Poverty, wealth and conservation HHeritage,eritage, povertypoverty andand landscape-scalelandscape-scale biodiversitybiodiversity cconservation:onservation: anan alternatealternate perspectiveperspective fromfrom thethe AAmazonianmazonian frontierfrontier JJanisanis B.B. AAlcorn,lcorn, CarolCarol Carlo,Carlo, JulioJulio Rojas,Rojas, DavidDavid Rothschild,Rothschild, AlakaAlaka Wali,Wali, aandnd AAlejolejo ZZarzyckiarzycki 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 ap- proach 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 posi- tive 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 at- mosphere 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 un- der 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 de- sign principles, and its results. Resumen. Se considera que los derechos basados en las iniciativas de la población y las au- toridades 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 comuni- dades—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- tiveT holds that people in high biodiver- sity areas are impoverished and there- fore 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 aallevia-llevia- 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 aap-p- 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 tthroughhrough civilcivil single village.2 services, and lack of voice in gov- rrights,ights, humanhuman rrights,ights, Rights-based approaches to conserva- ernment.6 The aandnd cculturalultural rrights.ights. 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 rrootoot causescauses