Go to the id21 home page   ID21 - communicating development research
Global Issues
 
Search the whole id21 database
 

Help page and other search methods
    id21 Global Issues
  Population change
  Food security
  Climate change
  Gender
  Poverty
  Human rights
  Global economy
  Governance
  Aid
  Conflict
and emergencies
  Tourism
 
    id21 Health
 
    id21 Education
 
    id21 Urban Development
 
    id21 Natural Resources
 
    id21 Rural Development
 
    id21 Home page
 
    Gender and Violence in African Schools
 
    id21 Publications
 
    id21 Viewpoints
 
    About id21
 
    Links
 
    Contact id21
 
    id21News
 
    id21 Insights
 
    id21 Media
 
     
Protecting nature, culture and people

Indigenous peoples' traditional ownership and use of land and resources has often been eroded by protected areas. Their consent has rarely been sought for establishing protected areas on their lands, nor have they received adequate compensation. But are conservation organisations and government protected area agencies beginning to recognise the important role these peoples can play?

It is possible that more than 50 percent of existing protected areas have been established on the ancestral lands of indigenous and other traditional peoples. While no complete data exists, there is little doubt that the impacts of protected areas have often been harmful:

  • Restricting access to land and resources causes deprivation and marginalisation.
  • Protected area management systems have removed traditional authorities and institutions.
  • Indigenous communities experience poverty and food insecurity from loss of access to resources, relocation to marginal areas or emigration to cities.
  • Violence has been used to force people to accept new rules restricting access to resources.
  • Negative cultural impacts include the loss of indigenous knowledge about managing environmental resources.

Protected areas can, in certain conditions, cause social exclusion. They do not create it - social exclusion is rooted in broader social and economic systems - but have been used to advance and justify it. For example, the Sri Lankan government denied the remaining Wanniyala-Aetto (Veddah) communities access to the last patch of tropical dry zone forest in Maduru Oya National Park relocating them to 'rehabilitation' villages. This was not an isolated protected areas policy but part of a broader policy of forced assimilation of the Veddahs into mainstream society.

Yet, protected areas can benefit local users and inhabitants by protecting their lands and resources from external threats: in Venezuela, the Alto Orinoco Biosphere Reserve has helped protect the traditional territory of the Yanomami and Yekuana Indians against developmental pressures.

Cultural awareness is crucial. Conservationists are beginning to appreciate the value of indigenous knowledge and local conservation practices. Many now accept that socially and culturally sensitive protected area policies must include indigenous and local knowledge for effective management and for ethical reasons. The World Conservation Union 5th World Congress on Protected Areas in 2003 was a key moment in this process, putting social and cultural values at the centre of the new 'paradigm' for protected areas, recognising that policies must be inclusive and relevant to local people's rights and needs.

Indigenous peoples are also interested in protected areas; a growing number of their organisations negotiate with their national governments to establish protected areas which recognise territorial rights and protect their land and resources. Imposition and conflict are now giving way to understanding and reconciliation, protecting biodiversity and culture.

Further policies for successful indigenous-managed or co-managed protected areas include:

  • Governments need skilled staff to understand cultural shifts, deal with social, cultural and technical issues and resolve conflicts.
  • Indigenous communities and organisations may need support such as funding, access to information and training in negotiation skills to take part in management discussions.
  • Conservation organisations need better skilled staff and more appropriate technical tools to deal with the implications of these changes and clearer policies for engaging with indigenous peoples and local communities.

Source(s):
‘Indigenous and Local Communities and Protected Areas: Towards Equity and Enhanced Conservation’, by G. Borrini-Feyerabend, A. Kothari and G. Oviedo, IUCN, Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, UK, 2004
‘Indigenous and Traditional Peoples and Protected Areas: Principles, Guidelines and Case Studies’, edited by J. Beltr‡n, IUCN, Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, UK and WWF International, Gland, Switzerland, 2000
'People and protected areas: new agendas for conservation', September 2005, id21 insights #57

id21 Research Highlight: 5 September 2005

Further Information:
Gonzalo Oviedo
World Conservation Union
28 Rue Mauverney
1196 Gland
Switzerland

Tel: +41 (0)22 999 0287
Fax: +41 (0)22 999 0020
Contact the contributor: gonzalo.oviedo@iucn.org

World Conservation Union, IUCN

Other related links:
‘People and protected areas: new agendas for conservation’

‘Making waves: unique challenges for Marine Protected Areas’

‘Is forced displacement acceptable in conservation projects?’

‘Agriculture versus protected areas’

‘Tourism in Nepal’

‘Governance of protected areas’

See id21's useful web links on people and protected areas

Views expressed on these pages are not necessarily those of DFID, IDS, id21 or other contributing institutions. Unless stated otherwise articles may be copied or quoted without restriction, provided id21 and originating author(s) and institution(s) are acknowledged.

Copyright © 2007 id21. All rights reserved.

Week beginning Monday 17th November 2008
FREE Information Delivery services from id21:
Get updates by email: id21 news
Insights: research digests
Contact id21

 

 

Go to the World Conservation Union, IUCN site.