees, poaching, fi rewood collection, etc.; b. employment opportunities created to the tune of around 1, 00,000 man days, benefi ting mostly the Tribals; c. community based ecotourism programmes generating around Rs 60,00,000 annually and providing direct employment to more than 500 tribal families; d. more than 2000 families participating in Sabarimala pilgrim season business and earning a decent livelihood; e. the state Government saving around 10 million rupees annually for the management of Periyar Ti- ger Reserve through the voluntary involvement of local people in forest protection.

In order to sustain these achievements beyond the life of the existing project, a public Trust named Periyar Foundation was established in 2004. The main objective of the Foundation is to support Periyar Tiger Reserve management in biodiversity conservation and community development activities with a landscape perspective. Being an autonomous organisation, the Foundation has the operational ﬂ exibility of a good Non Governmental Organization while getting the support from the Government.

Some important features of the Foundation are: it is a Government owned public Trust; the foundation works through a Governing Body (Chaired by Forest Minister, Kerala and Field Direc- tor, Project Tiger is the Executive Director) and an Executive committee; the Foundation also has public representation, as it includes members such as a local Member of Parliament, the Presidents of District Panchayats (local political body), members of the EDC, scientists and others; the Foundation has hired professionals in the ﬁ eld of ecology, sociology, economics, education and 303 Poverty, wealth and conservation

others to undertake various activities; the Foundation is free to mobilize independent, local, regional, national and international resources; the Foundation is levying an Eco-development Surcharge from visitors to the Reserve (Rs.100 from foreigners and Rs10 from Indians).

Some activities carried out by the Foundation so far: improvement of the local Primary Health Care Centre located in the tribal settlement; upgrade of the basic amenities at 38 village Anganavadis (play schools) around the Reserve; adoption of three tribal schools around the Reserve; lead of the Clean Periyar Tiger Reserve Campaign and supply of waste bins to Kumili town; ﬁ ve research programmes conducted in the Reserve; 25 capacity building/ training programmes for staff and EDC members; accessed funds from Tourism Department (Rs.15, 00,000) to improve tourism facilities in the Re- serve; sustained various eco-development activities in PTR.

We recommend that this remarkable -controlled natural resource manage- effort is followed up with other meas- ment, and reverse the historical al- ures, such as: ienation that has taken place between adivasis and for- ﬁ nding diverse livelihood opportuni- EEventually,ventually, thethe proc-proc- ties (there is currently too much de- ests. There is also pendence on pepper and ecotourism) a need to search eessss needsneeds ttoo eenternter eevenven including through the re-orientation for alternative mmoreore ffundamentalundamental iis-s- of rural development programmes; models of education, health, and ssues,ues, wwhichhich helphelp re-es-re-es- facilitating greater community take- employment that ttablishablish community-community- over of tourism which is currently in build on the skills the hands of private or government bbasedased aandnd --controlledcontrolled and traditions of tour operators; nnaturalatural resourceresource the communities providing additional land to adivasis themselves, and mmanagement,anagement, aandnd as close to the current settlements that help recon- rreverseeverse tthehe hhistoricalistorical as possible; nect them to na- aalienationlienation thatthat hashas involving communities in the man- ture rather than ttakenaken placeplace betweenbetween agement of the Tiger Reserve; alienate them establishing clear rights to essential further. There is aadivasisdivasis andand forests…forests… resources; already thinking towards many of these respecting and utilising traditional issues in the team at Periyar. The cur- knowledge in conservation; and rent initiative is a very good start, and it needs such vision and courage to addressing inequalities in the distri- tread further down the path of trans- bution of beneﬁ ts amongst differ- formation. ent EDCs and village groups, some of which have been pointed out by Ashish Kothari ([email protected]) and Neema NGOs like Equations. Pathak ([email protected]) are members of Kalpavriksh – Environmental Action Group, TGER and TILCEPA—the Eventually, the process needs to enter IUCN Theme on Indigenous/Local Communities, Equity, and Protected Areas, which is a joint Theme of The Commission even more fundamental issues, which on Environmental, Economic and Social Policy, and of the help re-establish community-based and World Commission on Protected Areas. Ashish is actually the TILCEPA Co-chair. 304 …if initiativesThe intertwined embraceLLivelihoodsivelih rootso rights,od…buts ofandan poverty,dconservationsecure Conservationconservationconse accessr vwealthatio cann to— canand resources alsoaargumentsr g endenvironmentalu providem upen and tenhancingsPolicy livelihoodsshaping hrealapi nthatparticipation degradationg thet benefits… poverty...hmatterse debatedebate!

LLivelihoods,ivelihoods, povertypoverty andand thethe NamibianNamibian ccommunity-basedommunity-based nnaturalatural rresourcesesources mmanagementanagement ((CBNRM)CBNRM) pprogramme:rogramme: wwhathat wwayay fforward?orward? CChristopherhristopher VaughanVaughan

Abstract. Recent studies of conservation and development programmes recommend tackling poverty through devolution of authority, improved local governance and activities that “fi t” livelihood priorities of local communities. The Namibian Community Based Natural Resources Management (CBNRM) Programme is one such example - credited with delivering rural development, poverty eradication and improved wildlife management. The achievements of the Programme are laudable but variable and complex. CBNRM has resulted in differential household and livelihood impacts with winners and losers. Changes in wildlife utilisation practices and subsequent increases in wildlife populations have primarily been achieved by increased localized control of wildlife management rather than benefi t distribution. Those closely involved with the Programme have gained employment and other opportunities, but a secondary impact has been increased confl ict and restricted access to wildlife for some people. In some cases this has diminished household food security and promoted unsustainable forms of wildlife hunting e.g. by snaring. The CBNRM Programme has promoted new institutional arrangements for community wildlife management, tourism and NRM decision-making in the form of community “conservancies”, leading to new social and political landscapes. Communi- ties are however still constrained by the only partial devolution of rights and the complexity of overlapping authority and responsibility for different resources. Achieving good governance remains challenging, with a need to increase transparency and accountability for decision- making. The Programme could better address equity between rich and poor and recognise the poor as the least likely to benefi t. In the short-term, people face pressing livelihood security needs, which cannot be met through existing CBNRM benefi ts alone. There is no single way to provide opportunities for livelihood diversifi cation and poverty reduction. Rather a suite of interventions and a programmatic focus on livelihood priorities is needed to achieve conservation and poverty reduction targets.

people-orientated approaches have Recent studies of community wild- been developed and widely promoted life management (CWM) and Commu- by conservation agencies since the nity Based Natural Resource Manage- 1980s examples of successful commu- ment (CBNRM) indicate the need to nity driven and owned projects, that deliver not only conservation targets address poverty and deliver tangible and economic incentives, but to ad- livelihood beneﬁ ts are few.2 dress poverty and most importantly, the complex and multifaceted livelihood The Namibian Community Based Natu- priorities of target populations. Recom- ral Resources Management (CBNRM) mendations support people-centred Programme is heralded as people-cen- approaches based on good governance, tred and propoor and is credited with with new institutional arrangements; providing devolution of community institutionalised participation and rights rights to new local institutions and in- based policy and legislation1 Whilst stitutions, thus supporting rural devel- 305 Poverty, wealth and conservation

opment, poverty reduction and conser- guards” initiative developed in re- vation. The Programme has reportedly sponse to heavy resulted in the empowerment of local poaching (par- ……thethe 11996996 wwildlifeildlife communities, the promotion of rural ticularly of rhinos) llegislationegislation providesprovides development and sustainable liveli- in the Kunene llegalegal conditionalconditional hoods, good governance and improved region (formerly community natural resources manage- Kaokoland) in rrightsights toto ruralrural com-com- ment (NRM).3 Central to the success Namibia’s North- mmunitiesunities ttoo man-man- and sustainability of the CBNRM pro- west, and more aagege aandnd bbenefitenefit ffromrom gramme is its capacity to identify and recently the 1996 deliver programme activities that sup- wildlife legisla- wwildlifeildlife throughthrough thethe port the livelihood priorities of the rural tion, which pro- eestablishmentstablishment ofof reg-reg- poor in Namibia’s communal areas, vides legal con- iisteredstered communitycommunity thus addressing the dual goals of con- ditional rights to cconservanciesonservancies servation and poverty reduction. rural communities to manage and benefi t from wildlife This paper draws on research fi ndings through the establishment of registered from the Wildlife Integration for Liveli- community conservancies.5 hood Diversifi cation (WILD) Project.4 It summarises a number of critical Since the Programme was established issues relating to the Namibian CB- and the fi rst conservancies registered NRM programme and the poverty and in 1998, there are now 31 registered livelihood concerns of communal area conservancies and a further 30 or so residents. The programme’s history, institutional arrangements, activities and current outcomes are described and its capacity to meet conservation and development agendas debated. The discussion presents suggestions for the programme to better address the livelihood needs of target populations and to deliver on the combined goals of rural development, poverty reduction and resource conservation. Whilst case study material focuses on the Namibia programme, programme and policy issues of relevance to the global conservation and development community are highlighted.

The Namibian Community-based Natural Resources Management (CBNRM) Programme In Namibia, the government has explicitly recognised CBNRM as a rural development strategy in its national development plans and 2030 vision. Picture 1. Registered and emerging The Namibian CBNRM Programme conservancies. (Courtesy Namibia Nature has two roots: the “community game Foundation 2004) 306 …if initiativesThe intertwined embraceLLivelihoodsivelih rootso rights,od…buts ofandan poverty,dconservationsecure Conservationconservationconse accessr vwealthatio cann to— canand resources alsoaargumentsr g endenvironmentalu providem upen and tenhancingsPolicy livelihoodsshaping hrealapi nthatparticipation degradationg thet benefits… poverty...hmatterse debatedebate!

more evolving (Figure 1). The total framework and new institutional ar- area of communal land that currently rangements at the local level. falls under conservancy management amounts to 28 % of all communal land Measurements of Programme success in Namibia, totalling 71,394 km2. This have focussed on increases in wildlife is just under 9 % of all the land in Na- numbers, macro-fi nancial revenues mibia. The number of registered mem- generated and the numbers of con- bers of conservancies is approximately servancies estab- WWhilsthilst thethe conserv-conserv- 37,000 individuals– just under 15% of lished. However, the close to a quarter of a million popu- as highlighted aancyncy programmeprogramme con-con- lation in these areas.6 The Government in the discus- ttinuesinues ttoo expand,expand, keykey estimates that within the next fi ve sion below, these qquestionsuestions areare beingbeing years almost the entire communal area coarse indications of Namibia will be under conservancies. of programme rraisedaised aboutabout tthehe ex-ex- success inad- ttentent toto whichwhich CBNRMCBNRM CBNRM in Namibia has reportedly equately explore hhasas beenbeen aableble ttoo aad-d- contributed to wildlife protection and the complexity ddressress iissuesssues ofof gov-gov- improved wildlife management, proof CBNRM promoting wildlife species increases in gramme effects eernance,rnance, ssupportupport sus-sus- communal areas, including desert- on livelihoods. ttainableainable livelihoodslivelihoods dwelling black There is currently aandnd rreduceeduce ppoverty.overty. EEstablishmentstablishment ofof newnew rhino (Diceros no comprehensive cconservancyonservancy organi-organi- Bicornis) and monitoring and evaluation system (ME) ssationsations hashas substan-substan- desert elephant and as this article demonstrates, the (Loxodonta Af- livelihood impacts of the programme, ttiallyially alteredaltered institu-institu- ricana). It has and opportunities for livelihood diver- ttionalional arrangementsarrangements provided new sifi cation and poverty reduction are fforor communitycommunity community or- complex and variable. As a result, the ganisational and Government has expressed concerns aandnd hhouseholdousehold wild-wild- institutional struc- over the extent to which CBNRM is llifeife management,management, tures for conser- able to directly support the livelihoods ttourismourism andand bbroaderroader vation and devel- of rural communities and in so doing NNRMRM ddecision-ecision- opment planning contribute directly to the national de- and provided velopment targets of poverty reduction mmaking.aking. employment, and rural economic growth.7 Whilst the training and rights restoration to previ- conservancy programme continues to ously disenfranchised post-apartheid expand, key questions are being raised communities. Establishment of new at government and local levels about conservancy organisations has sub- the extent to which CBNRM has been stantially altered institutional arrange- able to address broader issues of gov- ments for community and household ernance, to support sustainable liveli- wildlife management, tourism and hoods and to reduce poverty. broader NRM decision-making. Social, economic relations and power rela- Actors, organisations and new tions have changed with new rights for institutional arrangements for resources falling under the conservancy CBNRM remit. An important factor for change The programme is primarily promoted has undoubtedly been the development by national and international NGOs of a rights-based legislative and policy and donors (among them USAID and 307 Poverty, wealth and conservation

WWF), which provide support for the establishment and maintenance of the initiative.

Local communal area conservancy institutions are made up of a mixture of elected community representatives and employed community staff. Main activities include defi ning new geographical and political boundaries, drafting con- stitutions, defi ning membership, developing management plans, accessing funding and developing joint venture activities with tourism partners and the Picture 2. Bersig community, Torra conserv- management (utilization and protec- ancy. (Courtesy Christopher Vaughan) tion) of wildlife resources. Conservancy Livelihoods, poverty and the organisations are also involved in deci- CBNRM Programme sions relating to accessing employment and training opportunities, developing In general terms, the livelihood priori- and distributing benefi ts and employ- ties of communal area residents focus ing and deploying community game on securing incomes, maintaining their guards and environmental shepherds. food security and reducing vulner- The latter monitor wildlife numbers and ability. Livelihood strategies include illegal use and other NRM issues, e.g. livestock and cropping, a reliance on drought and fi re. Local residents have pensions and to register themselves as members of remittances, and TThehe llivelihoodivelihood pri-pri- the conservancy organisation to receive access to infor- ooritiesrities ofof communalcommunal benefi ts and to be able to vote at Con- mal employment. aarearea rresidentsesidents focusfocus servancy annual general meetings. Residents of communal areas are oonn securingsecuring income,income, The Namibian Government, espe- constrained by a mmaintainingaintaining foodfood se-se- cially the Ministry of Environment and lack of alterna- ccurityurity andand reducingreducing Tourism (MET) undertake a legislative employment vvulnerability.ulnerability. tive and monitoring role with support opportunities, for conservancy registration. Support with households critically dependent on is provided from regional offi ces and access to a variety of natural resources headquarters in Windhoek and through including fuel wood, grazing and wild- the recently developed CBNRM Sup- life (for direct consumption, income port Division (CSD). However, overall, and socio cultural purposes). House- the CBNRM Programme is primarily holds utilise natural resources to differ- promoted by NGOs, since government ent degrees, with some more depend- lacks the resources and fl exibility of ant on specifi c resources than others. the NGOs, to respond to the demands of these news institutions. Government Indicators of household wealth include ministries, however, play a pivotal role livestock numbers, cropping area, in supporting and regulating communi- income levels and the extent to which ty activities and developing and imple- households are more or less reliant on menting policy and legislation. natural resources. Geographical loca- tion, the nature and extent of social

308 …if initiativesThe intertwined embraceLLivelihoodsivelih rootso rights,od…buts ofandan poverty,dconservationsecure Conservationconservationconse accessr vwealthatio cann to— canand resources alsoaargumentsr g endenvironmentalu providem upen and tenhancingsPolicy livelihoodsshaping hrealapi nthatparticipation degradationg thet benefits… poverty...hmatterse debatedebate!

networks and institutional linkages and joint venture lodges) provide fi nan- are also critical factors in determining cial resources for local communities to a household’s relative wealth and/or develop their own wildlife management vulnerability profi les. The CBNRM Pro- institutions and to distribute to mem- gramme has a variety of impacts on bers as incentives for ongoing resource the different members of the conserv- conservation and management. ancies. Targeting the “poor and needy” is already a specifi c objective of some Aggregate conservancy incomes gen- conservancies’ erated through consumptive and non- PProgrammerogramme iinterven-nterven- benefi t distribu- consumptive tourism have been sig- ttionsions maymay inadvert-inadvert- tion plans.8 The nifi cant. In 2000 the estimated total poor maybe hard income for conservancies was just un- eentlyntly favourfavour thethe com-com- to defi ne and ac- der N$3.5 million (1N$ = 6.76 US $).10 pparativelyaratively richrich overover cess for develop- In 2003, the income quadrupled to tthehe poorestpoorest ofof thethe poor.poor. ment purposes, approximately N$14.5 million.11 Much yet according to of this income has, however, been WILD research they were often likely retained centrally within conservancies to be living on wildlife frontlines (i.e. in order to cover their ongoing running in geographically marginal areas) and costs, with few households yet to re- dependant on wildlife utilisation for ceive substantial benefi ts12 Since 1998, household food security.9 Conversely, the distribution of collective conserv- they are the people most unlikely to ancy income has taken place only in be involved in conservancy planning six conservancies. In Kunene, the Torra and development activities. As a result, conservancy payout of N$630 to regis- Programme interventions may inad- tered members in 200313 amounted to vertently favour the comparatively rich 8% of the average annual household over the poorest of the poor. incomes for the region.14 The income was predominantly used to pay school Access to cash income is critical for costs. In Caprivi, funds were used for livelihood security— providing for food, development-related infrastructure education, health care and farming. projects or for celebrations amongst Incomes to conservancies from con- villages. sumptive and non-consumptive tourism (from wildlife sales to trophy hunters Generated revenues can often remain in the hands of committees or other decision-making bodies and are utilised to pay running costs, whilst distribution at household level remains little more than symbolic. This, however, also relates to the long and short-term capacity for conservancies to generate suffi cient income, and to the extent by which suffi cient income generating opportunities exist for conservancies. Whilst benefi t sharing through distributing collective revenues is potentially an attractive option (people always need and welcome cash), it often fails Picture 3. Farmer milking goats in Kunene region. (Courtesy Christopher Vaughan) to meet the direct and recurrent liveli- 309 Poverty, wealth and conservation

hood needs of wildlife-using house- making for improved livelihood security holds (i.e. the poorer members of the and diversifi cation opportunities needs communities). Also, benefi ts that may to build on existing livelihoods strate- come from collective fi nancial revenues gies. Offi cial support and political will often do not exceed the direct benefi ts at local, regional and national levels derived from an individual’s illegal use are needed to support this approach of wildlife for household purposes.15 for conservancies. CBNRM could better The low level of household cash income address equity differences between rich from CBNRM dividends to date would and poor and recognise the poor as be- appear to indicate that distribution of ing the least likely to gain employment conservancy revenue incomes has yet and to benefi t equitably from distribu- to be a driving force for changing NRM tion of meat, revenue, employment or management behaviour. The extent training opportunities. to which collective benefi ts to remote rural centres promote changing behav- Options to target the poor and support iour is also unclear and warrants fur- cash and other forms of benefi t distri- ther research.16 bution include: 1. the development and adoption of The lack of a participatory process a pro-poor approach that identifi es for decision-making over collective and supports vulnerable and poor revenue distribution is also problem- peoples’ priorities; atic. Conservancy 2. maximising livelihood security by CCBNRMBNRM ccouldould bbet-et- membership lists securing CBNRM benefi ts and pro- tterer aaddressddress eequityquity are often outdat- moting rural development through ed with decisions ddifferencesifferences bbetweenetween education, healthcare and employ- over the amount rrichich andand poorpoor andand ment to reduce reliance on wildlife to be paid out utilisation; rrecogniseecognise thethe poorpoor asas made without bbeingeing tthehe lleasteast likelylikely broad consulta- 3. adoption of livelihoods approaches that focus on support strategies ttoo gaingain employmentemployment tion. In the case of Torra Conserv- building directly on people’s current aandnd ttoo benefitbenefit eequita-quita- ancy payout, both activities; bblyly fromfrom ddistributionistribution members and 4. acknowledgment of socio-economic ooff meat,meat, rrevenue,evenue, non-members differentiation specifi c targeting of eemploymentmployment oror train-train- received pay- pre-identifi ed groups (e.g. poor and outs. This caused vulnerable etc); iingng opportunitiesopportunities confl ict with no 5. full community participation in ben- transparent or agreed processes for efi t distribution decision-making; resolution or broader community in- 6. further research to review how in- 17 volvement in decision-making. dividual versus collective cash payments act as incentives to change Linking wildlife, tourism development wildlife management behaviour. and income generation are becoming more feasible, but not for all conserv- Tourism and livelihoods ancies and in the short-term people face pressing livelihood security needs, Tourism in communal areas currently which cannot be met through existing benefi ts the livelihoods of a limited CBNRM benefi ts alone. Conservancy number of people by delivering income, development planning and decision- employment, capacity building and ca- reer path development. In surveys car- 310 …if initiativesThe intertwined embraceLLivelihoodsivelih rootso rights,od…buts ofandan poverty,dconservationsecure Conservationconservationconse accessr vwealthatio cann to— canand resources alsoaargumentsr g endenvironmentalu providem upen and tenhancingsPolicy livelihoodsshaping hrealapi nthatparticipation degradationg thet benefits… poverty...hmatterse debatedebate!

ried out for the WILD project only 3.6% government with regard to tourism of respondent in the Kunene region, development with confusion over tour- and less than 1% in Caprivi region, ism policy and listed CBNRM and tourism-related em- legislation. There TTourismourism jjobsobs ttendend ployment as their main occupations.18 are site-specifi c ttoo gogo toto richer,richer, betterbetter In Caprivi, average incomes from tour- costs in terms of eeducatedducated iindividu-ndividu- ism employment in 2003 amounted restricting ac- to N $6,000 per annum— slightly less cess to resources aals…ls… communitiescommunities than the average household incomes resulting from ttraditionallyraditionally havehave from livestock, cropping, and natural changes in land ffewew rrightsights toto controlcontrol resource sales (N$6,500 per annum).19 use e.g. restrict- However, those who gain tourism-re- ing grazing mobil- uunregulatednregulated ttourismourism lated employment benefi t from more ity seasonally and aandnd ttoo negotiatenegotiate stable incomes and a subsequent abil- geographically. bbenefitsenefits ffromrom ity to support larger social networks. Community-based eexistingxisting concessionsconcessions Tourism jobs do, however, tend to go tourism enter- to individuals who are already at the prises, have failed where there has higher end of the wealth spectrum, are been weak local governance and lack of better educated, with a higher number clear service provider support.21 Whilst of household members contributing to the CBNRM programme has supported household incomes.20 Again this brings a foundation for communities to de- into question the benefi ts of tourism for velop new tourism enterprises and seek the poorest of the poor. joint ventures with the private sector, this has brought new associated costs of confl ict and restriction of access. In several cases this has resulted in increased community confl ict and court cases.22

Opportunities to support livelihoods and tourism development include: • better clarity on government policy relating to the position of communities in regard to existing and proposed tourism concessions and leaseholds; Picture 4. Staff at Damaraland Joint Venture • the establishment of an appropriate tourism Camp Torra conservancy. (Courtesy Kit Vaughan) National Tourism Concession Frame- work to devolve rights and assist in Communities traditionally have few the long-term fi nancial viability of rights to control unregulated tourism conservancies; and to negotiate benefi ts from exist- • government could adopt, develop ing concessions. Conservancies have and operationalise a pro-poor tour- limited rights over wildlife and de jure ism policy, focusing on tourism de- land rights remain in the hands of the velopments that have positive im- government. This creates uncertainty pacts contributing directly to poverty in the negotiation process between reduction, enhanced livelihood secu- communities and private enterprises. rity and social empowerment; There is insuffi cient guidance from 311 Poverty, wealth and conservation

• good local governance could be bet- led to changes in perception by local ter encouraged to deal with tourism communities, who are increasingly able enterprises and address confl ict; to see the link between their own com- • conservancies support to develop in- munity conservancy management and clusive stakeholder integrated land- the wildlife they WWhilehile thethe useuse ofof use planning processes that mitigate are surrounded site-specifi c livelihood costs; by. However ccommunityommunity gamegame meat distribution • rights provision to communities for gguardsuards hhasas discour-discour- alone contributes tourism related activities. aagedged ppoaching,oaching, illegalillegal little to overall livelihood secu- wwildlifeildlife useuse continuescontinues Wildlife management rity, although tim- ttoo playplay a criticalcritical rolerole Understanding social relations is a criti- ing of hunts and iinn people’speople’s livelihoodslivelihoods cal aspect of understanding the proc- species are desir- aandnd iiss governedgoverned byby esses involved in achieving community able by local peo- wildlife management objectives, which ple. Creating links ccomplexomplex locallocal socialsocial is as much about conservation as it is between manag- aarrangementsrrangements wwithinithin about wider processes of social change ing and benefi ting wwhichhich therethere isis locallylocally and attempts to redistribute social and from wildlife is political power. In Namibia new forms important. Even cconsideredonsidered “good“good andand of management, combined with exist- in areas where bbadad ppractice”.ractice”. ing institutional norms and accepted meat distribution practices have led to new social and takes place, some people continue to political landscapes and power confi gu- hunt illegally for the pot – and worry- rations at the local level. Changes in ingly there is some evidence of an in- wildlife utilisation practices and increase in more covert forms of hunting creases in species numbers have pri- such as snaring and trapping.23 marily been achieved by increased localized control of wildlife management While the use of community game rather than the distribution of benefi ts. guards has discouraged poaching, il- The deployment off community game legal wildlife use continues to play guards has discouraged poaching. This a critical role in people’s livelihoods change in local wildlife management and is governed by complex local so- and shift in community attitudes to cial arrangements within which there wildlife management has been support- is locally considered “good and bad ed by the provision of community hunts practice”. Approximately one quarter and the deployment off community of households surveyed by WILD use game guards, who have restricted “il- wildlife and it is important particularly legal” hunting by households, through for poorer households. Wildlife use, increased monitoring and the enforce- even if “illegal”, allows least secure ment of externally-derived government households to meet immediate food re- wildlife laws. quirements and to reserve more secure resources, such as livestock or crops, Legal wildlife utilisation (e.g., game for future use. Currently there is a gap hunting and meat distribution) has in the knowledge and capacity of the provided direct livelihood benefi ts programme to understand the extent and acted as an incentive for collec- and practices of local wildlife utilisation, tive management as well as mitigating and a lack of programme focus on the some of the costs associated with hu- importance of traditional, historical and man-wildlife confl ict. This in turn has cultural practices that shape, and con- 312 …if initiativesThe intertwined embraceLLivelihoodsivelih rootso rights,od…buts ofandan poverty,dconservationsecure Conservationconservationconse accessr vwealthatio cann to— canand resources alsoaargumentsr g endenvironmentalu providem upen and tenhancingsPolicy livelihoodsshaping hrealapi nthatparticipation degradationg thet benefits… poverty...hmatterse debatedebate!

tinue to shape existing wildlife use and Human-wildlife confl icts management. Rural people, government and NGO staff all report an increase in wildlife Options to support improved wildlife numbers as a result of the CBNRM management include: Programme but also, and as a conse- • conservancy and CBNRM Programme quence, an increase in human-wildlife activities explicitly recognise the confl ict (HWC). This affects the extent links between livelihood security and to which people will continue to sup- wildlife use for some households and port conservancy initiatives.24 HWC is build existing wild food uses into its a complex problem with no single and planning processes; easy solution. It results in a variety • a specifi c initiative focuses on locally of impacts on livelihoods with poorer valued species rather than the cur- groups tending to suffer the most.25 rent focus on charismatic high value mega fauna; In Caprivi estimates of average fi nan- • increased awareness of the factors cial loss from wildlife damage to crops, infl uencing wildlife management be- amounted to approximately 20% of av- haviour and the costs and benefi ts of erage annual incomes.26 This does not control and incentives approaches; refl ect the severity of impact on those • local norms and sanctions are devel- who earn considerably less or for those oped for managing and regulating who lose their entire crop. Impacts to wildlife use; livelihoods result from income losses • analysis of options for minimising from crop or livestock sales, but also and mitigating the negative effects loss of access to valuable food sources, of restricting wildlife access, particu- labour and fi nancial investment. WILD larly for poorer groups; research revealed that existing HWC • better understanding of both the sig- data isn’t system- nifi cance of wildlife use to different atically collated CConservanciesonservancies areare household types and the impact of and analysed iincreasinglyncreasingly seenseen asas harvesting upon the wildlife resource and that there is base; little integration tthehe responsibleresponsible in-in- • improved communication and broad- between stake- sstitutions,titutions, yetyet havehave er participation in decision-making holders, including nnoo directdirect authorityauthority processes; MET, other gov- ttoo dealdeal directlydirectly withwith • improved understanding of the im- ernment depart- plications of devolving local hunting ments, NGOs and cconflictsonflicts betweenbetween hu-hu- beyond the conservancy level; communities. mmansans aandnd wwildlife…ildlife… • review of the extent by which con- Conservancies are trol mechanisms support changes in increasingly seen by a variety of stake- wildlife management behaviour and holders as the responsible institutions, subsequent effects on the sustain- yet they have no direct authority to ability of that behaviour e.g., moves deal with the HWC problems. Legally, towards indiscriminate snaring to the responsibility for protected areas selective hunting with dogs and and protected species still resides with spears; government, and as yet there is no • support and acknowledgement to policy on HWC clarifying the roles and the traditional and cultural practices responsibilities of different stakehold- associated with wildlife management ers. and use.

313 Poverty, wealth and conservation

To mitigate the costs of HWC, the CB- at the local level. This has differential NRM Programme and conservancies are livelihood impacts and promotes varia- striving to improve HWC monitoring ble options for livelihood diversifi cation. and reporting systems, protect water CBNRM is a fast expanding and grow- points, introducing electric fences to ing programme but still in its infancy. It protect gardens, lobbying government is very important to assess progress as to simplify procedures for problem early as possible and to use research animal control, and piloting a Human fi ndings to dynamically adjust pro- Animal Confl ict Compensation Scheme gramme activities. (HACCS). If the conservancy programme is to Options to reduce HWC and support become sustainable and deliver positive livelihoods include: livelihood impacts and reduce poverty it • developing participatory processes to critically requires a better understanding agree locations of dams, fences and of people’s livelihood practices and accept responsibility for their main- priorities. This would support processes tenance; of institutionalising participation at conservancy and programme levels, • offsetting HWC costs in tangible improve planning and decision-making ways with support for community and the identifi cation of appropriate derived solutions with clear and conservancy-level livelihood support transparent compensation schemes; strategies. The poor constitute the • supporting further development of majority, yet they face the highest the HACCS scheme based on com- costs of adopting wildlife and tourism munity derived priorities; activities by losing access to important • developing integrated multi-stake- wild resources and suffering from holder strategy for HWC specifi c to HWC. Current and future interventions regions, involving conservancies, and support activities must address traditional authorities and conserv- differences between rich and poor. In ancy membership; addition the poor are the least likely to • developing a MET policy document gain employment and achieve benefi t clarifying the roles and responsibili- equity from distribution of meat, ties of government staff in managing revenue, or training opportunities. There HWC and devolving problem animal is no single way to improve and provide control to regions; livelihood support; rather a suite of • supporting the systematic collection small-scale interventions is needed to of HWC incidence data and proc- provide optimum strategies together esses for collaborative institutional with a process of institutionalised and community collective action for participation. incident reporting and prevention. Each conservancy could develop support Way forward for CBNRM while activities based on a participatory addressing Poverty and Livelihood learning and action research processes. priorities This would identify options towards supporting the priorities of particular The above discussion illustrates how groups of people, such as the rich and the introduction of new forms of wildlife poor, the young and the old, wildlife management in Namibia has led to the users and non users, the urban and emergence of new social and political the rural, etc. Conservancies could landscapes and confi gurations of power 314 …if initiativesThe intertwined embraceLLivelihoodsivelih rootso rights,od…buts ofandan poverty,dconservationsecure Conservationconservationconse accessr vwealthatio cann to— canand resources alsoaargumentsr g endenvironmentalu providem upen and tenhancingsPolicy livelihoodsshaping hrealapi nthatparticipation degradationg thet benefits… poverty...hmatterse debatedebate!

pilot various interventions and monitor at fi rst glance. As in any development effectiveness. CBNRM strategies to interventions there are winners and support existing and future opportunities losers and posi- for livelihoods diversifi cation need to tive and negative FForor tthehe majoritymajority ofof address increasing income from wildlife. outcomes for all cconservancies’onservancies’ resi-resi- Numerous social and institutional, policy parties. While CB- ddents,ents, tthehe contribu-contribu- and legislation issues also need to be NRM has the ca- ttionion thatthat conservancyconservancy addressed to support livelihoods and pacity to sustain- poverty reduction, as well as enabling ably meet more wwildlifeildlife andand tourismtourism communities to exercise rights to fully of the livelihood aactivitiesctivities makemake waswas manage and benefi t from wildlife. needs of margin- nnotot seenseen asas a prioritypriority alized peoples, oorr ofof centralcentral impor-impor- For the majority of conservancies’ reduce poverty residents, the contribution that and meet conser- ttanceance toto livelihoods.livelihoods. conservancy wildlife and tourism vation targets, it remains to be seen as activities make was not seen as a priority to whether it will fi nd the prerequisite or of central importance to livelihoods. will and resources to do so. CBNRM needs to further integrate Christopher (Kit) Vaughan ([email protected].) programmatic activities with livelihood is a Wildlife and Livelihoods Researcher at the Department for priorities and create links between the International Rural Development, University of Reading. He is fi nalising his PhD and lecturing at the University of Reading. activities and practices of rural producers He was employed by the WILD27 project http://www.dea.met. and income from wildlife and tourism. gov.na/met/programmes/Wild/wild.htm from which much of This requires an increased understanding this paper draws upon. Kit is a member of CEESP/ TGER. of livelihoods, suffi cient skills and Notes resources amongst CBNRM support 1 Agrawal et al., 2001 ; Adams et al., 2003 ; Adams organisations, and the prerequisite will to 2004 ; Brown, 2003; DFID WAP, 2002 ; Grimble et al., 2002 ; Jeanrenaud, 2002, Hulme et al., 2001, deliver programme activities that “fi t” the Long et al., 2004, Roe 2001. livelihood priorities of local communities. 2 Jeanrenaud op cit, Hulme et al., op cit. 3 Jones, 1999; 2002. The Namibian CBNRM Programme has 4 WILD was a Ministry of Environment and Tourism, supported poverty alleviation in some Government of Namibia research project, funded by the UK Government’s Department for Inter- cases whilst also restricting some peo- national Development (DFID). The WILD project ple’s access to illegal wildlife use and researched the implications of changing natural re- potentially increasing household food source use and management arising from CBNRM programme interventions and their effects upon insecurity in others. The Programme’s household livelihoods. development has supported improve- 5 A Conservancy is the name given by the governments in localised forms of wildlife ment to the legally recognized institutions established to manage new rights over wildlife. A con- management and conservation and servancy consists of a group of commercial farms developed opportunities for tourism or areas of communal land on which neighbouring but has in some cases increased con- land owners or members have pooled resources for the purpose of conserving and using wildlife fl ict. In order to better deliver on its sustainably. Members practice normal farming ac- dual objectives, the CBNRM Programme tivities and operations in combination with wildlife needs to integrate its activities with use on a sustainable basis. The main objective is to promote greater sustainable use through co-op- locally defi ned livelihood priorities to eration and improved management. Conservancies balance its current conservation agen- are operated and managed by members through a Conservancy Committee. (Ref. www.dea.met.gov. da. The Programme’s achievements na, accessed 17/02/05) have provided a foundation for future 6 Long, 2004. development activities and are highly 7 Long, 2004. laudable, but are more complex than 8 Long, 2004; Vaughan et al., 2003a and 2003b. 315 Poverty, wealth and conservation

9 Vaughan, in progress. cations for development policy, ODI Wildlife policy 10 Long, 2004. Briefi ng Number 2, ODI, London, 2003. 11 Long, 2004. DFID, Wildlife and Poverty study. A report prepared for the Department for International Development 12 Suich, 2003; Long et al., op cit; Vaughan et al., by the DFID Livestock and wildlife advisory group, 2003C). ODI, London, 2002. 13 Vaughan et al., 2003c. Grimble, R. and M.. Laidlaw, Biodiversity Manage- 14 Long, 2004. ment and Local livelihoods: Rio Plus 10, ODI Natural 15 Vaughan in progress. resource perspectives number 73, January 2002. 16 Vaughan et al., 2003c. Hulme, D. and M. Murphree, African wildlife and livelihoods: the promise and performance of community 17 Vaughan et al., 2003c. conservation, James Currey, London, 2001. 18 Long, 2004; Suich op cit. This work was part of Jeanrenaud, S., People-Oriented Approaches in Global a quantitative survey covering 1192 households Conservation: Is the Leopard Changing its Spots?, in total and 573 specifi cally in Caprivi and 619 Institutionalising Participation Series 1, IIED, Lon- in Kunene region. Respondents were randomly don, 2002. sampled and included employees of lodges and conservancy organisations. Jones, B. Community management of natural resources in Namibia, IIED Drylands Programme, Issue 19 Suich., op cit. Paper No. 90, IIED, London, 1999. 20 Long, 2004, Suich, op cit. Jones, B., The evolution of community based approach 21 Long, 2004. to wildlife management in Kunene, Namibia, in 22 Long, 2004; Murphy et al., 2003; Vaughan in Hulme and Murphree, op cit. progress. Long, S.A., C.S. Vaughan, M. Murphy, S. Mulonga, J. 23 Long, 2004; Vaughan et al., 2003a ; Vaughan et Katjiua, B. Jones, and D. Roe, Livelihoods and CB- al., 2003b. NRM in Namibia: the fi ndings of the WILD project. 24 Vaughan et al., 2003a. Final technical report prepared for the Directorate of Environmental affairs and the ministry of Environ- 25 Murphy et al., 2003. ment and Tourism, Windhoek, 2004. 26 Suich,op cit. Murphy, C. and L. Halstead, The person with the idea 27 WILD was a three-year applied socio-economic for the campsite is a hero: Institutional arrange- research project, supported by the Department ments and livelihood change of community-owned for International Development (DFID) UK Govern- tourism enterprises in Namibia, Research Discussion ment and the Namibian Governments Ministry of Paper No 6, Directorate of Environmental affairs, Environment and Tourism Directorate of Environ- Windhoek, 2003 mental Affairs (DEA). The WILD project researched Roe D., Community-based wildlife management: the implications of changing natural resource use improved livelihoods and wildlife conservation, Bio and management arising from CBNRM programme Briefs No.1, International Institute for Environment interventions and the effects upon household and Development, London, 2001. livelihoods. In addition to the fi nal technical report WILD produced 28 working papers, 10 research Suich, H. Summary of Partial Results from the Socio- discussion papers, several databases, consultants’ economic Household Survey regarding Community- reports, fact sheets and posters and held numer- based Natural Resource Management and Liveli- ous workshops. All of this information is available hoods in Caprivi and Kunene, WILD Project Working from the DEA library in Windhoek or from Wild’s Paper No 12, 2003. website: http://www.dea.met.gov.na/met/pro- Vaughan, C.A., J. Katjiua, S. Mulonga & N. Branston, grammes/Wild/wild.htm. Information used for this Living with Wildlife: proceedings of a workshop to paper is derived from data generated under the evaluate wildlife utilisation and human confl ict with project. Some fi gures may have changed since community game guards, Ombinda Lodge. Kunene, collection. Research topics ranged from tourism, WILD Project working paper 16, Windhoek, 2003a. community enterprises, meat distribution, and lo- Vaughan, C., J. Katjiua, S. Mulonga & N. Branston, cal wildlife use and conservancy wildlife utilisation Proceedings of a workshop held to discuss WILD and in depth household livelihoods research. project key fi ndings and build stakeholder consensus. Ombinda Lodge. Kunene. WILD Project working paper 18, Windhoek 2003b. References Vaughan, C. (J. Katjiua, S. Mulonga & N. Branston, S. Adams, W M. & M. Mulligan, Decolonising Nature: Cash from conservation: A short survey and review strategies for conservation in a postcolonial era, of the Torra conservancy cash payouts to individual- Earthscan, London, 2003. ly registered members. WILD Project working paper Adams, W M., Against Extinction: The Story of Con- 15, Namibia, 2003c. servation, Earthscan, London, 2004. Vaughan C., Constructing conservation: wildlife, liveli- Agrawal, A. Gibson, C. Communities and the Environ- hoods and change in Namibia’s Northwest, Depart- ment: ethnicity, gender and the state in community ment for International and rural development, based conservation, Rutgers University Press, New University of Reading, Reading (UK), Ph.D. Thesis Jersey (USA), 2001. (in progress). Brown. D., Bushmeat and Poverty Alleviation: impli- 316 …if initiativesThe intertwined embraceLLivelihoodsivelih rootso rights,od…buts ofandan poverty,dconservationsecure Conservationconservationconse accessr vwealthatio cann to— canand resources alsoaargumentsr g endenvironmentalu providem upen and tenhancingsPolicy livelihoodsshaping hrealapi nthatparticipation degradationg thet benefits… poverty...hmatterse debatedebate!

JJointoint developmentdevelopment inin protectedprotected areaarea bufferbuffer zones:zones: tthreehree ccasease studiesstudies inin BrazilBrazil EElkelke MannigelMannigel

Abstract. Participatory conservation and development initiatives in the buffer zone of protected areas are an approach to minimize impacts on the areas and promote sustainable development in the adjacent region. Some such initiatives were analyzed in three different protected area sites in Brazil, all belonging to IUCN Category II (“national park”) and situated in the Mata Atlântica Region. The sites, however, were under the governance of different institutions acting at different levels (a national conservation body, a state forestry institute and a non-governmental organisation). Since 1995, the three governance institutions collaborated in a project supported by the German Technical Cooperation. Although the areas had different surroundings, histories and management approaches, some general conclusions can be drawn from the case studies. Functioning of participatory conservation and development projects in the buffer zones was found to be inﬂ uenced by interacting factors, such as personal interest, institutional support and social organisation. On one hand, some negative factors reinforced each other and diminished participation and project success. On the other, some positive factors seemed able to contribute to the development of active and constructive partnerships. Two main participatory approaches can concern buffer zone initiatives: participation in conservation and development projects in the buffer zones and participation in the management of the protected area, for example through management contracts or committees. Focus here is on the ﬁ rst approach and the analysis shows that the three initiatives do not appear to have made major contributions to poverty alleviation. More positive results, however, were achieved when local actors were stimulated to promote their own development or strong institutional partnerships could be built. The institutions managing protected areas do not seem well suited to take sole responsibility for the promotion of development in the buffer zones.

Protected areas, poverty possible solution.3 Two different ap- alleviation and participation proaches of participation for parks can Over the past decade the perception be distinguished: participation through of the role of protected areas changed promotion of integrated conservation from a sole conservation oriented focus and development projects in the buffer to an inclusion of social and economic zones and direct participation of local issues. People-oriented approaches to stakeholders in the management of biodiversity conservation are now wide- protected areas, for example through ly accepted and the linkage of protect- management contracts or committees. ed areas to sustainable development Focus here is on the ﬁ rst approach is receiving more and more attention.1 concerning sustainable development Many social conﬂ icts become apparent in the buffer zones and its contribu- during establishment as well as imple- tion to poverty alleviation. Subject of mentation of protected areas (espe- this study were three different Brazil- cially for the more restrictive IUCN ian protected areas belonging to the management categories,2 which in this IUCN Category II, for which both public paper will be referred to as “parks”) participation and contribution to pov- and public participation and involve- erty alleviation are still controversial ment of local stakeholders is seen as a features. The three areas are governed 317 Poverty, wealth and conservation

by different institutions, allowing for Challenges for participatory conser- differentiated analyses of the processes vation and development initiatives in in question.4 buffer zones are similar to those for nnotot thethe approachapproach ofof Integrated conservation and participatory ap- iintegratedntegrated conserva-conserva- development in the buffer zone proaches in general. Most projects ttionion andand developmentdevelopment Integrated conservation and develop- criticized do not ment initiatives in buffer zones of pro- iitself,tself, butbut ratherrather thethe consider lessons tected areas are designed to minimize aactualctual implementa-implementa- already learned impact on these areas and promote in regards to local ttionion inin thethe fieldfield isis local development in the surrounding involvement and sstilltill fullfull ofof flaws.flaws. region. Projects aim at the compensa- participation in ru- tion of local stakeholders affected by ral development projects. Therefore not resource use restrictions and loss in in- the approach of integrated conserva- come or other hardships caused by the tion and development itself, but rather establishment of the protected area. the actual implementation in the fi eld Participation of local stakeholders in is still full of fl aws. Participation of local planning and implementing such activi- stakeholders certainly is no warrant for ties is seen as essential for their long long-term conservation, but failure to term success. Methods used for this involve local stakeholders may guaran- approach are often adapted from rural tee a projects’ failure. The aim of this development. Joint learning, multiple contribution is to analyze the factors perspectives, fl exibility and support for infl uencing participation in these inte- local innovations are seen as basic con- grated approaches and their contribu- ditions to promote rural development. tion to poverty alleviation. Along with the local realities, it is important to acknowledge policy context, organizational culture, management How can participation be structures, professional norms and analyzed? fi eld practice in all these approaches, The participatory approaches stud- to achieve long term positive outcomes ied are dynamic processes, changing not only on local level. and adapting over time. The research methodology had to be able to capture However, there is still little consistent these changes. An open approach was evidence that these efforts increase therefore chosen, where only broad sustainability of conservation and ru- thematic outlines are defi ned in the ral development at the same time. An beginning and questions are developed increasing number of authors questions and adapted throughout the research these integrated approaches for being and analyses periods. Validity, reli- based on false assumptions and being ability and objectivity of the informa- implemented without taking the local tion were verifi ed through the multiple social and political reality into account.5 sources and iterations. Data and trends Often perceived as conservation proj- observed were crosschecked from dif- ects, managers fail to realize that they ferent sources. Repetition of the same are in fact promoting large scale social observations with different actors or interventions where rural development at different times allowed eliminating activities have to fulfi ll conservation biases occurring in qualitative research. objectives. Before presenting the actual case studies a theoretical outline of participation

318 …if initiativesThe intertwined embraceLLivelihoodsivelih rootso rights,od…buts ofandan poverty,dconservationsecure Conservationconservationconse accessr vwealthatio cann to— canand resources alsoaargumentsr g endenvironmentalu providem upen and tenhancingsPolicy livelihoodsshaping hrealapi nthatparticipation degradationg thet benefits… poverty...hmatterse debatedebate!

is given here. are used to distinguish participatory approaches. They are elaborated and As most deﬁ nitions of participation are presented in the following, discussing very broad and yet often fail to cap- the different understandings of partici- ture all meanings of the term as used, pation. Figure 1 gives an overview of a speciﬁ c framework was developed the framework as a whole. for this analysis. Two different criteria

Participation as a mean for efﬁ ciency

AB C D E F G Institution minimal informing information actively negotiat- sharing transferring seeking consult ing ing authority authority Local stake- nominal passive informing giving active interactive taking holder opinions functional responsibility

Participation as an end for empowerment and equity

Figure 1. Different understandings of participation. (adapted from Borrini-Feyerabend, 1996, Pimbert and Pretty, 1997 and Diamond, 2002)

There are two distinct perspectives for view. In most cases, one is an institu- participatory approaches that infl uence tion (government or non-governmental their implementation greatly.6 Partici- organization) promoting a development pation can in fact be understood as: project, a change process, or a fi eld • a mean to improve effi ciency of study. The group affected by the mea- certain interventions, resulting in a sure in question, often referred to as change that is sustainable and ap- local stakeholders, is the other party. proved by a larger number of peo- Although there are often more groups ple. involved, for example other NGOs or scientists, only the perspectives of the • an end, necessary for equity and fi st two groups will be considered for empowerment of underprivileged the development of the framework, as groups. their differences are more pronounced. Some different “levels of participation” Although both perspectives are often are shown in Figure 1. mixed and their distinction is not always straightforward,7 it is important From the fi rst to the last level, con- to have these different perspectives tributions and interventions from the in mind when analyzing participatory local stakeholders increase and the approaches. In addition, there are control of the managing institution different levels of participation along lessens. Control is partially transferred a continuum, from simple sharing of to local stakeholders and expectations information to transfer of power and increase on their part. Although differ- responsibilities.8 Normally more than ent authors argue over one level over one party is involved, each perceiv- another, the order of levels does not ing the process from different points of imply here a ranking of importance or 319 Poverty, wealth and conservation

preference. Understanding participa- Context of the studies tion as a mean to achieve effectiveness Participation in Brazilian protected area allows choosing a level of participation management is mandated through in order to maximize a positive out- recent legislation. The SNUC, a law come. Institutions then are reluctant to that established the National System pass decision-making authority to local of Protected Areas in 2000, foresees stakeholders, and levels E, F, and G are social participation in the establishment seldom used. Seeing participation on and management of protected areas the other hand as an end to empower through public consultations, establish- local stakeholders, these latter levels ment of committees and co-manage- become preferable. It is important to ment with non-governmental organi- emphasize that the different levels are zations. Although these legal changes not distinct, but rather a continuum. are quite advanced in the international context, implementation is slow, as It is acknowledged here that under- protected area institutions have to standing participation in the literary adapt to the new requirements. sense of “taking part” or “acting together”, neither levels A, B nor level However, there are a few initiatives in G can be considered participatory. In Brazil that introduced participation in those cases, the local stakeholders or protected area management and start- the institution are only very distantly ed already prior to these changes. One involved in management and decision- of them is the Doces Matas Project. making activities. Yet, activities on all It was initiated in 1995 to contribute such levels are commonly referred to to the conservation of the remaining as “participatory” (for example stake- forest fragments of the Mata Atlân- holders “participation” in lectures given tica through new and innovative ap- by the institution or community-based proaches. Its objective was to establish management of natural resources) and participatory management systems for because of that they are included in protected areas, focusing on interactive this study. processes between different institutions and local residents. Participatory approaches are increas- The Mata Atlântica, also called the ingly applied to protected area man- Brazilian Costal Forest, once extended agement, although with different aims, along the Brazilian east coast and objectives and methods, which result covered the mountain ranges with a in different social impact as well as diverse forest, including many endemic 9 intended and unintended outcomes. species. Today it is considered one of Participation has been studied by vari- the 25 most important hotspots for ous authors in different settings, but biodiversity conservation worldwide, most studies focus on methodologi- but human settlements, agriculture and cal questions or stakeholder analyses. industry only left about 8% of the origi- Documentation of successful approach- nal vegetation cover.10 es is rare and urgently needed. Which kind of participation is the most ad- The Brazilian institutions involved in equate and what are practical methods the Doces Matas Project are two Bra- of achieving this in already established zilian government institutions from areas with often conﬂ icting surround- different administration levels: the ings are aspects addressed here. federal Brazilian Institute for Environ- ment and Renewable Natural Resources 320 …if initiativesThe intertwined embraceLLivelihoodsivelih rootso rights,od…buts ofandan poverty,dconservationsecure Conservationconservationconse accessr vwealthatio cann to— canand resources alsoaargumentsr g endenvironmentalu providem upen and tenhancingsPolicy livelihoodsshaping hrealapi nthatparticipation degradationg thet benefits… poverty...hmatterse debatedebate!

(IBAMA) and the Minas Gerais State Forestry Institute (IEF), as well as the non-governmental organization (NGO) Fundação Biodiversitas. They represent different governance levels, allowing for an interesting comparison in this study.11 All of them receive technical and ﬁ nancial support by the Deutsche Gesellschaft für technische Zusamme- narbeit mbH (GTZ), a German cooperation enterprise for sustainable development with worldwide operations.

Focus of the Doces Matas Project are three protected areas situated in the watershed of the Doce River (see Fig- ure 2), each managed by one of the institutions just mentioned:

protected area managing institution Caparaó National Park IBAMA Figure 2. Study areas in the Mata Atlântica re- Rio Doce State Park IEF gion in the Brazilian state of Minas Gerais. Mata do Sossego Private Fundação Biodiver- Reserve sitas

The national park and the private reserve are characterized by their loca- tion on the higher mountain ranges, providing water for the surrounding region, while the state park is dominated by a lowland lake system. All three areas have a protection status, which allows only for indirect use through visitation and scientiﬁ c research following the criteria for IUCN Category II. Picture 1. View of Caparaó National Park. The areas are isolated forest patches (Courtesy Elke Mannigel) suffering human pressure from the adjacent area. Coffee monoculture, with Caparaó National Park frequent use of pesticides and high The National Park is a national tour- erosion, is expanding in the two moun- ism attraction, located in two different tain regions (national park and private states within a region dominated by reserve), while the region surround- coffee monoculture. It attracts tourists ing the state park is characterized by a not only from the surrounding region, very heterogeneous surrounding area but also from the urban centers in the including farmland, eucalyptus planta- costal region. Park management objec- tions and a nearby urban and industrial tives and priorities changed in the last center.12 few years from a concentration on the 321 Poverty, wealth and conservation

park, to an opening towards the buf- group concerning local interests and fer zone, following international and confl icts further complicated the pro- national policies chances concerning cess. Discussions were tiresome and protected area management. Neverthe- joint implementation of ecological tour- less, confl icts still exist, enhanced by ism projects is slow as of today. centralized actions from the headquarters of the federal institution manag- Analysis of the participatory approach- ing the park. Expropriations, neces- es employed in the above described sary after the recent establishment of initiatives showed that participation park boundaries, were the most widely occurred at an institutional level, inte- discussed topic. Absence of informa- grating different organized stakehold- tion and consultation of the local land ers working in the buffer zone. Dif- users generated confl icts and mistrust. ferent levels of participation could be Another diffi culty was the differences identifi ed, from shared authority (level in tourism benefi ts obtained by the two F in Figure 1) for the implementation of states, and an increasing competition environmental sound agricultural prac- between institutions. tices, to minimal participation (level A) concerning the establishment of new Promotion of development and con- limits and the ongoing expropriations. servation in the buffer zone was initi- Advantages of institutional cooperation ated by the park administration and for the promotion of integrated devel- the Doces Matas Project. It includes opment and conservation projects were two main initiatives: alternative agri- evident. Through joint institutional cultural practices and planning of eco- activities of buffer zone organizations, logical tourism. The fi rst initiative is actions can be more easily adapted promoted by a partnership of organiza- to local realities and carried out more tions from the buffer zone, comprising effectively. Cooperation among lo- the local offi ces of the state rural ex- cal actors was more successful than tension services, the forest institutes, among non-local groups. Due to these local farmers associations and the park and other activities promoted by the management. Diffi culties in the begin- park, the articulation of institutions in ning of the initiative were their very the buffer zone is increasing. The most different institutional objectives and the prominent changes can be observed reluctance of the local staff of all insti- in park staff. Not only, are they work- tutions to increase their work load and ing with more enthusiasm in the buf- take responsibility for the partnership. fer zone, they also apply learned social Through workshops, joint fi eld work skills in their day to day activities, and excursions, they realized the common goal of promoting a sustainable development through changes in agricultural practices and the advantages of joining forces. The second initiative concerning sustainable tourism development was initiated by participants of the Doces Matas Project in the state capital of Minas Gerais, far away from local realities and without the participation of local groups. Involvement of local actors started in a second step. Picture 2. View of Rio Doce State Park. Missing knowledge of the coordinating (Courtesy Elke Mannigel) 322 …if initiativesThe intertwined embraceLLivelihoodsivelih rootso rights,od…buts ofandan poverty,dconservationsecure Conservationconservationconse accessr vwealthatio cann to— canand resources alsoaargumentsr g endenvironmentalu providem upen and tenhancingsPolicy livelihoodsshaping hrealapi nthatparticipation degradationg thet benefits… poverty...hmatterse debatedebate!

promoting a better image of the park in Stakeholders from the buffer zone do the surrounding area. not question the existence of the park. However, depending on prior contact Rio Doce State Park to the park, their educational level and The State Park is a lowland park, man- their social organization, they demand aged by the State Forestry Institute. a more active participation in plan- The region surrounding the park is het- ning and execution of the development erogeneous, with a variety of different initiatives in the buffer zone. The con- stakeholders and interests. Park objec- servation and development activities tives focus on conservation. Economic were not a priority among the park ad- development of the buffer zone to min- ministrations tasks and even the local imize pressure on the park is another actors, used to outsiders planning their goal defi ned in the management plan. activities, did not take responsibility for Perceptions of the relationship between them. the park and the surrounding area vary according to perspective. While the res- Participation occurred at different idents of the adjacent region fi nd the levels over time and space. For most park distant from their daily activities, of the initiatives analyzed, the level of park staff describes the relationship as involvement was low (level B to C in good and see the park as a promoter of Figure 1). Negotiation and interactive local development. participation (levels E and F) existed only for specifi c concerns, such as fi re Several projects have been initiated in prevention or environmental education, the buffer zone by the park adminis- where contracts with municipal govern- tration and the Doces Matas Project. ments or industrial companies were Production of banana sweets from or- signed. ganic banana plantations, and of bam- boo furniture and sweets from other local fruits are some examples. Most projects were initiated through discussions with local actors (farmers, school teachers or other community members), but without institutional support from headquarters. Environmental education and an integrated plan for the prevention and control of forest fi res are other important initiatives, where the park cooperates with buffer zone institutions. Participation in development initiatives in the surround- Picture 3. Production of banana sweets in the ing area is seen as a mean to improve buffer zone of Rio Doce State Park. park conservation by staff of the For- (Courtesy Elke Mannigel) estry Institute. Nevertheless, park staff envisions a more active involvement of Private Reserve of Mata do stakeholders than staff from the dis- Sossego tant headquarters. As this engagement The Private Reserve is the smallest of does not correspond to an institutional the three areas owned and managed priority, other tasks are seen as more by an NGO. In contrast to its size, the important by the decision-making level reserve has an important contribution and incentives are entirely absent. 323 Poverty, wealth and conservation

to conservation as it is situated in a future, envisioning an interactive par- larger forest remain and harbors one of ticipation (level F), or the take over of the most threatened primate species of responsibilities by communities (level the region. The rural communities sur- G). Focus for NGO staff from head- rounding the reserve are characterized quarters was the conservation of the by coffee monoculture by small-scale reserve and the development activities farmers, with little access to economic were seen as a mean to get the sup- or social services. Contacts between port of the local communities for their the reserve staff and the surrounding objectives. communities were good and regular in areas where activities were carried All different levels of participation could out, but more distant with other com- be found in the relationship of the NGO munities, due to time and transporta- with the rural communities and the tion constrains. Relationships with local different stakeholders in the area sur- associations were collaborative and rounding the reserve. Minimal contact exchanges occurred frequently. Coop- to the rural communities was observed eration with state institutions depended in areas outside the project interven- on personal interest of staff in the local tion (level A), but interactive coopera- offi ces, making the relationships at tion with shared responsibilities (level times complicated. F) could also be frequently observed for certain topics in the last few years. The work of the NGO focused on the Transfer of responsibilities (level G) did communities and the establishment of only occur for very specifi c tasks, and sustainable agricultural techniques and NGO staff acknowledges that this might agroforestry in the coffee plantations. be more possible in the future. Involve- Contact was initiated through partici- ment of institutional actors, especially patory rural appraisals, where whole the state institutions, depended on per- communities were called to discuss sonal interests, as institutional priori- their problems. In the fi rst commu- ties did not include rural development nity, conservation objectives were only or alternative a very small part of the issues listed practices. as important. This changed over the years, as work initiated in new com- The initiatives munities and conservation objectives might not became more important in the region assure imme- and were stated more clearly by the diate conser- NGO. Farmers associations got initiated vation of the and alternatives to coffee monoculture reserve or re- came to the fore. maining forest patches in the Reserve staff and employees working surrounding in the headquarters had different per- area, but they spectives of participation in local de- certainly con- velopment. Their opinions diverged on tributed to so- optimal level of stakeholder and com- cial organiza- munity involvement. Reserve staff saw tion within the participation initiated during develop- municipality. Picture 4. Buffer zone of the ment approaches as an end to empow- Although sup- Mata do Sossego Private Re- er local communities and stakeholders port for conserve. to promote their own activities in the servation var- (Courtesy Elke Mannigel) 324 …if initiativesThe intertwined embraceLLivelihoodsivelih rootso rights,od…buts ofandan poverty,dconservationsecure Conservationconservationconse accessr vwealthatio cann to— canand resources alsoaargumentsr g endenvironmentalu providem upen and tenhancingsPolicy livelihoodsshaping hrealapi nthatparticipation degradationg thet benefits… poverty...hmatterse debatedebate!

ies depending on the personal views of grounds, the support provided by the the stakeholders, an increase in coop- international cooperation project Doces eration could be observed. Support for Matas and the history of the areas local development that would not cause themselves. Although local conﬂ icts adverse environmental impact was the concerning all three protected areas common ground of communication and were common, their overall existence agreement. Environmental conserva- was not question became more important over time tioned, neither by AAlthoughlthough locallocal con-con- and agricultural alternatives became buffer zone insti- fflictslicts concerningconcerning allall more of an issue within the municipal- tutions, nor by tthreehree pprotectedrotected areasareas ity. Local groups acquired a degree of residents of the wwereere ccommon,ommon, ttheirheir social awareness that prompted self-or- adjacent rural and ganization to defend their rights. urban communi- ooverallverall existenceexistence waswas ties. The gov- nnotot questioned,questioned, nei-nei- How does participation work? ernmental areas ttherher byby bbufferuffer zzoneone were created a In all three protected areas studied long time ago and iinstitutions,nstitutions, nornor byby here, park managers, buffer zone the private re- rresidentsesidents ofof thethe adja-adja- stakeholders and residents of the local serve is small and communities conﬁ rm changes towards ccentent rruralural aandnd uurbanrban distant to most a closer relationship over the past few ccommunitiesommunities rural communi- years. Although the areas were quite ties, aspects that both contributed to different in regards to their history of acceptance of the areas. establishment, the characteristics of their surrounding regions and implemented approaches, some general con- Desired level of participation clusions about participation and buffer Different interpretations of participation zone initiatives can be drawn. became obvious in the three case studies. The desired level varied substan- The context of the initiatives was deter- tially depending on the different groups mined by the political and legal back- involved (Figure 3).

ABCDEFG minimal informing information actively negotiating sharing transferring seeking consulting authority authority nominal passive informing giving opin- active interactive taking ions functional responsibility

Local institutional stakeholders Local communities

Protected area staff Headquarter staff

Figure 3. Desired levels of participation for the different actors for activities in the buffer zone.

Participation level preferred by the ac- substantially for local stakeholders and tors from the surrounding region varied residents of the local communities in 325 Poverty, wealth and conservation

all three areas. Institutional stakehold- ent levels of participation described in ers were interested in participating the framework were found in the three actively not only in discussions but also protected areas. Participation increased in decision-making, especially concern- over time for activities promoted in the ing activities in the buffer zones or in buffer zones of the national park and management of the areas, where public the private reserve, changing from low use and other activities affected them. levels of involvement (levels B or C) Conversely, participation was mainly to a more active participation of local seen as a means to improve protected actors (level E or F). Participation was area management and to assure their higher from the beginning on in the long term conservation by staff of the private reserve, AAllll protectedprotected areaarea protected areas and headquarters’ staff but in both gov- of the managing institution. Only local ernmental areas mmanagersanagers aaimedimed aatt staff of the private reserve, and some more active lev- mmoreore aactivective levelslevels ofof members of the ecological tourism els of participa- iinvolvementnvolvement thanthan group acting in the buffer zone of the tion occurred for ttheirheir respectiverespective supe-supe- national park saw participation in local specifi c activities. development initiatives as an end and Involvement level rriorsiors inin thethe distantdistant an avenue to empower local communi- of local communi- hheadquarters,eadquarters, espe-espe- ties. Their objective was the mobiliza- ties was lowest cciallyially forfor activitiesactivities inin tion of the communities or buffer zone in the state park tthehe bufferbuffer zzoneone stakeholders to pursue their own de- (level B - C), velopment goals in a sustainable way. where few changes occurred over time. All protected area managers aimed at The integrated plan for fi re prevention more active levels of involvement than from the same park, however, is a good their respective superiors in the distant example for shared authority (level headquarters, especially for activities in F). Transfer of authority (level G) was the buffer zone. found only for specifi c activities and concerning some stakeholders in the Level of participation implemented private reserve. Participation level implemented varied for the different activities and increased over time for some of them. All differ-

Picture 6. Farmers market in the vicinity of the Picture 5. Coffee farmer and intercropping with Mata do Sossego Private Reserve – a ﬁ rst at- legumes in the buffer zone of the Mata do Sos- tempt to increase income. sego Private Reserve. (Courtesy Elke Mannigel) (Courtesy Elke Mannigel) 326 …if initiativesThe intertwined embraceLLivelihoodsivelih rootso rights,od…buts ofandan poverty,dconservationsecure Conservationconservationconse accessr vwealthatio cann to— canand resources alsoaargumentsr g endenvironmentalu providem upen and tenhancingsPolicy livelihoodsshaping hrealapi nthatparticipation degradationg thet benefits… poverty...hmatterse debatedebate!

Factors infl uencing implementation as personal contact, social skills and of participatory approaches self-confi dence were found important The factors infl uencing participation to raise participation levels, especially could be separated into four groups: in the early phases of the process. individual, socio-cultural, institutional Once participation is established, in- and logistical. creased involvement promotes a se- ……stereotypes,stereotypes, insuf-insuf- The different fac- ries of positive factors, which enhance each other. With raising involvement, fficienticient knowledgeknowledge tors interact and either increase knowledge about the local and insti- aandnd llowow iinstitutionalnstitutional or decrease par- tutional realities increases and joint ppriorityriority interactinteract andand ticipation (Figure planning and implementation is facili- mmakeake iitt iincreasinglyncreasingly 4). Where par- tated. Institutional factors are impor- ticipation levels tant for the higher participation levels. ddifficultifficult toto overcomeovercome are low, certain Social organization in the buffer zone eexistingxisting conflictsconflicts negative factors and the decentralization of protected ……[while]…[while]… ppersonalersonal enhanced one area institution are essential to reach higher levels of participation, as effec- ccontact,ontact, socialsocial skillsskills another. Estab- lished stereo- tive negotiations can not occur without aandnd sself-confidenceelf-confidence types, insuffi cient these changes. The involvement of the aarere iimportantmportant toto raiseraise knowledge of the decision-making level of protected area pparticipationarticipation levels…levels… different realities institutions in the local activities may and low insti- be an alternative to decentralization, tutional priority interact and make it but achievement seems impossible for increasingly diffi cult to overcome exist- all protected areas. ing confl icts. Individual factors, such

Figure 4. Model of factors inﬂ uencing participation level according to Mannigel, 2004. 327 Poverty, wealth and conservation

Different approaches to residents and social organization in participation in buffer zones the buffer zone. In the three case studies two different approaches for the promotion of Disadvantages: conservation and development projects • interests of communities and staff in the buffer zones of protected areas from the headquarters of the pro- could be observed (Figure 5). tected area institution is low in the beginning; • low institutional support through the protected area institution; • difﬁ cult logistics.

In regions dominated by confl ict and stereotypes, interest in active cooperation of rural community residents and staff from headquarters of the protected area agencies is low. Figure 5. Different approaches to participation. Sustainability of the initiatives can only be granted 1. Promotion of activities in direct through empowerment or continued cooperation with rural communities supervision of the activities by protect- The institution managing the protected ed area staff. To strengthen local com- area promotes local development and munities on one hand, participation has conservation initiatives in the rural to be understood as an end in itself. communities to reduce negative im- This is rarely the case in protected area pacts on the area and raise acceptance. management, as biodiversity conservation is almost always seen as more Advantages: important than the promotion of inde- • contact established with rural com- pendent local development. Continued munities, towards minimizing im- assistance on the other hand cannot pacts of land use and promoting be provided, if the institutional interest local development; and personnel and fi nancial resources • personal contacts between protected are low. Because many protected areas area management and residents of are owned and managed by govern- the surrounding communities; mental institutions, this approach may • better knowledge about local reali- thus be impossible to implement. ties; • facilitation of joint learning 2. Institutional cooperation • better self-confi dence of community Management of the protected area 328 …if initiativesThe intertwined embraceLLivelihoodsivelih rootso rights,od…buts ofandan poverty,dconservationsecure Conservationconservationconse accessr vwealthatio cann to— canand resources alsoaargumentsr g endenvironmentalu providem upen and tenhancingsPolicy livelihoodsshaping hrealapi nthatparticipation degradationg thet benefits… poverty...hmatterse debatedebate!

and stakeholders from the buffer zone Contribution to poverty alleviation cooperate in planning and execution of In all three case studies analyzed high activities. expectations were observed, especially for buffer zone actors, concerning the Advantages: outcomes of the development initia- • strategic alliances to minimize im- tives. Short term fi nancial gains were pacts on the area and promote local envisioned in the development; beginning of al- ……nonenone ooff tthehe aap-p- • high interest in cooperation on the- most all activities. pproachesroaches observedobserved inin matic areas were objectives are However, none of common; the approaches tthishis studystudy increasedincreased • easy logistics. observed in this eeconomicconomic benefitsbenefits forfor study increased tthehe surroundingsurrounding Disadvantages: economic benefi ts • prerequisite of organized stakehold- for the surround- ccommunityommunity substan-substan- ers in the buffer zone; ing community ttiallyially overover thethe pastpast • challenge of adaptation to local reali- substantially over ffourour yyears…ears… ties. the past four years. This lessened participation and Especially local stakeholders and local enthusiasm of local stakeholders over protected area staff are interested in time in some of the initiatives. Some this type of engagement, as shown in stakeholders, especially habitants of the case studies. Institutional backup the rural communities, expected ex- is often low for governmental stake- ternal solutions for their problems and holders and protected area institutions, neither self-organization nor develop- but headquarter staff normally does ment on their own account took place. not oppose such strategic cooperation Where participation and promotion of for specifi c issues. Implementation is the initiatives was seen as a mean to therefore advisable for governmen- increase effi ciency of the conservation, tal institution in protected areas with the agencies did not value the indepen- large, heterogeneous buffer zone, dent development of the communities where institutional stakeholders exist. and project success depended on continued external support. Where conservation objectives were stated clearly in the beginning and development initiative were seen as an end to empower communities, an increase in self-con- sciousness of community members and social organization in the buffer zones could be observed. Interest in organic coffee culture and ecological tourism development increased especially in the National Park and the Private Reserve. These can be fi rst steps towards sustainable economic alternatives in the Picture 7. Discussions about the different uses future. for tree species in the buffer zone of the Mata do Sossego Private Reserve. For the protected area administrations, (Courtesy Elke Mannigel) and especially for headquarter staff, 329 Poverty, wealth and conservation

development goals were less impor- vate Reserve, direct implementation in tant. Most of them saw the participa- the local communities might work well, tory projects as a mean to increase but for larger areas this is not viable. management effectiveness of their In this case strong partnerships and areas. Institutional support by the re- transfer of authority to local actors are sponsible agency was therefore often necessary. Social organization of the low. Personal interest and capacities of buffer zone, social skills as well as ex- park staff infl uenced their commitment isting social organization is necessary in the initiatives. Missing knowledge requirements for such transfers. As about economic issues, such as access sustainable changes take time, initia- to markets, commercialization and fi - tives should be designed as long term nancing mechanisms reduced effective- projects from the beginning on. In ness of the approaches. summary, the case studies cited in this paper show that under specifi c circumstances a substantial contribution to poverty alleviation through sustainable development in the buffer zone of protected areas is possible, but it remains a challenge to all actors involved.

Elke Mannigel ([email protected]) coordinates the international projects at the Tropical Forest Foundation OroVerde in Germany. She has been associated with the German Technical Cooperation Agency (GTZ) and has conducted ﬁ eld work in Brazil while developing her PhD-Thesis in International Nature Conservation.

Picture 8. Discussing community development Notes in the buffer zone of the Mata do Sossego Pri- 1 One of the recommendations of the World Parks vate Reserve. (Courtesy Elke Mannigel) Congress in September 2003 in Durban (number V 29) states that protected areas should strive to Taking into account the shortcomings contribute to poverty reduction at the local level. Resolutions from the World Conservation Congress of protected areas, such as shortage in Bangkok in November 2004 state the new role of fi nancial resources and specifi cally of conservations organizations in poverty allevia- skilled personnel, tion and development: “conservationists must strive to increase responsiveness to the concerns llocalocal parkpark staffstaff lacklack the promotion of the poor who live in and around areas signifi - tthehe forceforce andand thethe of development cant for conservation” (RESWCC 3.016). A linkage projects does not of protected areas to the surrounding landscapes/ kknowledgenowledge ttoo imple-imple- seascapes is sought to restore the relationship seem to be a task between people and places minimizing confl icts mmentent ddevelopmentevelopment suited for con- and assuring biodiversity conservation on the long term. Another resolution form the World Conserva- pprojects…arojects…a contribu-contribu- servation agen- tion Congress calls upon the World Conservation ttionion toto povertypoverty alle-alle- cies. Sustainable Union (IUCN) to strengthen, facilitate and promote development and the full and active participation of all stakeholders vviationiation inin thethe bufferbuffer in the implementation of activities which tangibly contribution to benefi t poverty reduction and nature conservation” zzoneone isis possible,possible, butbut itit poverty allevia- (RESWCC 3.014). rremainsemains a cchallengehallenge tion is seen as an 2 IUCN category II important issue 3 Many authors affi rm that participation is essential ttoo allall actorsactors involved.involved. for sustainable management of protected areas, by local park see for example Wells et al., 1992; Borrini-Feyera- staff, but they lack the force and the bend, 1996; Pimbert and Pretty, 1997; McNeely, knowledge to implement both on their 2001; Pretty, 2002. 4 A more comprehensive analysis of the case stud- own. In smaller areas, such as the Pri- ies, including the second approach of participation 330 …if initiativesThe intertwined embraceLLivelihoodsivelih rootso rights,od…buts ofandan poverty,dconservationsecure Conservationconservationconse accessr vwealthatio cann to— canand resources alsoaargumentsr g endenvironmentalu providem upen and tenhancingsPolicy livelihoodsshaping hrealapi nthatparticipation degradationg thet benefits… poverty...hmatterse debatedebate!

in the management of the protected area, can be 2002. found in Mannigel (2004). Fundação-SOS-Mata-Atlântica, Atlas da evolução dos 5 See for example Barrett and Arcese, 1995; Gibson remanecentes fl orestais e ecosistemas no domínio and Marks, 1995; Brandon et al., 1998; Agarwal da Mata Atlântica no período 1990-1995, São Paulo, and Gibson, 1999; Brandon, 2000. 1998. 6 Adapted from Borrini-Feyerabend, (1996), Pimbert Fundação-SOS-Mata-Atlântica. Atlas dos remanecen- and Pretty, (1997) and Diamond, (2002) tes fl orestais da Mata Atlântica. Período 1995-2000. 7 Cleaver, 1999, Diamond, 2002. Relatório fi nal, São Paulo, 2002. 8 Borrini-Feyerabend, 1996; Pimbert and Pretty, Gibson C. C. and S. A. Marks, “Transforming rural 1997; Mattes, 1998; Agarwal, 2001. hunters into conservationists: an assessment of community-based wildlife management programs in 9 Cooke and Kothari, 2001. Africa”, World Development, 23 (7): 941-957, 1995. 10 Fundação-SOS-Mata-Atlântica, 1998; CI-Brasil IUCN, Durban Action Plan, Durban, South Africa. 8-17 et al., 2000; Myers et al., 2000; Fundação-SOS- September 2003, IUCN, The World Conservation Mata-Atlântica, 2002 Union, 2003. 11 McNeely, 1999; IUCN, 2003. Mannigel, E., Integrating parks and neighbors. Par- 12 All three protected areas and their surrounding ticipation and protected areas in three case studies region, history and important local stakeholders in the Mata Atlântica region of Brazil, PhD-Disser- are described in detail in the study by Mannigel tation, Greifswald, University of Greifswald, 2004. (2004). (published in 2005 by Weissensee Verlag, Berlin, Germany) McNeely, J., A., “Protected area institutions” pp. 195- References 204 in Stolton S. and N. Dudley (eds.), Partnerships Agarwal A. and C. C. Gibson, “Enchantment and for Protection. New strategies for planning and man- disenchantment: the role of community in natural agement for protected areas, Earthscan Publications resource conservation”, World Development, 27 (4): Ltd., WWF, IUCN, London, 1999. 629-649, 1999. McNeely, J., A., “Roles for civil society in protected Agarwal B., “Participatory exclusions, community area management: a global perspective on current forestry, and gender: an analysis for South Asia and trends in collaborative management” pp. 27-49 in: a conceptual framework”, World Development, 29 Buck L. E., C.C. Geisler, J. Schelhas and E. Wollen- (10): 1623-1648, 2001. berg (eds.). Biological Diversity: balancing interests Barrett C. B. and P. Arcese, “Are integrated conserva- through adaptive collaborative management, CRC tion and development projects (ICDPs) sustainable? Press, Boca Raton, London, New York, Washington On the conservation of large mammals in Sub-Saha- D. C., 2001. ran Africa”, World Development, 23 (7): 1073-1084, Myers N., R. A. Mittermeier, C. G. Mittermeier, G. A. 1995. B. d. Fonseca and J. Kent. “Biodiversity hotspots Borrini-Feyerabend, G., Collaborative management of for conservation priorities“, Nature. 403: 853-858, protected areas: tailoring the approach to the con- 2000. text, Gland, Switzerland, IUCN, 1996. Pimbert M. P. and J. N. Pretty, “Parks, people and pro- Brandon, K., “Moving beyond integrated conserva- fessionals: putting ‘participation’ into protected area tion and development projects (ICDPs) to achieve management” pp. 297-330 in Ghimire K. B. and M. biodiversity conservation” in Lee D. R. and C. B. P. Pimbert (eds.), Social Change and Conservation. Barrett (eds.), Tradeoffs or synergies? Agricultural Environmental politics and impacts of national parks intensifi cation, economic development and the envi- and protected areas, Earthscan Publications Limited, ronment, 417-432, CAB International, Wallingford, London, 1997. (UK), 2000. Pretty, J., “People, livelihoods and collective action in Brandon K., K. H. Redford and S. E. Sanderson, Parks biodiversity management” in O´Riordan T. and S. in Peril. People, politics and protected areas, The Stoll-Kleemann (eds.), Biodiversity, Sustainability Nature Conservancy, Island Press, Washington, D.C. and Human Communities. Protecting beyond the and Covelo (California), 1998. protected, University Press, Cambridge (UK), 2002. CI-Brasil MMA, F. S. M. Atlântica, F.Biodiversitas, I. d. Wells M., K. Brandon and L. Hannah, People and P. Ecolgicas, SEMAD-SP and IEF-MG, Avaliações e Parks: linking protected area management with ações prioritárias para a conservação da biodiver- local communities, World Bank, Washington, D.C., sidade da Mata Atlântica e Campos Sulinos, MMA, 1992. Brasília, 2000. Cleaver F., “Paradoxes of participation: questioning participatory approaches to development”, Journal of International Development, (11) 597-612, 1999. Cooke B. and U. Kothari, Participation: the new tyr- anny?, London, Zed Books Ltd., 2001. Diamond N., Participatory Conservation for Protected Areas. An annotated bibliography of selected sources (1996-2001), World Bank, Washington D.C., 331 Poverty, wealth and conservation

PParticipation:articipation: a prerequisiteprerequisite forfor conservation?conservation? TThehe NNaturaatura 22000000 nnetworketwork aandnd llocalocal pprotestrotest iinn thethe iislandsland ofof Cyprus.Cyprus. AAnnanna PhilippouPhilippou

Abstract. The establishment of Protected Areas is a tool of great importance for the conservation of the biodiversity of our planet and is characterized as “the most widely accepted means of biodiversity conservation so far supported by national and international agencies”.1 Local communities, however, do not always welcome the establishment of Protected Areas on their grounds with the same enthusiasm. The present study investigates the reasons that led a few villages in the Akamas peninsula, such as Inia and Drousia, to oppose the Natura 2000 European network of Protected Areas. It describes a few important ﬁ ndings of a qualitative inquiry conducted in both urban and rural areas of the island, aiming to examine how people value Protected Areas and whether they were aware of the Natura 2000 network. The results suggest that people living near the candidate sites of Natura 2000 oppose the network because they have been left out of the selection process. Additionally, the survey demonstrates that even though people hold favorable attitudes towards the environment, they were not familiar with the Natura 2000. People in rural areas were the most receptive to the establishment of Protected Areas on their lands. In the light of the analysis described in this paper, it appears essential that, during the next phase of the Na- tura 2000 local government agencies work with village residents to make certain that the opportunity is made available for them to engage with stronger voices in the decision-making processes that affect their lives.

agencies”.2 But communities living in or around Protected Areas do not always greet their establishment with the same enthusiasm. Such an example is the implementation of the European Union’s network of protected areas— Natura 2000— in Cyprus. Here we examine this case to provide insights into people’s attitudes towards Protect- ed Areas. Speciﬁ cally we address the attitude that Cypriots have towards the existence of Protected Areas and natural environment and whether they are familiar with the Natura 2000 network in Cyprus. We also analysed the way Picture 1. A local resident of Inia returns to the village from his goat-herding activities. in which the Natura 2000 network was (Courtesy Anna Philippou) implemented in Cyprus and the reasons why the local communities in the Aka- he establishment of Protected Areas mas peninsula, and speciﬁ cally the vil- Tis “the most widely accepted means of lage of Inia, came to oppose the Natura biodiversity conservation so far sup- 2000 initiatives. ported by national and international 332 …if initiativesThe intertwined embraceLLivelihoodsivelih rootso rights,od…buts ofandan poverty,dconservationsecure Conservationconservationconse accessr vwealthatio cann to— canand resources alsoaargumentsr g endenvironmentalu providem upen and tenhancingsPolicy livelihoodsshaping hrealapi nthatparticipation degradationg thet benefits… poverty...hmatterse debatedebate!

Cyprus is located in the Eastern part of cal diversity within the EU.6 Its legal the Mediterra- basis is found in the Habitats Direc- TThehe HHabitatsabitats DirectiveDirective nean occupying tive (1992) and the Birds Directive ddoesoes nnotot callcall forfor thethe an area of 9251 (1979). Under EU law, all EU countries eexclusionxclusion ofof allall hu-hu- km2. In ancient must adopt Natura 2000. The Habitats mmanan aactivitiesctivities withinwithin times it was Directive does not call for the exclu- entirely forested sion of all human activities within the tthehe “Natura“Natura 2000”2000” and was known Natura 2000 sites, but human activities ssites,ites, butbut hhumanuman aac-c- as the “green can be maintained as long as they do ttivitiesivities cancan bebe main-main- island of the not threaten the biodiversity objectives ancient world”.3 of the Protected Areas.7 ttainedained asas longlong asas theythey It is still rich in ddoo nnotot threatenthreaten thethe fauna bbiodiversityiodiversity objectivesobjectives and ooff thethe ProtectedProtected Areas.Areas. fl ora with a great number of species relative to its small size and one of the richest fl oras in the Mediterranean basin. It is also listed as one of the biodiversity hotspots in the Mediterranean basin.4 The Cyprus fl ora includes 1800 different taxa of which 7% (128 taxa) are endemic.5 Since 1974, 36% of the territory of the Republic of Cyprus has been under the control of the Turkish occupation troops, 162.000 Greek Cypriots (32% of the Greek Cypriot population) have become refugees and important habitats in the Northern part of the island have been destroyed. In addition current trends of tourist development and the over-exploitation of resources place the natural habitats and the endemic species of the island at risk.

Natura 2000 was initiated in 1992 aiming to cover fragile and valuable natu- Map 1. Map of Akamas showing the state forest and tourist zones. Source: Convention on the Conservation of European ral habitats and species of wildlife and natural habitats, Standing Committee 21st meeting, particular importance for Strasbourg 26-30 November 2001, Speciﬁ c ﬁ le: Conservation of the conservation of biologi- the Akamas Peninsula in Cyprus, Report by the NGOs. 333 Poverty, wealth and conservation

The Natura 2000 network must be seen an “untouched wilderness”, probably in the context of the global growth of infl uenced by the American wilderness the coverage of protected areas— from ethics, leads many conservation initia- 2.4 in 1963 to over 20 million km2 in tives to focus on eliminating or restrict- 2005. In September 2003, the Fifth ing people’s access to natural resourc- World Parks Congress in Durban, South es. As a consequence, the designation Africa, announced, “the global network of Protected Areas has been associated of protected areas now covers 11.5% with forced displacement and loss of of the planet’s land surface. This sur- access to natural resources for the passes the 10% target proposed a people living in and around them, with decade earlier, at the Caracas Con- little or no compensation leading to gress, for 9 out of 14 major terrestrial local protest and opposition.13 In such biomes”.8 According to Geisler, in 1950 cases, protected areas have increased there were fewer than 1000 protected poverty often amongst the poorest of areas worldwide. The count grew to the poor.14 3,500 in 1885 and to 9,800 in 1995 before exploding to today’s 105,000.9 The problems of this approach are evident in the resistance they generate, The Natura 2000 initiative may be typi- as these cases demonstrate. In the cal in its inadequate attention to local early autumn of 1997, four landowners needs. Some observers have noted from Karvia, Finland, went on hunger that “so far, the compilation of national strike to protest against the proposed lists for important habitats and species Natura 2000 network. The reasons for around Europe has been the respon- their protest were that the landowners sibility of civil servants and scientists had not been consulted in the selec- who follow a set of scientifi c criteria, tion process, that they disagreed with while the perspectives of local people the Ministry’s proposals and that they living in those habitats have not always felt that they had to stand up for their been incorporated in the selection pro- rights. The hunger strike got much cess”.10 Indeed, there are many diffi cul- public attention and it ended a week ties arising when promoting the ideals after a visit to the scene by the Min- of human dignity while pursuing na- ister of Agriculture and Forestry and ture protection. “The vexing dilemma after nearly half of the areas had been between preserving biodiversity and withdrawn from the Natura 2000.15 Ad- protecting the livelihood of populations ditionally, it is worth mentioning that deemed to endanger biodiversity is nei- due to the fact that no arrangements ther new, nor easy to solve”.11 were made for public involvement, the process “prompted a huge reac- A common assumption in the conservation, including almost 15,000 letters tion arena has been that local people of appeal nationwide”.16 In France the are responsible for the environmental opposition came fi rstly from the rep- degradation and that people have an resentatives of private forests called adverse effect on the natural ecosys- “Group 9”, later joined by important tems. For that reason, some main- representatives from the agricultural, tain that conservation goals are best forestry, game and fi sh-breeding sec- achieved when all anthropogenic forces tors. “Group 9” objected to the meth- are removed from the Protected Ar- ods used by the Ministry of Environ- eas.12 In addition, the ideology that ment for the compilation of the lists of fragile nature should be preserved as sites. They also demanded the surface 334 …if initiativesThe intertwined embraceLLivelihoodsivelih rootso rights,od…buts ofandan poverty,dconservationsecure Conservationconservationconse accessr vwealthatio cann to— canand resources alsoaargumentsr g endenvironmentalu providem upen and tenhancingsPolicy livelihoodsshaping hrealapi nthatparticipation degradationg thet benefits… poverty...hmatterse debatedebate!

areas of the Natura 2000 sites to be identify whether people were familiar reduced and fi nancial resources to be with the Natura 2000 network. Addi- allocated so as to compensate for the tionally, in order to examine why peo- loss of earnings due to the new man- ple in the villages of Akamas peninsula agement measures. This led to a huge protested against the Natura 2000, a protest and the Ministry of Environment focus group in Inia and an interview re-launched the Natura 2000 on 5th of with the Community Leader of Drou- February 1997 resulting to a decreased sia were undertaken. Furthermore, an number of sites and the incorporation interview with the Project Leader of Na- of local people in the selection proc- tura 2000 was also conducted in order ess.17 to provide an insight on how the fi rst phase of the project— the selection of It is not only morally and socially just candidate sites— had been conducted to incorporate local people in the con- and what diffi culties the Cypriot team servation process but it is also advan- had faced during the procedure. tageous to conservation.18 People need incentives in order to see conservation Findings in a positive way. Their income losses The Project Leader of Natura 2000 in have to be compensated based on both Cyprus reported that the compilation moral and legal standards. There ap- of the list of the candidate sites was pears to be an IItt isis notnot onlyonly mor-mor- based on scientifi c evidence only. Local urgent need to communities were not consulted in this aallylly andand sociallysocially justjust make conserva- process. On the contrary, they were ttoo incorporateincorporate locallocal tion concepts only informed after the selection pro- comprehensible ppeopleeople inin thethe conserva-conserva- cedure was over and the government to the general began an informative campaign to raise ttionion processprocess butbut itit public. Adams public awareness and enlighten them iiss alsoalso advantageousadvantageous says: “When about Natura 2000 and its importance. ttoo conservationconservation people feel pas- Initially, 43 areas were recognized as sion for nature, candidate sites for the Natura 2000 the arguments that carry conviction, network but due to political obstacles and also the possibility of broad demo- (seven of them were in the Northern cratic support, are those that make (occupied part) and three under the UK 19 sense to ordinary people”. A fi rst step Sovereign Base Areas) only 33 were fi - here has to be attempting to under- nally included in the network, covering stand local positions and perspectives. 22.6 % of the island’s surface. More We attempt this here for Cyprus. than half of these areas (18 out of 33) are private land. The research method In order to examine people’s attitudes The survey revealed that interviewees and perspectives towards the environ- have favourable attitudes towards the ment and Protected Areas, a survey environment and they appreciate the was conducted by means of a question- ecological, cultural and economic sig- naire administered through personal nifi cance of the Protected Areas and interviews. The survey was conducted the environment in general. However, in July 2004 in both urban and rural ar- even though interviewees were positive eas all over the south part of the island towards the environment, only 40% in order to shed more light to people’s of them were familiar with the Natura attitude towards the environment and 2000 network, the majority of these 335 Poverty, wealth and conservation

from rural areas. very few important sea turtle nesting areas in the Mediterranean region and The survey surprisingly demonstrated is protected under the Barcelona Con- that people living in rural areas, even vention. Both the loggerhead (Carreta- though they carreta) and the Green turtle (Chelonia RRuralural ppeople-theeople-the onesones stated that they mydas) depend on the Akamas beach- tthathat areare mostlymostly do not sup- es for their survival. Also, monk seals port the Natura have been occasionally reported in the aaffectedffected bbyy tthehe NNatu-atu- 2000 network as area. rraa 20002000 nnetworketwork aarere much as people rreceptiveeceptive toto thethe possi-possi- in urban areas, The main occupation of the people bbilityility ofof establishingestablishing were more will- living in the village of Inia is sheep or ing to sacrifi ce goat raising and viticulture. Due to the PProtectedrotected AAreasreas oonn their land for urbanisation trend that has been prev- ttheirheir land.land. HoweverHowever environmental alent in the island during the past few ttherehere aarere aalsolso strongstrong protection com- decades most of residents are older pared to people men and women. ddiscrepanciesiscrepancies betweenbetween in urban areas. tthesehese declareddeclared In contrast, The village of Inia has a previous con- aattitudesttitudes andand actualactual even though the servation history beginning 15 years bbehaviour,ehaviour, asas thethe IniaInia majority of the ago. In 1989, the Ministry of Environ- urban sample ment decided that the Akamas pe- ccasease illustrates.illustrates. (93%) claimed ninsula was of to support the network, when they had great importance TThehe AAkamaskamas been asked whether they would sacri- and therefore it ppeninsulaeninsula isis oneone ofof fi ce their land, a 66% stated that they should be protect- would respond negatively. ed. Therefore, tthehe mostmost importantimportant they drafted the nnaturalatural habitatshabitats These fi ndings are very important as Akamas scheme ooff Cyprus.Cyprus. BothBoth they suggest that rural people, the and the area tthehe loggerheadloggerhead ones that are mostly affected by the around the penin- Natura 2000, are receptive to the pos- sula was listed as (CCarreta-carretaarreta-carreta) sibility of establishing Protected Areas a Protected Area. aandnd tthehe GreenGreen tturtleurtle on their land. However there are also According to the (CCheloniahelonia mydasmydas) strong discrepancies between these community leader ddependepend oonn tthehe declared attitudes and actual behaviour of Drousia, “…it as the Inia case illustrates. was aiming to AAkamaskamas beachesbeaches forfor protect the Aka- ttheirheir survival.survival. The case of Inia in the Akamas mas peninsula by Peninsula converting private land to governmen- The village of Inia is situated in the tal. The government took away our western tip of the Cyprus, known also land in exchange to money and other as the Akamas peninsula. The Akamas land. However, this was only in the 20 peninsula is one of the most important papers.”. natural habitats of Cyprus. It covers about 230 km2 and is located in the Following a request from the Cyprus 21 western tip of the island. Its breath- Government in 1992 a project was taking beauty is reminiscent of Hom- set up by the World’s Bank Mediterra- er’s time. Furthermore, it is one of the nean Technical Assistance Programme (METAP), and funded jointly by the 336 …if initiativesThe intertwined embraceLLivelihoodsivelih rootso rights,od…buts ofandan poverty,dconservationsecure Conservationconservationconse accessr vwealthatio cann to— canand resources alsoaargumentsr g endenvironmentalu providem upen and tenhancingsPolicy livelihoodsshaping hrealapi nthatparticipation degradationg thet benefits… poverty...hmatterse debatedebate!

World Bank and the EU, to prepare a the Natura 2000 network. They be- management plan for the Akamas and lieved that only the land that does not its surrounding area. The resulting have the perspectives for development report, usually referred to as the World or cultivation Bank Study, was published in 1995 and should be part ““WeWe sspentpent soso muchmuch it called for the strict protection of the of the network. ttimeime ttoo transformtransform beaches and of the core area (which They said, “We tthishis barrenbarren landland intointo largely corresponds to the State For- spent so much est) and the creation of buffer zones time to transform ccultivatedultivated land.land. NowNow around it, which would be restricted to this barren land ttheyhey wantwant toto taketake itit traditional activities, with little or no into cultivated aawayway fromfrom uus.s. AAllll development to be taking place. The land. Now they oourur eefforts,fforts, timetime aandnd main aim of this study was to declare want to take it Akamas as a National Park. However, away from us. All ssweatweat aarere ggoingoing still there is not much done and even our efforts, time wwasted.asted. WWee ddoo nnotot though Akamas is considered as a Na- and sweat are go- wwantant tthishis toto happenhappen tional Park, there are no clearly defi ned ing wasted. We boundaries. So far, only Lara-Toxeftra do not want this aandnd bbecauseecause ooff tthathat is listed as a Marine Reserve under the to happen and wwee aarere oopposingpposing thethe IUCN category IV.22 this is why we NNaturaatura 22000”.000”. are opposing the In addition, strict restrictions have Natura 2000.26 These sentiments were been imposed on private land in Aka- reminiscent of Thedossopoulos’ work mas and very small development co- on resistance to sea turtle conservation effi cients (1/2 or 1%) are allowed23, in southwest Greece.27 In both cases according to the residents of the area. residents emphasised their long per- This scheme affected the villages in the sonal histories of struggling with, and Akamas peninsula, known in the island transforming land, which is then simply as the Laona district. People with lands overridden by protected area establish- in the Akamas scheme have protested, ment. claiming that they have not been compensated for their land.24 The government, people said, took them into account only when it was When, therefore the government decid- election time. As expressed by an ed that Akamas should also be part of elderly man from Inia:28 “So many the Natura 2000 network, it was likely times, so many governments prom- to meet opposition. Local people felt ised to make a difference. They have that the parts of the village that were done nothing yet. The same situation not included previously in the Akamas is pending since 1989”. The Community scheme would now be included in the Leader of Drousia29 also stated that: Natura 2000 network. As stated by the “Three different governments in the community leader of Drousia:25 “What last 15 years were unable to do any- was left out before is included now. We thing about it”. “The community council can’t get away with it. Our lands are went visiting the government offi cials “locked” and we cannot do anything but every time we returned to Drousia about it.” more and more disappointed.”

The residents of Inia, due to their The sense of stunted progress is previous experience with conservation strong. As expressed by a villager schemes, are very negative towards from Inia:30 “We feel completely ig- 337 Poverty, wealth and conservation

nored. No one is caring neither for scientifi c criteria stated by EU. Accord- our rights nor for us. Our village is ing to Community Leader of Drousia:32 not developing any more. Nearby vil- “To tell you the truth, the senior offi cer lages have successfully come out of of the Ministry of Environment came poverty and raised their living stand- and tried to talk to us about the net- ard. Inia used to be the best village work. We were very negative towards among them. Nowadays, things have it because of our previous history with changed. The government deprived us the protective areas schemes. Actually from our land rights and we cannot sell we did not even let him talk about it. the land, or cultivate it or even built Then, the Ministry of Environment sent our house on it. Government locked us some maps with names in a foreign our lands and at the same time de- language and we did not understand prived our village the opportunity to be which areas were included in the net- developed. We are condemned to live work.” in poverty”. “We agree in protecting some areas that are ecologically sensitive. We do not agree to protect the whole village for ecologic reasons. They should at least allow some degree of sustainable development”, Mr. Andreas G. Char- alambous, a residence of Inia, stated.33 “If the government suggested some kind of compensation in exchange with our land we would not have been that negative. But requesting our land in exchange for nothing… this is unac- ceptable. We demand the same opportunities that existed before the Natura 2000 network”, a Picture 2. The Lara beaches, important turtle 65 year old said. ““…I…I wwouldould ssacrificeacrifice mymy breeding site of the loggerhead (Carreta-careta) Additionally, the and green turtle (Chelonia mydas) as viewed ppropertyroperty forfor environ-environ- from the Inia outskirts. community leader (Courtesy Loucas Philippou) of Drousia said,34 mmentalental pprotection.rotection. ButBut “…Personally, I I wouldwould rrequestequest ssomeome “They decided which areas should be would sacrifi ce eexchangexchange inin return.return. ” included and then announced us the my property for results. We did not take part in the environmental protection. But I would process. We feel disappointed about request some exchange in return. I the way they treat us. It is about our cannot afford to pay for the conserva- lives and our children lives and some- tion of our environment in such a way. one else decides for us.” another resi- As a landowner I should have the right 31 dent of Inia stated. to exploit or develop my land in the way I thing is appropriate and not be- The Government tried to inform the ing deprived of my property.” citizens about the Natura 2000 through various means. However, the dissemi- Mr Charalambous, both a teacher and nation of information was made after a lawyer, is considered as an important the sites had been selected on a set of person in the village of Inia. He organ- 338 …if initiativesThe intertwined embraceLLivelihoodsivelih rootso rights,od…buts ofandan poverty,dconservationsecure Conservationconservationconse accessr vwealthatio cann to— canand resources alsoaargumentsr g endenvironmentalu providem upen and tenhancingsPolicy livelihoodsshaping hrealapi nthatparticipation degradationg thet benefits… poverty...hmatterse debatedebate!

ised a group of 105 landowners that who must pay for it”. Additionally, Mr. took the government in court to fi ght Andreas Charalambous concluded, “No against the deprivation of their land.35 scheme can survive if there is local They lost the case on the ground that a opposition. The government should government is allowed to impose re- engage residents in the process. There strictions on individual freedoms in the must be a two-way relationship. It name of the common good. Now, they requires honesty, good will, cooperation are raising money from the villagers and, of course, (∼£150 per each affected landowner)36 money. We want IIff thisthis managementmanagement and they are making procedures to be a greener envi- sschemecheme ffailsails andand vil-vil- heard in the European Court of Justice ronment but we llagersagers taketake thethe gov-gov- in Hague. “We are hoping to bring an cannot afford to end to this situation. Private prop- be the ones that eernmentrnment ttoo ccourt,ourt, ccon-on- erty is a basic human right and we are will pay for it. All sservationervation wouldwould taketake being deprived of it. The landowners Cypriot citizens a ssteptep backwards…backwards… should be refunded in return for their should pay for a land. We will fi ght for our rights.” he greener environment. The government also said.37 should put green taxes. The environment is something that concerns all According to Mr. Andreas G. Charalam- of us and everyone must contribute bous, “The residents of Inia demand equally to make our island a better only three things from the govern- place.” ment: The fi rst and most important one is equal treatment. Secondly, we In 2004 the Government announced demand the right to exploit our land that it was at the fi nal stage of prepar- and property in the way we want it to ing a management plan for the Akamas and lastly we want equal opportunities peninsula. The proper cost of manage- of economic development. We will only ment plan was around £120 million compromise and give our land to the pounds to be spent on both the envi- government only if we exchange our ronmental protection and on the com- land with other land of equal economic pensation of the landowners.39 Hope- value and of equal opportunities of fully, that would reconcile the demands exploitation, if we are compensated in of the local people and the conserva- terms of money and if the land remains tion of the Akamas Peninsula. to the owner but the owner receives money for not exploiting it. We believe A year later (2005), however, still noth- that we are not requesting something ing has been signed and the commu- extraordinary or something that is out- nity leaders of the local communities rageous.”, he said. are threatening to go on hunger strike outside the Presidential Hall for as long According to the Community Leader as they can, in order to force the gov- of Drousia:38 “The Government should ernment to take some action and bring cooperate with local communities to an end soon to the current situation.40 sort these things out. We request If this management scheme fails and honesty, understanding and fair trade. villagers take the government into It is a basic human right that every courts, this would automatically imply person should not be deprived of its that conservation is taking one step private property. We want the common backwards. good but we should not be the ones 339 Poverty, wealth and conservation

In the case of Inia, people depend on their land for their living and they emphasized that they are not willing to bear personally the cost of environmental protection. They suggest that: “Everyone must pay its fair share in order to protect, conserve and manage what is left for future generations.”.42 Locally, participation is perceived to be morally and practically essential for implementing conservation schemes and policies. As Michaelidou and Decker (2003) suggest: “nature conservation and community viability are interde- pendent and should be simultaneously Picture 3. The Baths of Aphrodite beach in the addressed if both are to benefi t”. Akamas peninsula. On top of this beach, there is a small cave were Aphrodite was said to bath. According to the myth, the goddess’s baths are But this is no panacea. There are a sourceDiscussion of fertility. and(Courtesy conclusions Demos Philippou) profound contradictions at work here. The villagers of Inia demand to develop The unpalatable, if unsurprising, their land within the framework of all conclusion from our analysis is that EU regulations”.43 In addition, they schemes such as the Natura 2000 are pursue the construction of an asphalt welcome as long as they do not affect road that will connect their village to the personal interests of the citizens. the beaches of Lara (12km) and exploit The Natura 2000 wishes to reconcile a their land for tourism infrastructure. scientifi c objective— biodiversity con- However, such an action will connect servation— “while taking economic, so- and open up all the protected beaches cial, cultural and regional requirements to mass tourism and will have serious into consideration”. However, the sepa- implications not only to the fl ora but ration of the scientifi c standards of the also to the fauna of the area and es- Natura 2000 network from those of the pecially both to Loggerhead and Green social debate has brought strong local turtles. Local people may be the most opposition from persons in the island of passionate and intelligent defenders Cyprus as it did before in other Euro- of their environment…if only the state pean countries. and the powerful economic actors allow them.”.44 But this will take a careful As the results of the focus group sug- structuring of the costs and benefi ts. gested, the people of Inia want to be

incorporated in the selection process. Without contact with nature, people’s They may be more willing to conserve capacity to understand and engage the environment if protected areas are with it withers.45 As Aldo Leopold cor- established on fair grounds with suf- rectly observed, “Conservation is not ﬁ cient incentives. In addition, they merely a thing to be observed in out- want to be “equal partners with other door museums, but a way of living on bodies in a possible future administra- the land”.46 The future of conservation and management scheme, which tion will turn on the extent to which a would give solution to the problem of strong individual connection to nature coordinating the various activities and and natural processes is maintained for could help resolving arising conﬂ icts.”.41 the world’s people in the 21st century 340 …if initiativesThe intertwined embraceLLivelihoodsivelih rootso rights,od…buts ofandan poverty,dconservationsecure Conservationconservationconse accessr vwealthatio cann to— canand resources alsoaargumentsr g endenvironmentalu providem upen and tenhancingsPolicy livelihoodsshaping hrealapi nthatparticipation degradationg thet benefits… poverty...hmatterse debatedebate!

as Adams suggests.47 Yet the sad irony Notes is that in some cases people’s own 1 Nagothu, 2003. interactions with the land, and with na- 2 Nagothu, 2003. ture, may not be to nature’s detriment. 3 Thirgood, 1987. As Adams’ observes, “without conser- 4 Medail and Quezel, 1999. vation action where they live, people 5 Tsintidis and Courtellaridis, 1995. 6 Natura 2000: A Network of Biological Diversity in are destined forever to live in land- the European Union. scapes stripped of their natural diversi- 7 Michaelidou and Decker, 2003. 48 ty”. It becomes a tragedy when con- 8 Rodriguez et al., 2004. servation action 9 Geisler, 2003. ““ConservationConservation isis notnot becomes part of 10 Michaelidou and Decker, 2003 mmerelyerely a tthinghing toto the alienation 11 Cernea and Schmidt-Soltau, 2003. bbee oobservedbserved iinn ooutdoorutdoor process. That is 12 Michaelidou and Decker, 2003. why it essential 13 Brockington et al., forthcoming. mmuseums,useums, bbutut a wwayay that, during the 14 Roe and Hollands, 2004. ooff livingliving onon thethe land”land” next phase of 15 Hiedanpaa, 2002. AAldoldo LeopoldLeopold the Natura 2000 16 Hiedanpaa, 2004. local government 17 Alphandery and Fortier, 2001. agencies work with village residents to 18 Brechin et al., 2002. make certain that the opportunity is 19 Adams, 2004, p.233. 20 Key Informant Interview with the Community made available for them to engage with Leader of Drousia, 15/07/04/. stronger voices in the decision-making 21 Conservation of the Akamas peninsula report, 26- processes that affect their lives.49 30 November 2001. 22 Category IV: a Habitat/Species Management Area: protected area managed mainly for conservation Much fewer studies examine the links through management intervention (according to between local communities and Pro- IUCN Protected Area Management Categories). tected Areas in Europe with respect to 23 Developing coeffi cient 1%: If you own a land of an Africa or Asia. But no matter where area equal to 100m2, only 1% of the land i.e. 1m2, should be developed. Similarly, if the coeffi cient the Protected Areas are established, is 1/2 %, only 0.5m2 should be used for develop- the guiding line underlying community ment. conservation remains the same. As 24 Most of the land is near the coastline and holds high economic value. Therefore, many of the vil- Brechin et al. suggested: “The most lagers wish to exploit their land for tourism infra- feasible and socially just alternative for structure. long-term success is for the conserva- 25 Key Informant Interview with the Community tion community to work constructively Leader of Drousia, 15/07/04. th with people at all levels, as diffi cult and 26 Focus group in the village of Inia, July 15 , 2004. imperfect as that may be. To proceed 27 Thedossopoulos, 2002. 28 Focus group in the village of Inia, July 15th, 2004. in this fashion will require that we 29 Key Informant Interview with the Community adopt a stance of open dialogue and Leader of Drousia, 15/07/04. concerted negotiation with a wide array 30 Focus group in the village of Inia, July 15th, 2004. of actors in diverse contexts ranging 31 Focus group in the village of Inia, July 15th, 2004. from local people to government of- 32 Key Informant Interview with the Community fi cials to international leading institu- Leader of Drousia, 15/07/04. tions”.50 33 Telephone interview with Mr. Charalambous, 20/08/04. Anna Philippou ([email protected]) 34 Key Informant Interview with the Community trained as a biologist and is currently working in the Agri- Leader of Drousia, 15/07/04. culture Research Institute in Nicosia, Cyprus. The material 35 Telephone interview with Mr. Charalambous, presented in this paper is an overview of the disserta- 20/08/04. tion she carried out in pursue of her MSc ON Biodiversity, 36 Equals to 1/5 of an average monthly salary (Capita Conservation and Management at the University of Oxford income/year: C£8.781,5). in 2004. 341 Poverty, wealth and conservation

37 Telephone interview with Mr. Charalambous, (Phileleftheros newspaper: The villages of Akamas 20/08/04. are protesting, 05/05/05 by Akis Ethelontis) 38 Key Informant Interview with the Community Eφημερίδα «Φιλελεύθερος: Αντιδράσεις κατοίκων για Leader of Drousia, 15/07/04. την υλοποίηση του Ευρωπαϊκού σχεδίου, 19/07/04- 39 Phileleutheros, 19/07/04. Άκης Εθελοντής. (Phileleftheros newspaper: Local protest towards the implementation of European 40 Phileleutheros, 05/05/05, Cyprus mail 05/05/05. network, 19/07/04 by Akis Ethelontis). 41 Trakolis, 2001. Geisler, C., “A new kind of trouble: evictions in Eden”, 42 Focus group in the village of Inia, July 15th, 2004. International Social Science Journal, 55: 69-78, 43 Cyprus mail, 12/04/01. 2003. 44 Feyerabend and Farvar, 2002. Hiedanpaa, J., ”European-wide conservation versus local well-being: the reception of the Natura 2000 45 Adams, 2004, p: 236. Reserve Network in Karvia, Finland.”, Journal of 46 Meine 1988, p.310. Landscape and Urban Planning, 61:113-123, 2002. 47 Adams, 2004, p.236. Hiedanpaa, J., “The edges of confl ict and consensus: 48 Adams, 2004, p.2361. a case for creativity in regional forest policy in 49 Michaelidou and Decker, 2003, and cf. Reid, this Southwest Finland”, Journal of Ecological Economics, issue of Policy Matters. December 2004. 50 Brechin et al., 2002. Infi eld, M. and A. Namara, “Community attitudes and behaviour towards conservation: an assessment of a community conservation programmes around Lake References Mburo National Park, Uganda”, Oryx 35(1): 48-60, 2001. Adams, W.M., Against Extinction: The story of Conser- Krott, M., “Voicing Interests and ConcErns (VOICE): vation, Earthscan, London, 2004. Natura 2000: An ecological network in confl ict with Alphandery, P. and A. Fortier, “Can a territorial policy people”, Journal of Forest Policy and Economics, be based on science alone? The System for Creat- 1:357-366, 2000. ing the Natura 2000 network in France”, Sociologia Meine, C., Aldo Leopold: his Life and Work, University Ruralis. 41(3): 311-326, 2001. of Wisconsin Press, Madison (Winsconsin), 1988. Borrini-Feyerabend, G. and M.T. Farvar “The heart Michaelidou, M., and J.D. Decker, “European Union and soul of conservation” (editorial), Policy Matters, Policy and Local Perspectives: Nature Conservation 10:2-3, 2002. and Rural Communities in Cyprus”, Journal of The Brechin, S., P. R., Wilshusen, C. L. Fortwangler and Cyprus Review, 2003. P. C. West, “Beyond the Square Wheel: Toward a Nagothu U.S., “Local people’s attitudes towards con- More Comprehensive Understanding of Biodiversity servation and wildlife tourism around Sariska Tiger Conservation as Social and Political Process”, Journal Reserve, India”, Journal of Environmental Manage- of Society and Natural Resources. 15:42-64, 2002. ment, 69:339-347, 2003. Brockington, D., “Injustice and Conservation-is “local Natura 2000: A network of Biological Diversity in the support” necessary for sustainable development?”, European Union http://www.natura2000.lt/en/apie. Policy Matters 12:22-30, 2003. php last accessed 08/08/04 Cernea, M.M. and K. Schimdt-Soltau, “The end of for- Neuman, W.L., Social Research Methods: Qualitative cible displacement? Conservation must not impover- and Quantitative Approaches, 5th edn. Pearson Edu- ish people”, Policy Matters, 12: 42-51, 2003. cation, Allyn and Bacon, Massachussets, 2003. Cyprus mail newspaper: 38 sites earmarked for EU Randerson, J., “Nature’s best buys”, New Scientist, ecological protection, 22/11/00 177 (2384): 32, 2003. www.cyprus-mail.com last accessed 13/06/05 Rodriguez et al. “Effectiveness of the global protected Cyprus mail newspaper: We want to develop our land, area network in representing species diversity”. Akamas villagers insist, 12/04/00 Nature 428: 640-643, 2004. www.cyprus-mail.com last accessed 13/06/05 Roe, D. and M. Hollands, ”Protected Areas: How much Cyprus mail newspaper: Akamas residents threaten to is enough?” IIED, Sustainable Development Opinion, blockade EU delegation, 22/11/02 2004. www.cyprus-mail.com last accessed 13/06/05 Thedossopoulos, D., “Environmental Conservation and Cyprus mail newspaper: “Let us develop the Akamas”, Indigenous Culture in a Greek Island Community: 05/05/05 by John Leonidou. the Dispute over the Sea Turtles”, pp. 244-260 in Chatty D. and M. Colchester (eds.), “Conserva- www.cyprus-mail.com last accessed 13/06/05 tion and Mobile Indigenous Peoples. Displacement, De Vaus, D.A., Surveys in social research, 5th edn. Forced Settlement and Sustainable Development”, Routledge, London, 2002. Berghahn Books, New York, 2002. Environment http://www.europa.eu.int/comm/envi- Thirgood, J., V., Cyprus: A Chronicle of its Forests, ronment/nature/home.htm last accessed August Land and People, University of British Columbia, 2004 Vancouver (Canada), 1987. Eφημερίδα «Φιλελεύθερος»: Τα χωριά του Ακά- Trakolis D., “Local people’s perceptions of planning μα επαναστατούν, 05/05/05-Άκης Εθελοντής,. and management issues in Prespes Lakes National 342 …if initiativesThe intertwined embraceLLivelihoodsivelih rootso rights,od…buts ofandan poverty,dconservationsecure Conservationconservationconse accessr vwealthatio cann to— canand resources alsoaargumentsr g endenvironmentalu providem upen and tenhancingsPolicy livelihoodsshaping hrealapi nthatparticipation degradationg thet benefits… poverty...hmatterse debatedebate!

Park, Greece”, Journal of Environmental Manage- Wilshusen, P. R. , S. R. Brechin , C. L. Fortwangler ment, 61: 227-241, 2003. and P. C. West , “Reinventing a Square Wheel: Tsintidis T. and L. Courtellaridis, The endemic plants of Critique of a Resurgent “Protection Paradigm” in Cyprus, Bank of Cyprus Publications, 1995. International Biodiversity Conservation”, Journal of Society and Natural Resources, 15:17-40, 2002. Tsintidis, T., G., Hadjikyriakos and C. Christodoulou, Trees and Bushes of Cyprus, 1st edn. Bank of Cyprus Worah, S., “The challenge of community-based pro- publications, 2002. tected area management”, Parks. 12 (2): 80-90, 2002.

TThehe pprospectsrospects ofof forestforest cleanclean developmentdevelopment mmechanismsechanisms (CDM)(CDM) ttoo ccontributeontribute toto socialsocial eequityquity inin BrazilBrazil MManan YuYu CChanghang

Abstract. The evolution of the rules of the market mechanisms of the global climate regime tends to favour corporate participation as well the generation and trade of carbon certifi cates as such. This trend is refl ected by investor’s preference for larger scale energy CDM projects. One criteria proposed here to assess the contribution of CDM projects to social equity is whether they are conceived so that low-income communities may take part in the activities that either reduce or sequestrate carbon as direct benefi ciaries of the economic activity proposed and the carbon credits generated. In the Brazilian case, the inclusion of rural households in reforestation projects for carbon sequestration or the production of crops for renewable biofuel are examples of the potential for income generation and distribution to individuals of lower economic standing in the population. Although CDM projects for cleaner and more effi cient energy may be more effective in climate change mitigation, the social contributions of these projects often remains diffuse or indirect, whereby social components are superfi cially linked to the project. Analysis of the impact of the pilot forest carbon projects in Brazil, based on a typology of forest carbon projects, indicates that the social benefi ts and social participation in most of the pilot projects have fallen short of their potential. In order for low-income small landholders to take part in the carbon market, the recently approved small-scale project helps, but remains far from suffi cient. It further requires a synchroniz- ing of conditions and adjustment to the local realities without which it becomes unviable. The conditions are: the political commitment of local and national governments to provide supportive and conducive policies in a timely manner; the organization of small landholders for their effective participation; and the willingness of CER (Certifi cate of Emission Reduction) buyers to invest in a premium price for the image of corporate social responsibility. The combination of these conditions suggest that the prospects of forest CDM to contribute to social equity in Brazil is likely to be very limited and constrained to a small niche of the growing carbon market. 343 Poverty, wealth and conservation

forestation and afforestation that se- The prospects of forest clean devel- quester carbon (including agroforestry opment mechanism (CDM) projects to systems); ii) sustainable forest man- contribute to sustainable development agement that sequesters and reduces in Brazil and social equity may be il- emissions; iii) forest conservation and lustrated by a critical analysis on three protection from deforestation, which distinct but interrelated spheres: i) the are taken as an emission avoidance; present setup of rules of the global and iv) the substitution of fossil fuels climate regime and its refl exes on the with renewable biomass that reduces competitiveness of forest CDM projects emission. Among the four modalities in the context of the carbon market; ii) only in fuel substitution the emission the kind of impact pilot forest carbon reduction would be permanent.1 projects in Brazil are effectively bringing and how likely they are to contrib- In 2001, after a long and exhausting ute to the sustainable development of debate at COP 7, the Marrakech Ac- the country; iii) the pre requisites for cord eventually approved carbon se- CDM projects to contribute to social eq- questration as a modality in the KP, uity through the promotion of sustain- but with restrictions. The controversial able livelihood. forest conservation, which had been a deadlock for the advancement of Forest CDM in the global climate deliberations at COP 6, has however regime been excluded for the fi rst commitment The CDM is a compensation mechanism period of the KP from 2008 to 2012. established by the Kyoto Protocol (KP) It has also been decided that forest in order to make less costly the attain- CDM projects cannot exceed 1% of the ment of targets for carbon emission emission of Annex 1 countries, at 1990, reduction of Annex 1 countries. This times fi ve, during the fi rst commitment mechanism allows Annex 1 countries period. In 2004, at COP 9 in Milan, it to compensate part of their reduction has been defi ned that CERs (Certifi - through the implementation of activi- cates of Emission Reduction) generated ties in non Annex 1 countries, whereby by forest activities would be temporary. either GHG (greenhouse gas) in the at- These measures aimed at restricting mosphere will be sequestered or emis- compensations of existing emissions sion in the latter will be reduced. In its rather then re- conception it is expected that CDM will ducing them. TThehe ffactact thatthat forestforest promote a double gain: the mitigation ccarbonarbon stocksstocks areare nonnon of climate change and sustainable de- The fact that for- ppermanentermanent hhasas beenbeen velopment in the host countries. est carbon stocks are in effect non oonene ofof thethe mainmain diver-diver- The original justifi cation for the CDM permanent has ggencesences amongamong coun-coun- proposal was meant to apply for emis- been one of the ttriesries regardingregarding carboncarbon main divergences sion reduction activities such as energy ssequestration.equestration. effi ciency, whereby the cost & ben- among countries efi t in developing countries outweighs regarding carbon sequestration. The those in developed ones. However, as decision, also taken at COP 7, that for- a result of confl icting interests of dif- est carbon credits would be temporary, ferent blocks of countries, the KP has has given back, on the one hand, the considered at its onset four different possibility to reverse land use, but on forms of carbon sequestration: i) re- the other, has reduced the competitive- 344 …if initiativesThe intertwined embraceLLivelihoodsivelih rootso rights,od…buts ofandan poverty,dconservationsecure Conservationconservationconse accessr vwealthatio cann to— canand resources alsoaargumentsr g endenvironmentalu providem upen and tenhancingsPolicy livelihoodsshaping hrealapi nthatparticipation degradationg thet benefits… poverty...hmatterse debatedebate!

ness of forest sink projects, once the at COP 10 in December 2004 in Buenos forest CERs have to be replaced at the Aires. These projects are limited by the end of its validity. The tCERs (Tempo- cap of 8 kilo tons of net anthropogenic

rary Certifi cate of Emission Reduction) CO2 per year, in average, during each would expire at the end of each com- commitment period and they should be mitment period1 and the lCERs (Long implemented specifi cally by low-income term Certifi cate of Emission Reduction) communities or individuals. would expire at the end of each ac- creditation2 period. Both need to be re- Regarding the outcome of forest placed by other certifi cates, temporary projects in the following commitment or permanent at the end of their period period there is still one important of validity. technical and much controversial issue to be settled which may effect the In addition to the above mentioned defi nition of its continuity. The Marra- restrictions, the on-going pilot forest kech Accord established at COP 7 that sink projects has signalled that forest LULUCF (Land-Use, Land-Use Change projects are by nature uncertain, which and Forestry) activities refer to those has led to more restricted regulations directly promoted by human activities. which imply higher complexity and The diffi cult task of separating carbon transaction cost for their implemen- sequestered from anthropogenic activi- tation. Just to name a few: the need ties from those of natural occurrence,

to prove the absence of forest cover- such as the CO2 and nitrogen fertiliza- age before December 1989 for project tion3, remains. At present, science is eligibility; the higher complexity of the still incipient to understand the com- project baseline design to prove car- plex dynamics of carbon fl ow between bon additionality; complexity in the the biota and methodologies for quantifi cation and the atmosphere. TThehe sspecialpecial conditionsconditions monitoring of carbon stocks; uncertain- Specifi cally it eenjoyednjoyed byby ssmall-scalemall-scale ties due to higher risks of uncontrolled lacks the meth- fforestorest projectsprojects shouldshould leakage such as forest fi re, disease and odologies to drought, etc. All these characteristics of determine the in- ttheoreticallyheoretically enableenable forest projects contribute to the demise crease of carbon tthemhem ttoo benefitbenefit ssmallmall of project results, hence reducing the stock in the biota llandholdersandholders inin regardregard competitiveness of forest sink projects. due to carbon fertilization. ttoo incomeincome generationgeneration In view of the complexity and higher aandnd socialsocial inclusion.inclusion. transaction cost for the implementation The present UUnfortunately,nfortunately, roomroom of forest sink projects, and consider- regulations of fforor thisthis modalitymodality ofof ing that many of the least developed the global cli- countries (LDC) can only participate in mate regime and pprojectsrojects withinwithin thethe car-car- forest CDM as they present little attrac- the nature of for- bbonon marketmarket iiss mminuteinute tiveness for technology transfer or en- est carbon stocks ddueue ttoo ttheirheir llowow eco-eco- ergy projects, small-scale projects have are refl ected in nnomicomic competitivenesscompetitiveness also been proposed for forest activities the behaviour of at COP 9. These projects will follow investors in the CDM market. The trend simplifi ed procedures and modalities points to a reduction in demand for so that low-income communities may Annex 1 investors for forest projects as take part of CDM projects. The fi nal compared to the expected demand at defi nitions of this modality took place the onset of the Climate Convention. 345 Poverty, wealth and conservation

The preference has migrated ostensibly size for small-scale forest projects. In towards projects in the energy sector. other words, cost reduction will only be The prospects are that there is clear economically signifi cant for projects of preference by investors and prevalence greater scale. of big scale energy projects in the carbon market. Many experts on the issue Another limitation of small-scale announce that there are more carbon projects is that the capacity of small projects in elaboration than there is a landholders to participate in the car- demand for them, which make forest bon market is very low as they lack small-scale carbon projects even less the information on the market and the palatable. knowledge of the rather complex procedures of the carbon market. Many The special conditions enjoyed by low-income communities are not suf- small-scale forest projects should fi ciently organized for their own rep- theoretically enable them to benefi t resentation. Besides, many potential small landholders in regard to income fi nancers of CDM projects with social generation and social inclusion. Un- concern, such as the EU, Japan4 and fortunately, room for this modality Holland are not particularly in favour of of projects within the carbon market forest CDM projects, precisely for their is minute due to their low economic ephemeral nature (non-permanence) competitiveness ranking behind energy discussed before. projects and large scale forest projects. Most investors prefer large scale projects because they can generate a larger amount of removed carbon, except for those that are seeking corporate social responsibility image. Another reason for its lower preference is that small-scale projects present lower economic competitiveness, since transaction cost is higher per unit of carbon sequestered. Pedroni and Locatelli (2004) developed a model for cost-benefi t analysis for forest carbon projects and showed that the minimum economically feasible size is around 500 ha. This shows that the reduction in cost due to the simplifi ed procedures and modality would benefi t very little the cost structure of projects below 500 ha, which depending on the type of ecosystem would be the maximum Map 1. Localization of Pilot Forest Sink Projects in Brazil. 346 …if initiativesThe intertwined embraceLLivelihoodsivelih rootso rights,od…buts ofandan poverty,dconservationsecure Conservationconservationconse accessr vwealthatio cann to— canand resources alsoaargumentsr g endenvironmentalu providem upen and tenhancingsPolicy livelihoodsshaping hrealapi nthatparticipation degradationg thet benefits… poverty...hmatterse debatedebate!

Pilot forest carbon projects dimensions of sustainability (ecological, in Brazil and their likeliness social and economic), in various tiers to contribute to sustainable (global, national, regional and local) development and in regard to the duration of the impacts (long or short term)6. Although Analysis of on-going pilot forest carbon much quantitative data have been col- projects in Brazil may offer a picture of lected during the fi eld research, the the possible limitations and potential evaluation is basically qualitative due to of their effective contribution to the the different stages of project implemen- sustainable development of the coun- tation and the very nature of sustainabil- try. Chang (2004) has analyzed in her ity analysis. thesis four pilot forest sequestration projects on-going at the time of her The conceptualization of the typology research in 2001.5 They are: of forest carbon projects is theoreti- • PLANTAR Project in Curvelo, in the cally based on the interpretations of central savannah of the state of Mi- different environmental concepts on nas Gerais; Sustainable Development (SD) (see • PEUGEOT Project in Juruena, in the Figure 1). Conceptually there seems Amazon forest of the state of Mato to be a consensus on the idea that the Grosso; three pillars of SD are the economic, • Climate Action Project in Guar- ecological and social dimensions and aqueçaba, in the Atlantic Forest of that they should be present and inte- the state of Paraná; grated simultaneously. The most com- • Bananal Island Carbon Sequestration mon understanding of this integration Project (BICSP) in the Bananal Is- is that it should be in balance, with- land, in the transition area of savan- out prevalence of neither. The idea of nah, Amazon Forest and marshland equilibrium, although attractive, is very of the state of Tocantins. imprecise, as there is no way to defi ne a generic equilibrium, a priori. In real- The analysis of the projects started ity, for each situation there are always different “technical” ways of combining ……therethere aarere aalwayslways with a typology of forest carbon the three dimensions of sustainability, ddifferentifferent ““technical”technical” projects based on whereby the choice taken is always wwaysays ofof combiningcombining their main objec- political. There is tension and often opposition among the dimensions, whose tthehe threethree dimensionsdimensions tive (commercial, conservation or integration requires a certain trade-off ooff sustainability,sustainability, development). among them. It is the opposition of wwherebyhereby tthehe cchoicehoice The impact as- the confronting parties within society sessment is built that defi ne the priorities, sometimes ttakenaken iiss alwaysalways prioritizing one and sometimes another ppolitical.olitical. ThereThere isis ten-ten- into a matrix with the different dimension, depending on the interest ssionion andand oftenoften impacts identi- and strength of the prevailing party in 7 ooppositionpposition amongamong thethe fi ed (positive each concrete situation. and limitations), ddimensionsimensions whosewhose The three types of forest carbon iintegrationntegration requiresrequires the benefi ciaries (investors, projects identifi ed in Figure 1 are as ttrade-offsrade-offs .... local communi- follows: ties, NGOs, national community or the • Commercial Projects, which prioritize diffuse global community) in the three the generation of CERs to compen- 347 Poverty, wealth and conservation

ate within the concept of sustainable development, as shown in the theoretical framework9. In other words, although priority is given to one of the dimensions of sustainability, all take into consideration the other dimensions. However, what distinguish them from one another are the different priorities, which limit the achievement of the secondary objectives.

The fi ndings showed that all projects made some effort to include some kind of social or eco- Figure 1. The types of forest carbon projects and their logical components to compensate relations to the sustainability dimensions and the envi- for their specifi c defi ciencies and ronmental thoughts. in order to assure the image of

sate for CO2 emission and to im- sustainability. This is more evident prove the environmental image of if the project’s priority is to generate the corporation for market competi- marketable carbon certifi cates, as the tion. Also in this type are national CDM Executive Board requires that the enterprises interested in the fi nancial hosting government declares that the resources available for CDM, e.g. project contributes to its sustainable Peugeot and Plantar Projects. development for approval. • Conservation Projects, which prioritize secondary ecological benefi ts Below is a synthesis of the socio-en- - conservation - while fi xing carbon. vironmental impact of the four pilot Often these projects are initiatives or projects analyzed. mediated and implemented by environmental NGOs, e.g. Climate Action Let us begin with the commercial type Project. projects: the social and ecological ben- • Development Projects, which pri- efi ts of Plantar Project are restricted oritize social and environmental to what an industrial enterprise could objectives while fi xing carbon. Usu- offer, within the limits imposed by the ally these projects are fi nanced by competition of … aallll projectsprojects mademade the pig iron sec- corporations seeking for corporate ssomeome eeffortffort toto includeinclude social responsibility image besides tor. The main the compensation of their carbon social benefi t of ssomeome kkindind ooff socialsocial commitments. The implementers are this project is the oorr ecologicalecological compo-compo- usually characterized by a develop- maintenance of 1,270 jobs, spe- nnents,ents, ttoo compensatecompensate ment profi le, sometimes the govern- fforor theirtheir specificspecific defi-defi- ment itself, e.g. BICSP Project. cifi c to the sector, where the char- ccienciesiencies andand inin orderorder The analysis of the study cases led to coal burning proc- ttoo assureassure thethe imageimage ofof ess is still very the conclusion that, regardless of the ssustainability…ustainability… type8 of carbon project, all do contrib- labour intensive. ute to some extent with positive social The Plantar Group claims that their em- or ecological impact, because all oper- ployees would be eliminated should the 348 …if initiativesThe intertwined embraceLLivelihoodsivelih rootso rights,od…buts ofandan poverty,dconservationsecure Conservationconservationconse accessr vwealthatio cann to— canand resources alsoaargumentsr g endenvironmentalu providem upen and tenhancingsPolicy livelihoodsshaping hrealapi nthatparticipation degradationg thet benefits… poverty...hmatterse debatedebate!

company close its doors in view of the cal NGO, the IPN, the project has cre- lack of fi nancing for reforestation in the ated a forest extension activity and has country. The Project presents several distributed multifunctional seedlings to defi ciencies regarding its contribution small landholders to the local sustainable development, in the vicinity of IInn commercialcommercial typetype particularly as regards the strengthen- the project area. pprojects,rojects, thethe lacklack ofof ing of local livelihood. Given the refor- However, these ssocialocial participationparticipation estation vocation of the region and the benefi ts have not long experience of Plantar in the pro- been a product aandnd iinputnput fromfrom sstake-take- duction of cloned seedlings with cutting of local demand hholdersolders isis a commoncommon edge technology, there is considerable and are ad hoc ffeature.eature. DDecisionecision potential to extend the benefi ts to local in nature. They farmers through an outgrow scheme have been con- mmakingaking isis biasedbiased similar to the existing Forest Farmer centrated on the ttowardsowards thethe economiceconomic program. However, the company claims initial phase of ssustainabilityustainability ofof thethe that such a program would hinder their tree plantation. ffundingunding eenterprise.nterprise. operation, demonstrating no commit- During the main- ment to social promotion effort. The tenance phase, starting from 2003, company limited its actions to a mod- both the demand for jobs and the est environmental education program taxes levied fell sharply. The extended and a “child friendly” certifi cation by nursery that supplied the project has complying with a law forbidding the use been deactivated. Continuity of ben- of child labour. In addition, the need to efi ts was not secured, as they are not purchase large plots of land for refor- part of the primary objectives of the estation, and, the high replicability of investor or implementer. The ecologi- the project by other enterprises within cal impact of the project is mainly the the sector creates a risk of unleash- reversion of the pasture to reforestation ing the process of land ownership within fences of the project property. concentration in the region. The eco- To some extent it has also contributed logical benefi ts can be summarized as to the public awareness of the impor- compensation and mitigation efforts to tance of forest resources through ex- reduce the negative ecological impact tensive reforestation in an agricultural of legitimizing industrial plantations of frontier where deforestation is common exotic species. practice. However, the effectiveness of

The Peugeot Project, also a commercial type, generated social beneﬁ ts that are primarily short term in nature. The Project has created job and income opportunities for local populations, such as the collection of native tree seeds, tree planting, and initial maintenance. It also beneﬁ ted the local municipality by increasing service tax collection. It has adopted an environmental program aimed at improving relationship with local communities by promoting the Picture 1. Native tree saplings planted amid bra- Project directly to them, local students chiária folder at Peugeot Project. in particular. In partnership with a lo- (Courtesy Manyu Chang) 349 Poverty, wealth and conservation

this impact to sustainable use of forest carbon certifi cates. The conservation and land resources by local producers priority of the project in an APA acquires depends largely on a concerted effort social signifi cance as supposedly, the of other development agents and op- decision for its status has been decided portunities, such as adequate technical on a collective basis and the implement- assistance, promotion of environmental ing NGO acts as a partner to the offi cial education and availability of fi nancial environmental institutions to enforce support. the necessary protection. Under these circumstances there is preponderance Regarding the two commercial type on the ecological objective, towards projects, the research has identifi ed which the other two dimensions (eco- that the lack of social participation and nomic and social) should converge and input from other stakeholders is a com- be subordinated in the construction of mon feature. Decision making is biased the local sustainable development. towards the economic sustainability of the funding enterprise; for example, The implementing local NGO is in the the economic feasibility of Plantar S.A., process of adopting a participative and the creation of an environmentally conservation friendly image for the competitiveness approach and is ……manymany cconservationonservation of the Peugeot Corporation. As a mat- working in asso- pprojectsrojects [embark[embark oon]n] ter of fact, centralized decision making ciation with other is a strong characteristic of the private development ccommunityommunity devel-devel- sector, and is a big limitation to the and commercial oopmentpment activitiesactivities toto construction of sustainable develop- organizations in ssecureecure tthehe cconservationonservation ment. the area. The aagendagenda iitself…tself… project sup- The lack of precision in the term “sus- ports economic activities considered tainable development” leaves room for socially and ecologically sustainable to commercial projects to use their proac- small landholders in the vicinity of the tive social and environmental actions project reserve, such as the production for their market strategies as their con- and export of dried organic banana, in tribution to sustainable development. partnership with Terra Preservada, the A healthy sustainable development Federal University of Paraná – UFPR requires the participation of different and the offi cial extension system. It stakeholders, from identifi cation, plan- has created 80 jobs among the three ning, and implementation to the evalu- project reserves; has donated environ- ation of the project activities. There- mental books to local school libraries; fore, although commercial projects may and has supported land titling of small offer some social benefi ts, they tend to parcels on the border of their reserves. be limited by impermanence for they The ecological contribution of the exist at the discretion of the market project is primarily the protection and pressure of the investing enterprise.10 restoration of degraded areas by buf- falo ranching to forested area through The case of the conservation type Cli- natural regeneration and reforestation mate Action Project takes place in the inside the project area transformed into APA (Environmentally Protected Area) natural reserves. Findings show that, of Guaraqueçaba. Its main objective is although the outcome of the devel- to preserve the Atlantic Forest and the opment component has yet to con- biodiversity therein while generating solidate, should the local communities 350 …if initiativesThe intertwined embraceLLivelihoodsivelih rootso rights,od…buts ofandan poverty,dconservationsecure Conservationconservationconse accessr vwealthatio cann to— canand resources alsoaargumentsr g endenvironmentalu providem upen and tenhancingsPolicy livelihoodsshaping hrealapi nthatparticipation degradationg thet benefits… poverty...hmatterse debatedebate!

strengthen their participation in deci- component and research activities. sion making and should the partnership It has introduced the so called “so- with other development organizations cial carbon”, meaning carbon fi xation carry on, the project activities are likely with primary focus on social aspects. to contribute to sustainable develop- The project outstands in two development of the region in the long run. ment features compared to the other projects analyzed in this research: iisolatedsolated activities,activities, it did not pur- nnotot linkedlinked toto chase land for ddevelopmentevelopment programsprograms carbon seques- aandnd sstructurestructures ooff tration and it has put emphasis in bbiggerigger ooutreach,utreach, tendtend community par- ttoo renderrender ppunctualunctual ticipation. Their aandnd iinsignificantnsignificant actions aim at ttangibleangible results…results… addressing the socio-environmental demands of the agrarian reform settlers. The main Picture 2. Identifi cation sign for the protection social contributions are: environmental of the natural reserve of the Climate Action education to school students, teachers Project. (Courtesy Manyu Chang) and members of the community in gen- It is worth mentioning that the conser- eral; capacity building to small farm- vation type projects, in order to take ers; support for ecologically sustainable advantage of the CDM resources, align income generating activities; establish- the objective of carbon fi xing with the ment of agroforestry systems; and the conservation agenda of the implement- distribution of seedlings to land reform ers. This action may be socially legiti- settlers, communities and indigenous mate from the perspective of diffuse groups. benefi t, if an important ecosystem under threat is being protected. However, Although the activities point to the di- these projects could only be considered rection of social and ecological sustain- socially sustainable if their actions will ability, the project has rendered limited also attend effectively to the socio-en- results, both in terms of carbon fi xation vironmental needs of the local popula- and in terms of tangible improvement tion with genuine participation in deci- to the benefi ciaries’ livelihood. This is sion making. Otherwise, they remain partly explained by the fact that the simply conservation projects, as many implementers made the political deci- indeed are, where the community de- sion to target small settlers of land velopment activities are used to secure reform settlements with little poten- the conservation agenda itself. tial to sequester carbon. The trade-off between carbon benefi ts and the social The Bananal Island Carbon Seques- benefi ts committed by the project was tration Project - BICSP is one that rather high. The small scale of the re- has been transformed from conserva- sult could therefore be justifi ed by the tion to a development type project due limited infrastructure, in terms of team to project implementation contingen- and logistics of an isolated project vis- cies. However, in practical terms, it à-vis its tremendous task. The case of has shifted its activities towards social the development type leads us to the 351 Poverty, wealth and conservation

conclusion that even when activities Besides the pilot projects in Brazil ana- lead to the direction of sustainability, if lyzed above, which have demonstrated they are isolated or not linked to de- their limitations to attain substantial velopment programs and structures of social benefi t, a peer look on projects bigger outreach, they tend to render that are strictly of developmental type punctual and insignifi cant tangible re- in other countries may broaden one’s sults. The ecological contributions are understanding of the matter. basically indirect actions, such as environmental education, distribution of The case of the Scolel Te Project in seedlings and the establishment of pilot Mexico has emerged from indigenous agroforestry systems. communities in the Chiapas region. Throughout the implementation proc- Limitations of the carbon market ess the project decided to expand the number of par- and the conditions to benefi t low MMarketarket iinstrumentsnstruments income communities ticipants in order to raise the fforor environmentalenvironmental The section above concerning the con- amount of carbon ceptualization of the typology of for- mmanagementanagement mmayay bbee sequestered. This est carbon projects has dealt with the has caused the ttheoreticallyheoretically efficient,efficient, idea of setting up trade-offs among project to rele- bbutut iinn ppracticeractice areare different dimensions of sustainability, gate the develop- which is often a political decision. We rrestrainedestrained byby thethe ment activities to also see in the impact assessment of ttraderade mmediationediation … a second priority the pilot carbon projects that there due to high main- mmarketsarkets aarere nnotot vveryery is indeed trade-off between the eco- tenance costs. ggoodood toto attendattend simul-simul- nomic priority, herein represented by Gradually the the generation of carbon certifi cates, ttaneouslyaneously toto socialsocial project has be- and the social priority, represented by ddemandsemands aandnd ttoo tthehe come more car- the promotion of local livelihood. This bon than develop- eefficientfficient allocationallocation trade-off in a way translates the con- ment oriented.11 ooff resources.resources. tradiction between the market and the According to the attendance to social needs in a broader authors, while the majority of govern- sense. The capacity of carbon projects ment offi cials are concerned with the to provide concrete social benefi ts may carbon component, NGOs and project be restrained by the very nature of the developers involved are not willing to market, as corporations are ultimately channel the resources primarily to car- pressed by the market competition and bon activities. In practice, the Project may be forced to seek less costly alter- has demonstrated that it is diffi cult to natives. Market instruments for envi- attend to carbon requirements without ronmental management may be theo- compromising social demands. retically effi cient, but in practice are restrained precisely by the trade medi- The considerations above lead us to the ation. The markets, in general, are not important role of engaged governments very good to attend simultaneously to in CDM projects so that social-environ- social demands and the effi cient alloca- mental demands can be prioritized. The tion of resources. This is perhaps the carbon market will not spontaneously main reason the carbon market is not create room to benefi t small and low-in- likely to commend sustainable develop- come producers. In order for this to oc- ment as stipulated by the CDM. cur, it is necessary for engaged governments to compensate for this handicap 352 …if initiativesThe intertwined embraceLLivelihoodsivelih rootso rights,od…buts ofandan poverty,dconservationsecure Conservationconservationconse accessr vwealthatio cann to— canand resources alsoaargumentsr g endenvironmentalu providem upen and tenhancingsPolicy livelihoodsshaping hrealapi nthatparticipation degradationg thet benefits… poverty...hmatterse debatedebate!

by reducing the risks and costs of these to build on synergies with compatible projects laying specifi c public policies to development strategies for it is not assist these target benefi ciaries. likely that forest carbon projects can reach signifi cant social accomplishment There are a number of pre requisites in isolation. that forest CDM projects must follow in order to effectively promote rural live- Conclusion lihood. It is very important that local Taking CDM in general an overview of stakeholders will participate actively in the present defi nition of its rules and decision making. Project design needs the carbon market one may infer that to be fl exible and adaptive to the local although it is explicit in the KP that context so that it can address the spe- CDM should contribute to sustainable cifi c needs of the PParticipationarticipation andand ac-ac- development of local people and the host country, fforor forestforest CDMCDM ccessess toto decisiondecision mak-mak- responsibilities of the competition pprojectsrojects toto contributecontribute iingng couldcould bebe ggreatlyreatly carbon account- for resources will ing. It is impor- ttoo socialsocial equityequity … itit eenhancednhanced bbyy wwork-ork- most likely weak- tant that project en this requisite. mmayay bbee nnecessary…ecessary… iingng withwith commu-commu- activities fi t in If the Brazilian ttoo synchronisesynchronise severalseveral nnity-basedity-based oorganiza-rganiza- local land use Government or iimportantmportant conditionsconditions ttions….ions…. ThisThis impliesimplies conditions, local any other nation- demand for for- ssuchuch as:as: engagedengaged tthathat communitiescommunities al government est produce and imposes stringent ggovernments,overnments, stake-stake- nneedeed ttoo ggainain a mini-mini- still meet the social sustainabil- hholderolder participation,participation, carbon require- mmumum llevelevel ooff oorgani-rgani- ity criteria it will fflexiblelexible andand aadaptivedaptive zzationation toto bebe eligible…eligible… ments. If social risk reducing the issues are to be competitiveness pprojectroject designs,designs, avail-avail- prioritized they need to be addressed of the country, as aabilitybility ofof financiersfinanciers at the beginning as an integral part of long as there are aandnd oorganizedrganized locallocal the project design, and further followed other countries rrepresentatives…epresentatives… throughout implementation, otherwise willing to accept they are likely to remain as an ap- looser criteria to attract the project.13 pendix and fail on most counts of con- In effect, the competition for the CDM tributing to sustainable development. resources may push the projects too Participation and access to decision close to investment as usual. Whilst making could be greatly enhanced by this is the reality, less stringent so- working with existing community-based cial sustainability criteria should not organizations that are representative be encouraged. However, they should and accountable. This implies that not be addressed as part of a broader set all low-income communities are eligi- of conditions that need to be in place ble; they need to gain a minimum level and be made attractive as an essential of organization for their representa- component of this broader context. tion.12 In this sense for forest CDM projects Another great limitation regarding the to contribute to social equity it is im- likeliness of forest CDM to contribute portant to highlight the role of en- to sustainable development is high gaged governments in the design of transaction cost of projects engaged conducive policies and the formatting with social priority. One of the possibili- of developmental type carbon projects ties which are highly recommended is 353 Poverty, wealth and conservation

adapted to local realities; assist in the Notes dissemination of information to scat- 1 IPPC, 2001. tered small landholders, and dispose 2 The accreditation period can be fi xed as 20 years renewable twice, or 30 years, renewable only the resources and offi cial infrastructure once. so as to reduce transaction cost. The 3 Some recent researches suggest that the acceler- engagement of public institutions in the ated growth of trees is in response to the fertilization effect as a result of the high CO concentra- process helps to secure public policies 2 tion in the atmosphere and nitrogen accumulation and provide the necessary support and (IPCC, 2001). create synergy in existing development 4 As announced by the CDM/JI Program of the Minis- activities. try of Environment of Japan. 5 The fi eld research and the reporting of three of the four study cases: Peugeot Project, Plantar Project Regarding the forest CDM the present and BICSP Project was carried out by an interdis- setup of rules ciplinary team composed by Manyu Chang (so- RRealistically,ealistically, oneone tends to favour cio-economist), Fernando Veiga (agronomist) and Emily Boyd (forester), coordinated by Peter May mmustust rrecognizeecognize thatthat larger scale en- (resource economist), supported by the Interna- ergy and landfi ll tional Institute of Environment and Development, tthehe marketmarket ssharehare London, published under the title Local Sustainable projects. Forest Development Effects of forest Carbon Projects in fforor forestforest CDMCDM projects are less Brazil and Bolivia: a view from the fi eld (May et pprojectsrojects withwith socialsocial competitive and al., 2004). the small-scale 6 The detailed matrix is available in Portuguese in ppriorityriority isis minute.minute. the complete version of the research published by ones are even less Editora Annablume, http://www.annablume.com. so, although they are more likely to in- br under the title: Seqüestro Florestal de Carbono no Brasil-Dimensões políticas, socioeconômicas e clude small landholders into the carbon ecológicas. market. 7 PIERRI, 2003. 8 Concerning the typology proposed, it merits men- Thus, realistically, one must recognize tioning that four study cases are little in number to that the market share for forest CDM generalize the characteristics to the project types. Instead they serve as indications to signal possible projects with social priority is minute. impacts in other cases of the same project type. It is restricted mainly to investors 9 Available in the complete version of the research seeking for the image of social respon- as mentioned before. sibility. In sum the decision of simpli- 10 This is the case of AES Barry and the Camisea Project analyzed in the thesis, whereby the profi ed modalities and procedures for active social and ecological activities have been small-scale forest CDM projects helps, interrupted due to fi nancial diffi culties and even but is still much insuffi cient to secure insolvency of the investor. success of this kind of project. It still 11 Brown and Corbera, 2003. requires the synchronization of several 12 Boyd et al., 2005. 13 It is similar to the fi scal war in Brazil where differ- important conditions such as: politically ent states of the federation dispute for the estab- engaged governments, the assurance lishment of transnational corporations by granting stakeholder participation, the creation longer grace period of tax levy and other exemp- tions. of fl exible and adaptive project designs, and the availability of fi nanciers and organized local representations. References Brown, K. and E. Corbera, “Exploring equity and sus- Man Yu Chang ([email protected]) is a socio-econ- tainable development in the new carbon economy”, omist with a PhD in Environment and Development (her Climate Policy, Special Supplement on Climate thesis is on Forest Carbon Projects in Brazil). Currently she Change and Sustainable Development. Supplement is assisting the Department of Environment of the State of 1, (3) 41-56, November 2003. Paraná to develop pilot small-scale forest carbon projects Brown, K. et al., How do CDM projects contribute to for small landholders. These projects aim at selling carbon sustainable development? Tyndall Centre for Climate credits as an additional incentive for farmers to restore Change Research, Technical Report No. 16, June their legal forest reserve and riparian vegetation in their 2004. properties while generating income. 354 …if initiativesThe intertwined embraceLLivelihoodsivelih rootso rights,od…buts ofandan poverty,dconservationsecure Conservationconservationconse accessr vwealthatio cann to— canand resources alsoaargumentsr g endenvironmentalu providem upen and tenhancingsPolicy livelihoodsshaping hrealapi nthatparticipation degradationg thet benefits… poverty...hmatterse debatedebate!

Boyd, E., M. Gutierrez, and M. Chang, Adapting small- mecanismo de desenvolvimento limpio: uma síntese, scale CDM sinks projects to low-income communities, working paper, 2004. Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research, Working May, P., F. Veiga, E. Boyd and M. Chang, Local sustain- Paper 71. March 2005. http://www.tyndall.ac.uk/publi- able development effects of forest carbon projects in cations/working_papers/wp71.pdf Brazil and Bolivia, a view from the fi eld. IIED, MES Chang, M.Y., “Forest carbon sinks in Brazil: A political, (5), London, 2004. socio-economic and ecological analysis”, pp: 9-42 Pedroni, L. and B. Locatelli, “Effects of simplifi ed M&P in Sanquetta, C. and M.A. Zilloto (eds.), Carbon- on the minimum viable scale of AR-CDM project Global Market and Science, UFPR/Instituto Ecoplan, activities”, ENCOFOR, COP-10 Side Event, EU Pavil- Curitiba (Brasil), 2004 lion/La Rural, 7 December 2004. Chang, M.Y., “Forest carbon sinks in Brazil”, Tiempo. Pierri, N., As contradições nas dimensões do desen- Special issue on the Clean Development Mechanism, volvimento sustentável, CEM-UFPR, working paper, IIED/UEA/SEI-Y. Issue 53, London, 2004. Curitiba (Brazil) 2003. Chang, M.Y., Seqüestro fl orestal de carbono no Brasil UNFCCC, Simplifi ed modalities and procedures for – Dimensões políticas, socioeconômicas e ecológicas, small-scale afforestation and reforestation project Editora Annablume, São Paulo (Brasil), 2004. http:// activities under the clean development mecha- www.annablume.com.br nism and measures to facilitate their implementa- Krug, T., Modalidades e procedimentos para atividades tion. Advance version. Decision 14/CP.10 FCCC/ de projeto de fl orestamento e refl orestamento no CP/2004/10/Add.2, 19 April, 2005.

RReduccióneducción ddee llaa ppobrezaobreza y conservaciónconservación dede lala bbiodiversidad:iodiversidad: haciahacia elel desarrollodesarrollo local.local. VVivienneivienne SolísSolís Rivera,Rivera, PatriciaPatricia MadrigalMadrigal Cordero,Cordero, MMarvinarvin FonsecaFonseca Borras,Borras, IvanniaIvannia AyalesAyales Cruz,Cruz, DDavidavid ChacónChacón RojasRojas y MinorMinor SerranoSerrano

Una visión desde Mesoamérica de la pobreza los objetivos de la con- En la mayoría de los países del globo servación de la biodiversidad en los existe un reconocimiento generali- países del trópico zado de que la degradación ambiental no se cumplirán. … llosos problemasproblemas so-so- acentúa el problema de la pobreza. No ccialesiales y ambientalesambientales obstante, en la práctica, pese a los es- En una mayoría ssee hhanan atacadoatacado dede de las experien- fuerzos realizados desde la perspectiva fformaorma ssectorial,ectorial, ori-ori- técnica, no se han establecido clara- cias de desarrollo mente las relaciones entre la conser- rural tradiciona- eentadosntados a cubrircubrir llasas vación de la biodiversidad y la reduc- les, los problemas nnecesidadesecesidades a cortocorto ción de la pobreza. Asumir el tema de sociales y am- pplazolazo concon políticaspolíticas bientales se han la pobreza como una preocupación que aasistencialistas…sistencialistas… requiere atención y buscar formas in- atacado de forma novadoras para su reducción no ase- sectorial, orientados a cubrir las nece- gura automáticamente la conservación sidades a corto plazo con políticas asis- de la biodiversidad. Por otro lado, es tencialistas, lo cual ha provocado una evidente que si no se considera el tema alta dependencia económica y técnica 355 Poverty, wealth and conservation

de las comunidades a las que se dirige da. Existen dudas sobre la efectividad la atención— en su gran mayoría loca- de las áreas protegidas para la con- les y pobres— hacia las instituciones servación de los recursos naturales, involucradas, sean estas gubernamen- incluyendo aquellos bajo protección del tales o no gubernamentales. Detrás de Estado. Actualmente, muchas de las los confl ictos socio-ambientales y los áreas silvestres protegidas se encuen- problemas de desarrollo rural subyacen tran geográfi camente en los espacios problemas íntimamente vinculados: la de acción e impacto de las comunida- degradación ambiental y la pérdida de des rurales, y un porcentaje importante la biodiversidad, la pobreza y la vul- de ellas todavía no se han pagado a nerabilidad social. Las respuestas que sus dueños originales. Estas comuni- se han tratado de implementar no han dades, a la vez, son los grupos sociales sido del todo positivas. En Mesoaméri- que generalmente muestran los nive- ca, la respuesta tradicional al problema les más bajos en educación, servicios ambiental ha sido, por una parte, la sociales básicos, fuentes de empleo. Es creación de áreas silvestres protegidas en las comunidades rurales y pesque- y, por otra parte, los problemas de ín- ras donde se encuentran los mayores dole social, tales como fuentes de em- niveles de pobreza del país y una de- pleo, alimentación, educación, salud, pendencia más fuerte sobre la base de se han intentado resolver desde las recursos naturales para la subsistencia. instituciones públicas y organismos de cooperación internacional, desde una Como si fuese poco, producto de la de- lógica asistencial para cubrir las nece- gradación ambiental y las condiciones sidades. Ambas iniciativas son valiosas, sociales, se obser- pero en la mayoría de los casos realiza- va un aumento en … llosos puentespuentes entreentre das de manera aislada y atomizada. la vulnerabilidad llaa conservaciónconservación dede lala social ante eventos bbiodiversidadiodiversidad y dis-dis- naturales. Muchos mminucióninución dede llaa pobre-pobre- de los efectos de- vastadores de es- zzaa enen nnuestrasuestras ccomu-omu- tos eventos en la nnidadesidades ruralesrurales nnoo sese región Mesoameri- hhanan construidoconstruido … cana, se debieron principalmente a la marginación social y la degradación ambiental. Elemento detonador, además de la generación de confl ictos socio-ambientales, es el hecho de que las comunidades locales bajo estas condiciones no logran asegurar las fuentes de subsistencia, provocando una alta competencia por los recursos naturales. Es claro que los puentes entre la conservación de la biodiversidad y disminución de la pobreza en nuestras comunidades rurales Foto 1: Niño y pez en Tárcoles, Costa Rica. no se han construido. Ni se han fortale- (Cortesia CoopeSolidar R.L.) cido de forma sostenible las estructuras Los esfuerzos de conservación en Costa locales organizadas. Rica se encuentran en una encrucija- 356 …if initiativesThe intertwined embraceLLivelihoodsivelih rootso rights,od…buts ofandan poverty,dconservationsecure Conservationconservationconse accessr vwealthatio cann to— canand resources alsoaargumentsr g endenvironmentalu providem upen and tenhancingsPolicy livelihoodsshaping hrealapi nthatparticipation degradationg thet benefits… poverty...hmatterse debatedebate!

En este contexto CoopeSolidar R.L una gestión a familias e individuos (hom- cooperativa de autogestión de servicios bres, mujeres y niños) en el desarrollo profesionales para la solidaridad so- de actividades que mejoran las condi- cial en Costa Rica, presenta una nueva ciones de vida, aún en circunstancias forma de trabajo y gestión que intenta sociales y económicas críticas. abordar como uno de los elementos fundamentales el tema de la pobreza. Por su parte, el movimiento coopera- Desde hace algunos años, ha iniciado tivo costarricense potencia recursos un proceso de asociatividad con otras económicos y humanos que deben estructuras cooperativas de autoges- aprovecharse desde el marco del desa- tión en busca de clusters cooperativos rrollo sostenible. Los procesos de ca- empresariales que innoven en la forma pacitación, transferencia de tecnología, de desarrollar actividades sostenibles préstamos productivos y otros deben desde lo social, lo económico y lo am- incorporar la temática ambiental como biental. eje transversal de trabajo.

Este artículo, pretende compartir el A principios del año 2003, CoopeSoli- avance conceptual y metodológico e dar R.L. y CoopeTárcoles R.L iniciaron incluir una reseña del proceso que ha una relación de fortalecimiento mutuo, logrado el establecimiento de una rela- como parte de un proyecto de liderazgo ción de asociatividad entre dos coope- de la Fundación AVINA. Esta alianza ha rativas, Coope Sol i Dar R.L. y Coope permitido poner en práctica algunas de Tárcoles R.L. una cooperativa de pes- las recomendaciones del X Congreso cadores artesanales que desarrollan su Nacional del Movimiento Cooperativo actividad en el Pacíﬁ co Central de Costa Costarricense, en materia de ambien- Rica. Esta relación de asociatividad te y desarrollo sostenible. La alianza puede brindar algunos elementos para tiene como objetivo general incidir en la construcción de puentes entre la la incorporación de la temática ambien- reducción de la pobreza y conservación tal y de desarrollo sostenible dentro del de la biodiversidad. marco de las actividades de pesca artesanal de CoopeTárcoles R.L. a través Un proceso de acompañamiento del desarrollo de una relación de aso- hacia una relación de ciatividad y colaboración novedosa, una asociatividad y un uso sostenible alianza estratégica cooperativa empre- del mar sarial fundamentada en la responsabilidad social y ambiental. A la entrada del nuevo siglo, el cooperativismo conti- … eell ccooperativismoooperativismo núa siendo válido ccontinúaontinúa siendosiendo vá-vá- como modelo llidoido comocomo modelomodelo dede de gestión so- ggestiónestión socio-produc-socio-produc- cio-productivo que considera la ttivoivo queque consideraconsidera lala preocupación por ppreocupaciónreocupación porpor elel serser el ser humano hhumanoumano eenn fformaorma iin-n- en forma integral desde lo social, ttegralegral desdedesde lloo social,social, económico y Foto 2. Bote de pesca artesanal, Tárcoles Costa eeconómicoconómico y personal.personal. personal. Una Rica. (Cortesia CoopeSolidar R.L.)

cooperativa permite incorporar en su 357 Poverty, wealth and conservation

Se espera que la iniciativa permita el de autogestión a través de la cual se uso sostenible del recurso pesca, la brindan los servicios profesionales en conservación de los recursos marino un marco de solidaridad social, la cual costeros y el desarrollo local justo ha afi anzado la idea de que el cambio y equitativo. Existe un interés en el de actitudes y la promoción de valores fortalecimiento del valor de la soli- que fundamentan la sostenibilidad, daridad entre cooperativas, en esta encuentra un espacio de organización iniciativa ambas cooperativas Coope- propicio en el cooperativismo por sus Tárcoles R.L y CoopeSolidar R.L se valores de solidaridad y bienestar. dan la mano, esperando que su ejem- plo logre interesar a los órganos de Los cambios que se han venido pro- segundo y tercer nivel del movimiento duciendo en la defi nición de formas cooperativista en esta iniciativa, brin- de pesca responsable, responden a dando su apoyo para continuar con la directrices que aprueba el Consejo discusión sobre el tema de ambiente y de Administración (órgano de toma desarrollo, dentro y desde el coopera- de decisión de la cooperativa). Estas tivismo. directrices son aprobadas posteriormente por la Asamblea General y son El sector pesquero nacional, desarrolla posteriormente incorporadas a las sus actividades desde muy diversas prácticas de trabajo diario de los pes- estructuras de organización siendo cadores artesanales. una de ellas las cooperativas. Su trabajo desde este sistema de orga- Se ha logrado desarrollar con Coope nización micro-empresarial, permite Tárcoles R.L. un proceso de discusión una mejor y más justa distribución sobre la incorporación del tema am- de benefi cios derivados del uso de los biental en la gestión de su coop- recursos pesqueros. Además, permite erativa. De los resultados obtenidos el desarrollo de actividades producti- hasta ahora, se puede identifi car los vas más integrales, que sustentadas siguientes: en los valores cooperativistas pueden 1. Reforma de los estatutos de Coope ser de largo plazo, dejando un espacio Tárcoles R.L. para incluir como uno importante para la discusión y puesta de sus objetivos la promoción de en práctica del concepto de desarrollo la búsqueda de formas de gestión sostenible. sostenible de los recursos naturales y culturales. CoopeSolidar R.L ha procurado con- 2. La consolidación de un proceso ori- ocer cómo, desde la práctica y a entado a defi nir el interés del sector través del reconocimiento de distintas privado local, formas de conocimiento de los pesca- para articular SSee haha logradologrado desarr-desarr- dores artesanales, se percibe el tema un modelo de oollarllar unun procesoproceso dede de ambiente y desarrollo, con el fi n de desarrollo en realizar una propuesta de más largo ddiscusióniscusión sobresobre lala el área de in- plazo y mayor impacto en el mov- iincorporaciónncorporación deldel fl uencia de la imiento cooperativo nacional sobre el cooperativa, ttemaema aambientalmbiental eenn llaa tema de ambiente y responsabilidad que permita el ggestiónestión cooperativa…cooperativa… social. Esta inquietud ha sido moti- reconocimiento vada desde el proceso de formación de sus intereses hacia una pesca y consolidación de esta cooperativa 358 …if initiativesThe intertwined embraceLLivelihoodsivelih rootso rights,od…buts ofandan poverty,dconservationsecure Conservationconservationconse accessr vwealthatio cann to— canand resources alsoaargumentsr g endenvironmentalu providem upen and tenhancingsPolicy livelihoodsshaping hrealapi nthatparticipation degradationg thet benefits… poverty...hmatterse debatedebate!

responsable y su responsabilidad encia, ayuda mutua, solidaridad y social con la comunidad de Tár- responsabilidad coles. social y am- EEll aprendizajeaprendizaje haha sidosido 3. La identiﬁ cación de los valores y biental. Estos ggranderande y hhaa dejadodejado eenn actividades que pueden desarrollar valores son la eevidenciavidencia lala necesidadnecesidad a partir del Código de Pesca Re- base del desar- ddee uunn ttrabajorabajo ssolidarioolidario sponsable de la FAO, que ha condu- rollo de activi- cido a la adopción de un Código de dades acorda- y responsable,responsable, queque Pesca Responsable propio como un das por ambas aaporteporte alal fortalec-fortalec- instrumento voluntario. cooperativas a iimientomiento dede llasas organ-organ- través de sus iizacioneszaciones dede basebase … Consejos de 4. La incidencia en la discusión del Administración. proyecto de ley de pesca, de mane- 2. La elaboración de convenios, acu- ra que incorpore algunos de los erdos y alianzas de trabajo y com- aspectos más relevantes salidos de ercio justo entre CoopeTárcoles R.L la experiencia de estas cuarenta y el sector privado local, principal- familias pescadoras organizadas en mente turístico. CoopeTárcoles R.L. 3. El desarrollo de investigación que 5. Intercambios y espacios de reﬂ ex- logre integrar el conocimiento téc- ión con otros grupos de pescadores nico con las formas de conocimien- artesanales para hacer conciencia to y saber local, constituyéndose en sobre la importancia de una pesca la base de la toma de decisiones en responsable y la necesidad de que las diferentes esferas. se reconozcan sus aportes a la con- servación. 4. La creación de la primera área de conservación comunitaria marina El aprendizaje hasta ahora ha sido en Costa Rica. grande y ha dejado en evidencia la necesidad de un trabajo solidario y responsable, que aporte al fortalecimiento de las organizaciones de base que desarrollen un uso sostenible de sus recursos naturales y promuevan el desarrollo de sus habitantes con responsabilidad social.

Esta relación de asociatividad entre Coope SoliDar R.L. y Coope Tárcoles R.L. aspira a a gestarse en el mediano y largo plazo en torno a cuatro ejes principales de trabajo: 1. Una relación asociativa entre Foto 3. David Chacón introduce el codigo de CoopeTárcoles R.L y CoopeSolidar pesca responsable desarrollado para CoopeTár- R.L, entre técnicos y líderes de coles R.L. (Cortesia CoopeSolidar R.L.) proyectos con las comunidades fundamentada en valores de transpar-

359 Poverty, wealth and conservation

Recuadro 1. Cooperativa de Pescadores de Tárcoles R.L. CoopeTárcoles R.L. “Nuestro Código de Pesca Responsable” Acompañamiento: Coope SoliDar R.L. Los Asociados de la Cooperativa de Pescadores de Tárcoles, CoopeTárcoles R.L., entendemos nuestra responsabilidad social y ambiental como cooperativa de pesca artesanal, y en cumplimiento de uno de nuestros objetivos establecido en los Estatutos: “Promover la búsqueda de formas de gestión sostenible de los recursos naturales y culturales”, adoptamos voluntariamente el siguiente Código de Pesca Responsable.

Estamos conscientes de que: • El recurso pesquero del Golfo de Nicoya ha sido seriamente deteriorado por la sobreexplotación y la contaminación. • El camarón y la langosta son especies de gran valor para nosotros, pero son especies en peligro de extinción. • Todavía nosotros pescadores artesanales hacemos usos de algunas artes de pesca que dañan el recurso a largo plazo: • Trasmallos en la desembocadura de los ríos. • Pesca en la desembocadura de los ríos. • Mallas menores a las 3 pulgadas. • Pesca con rastras artesanales. • Captura de especies amenazadas o en tallas muy pequeñas.

Este código de pesca puede permitirnos mejores relaciones de apoyo y de negocio con INCOPESCA, MINAE, INFOCOOP y el sector privado de la zona

Es fundamental para el desarrollo y bienestar de nuestras familias permitir la recuperación de la pesca y tomar medidas de salud e higiene en nuestra comunidad.

La Isla del Caño es un área de reserva para la langosta.

Reconociendo que mucho podemos hacer desde nuestra actividad diaria de la pesca artesanal nos proponemos desarrollar un proceso paulatino para: • Informar a todos nuestros asociados sobre la problemática del Golfo de Nicoya, su situación ambiental y el impacto en nuestra vida, y compartir en la medida de lo posible esta información y preocupación con los demás compañeros pescadores artesanales. • Deﬁ nir entre todos los asociados principios de gestión ambiental que nos permitan mejorar y con- tribuir con la conservación, tratando de involucrar a la comunidad de Tárcoles.

Nos proponemos cuidar y limpiar nuestra playa a través de: • La formación de brigadas de limpieza. • Traer el pescado limpio a la playa • Manipular el pescado adecuadamente. • No desviscerar el pescado en la playa. • Lavar la panga y dejarla boca abajo. • Cambiar el aceite adecuadamente y reciclarlo.

Non proponemos también de: Mejorar el espacio para la manipulación del pescado. • Saber más sobre las leyes vigentes, nacionales e internacionales, cumplirlas y procurar que otros las cumplan. 360 …if initiativesThe intertwined embraceLLivelihoodsivelih rootso rights,od…buts ofandan poverty,dconservationsecure Conservationconservationconse accessr vwealthatio cann to— canand resources alsoaargumentsr g endenvironmentalu providem upen and tenhancingsPolicy livelihoodsshaping hrealapi nthatparticipation degradationg thet benefits… poverty...hmatterse debatedebate!

• Fortalecer y capacitar permanentemente al Comité de Vigilancia para actuar en denuncias efectivas contra las artes de pesca destructivas u otros métodos dañinos al ecosistema marino.

Para garantizar el cumplimiento de estos acuerdos, el Comité de Educación y Bienestar Social desar- rollará un proceso de educación sobre: • Artes de pesca legales en el país y el impacto ambiental que tienen otros artes de pesca. • Especies en vías de extinción: características de la especies, por qué están amenazadas, ciclos de vida, etc. • La legislación ambiental y como podemos ayudar para hacerla cumplir.

Cuando un asociado incumpla las disposiciones establecidas en este Código de Pesca Responsable se le aplicará según el Artículo 19 de los Estatutos una corrección disciplinaria por parte del Consejo de Administración. La primera vez que incumpla recibirá una advertencia por escrito. La segunda vez que incumpla será suspendido de sus derechos como asociado.

Cuando exista una voluntad maniﬁ esta para no cumplir lo establecido en este Código de Pesca Re- sponsable, se tratará según lo establecido en el Artículo 18 de los Estatutos como una causa que puede hacer perder la calidad de asociado. En este caso se debe seguir el procedimiento establecido en el artículo 20, el Comité de Vigilancia o el Consejo de Administración deberán elaborar un informe, que será de conocimiento del Consejo de Administración, el cual informará al asociado sobre los car- gos y pruebas en su contra. Se le brindará la oportunidad de presentar su defensa. El Consejo de Ad- ministración tomará la decisión, si se trata de una expulsión se deberá incluir como punto de agenda en una Asamblea General.

Le solicitamos a las instituciones de gobierno competentes: INCOPESCA, Guardacostas, INFOCOOP, ICT, INA, y al sector privado su apoyo y colaboración para que podamos cumplir con lo que voluntariamente aquí nos hemos comprometido.

Firmado en Tárcoles, a las diecisiete horas del veinte de noviembre del año dos mil cuatro.

Adoptado en Asamblea General Ordinaria y presentado a las autoridades competentes en actividad pública del viernes 8 de abril del 2005.

Algunas conclusiones Podemos concluir que si bien existe todavía una cierta disociación entre los esfuerzos de conservación y la necesidad de reducción de la pobreza, en los últimos años se han ido desarrollando esfuerzos e iniciativas que en su accionar apuntan hacia enfoques alternativos basados en la conservación de la biodiversidad con equidad, en la distribución justa de beneﬁ cios, en el mantenimiento de la capacidad de carga de los sistemas naturales y en el mejoramiento de la Foto 4. Joven lujador de la CoopeTárcoles R.L. calidad de vida de quienes menos tie- (Cortesia CoopeSolidar R.L.) nen. Iniciativas que pretendan asumir este reto deben tomar en cuenta: 361 Poverty, wealth and conservation

• La valoración de los enfoques inter- análisis de los impactos ambienta- disciplinarios que respeten y pro- les de los grupos más vulnerables muevan la preservación de formas frente a los sectores económicos de de vida y valores encaminados mayor infl uencia y que producen un hacia un mejor bienestar individual mayor impacto ambiental. y colectivo. • La articulación de los actores lo- • La participación efectiva de los cales con gobiernos e instancias sectores excluidos de la toma de regionales que contribuyan a una decisiones, en la construcción de un gestión ambiental participativa y modelo de desarrollo que permita descentralizada, tratando de canali- disminuir la vulnerabilidad social y zar espacios para que las instancias ambiental de los ecosistemas y su comunitarias accedan a los niveles gente. políticos y globales, garantizando • La contribución a la equidad a tra- una mayor democratización del po- vés de la construcción creativa y der en la toma de decisiones. consensuada de mecanismos para una distribución más justa de bene- En todo este proceso debe predomi- fi cios de la conservación, que ga- nar la consolidación de la confi anza rantice también la incorporación del en las capacidades locales y la discu- enfoque de género y el respeto a sión de principios éticos que puedan las diferencias étnicas y a la diver- guiar los esfuerzos en la construcción sidad cultural. de nuevas prácticas de desarrollo y conservación, con el fi n de acrecentar • El reconocimiento de los derechos el capital social, natural, económico y de los pueblos indígenas y campe- cultural de nuestros pueblos. sinos, en cuanto a sus territorios y tierras, derecho a la objeción cul- Vivienne Solís Rivera ([email protected] ), Patricia tural en el uso de recursos de la Madrigal Cordero ([email protected]), Marvin Fonseca Borras ([email protected] ) y Ivannia biodiversidad y derecho al conoci- Ayales Cruz ([email protected] ) son asociados de miento informado previo. CoopeSolidar R.L y miembros de CEESP/ TGER. Vivienne es Co-Presidente de el TGER. David Chacón Rojas y • El análisis de la problemática am- Minor Serrano ([email protected] ) son EEll análisisanálisis dede lala prob-prob- biental que asociados de CoopeTárcoles R.L., ooperativa de pesca ubique en jus- artesanal de Tárcoles, Costa Rica. llemáticaemática ambientalambiental ta perspectiva rrequiereequiere uubicarbicar eenn las actividades jjustausta pperspectivaerspectiva laslas económicas que aactividadesctividades económi-económi- tienen un impacto ambiental ccasas queque ttienenienen uunn grave y la res- iimpactompacto ambientalambiental ponsabilidad de ggraverave y lala responsa-responsa- los sectores que bbilidadilidad dede llosos sectoressectores contribuyen en mayor medida al qqueue ccontribuyenontribuyen eenn deterioro de los mmayorayor medidamedida aall recursos natu- ddeterioroeterioro dede llosos recur-recur- rales. Esto es la ssosos naturalesnaturales búsqueda de la equidad en el 362 …if initiativesThe intertwined embraceLLivelihoodsivelih rootso rights,od…buts ofandan poverty,dconservationsecure Conservationconservationconse accessr vwealthatio cann to— canand resources alsoaargumentsr g endenvironmentalu providem upen and tenhancingsPolicy livelihoodsshaping hrealapi nthatparticipation degradationg thet benefits… poverty...hmatterse debatedebate!

PPovertyoverty andand biodiversitybiodiversity inin thethe CrossCross RiverRiver ForestForest RRegionegion ofof NigeriaNigeria EEmmanuelmmanuel OO.. NNuesiriuesiri

Abstract. It is estimated that about 300 million individuals located in Africa live in poverty and rely directly on biodiversity for livelihood. In recognition of the relationship between poverty and biodiversity loss, there is a global consensus that biodiversity conservation should also deliver poverty alleviation. In 1996 a conservation and development project was initiated at Ebok-Boje in the Cross River Forest region, home to the critically endangered Cross River Gorilla (Gorilla gorilla diehli). The project introduced alternative livelihood opportunities as an incentive for local poor people to stop hunting. Project objectives were not attained because poverty alleviation is not to be attained only by introducing the “right” technical solutions but by combining this with a nuanced understanding of local socio-economic dynamics. Suc- cessful initiatives would need to deﬂ ect increased consumption to more biodiversity friendly pathways and identify potential conservation “champions”. These should be the focus of capacity building initiatives enabling them to speak for biodiversity as a result of internalised conservation ethic.

Contemporary development and biodi- It’s about 3 pm and I am seating in versity conservation discourse is fi lled a bushtaxi at Okuni market waiting with rhetoric on poverty alleviation.1 for it to get full and take me to Boje, This refl ects the fact that the major- the fi eld offi ce base of the Afi Moun- ity of the world’s people live in pov- tain Wildlife Sanctuary Project. Okuni erty with about 300 million individuals market is a major market in Boki local located in Africa.2 Studies show that government area and— as any other this has a huge impact on biological self-respscting African market— bustles resources as the poor rely directly on with activity. The commodities that are these resources for their livelihood.3 dominant are bananas, plantains and garri (milled cassava). While waiting, I make conversation with the taxi driver on a range of issues from national politics to local subsistence agriculture. Eventually I ask him why so many bananas in the market and he responds: ‘Bananas command a good price in the market and have a short crop rotation cycle. Boki has no industries, no government jobs and is the least developed local government area in Cross River State. The primary means of living is farming and trade in farm produce… I also own a farm which I visit regularly on weekends Picture 1. Transporting people and crops to to supplement income from taxi driv- the market. (Courtesy Forests, Resources and ing’ People) 363 Poverty, wealth and conservation

It is maintained that there is a vicious losses of environmental resources”. cycle of poverty leading to biodiversity The UN maintains that the millen- loss, which then leads to greater pov- nium development goals are mutually erty. Numerous strategies have been re-enforcing and goes on to re-assert executed with the purpose of lifting the standpoint that “economic growth, the poor in developing countries out of which work to improve peoples’ lives, poverty. The most recent coming out can also work to improve the environ- as usual from the World Bank’s stable ment”.7 is the Heavily Indebted Poor Countries (HIPC) initiative.4

Integrating conservation and poverty alleviation At the 1992 Earth Summit in Rio, there was global consensus that efforts at biodiversity conservation should also deliver poverty alleviation.5 Since then, a plethora of initiatives under the rubric of integrated conservation and development (ICDP) projects and or community-based conservation (CBC) have sought to achieve this twin task.6

In 2000, in recognition of the gravity and complexity of this task, the UN TThehe UUNN mmaintainsaintains declared poverty alleviation tthathat thethe millenniummillennium as one of eight ddevelopmentevelopment goalsgoals areare millennium mmutuallyutually re-enforc-re-enforc- development iingng andand goesgoes onon goals, alongside environmental ttoo re-assertre-assert thethe stand-stand- sustainabil- ppointoint thatthat “economic“economic ity. The target ggrowth,rowth, whichwhich workwork of the poverty Map 1. Aﬁ River Forest Reserve in the Northeast- alleviation mil- ern fringe of the Cross River forest region. (Source ttoo improveimprove peoples’peoples’ Eniang, 2003) lennium goal llives,ives, cancan alsoalso is the halving wworkork ttoo improveimprove thethe of the number Based on the above premise, Pro- eenvironment”nvironment” of poor people Natura International in 1996 initi- who live on less ated a conservation and development than a dollar a day and suffer from project at Ebok-Boje (also known as hunger, by 2015. The environmental Ebok-Kabaken or Ebaken) in the Aﬁ sustainability millennium goal aims to Forest Reserve of the Cross River For- “integrate the principles of sustain- est region. Ebok-Bjoe is in Boki lo- able development into country poli- cal government area of Cross River cies and programmes and reverse the State, Nigeria and is a critical site

364 …if initiativesThe intertwined embraceLLivelihoodsivelih rootso rights,od…buts ofandan poverty,dconservationsecure Conservationconservationconse accessr vwealthatio cann to— canand resources alsoaargumentsr g endenvironmentalu providem upen and tenhancingsPolicy livelihoodsshaping hrealapi nthatparticipation degradationg thet benefits… poverty...hmatterse debatedebate!

for biodiversity conservation.8 Boki state if this is as a result of successful is home to species of high conserva- project interventions or other contin- tion value including the migrant barn gent factors. It is common knowledge Swallow (Hirundo rustica), Baumann’s in Ebok-Boje that the piggery project Greenbul (Phyllastrephus baumanni), set up to provide an alternative source Grey-necked Picathartes (Picathartes of protein and income-earning venture oreas), endangered primates (Mandril- for the local people collapsed when lus leucophaeus, Pan troglodytes vel- donor funding ceased. The environ- lerosus) and the critically endangered mental education initiative is severely Cross River Gorilla (Gorilla gorilla limited and the study fellowship ben- diehli).9 Oates et al. (2002, p.83) note eﬁ ted just two community members that “it has been suggested that this who travelled to Italy. [Ebok-Boje] is the largest wintering roost site of barn swallows in Africa, occupied at times by 20 million birds”.

TThehe PPro-Naturaro-Natura iini-ni- The Pro-Natura initiative at ttiativeiative atat Ebok-BojeEbok-Boje Ebok-Boje was wwasas aaimedimed aatt pprovid-rovid- aimed at provid- iingng incentivesincentives forfor ing incentives tthehe peoplepeople ofof Ebok-BojeEbok-Boje for the people of Ebok-Boje to ttoo stopstop huntinghunting thethe stop hunting the mmigrantigrant barnbarn swal-swal- migrant barn llowsows forfor food.food. Swallows for food.10 The initiative, which is now under the auspices of the Nigerian Conservation Founda- tion (NCF) and the Italian League for Bird Protection (LIPU),11 consists of an environmental education component, a piggery project and an academic study fellowship for two Ebok-Boje community members to Italy.12 It is known that about 200 000 barn swallows were caught everywhere for food Picture 2. Heading home from the farm. in the Ebok-Boje area.13 Other threats (Courtesy Tunde Morakinyo/ Iroko Foun- facing wildlife in the area include habi- dation) tat loss via land clearance and bush burning for farming and habitat distur- Obstacles or opportunities: bance due to logging operations. neither either-or but both-and Field contacts in Boje indicate that Francesco Micheloni, LIPU’s contact hunting of Barn Swallows for food person for the Ebok-Boje project, in has not ceased. Part of the allure of his report on his most recent trip to hunting for Barn Swallows is the rela- Boje asserts that the people are no tive ease with which this can be done longer interested in eating the swal- relative to hunting for other wildlife lows.5 However, Micheloni does not 365 Poverty, wealth and conservation

in the area. The creation of the Afi articulate who placed personal rather Mountain Wildlife Sanctuary (AMWS) than community interest at the fore. and subsequent This individual(s) put on the garb of FFieldield ccontactsontacts inin BojeBoje deployment of community spoke person(s) and won iindicatendicate thatthat huntinghunting sanctuary rang- the “trust” of the conservation organi- ers has made zation fi eld personnel working in the ooff BarnBarn SwallowsSwallows forfor it increasingly area at the time. It is worth noting ffoodood hashas notnot ceased.ceased. diffi cult to hunt that the above outcome is not new larger wildlife.14 to the conservation and development Thus, despite on-going conservation debate.17 intervention with respect to protecting an important wintering roost site This example draws attention to the for the European Barn Swallows, its fact that rural poverty cannot be fate still hangs in the balance. How- eliminated simply by having the right ever the point that this article wishes technical solutions but by combining to dwell upon is the collapse of the this with an understanding of local piggery project. It is also maintained socio-economic dynamics. The fact that the project collapsed as a result that international NGOs are interested of the disinterest on the part of com- in conserving biodiversity in Boki is munity members appointed to manage viewed by local people— rightly or the piggery on behalf of the Ebok-Boje wrongly— as an opportunity for mate- community.15 rial and fi nancial benefi ts, preferably in the form of monetary compensation This in part re- rather than labour demanding commu- TThehe ffactact thatthat inter-inter- fl ects a common nity projects.18 This mirrors the perva- nnationalational NGOsNGOs areare mindset in this siveness of a “get-rich-quick” mental- iinterestednterested iinn conserv-conserv- region that views ity in Nigeria.19 How then could NGOs labour demand- effectively deliver conservation and iingng biodiversitybiodiversity inin ing exogenous poverty alleviation under these cir- BBokioki isis viewedviewed byby alternative in- cumstances? This is a very pertinent come generating question, given llocalocal people—people— rightlyrightly WWouldould increasedincreased oorr wrongly—wrongly— asas anan activities with that Nigeria disfavour.16 Farm- and Cameroon pprosperityrosperity notnot leadlead toto oopportunitypportunity forfor ing of crops with have just signed iincreasedncreased consump-consump- mmaterialaterial andand short rotation an agreement ttionion andand consequentlyconsequently (such as banana) creating a trans- ffinancialinancial benefits,benefits, iincreasedncreased exploitationexploitation ppreferablyreferably inin thethe formform with an assured boundary pro- annual yield and tected area in ooff forestforest resources?resources? ooff monetarymonetary compen-compen- high market the Cross River ssationation ratherrather thanthan value (such as forest region between both countries.20 llabourabour ddemandingemanding oil palm) is high on favoured list The conservation importance of this ccommunityommunity projects.projects. of income gener- region has attracted several high pro- ating ventures. fi le international organizations to the If this is the case why did the com- region, including WWF, WCS, FFI, GTZ, munity accept the piggery project? CIDA and USAID. The starting point A common response I received was would be for these actors to recognize that the community decision-mak- that only a long term (minimum fi fteen ing process was captured by the most years) approach would yield meaning- 366 …if initiativesThe intertwined embraceLLivelihoodsivelih rootso rights,od…buts ofandan poverty,dconservationsecure Conservationconservationconse accessr vwealthatio cann to— canand resources alsoaargumentsr g endenvironmentalu providem upen and tenhancingsPolicy livelihoodsshaping hrealapi nthatparticipation degradationg thet benefits… poverty...hmatterse debatedebate!

ful outcome in the region. There is also designed on a 5-year rotation aimed at a real need for a comprehensive un- working with the next immediate gen- derstanding of the ecological, historical eration of potential labour force and and socio-economic causes of biodiver- consumers. Environmental education sity loss in the region. This would form programmes should be initiated with the foundation for a locale-speciﬁ c and the dual purpose of building conserva- pragmatic biodiversity friendly poverty tion conscientiousness and identifying alleviation strategy. The strategy would potential future conservation “cham- need to provide effective solutions to pions”. These children should be the the problem of soil productivity with a focus of capacity building initiatives view towards enhancing productivity designed to develop local leaders who of existing farmlands and bringing into would speak for biodiversity as a result usage abandoned farmland.21 of internalised conservation ethic.

The choice of crops should be left in The plethora of international develop- the hands of the local people. The goal ment and conservation organizations in should be to freeze farmland expansion the Cross River forest region could be and provide gainful employment within problematic. Rather than each organi- a long term time frame. This must be zation seeking for pre-eminence and EEnvironmentalnvironmental edu-edu- coupled with thus breeding institutional rivalry, it is capacity building in the best interest of all if they work ccationation programmesprogrammes aimed at rais- in synergistic harmony. They would sshouldhould bebe iinitiatednitiated ing the market- also have to reach out in equitable wwithith thethe dualdual purposepurpose ing acumen of partnerships with the various local ooff buildingbuilding conserva-conserva- the local people. NGOs in the region. I do acknowledge Would increased the role of broader political and eco- ttionion conscientious-conscientious- prosperity not nomic factors towards the perpetu- nnessess aandnd iidentifyingdentifying lead to increased ation of poverty in Nigeria and other ffutureuture pprobablerobable consumption and developing countries.22 However, it is cconservationonservation consequently beyond the mandate of conservation increased exploi- NGOs to engage comprehensively in ““champions”.champions”. tation of forest this arena. At best conservation NGOs resources? Yes, it would in the short should add their voice to the call for a term, but long-term strategies can be more people responsive and poverty put in place to ameliorate the negative alleviating global political and econom- impact of increased local wealth on ic order. biodiversity. This would involve historical analyses of resource exploitation Conclusion to reduce the probable impact of in- The proposals herein are not presented creased wealth on the resource base. as silver bullets as there are no easy answers to an effective coupling of Results from this exercise could be biodiversity conservation with poverty use to deﬂ ect future consumption to alleviation. However, the interconnec- more biodiversity friendly pathways. tions between poverty and loss of bio- Demographic analyses could be used diversity in developing countries such to design tailored programmes aimed as Nigeria indicates that conservation at inculcating the conservation eth- NGOs cannot opt out of this arduous ics into younger community members. task. This proposed intervention could be 367 Poverty, wealth and conservation

ment.htm 8 Ezealor, 2002 9 IUCN, 2003; Oates et al., 2002. 10 Ezealor, 2002. 11 See Ali Notizie June 2000 (LIPU – UK Conservation Newsletter) available online at http://www.lipu- uk.org/Pubs/Publications.htm 12 See http://www.swallowschool.it/ingl/obiet_africa/ justina.html; see also Ali Notizie, June 2000. 13 Ezealor, 2002. 14 Owan M., Personal Communication, Boje, Nigeria, 16 June 2003. 15 Otu M., Personal Communication, Boje, Nigeria, 16 June 2003. 16 Owan M., Personal Communication, Boje, Nigeria, 16 June 2003. 17 Cooke and Kothari, 2001. 18 Eniang E., Personal Communication, Calabar, Ni- geria, 17 February 2003. 19 The Economist, 2000. 20 UNEP, 2003. 21 Balogun, 1994; Boyd and Slaymaker, 2000. 22 Cheru, 1992; Hellinger et al., 2001; Pimbert, 2001; Okunmadewa et al., 2002.

References Balogun P., “The Impact of Social and Economic Issues on Forestry in Cross River State Nigeria”, Unpub- lished Report Submitted to the Cross River State Picture 3. Tough ride to the market. Forest Department, 1994. (Courtesy Forests, Resources and People) Boyd C. and T. Slaymaker, “Re-examining the ‘More People Less Erosion Hypothesis’: Special Case or Wider Trend”, ODI Natural Resource Perspectives Emmanuel O. Nuesiri ([email protected]. 63, ODI, London, 2000. uk ) is a DPhil. Clarendon Research Scholar at the Oxford University Center for the Environment (OUCE) and a Cheru F., “Structural Adjustment, Primary Resource member of St Antony’s College Oxford. This article is based Trade and Sustainable Development in sub-Saharan on a research study executed in 2003 for Fauna and Flora Africa”, World Development 20(4): 497-512, 1992. International on conservation and resource use in the Cooke B. and U. Kothari, Participation: The New Tyr- Cross River trans-border forest region. The author wishes anny?, London, Zed Books, 2001. to acknowledge the helpful comments of Dan Brockington, DFID, Biodiversity: A Crucial Issue for the World’s Stella Asaha and Peter Wole. Opinions expressed herein are Poorest, DFID, London, 2001. those of the author and should not be attributed to any of Eniang E. A., “Effects of Habitat Fragmentation on the the above institutions or persons. Cross River Gorilla (Gorilla gorilla diehli): Recom- mendations for Conservation” pp. 343 – 364 in Notes Marsh L. K. (ed.), Primates in Fragments: Ecology 1 UNDP, 2000; DFID, 2001; Mellor, 2002; Sanderson and Conservation, Kluwer Academic/Plenum Pub- and Redford, 2003 lishers, New York (USA), 2003. 2 World Bank, 2000; Manuel, 2004. Ezealor A. U., Critical Sites for Biodiversity Conserva- 3 Forester and Machlis, 1996; Swanson, 1998; Kozi- tion in Nigeria, NCF, Lagos, 2002. ell, 2001. Forester D. J. and G. E.Machlis, “Modelling Human 4 World Bank, 2001. Factors that Affect the Loss of Biodiversity”, Conser- vation Biology 10(4):1253-1263, 1996. 5 See ‘Combating Poverty’ and also ‘Conservation of Biological Resources’ in Agenda 21 available online Hellinger D., Hansen-Kuhn K. and A. Fehling, “Strip- at: http://www.un.org/esa/sustdev/documents/ ping Adjustment Policies of their Poverty-Reduction agenda21/english/agenda21toc.htm Clothing: New Convergence in the Challenge to Cur- rent Global Economic Management”, The Develop-

6 Hughes and Flintan, 2001; Hulme and Murphree, ment GAP Policy Paper, available online at http:// 2001. www.developmentgap.org, 2001. 7 See http://www.developmentgoals.org/Environ- Hughes R. and F. Flintan, “Integrating Conservation 368 …if initiativesThe intertwined embraceLLivelihoodsivelih rootso rights,od…buts ofandan poverty,dconservationsecure Conservationconservationconse accessr vwealthatio cann to— canand resources alsoaargumentsr g endenvironmentalu providem upen and tenhancingsPolicy livelihoodsshaping hrealapi nthatparticipation degradationg thet benefits… poverty...hmatterse debatedebate!

and Development Experience: A Review and Bibliog- geria: Illbeing and Insecurity” in: Narayan D. and P. raphy of the ICDP Literature”, IIED Biodiversity and Petesch (eds.), Voices of the Poor from Many Lands, Livelihoods Issues, IIED, London, 2001. OUP, Oxford (UK) and World Bank, Washington D. Hulme D. and M. W. Murphree, African Wildlife and C., 2002. Livelihoods: The Promise and Performance of Com- Pimbert M., “Reclaiming our Right to Power” in: munity Conservation, James Currey, Oxford (UK), Pimbert M. and T. Wakeford (eds.), PLA Notes 40: 2001. Deliberative Democracy and Citizen Empowerment, IUCN, IUCN Red List of Threatened Species, IUCN, London, IIED, pp. 81 – 84, 2001. Gland (Switzerland) and Cambridge (UK), 2003 Sanderson S. E. and K. H. Redford, “Contested Rela- www.redlist.org, accessed 30 January 2004. tions between Biodiversity Conservation and Poverty Koziell I., “Diversity not Adversity: Sustaining Liveli- Alleviation”, Oryx 37(4): 1 – 2, 2003. hoods with Biodiversity”, IIED Biodiversity and Swanson T. (ed.), Economics and Ecology of Biodi- Livelihoods Issues, IIED, London, 2001. versity Decline: The Forces Driving Global Change, Manuel T., Making Globalization Work for Africa, Paper Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (UK), 1998. Presented at the Inaugural Lecture of Global Eco- The Economist, “A Survey of Nigeria – Umpteenth nomic Governance Programme, University College, Time Lucky?”, 15 January 2000. Oxford (UK), 2004. UNDP, Overcoming Human Poverty, UNDP Poverty Mellor J. W., “Poverty Reduction and Biodiversity Report 2000, UNDP, New York (USA), 2000. Conservation: The Complex Role for Intensifying Ag- UNEP, “ENS - Nigeria, Cameroon to Protect World’s riculture”, WWF Viewpoint Series on Poverty and the Rarest Gorilla”, The Environment in the News, online Environment, WWF-US, Washington D. C., 2002. at http://www.unep.org/cpi/briefs/, 19 September Oates J. F., Bergl R. A. and J. M. Linder, “Biodiversity 2003. Patterns and Conservation in the Gulf of Guinea For- World Bank, Global Poverty Report, MDBs/IMF Report ests”, Unpublished Report Submitted to Conserva- to the G8 Okinawa Summit, World Bank, Washing- tion International (CI) and the Wildlife Conservation ton D. C., 2000. Society (WCS), 2002. World Bank, World Bank Group Strategic Framework, Okunmadewa F., Aina O., Ayoola G. B., Mamman A., World Bank, Washington D. C., 2001. Nweze N., Odebiyi T., Shehu D. and J. Zacha, “Ni-

369