Wild Profusion: Biodiversity Conservation in an Indonesian Archipelago

218 Pages·2006·2 MB·English

by  Celia Lowe

Wild Profusion
SeriesEditor
PaulRabinow
Alistoftitlesintheseriesappearsatthebackofthebook
Wild Profusion
BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION IN AN
INDONESIAN ARCHIPELAGO
Celia Lowe
PRINCETON UNIVERSITY PRESS
PRINCETON AND OXFORD
Copyright©2006byPrincetonUniversityPress
PublishedbyPrincetonUniversityPress,41WilliamStreet,Princeton,NewJersey08540
IntheUnitedKingdom:PrincetonUniversityPress,Oxford
AllRightsReserved
LibraryofCongressCataloging-in-PublicationData
Lowe,Celia,1961–
Wildprofusion:biodiversityconservationinanIndonesianarchipelago/CeliaLowe.
p. cm.—(In-formationseries)
Includesbibliographicalreferences(p.)
ISBN-13:978-0-691-12461-2(cl:alk.paper)
ISBN-10:0-691-12461-2(cl:alk.paper)
ISBN-13:978-0-691-12462-9(pbk.)
ISBN-10:0-691-12462-0(pbk.)
1.Biologicaldiversityconservation—Indonesia—TogianIslands.2.Biologicaldiversity
conservation—Indonesia—Togian Islands—Social aspects. I. Title. II.In-formation series
(PrincetonUniversity).
QH77.I5L69 2006
333.95′1609598—dc22 2006041598
BritishLibraryCataloging-in-PublicationDataisavailable
ThisbookhasbeencomposedinSabon
Printedonacid-freepaper.∞
pup.princeton.edu
PrintedintheUnitedStatesofAmerica
1 3 5 7 9 10 8 6 4 2
CONTENTS
Preface vii
Acknowledgments xiii
ListofAbbreviations xvii
INTRODUCTION
BetweentheHumanandtheWildProfusion 1
PART ONE
Diversity as Milieu 27
CHAPTERONE
MakingtheMonkey 33
CHAPTERTWO
TheSocialTurn 53
PART TWO
Togean Cosmopolitics 75
CHAPTERTHREE
ExtraterrestrialOthers 81
CHAPTERFOUR
Onthe(Bio)logicsofSpeciesandBodies 106
PART THREE
Integrating Conservation and Development 129
CHAPTERFIVE
FishingwithCyanide 135
CHAPTERSIX
TheSleepofReason 154
Appendix:Scientific,Military,andCommercialExplorations
intheTogeanIslandsandVicinity:1680–1999 167
Notes 171
References 181
Index 193

PREFACE
AS I DEPARTED for the last time from the Togean Islands of Central Su-
lawesi,inAugustof1997,thesunwasbloodredandthehorizonenvel-
opedbyasmokyhaze.Indonesiawasburning.Itwasthedryseason,but
this would be like no dry season ever before. Over the ensuing months,
the dense haze would form a cloud of smoke across Southeast Asia as
wideandbroadasthefootprintoftheUnitedStates.FiresofthatElNin˜o
yearwouldcauseplanestocrashandshipstorunaground,harmpublic
health, destroy property and livelihoods, deplete biodiversity, and force
PresidentSuhartotoissueapublicapologytoIndonesia’sSoutheastAsian
neighbors.Thisdryseasonwouldprovetobeanunprecedentedenviron-
mentaldisasterforIndonesia.
Many different explanations for the fires emerged (Colfer 2002; Har-
well2000).Forthemostpart,thestatepursueditsconventionalstrategy
ofblamingswiddenagriculturalistsandsubsistencefarmersfordegrading
the land and igniting the flames. Sometimes it was suggested that the
sparks necessary to start the fires were caused by trees rubbing together
orbylighteningbolts.Authoritiesdeclaredthatanyonewhoattributeda
cause to the fires other than the unusual El Nin˜o was a “Communist,”
whicheffectivelypreventedthemediafromspeculatingonalternativeex-
planations.Somenationalistswantedtoblameforeigncorporations,de-
spite the fact that foreign investors in the Indonesian forestry sector all
had domestic allies, including President Suharto’s own family and busi-
nesspartners.
Butanunprecedentedtriumphalsoemergedoutofthesmokeandash:
Indonesiannongovernmentalorganizations(NGOs)wereabletocounter
the state’s rhetoric that blamed the devastation on small-scale farmers,
therubbingoftree-limbs,foreigners,andtheweather.Forthefirsttime,
activistswereabletomakethecasethatthefireswerecomingfromstate-
owned forests and oil palm plantations and were a consequence of the
government’s own forest conversion policies. They made this argument
byappropriatingthenewscientifictechnologyofGeographicInformation
Systems (GIS), pinpointing the exact locations of the fires and mapping
theselocations ontostate andcommercialproperties. Producedthrough
“science,”thesatelliteimageswerepoliticallyunassailable,andtheIndo-
nesianForumfortheEnvironment(Walhi)wasabletousethemtobring
lawsuitsagainstloggingcorporationsdespitethestatusandpowerofthe
majoractorsinvolvedinforestconversionandtimberharvesting.
WildProfusiontellsthestoryofatime(thedecadeculminatinginthe
firesof1997–98)whentheIndonesianenvironmenthadbecomeapoint
viii PREFACE
ofconcernforsocialandenvironmentalactivists,scientists,andformany
fishersandfarmersacrossthecountrywhoweresufferingfrombothde-
gradedenvironmentsandfromaccusationsthattheywereresponsiblefor
destroyingnature.MynarrativeapproachesthestatusofIndonesianland
and marinescapes through one specific framing of nature: biodiversity.
Biodiversity, in 1990s Indonesia, implied a particular assemblage of na-
ture,nation,science,andidentity—makingIndonesians’mappingofthe
concept distinct within the transnational biodiversity practices and dis-
coursescirculatingwidelyatthetime.Aswiththefires,Indonesia’sgreat-
estenvironmentaldisaster,biodiversitylossentailscomplexstrugglesover
responsibilityandblame,financeandprofit,technoscience,nationalism,
culturalandethnicdiversity—evenoverthenatureofnatureitself.
In Wild Profusion I tell of Indonesian scientists and their efforts to
documentthespeciesoftheTogeanIslands,toeconomicallyandsocially
“develop” Togean people, and to turn the archipelago into a new na-
tional park. These elite Indonesians sought to produce a biological sci-
encethatwasbothinternationallyrecognizableandpoliticallyeffective
in theIndonesian context inorder toincite positive socialand environ-
mentaloutcomes.
At the same time, I describe experiences of Togean people, especially
people of Sama ethnicity. Sama and other Togean residents, as marginal
Indonesian citizens, were often blamed for destroying the environment,
despitethefactthatwell-connectedentrepreneursandstatedevelopment
projects were responsible for the major transformations in Togean land
andmarinescapes.Togeanpeoplehadtheirownunderstandingsofnature
and nation, however, and stories of nature-making can also be narrated
fromtheirperspectives.
WildProfusionislikewiseastoryofTogeannature.Itdetailschanges
in Togean land and marinescapes, and contests over what should count
assignificantorvaluableformsofnatureforTogeanpeoples,tradersand
bureaucrats,tourists,andinternationalanddomesticbiologists.Ittracks
nature’sabilitytoshiftits“nature”dependingonwhoisdoingtheobserv-
ing.Andittakesseriouslythedeclineinspeciesdiversityandabundance
onaglobalscale.
IbegantostudytheintersectionofIndonesians’conservationbiology,
Samalives,andTogeannaturein1993.Myinitialapproachtothiscon-
vergence was shaped by my background in political ecology and in the
criticalperspectivesofwhatanthropologistswerecallingthena“culture
andpoliticaleconomy”school.Inthe1990ssuchanapproachprovided
a clear formula for determining winners and losers in the transnational
politicaleconomy.Suchanalysesofbothenvironmentalismandeconomic
developmentpreparedmewellto:first,recognizehowconservationand
developmentregimeshavetendedtosubstituteabeliefinpurenatureand
PREFACE ix
instrumental rationality for others’ natures and ideas; second, see how
theseregimescanextendthepowerofthestatethroughcoercivepractices
ofculturalandeconomicmystification;andthird,torecognizetheways
economicdevelopmentprogramscontinuallyfailtoimprovehumanwel-
farewhileconservationinitiativesarehardlyeverabletosavenature.
Once Iwas inIndonesia, however,this theoreticalbackground placed
meinaquandary.Whileatfirstitwasdifficulttoseeanythingelseinthe
Togeanprojectbutpoliticalandeconomicinjusticeinmanyforms,Iwas
alsodevelopingacertainfriendshipwith,andanthropologicalloyaltyto,
the scientists and activists whose work I was following. These scientists
were deeply committed to their program of conservation and develop-
ment, and saw their work as a point of hope for the nation. Moreover,
one of the very first things I discovered in Indonesia was that scientists
werequitesensitivetocriticismfromforeignscholarsandwerecontinu-
ally evaluating me as to what kind of person I was: was I the type of
foreign scholar who wanted to tell them how they had it all wrong, or
could I also learn from them and value their contributions? How was I
tomaintainmyanalyticperspectiveonthepoliticallogicsofconservation
anddevelopment,andsimultaneouslycontinuetoshareanempathicrela-
tionship with Indonesian scientists who believed that conservation biol-
ogy and projects of economic development would contribute to the ad-
vancementoftheirnation?
ItwasultimatelymyIndonesiancolleaguesthemselveswhotaughtme
toseetheirworkinanewlight.Intheirquestioningofmyunderstanding
ofconservation,andintheirreadingofmytheoriesascriticismofthem
(as individuals and as a national community), it became clear that the
problemofhowtoholdthesituatednessofIndonesian’sscienceinsimul-
taneoustensionwiththequestionsofjusticeraisedbyTogeanconserva-
tion was central to my work and should be explored rather than deli-
catelyavoided.IwouldneedtofindawaytotakeIndonesianscientists
andtheirTogeanworkseriously,whileretainingmyawarenessthatbio-
diversityconservationwascapableoffurthermarginalizingTogeanpeo-
ple and their ability to live within the natures and histories they them-
selvessustained.
My desire simultaneously tounderstand scientists’ and Sama peoples’
perspectives onTogean natures,even whenthey werein conflict,led me
down an empirical path marked by an increased attention to the details
ofbiologyandconservationIwitnessed,andbynoticingdifferencesnot
onlybetween,butwithin,thecategories“Sama”and“Indonesianscien-
tist.” In the realm of theory, this practice led me to new literatures in
science and technology studies and in postcolonial theory. The ethno-
methodological approach of recent science and technology studies has
helpedmetotrackthemicropracticesofbothscientistsandSamapeople