Economic Botany, Conservation, and Development: What's the Connection?

13 Pages·1995·11.6 MB·English

by  Janis B Alcorn

ECONOMIC
BOTANY,
Janis B. Alcorn*
AND
CONSERVATION,
DEVELOPMENT: WHAT'S
THE CONNECTION?
1
indirectly participated in
c
momic
botanists
They have opportunities
forest. also
t
The linkages between economic botany and eco- what you are looking at, that there could be un-
nomic development are generally conceived as link- expected order in what seems disordered or un-
knowledge about .Tops: majoi crops important, that easy to overlook the obvious.
age: In it is
<«i[ii,li
1
and their domestication and evolution; and new In tl p.ipei focu -in «i. hing that has gen-
1
i
i
Mm
crops n level. lent erally been overlooked botanists working in the
oiil.l
1.1 it i! I
1 1 1 « 1 . i .(
|
of new products. Discovery of wild plant products tropics, and is hence an unseen dimension of the
could commercially exploited has been a linkages between conservation, development, and
that
b«-
how
The on
standard second dimension of that linkage. onomic botanj Specifically, focus rights
r<
I
"common
hnLir ween economic botany and conserva- to property" resources have been invis-
Let
on
are ps
lioii les- oil. id. .1, p. li; l» ins. tli*
i i i -
common
man-
production of economically valuable plant prod- changing. Recognition of property
conversion agement systems turn leads us to recognize the
ucts, parti, ularlj crops, tied to habitat in
is
onom
helween on and
which generally re.ln.es biodiversity levels. Link- positive linkage el \alioi «
.
communities have been
ages between economic botany and conservation botany traditionally
ic
have primariK - dun plants that are valued
heci icci
loi
.1 it - in l< i i
. 1 , i • 1 > i i
ested the conservation of crop genetic resources. locally for economic and other benefits.
in
my much
A commonly hope paper, of Edgar An-
negative conservation linkage rec- that like
I
and
ognized the pattern of depletion of plant popu- derson's work, is a bit controversial that it
is
I
the reader to think about the issues
I
i! ti
Edgar Anderson, who honored at this sym- raise. Most of the world's biodiversity lies outside
is
posmtn, showed us thai eonlii be difficult to see protectee] areas and is under increasing threat. I
il
paper
This
Ii.mk mi k
ilx iii f..i s
I I i i I I
work progress
in it.
Inn.isiiv Press. thank those who have commented on parts of that longer manuscript. In particular, thank
all I
I
Owen Lynch for teaching me to pay closer attention to tenurial rights. assume full responsibility for this paper.
I
J.
World Fund Agency
The conclusions expressed herein should not be attributed to Wildlife or to the U.S. for International
Development. dedicate this paper to the memory of my father, Bruce F. Bristol, who passed away on August 15,
I
%
Biodiversity Support Program, World Wildlife Fund, 1250 24th St. N.W., Washington, D.C. 20037, U.S.A.
•
34-46.
Ann. Missouri Bot. Gard. 82: 1995.
i
Volume Number
82, Alcorn
1
1995 Economic
Botany,
and Development
make generalizations based on my own and They grow and
others' cereals
ers. like rice
r
research, and draw discussion-, with people in crops, like manioc, sweet potato, tar
I
i
Making
the field. their main crop, they
-
i . 'II. I<>-l <
i
and
L the definition
>i i » I
aw{ mask They depen
specific situations variation. sim- of their identit) Indigenous people's
i
I
ways be deuce on forest and field evident in ritual ex-
is
Im For example,
del .duets.
ih lia ig. pt
i
> . • I i
able, because they also offer a new model against when the Bora of the Peruvian and Colombian
which compare Such comparisons Amazon have ceremony
to specific cases. a or meeting that includes
can and
result in revised refined generalizal two different niiinil the two ritually ex-
.-
;,
Whether we we
realize or not, are already fram- change manioc bread and pineapples from one
it
made
existing generalizations that have not been ucts like fish, insects, and game. This exchange
explicit. In this pa| nterdependence be-
. ,
make
Iram. -works ami ellnrl todeline a mor. tweeu llora communities. ^ell as between the
;,i :-
human
useful one. Given the urgency of the biodiversity and forest
c
crisis, behooves us to step hack and consider The rem; ng regions ol intact forest often
it
n
whether general pal ms that might overlap with areas used and claimed by indigenous
ofl.
I.
improve
conservation efforts. communities. The term "indigenous" used here
is
to refer to long-term' residents of a given place.
,n arts of Africa Europe, Asia, the Arctic, and
Tropical Forests: Their Use and Management P
'
the Pacific, the majority population indigenous.
is
The
we
tropical forests that botanists love are
and different indigenous communities from those
and The
beautiful varied. diversity of the dry forests now may
presen have used forests in the past. In
t
of Africa, the mangroves of Central America and
commu-
lhe Americas, indigenous forest-dwelling
the rainforests of Amazonia
are usua H marginalized, minority native
nities
y
lorget that people
live
cnous groups survived conquest by Europeans
that
;
thousands
lived
i I ». -I. an(J sunse( uent mareinalization bv neocolomal
,
,
ow. These
forests
indigenous
j
then
livelihoods.
>l of mixed ancestry that rely
While maps show
global of tropical forests vast
on and have developed
forests
r
expanses of green belts around the Earth's equator,
them rom
aging often by earning the indigenous
f
ir
l
know
you do unbroken
field biologists not find pri-
IHMg hbors or relatives. If were possible for a
it
meval
throughout
forests this belt. Tropical forests
show
s<l|( .| h|t . |m<l ,, . ,„ iM . ria photo t() not onJy the
t
|
They may
vary
greatly in size. be large or small,
ro ructun .„ a gIven a( .,. 1)ut a so the tenure
, , , , p |. l
blocks or narrow, corridors along
fingerlike rivers
and community
slructure the organizational struc-
or ridges. At one end of the size scale stand the
we
ures lha exist in forested area s, then would
, ,
New
Papua
forests of Guinea, Indonesia, Central
much
have
a better picture of the world's forests.
and Amazonia, where
Africa, large swathes of
for- we
on top of that could over a the past and
If y
|
est occupied by indigenous peoples are being opened
on and
prrs ,. nt ,s llsrrs (including indigenous out-
( ,
by loggers, companies, mining operations, and
oil
sidor users> and he end-users other conn-
final in
t
resettlement programs. some
In places, these for-
wdl
tries) as as ,,„, de jure an.) de facto tenurial
ests are highly diverse communities; and
biotic in
nghts exercised over the areas question, and the
in
other places, the forest very disturbed but none- common
is status of property management systems
undergoing
theless a natural process of
V
old
the nd •
..ill. a!>
tl
. , i i
>M M. mi example, which
lot
..
I • The
exact definition of long-term depends on the
'
ange
from a lew hectares to hundreds or thousands
context and the classes of residents being compared. In
hectares that land as islands land under
if in
as at least two generations, approximately 40 years. In
An 200 500 other cases, where conflict between a new group and an
estimated to million people live in
na that has been resident for centuries long-
i. is
he midst of the world's tropical forests (Lynch, ! i
tin in a. Iiu in
ii li . 1 i I.. . i i - 1.. .1. i< i. .1 i
1990), and they use the forests and forest plants.
enous would not be lopers whose rights
ni.-i
-
Vtost of these forest-dwelling people are also farm-
m Large
place, then we would have an even belter starling in inaiiv forested arras of the world. lore:
make drums
point for understanding forest dynamics and the trees are used to f
But such
factors behind the loss of biodiversity.
overlays do not and analyses of forest de- transport. Forest dwell, is -.11. rally use fresh plant
exist,
W
someone
based on incomplete information and animal materials as medicine. lien
are often
pletion
about forest users. they go into their forests and gardens to collect
is
ill,
Indigenous residents forested areas use the and process fresh material daily for as long as
in it
forest and its products for multiple purposes. For is necessary. The medicine is available if the habitat
example, Mexican Huastec Maya name nearly which grows has been preserved.
the in
it
90%
environment Local communities generally value forests be-
of plants available in their (Al-
corn, 984). Two-thirds of those plants (forest and yond the products that are immediately harvested:
1
non-forest plants) have uses. While you might as- They value forests for serving as living factories
sume that people go out and look lor a plant from which products can be harvested, for the
|ii
1
when they want to use find bring home, natural regenerative pro. esses that subsidize ag-
it, it, it
manage
communities and then ecological function. Forest
and use forest-dwelling riculture, for
it,
their use of ecosystems lo ensure ihal a wide varietv dwellers incorporate the forest into their laud use
known
of useful species are available. In communal lands systems Swiddeu agriculture, also as slash
owned by the Huastec, one-third of available plant and burn, was long vilified as destruction of the
—
who permanent
species are "managed for" in the sense that peo- forest by those think of forest as a
m
changing
pie plant or protect those species order to main- group of standing trees. This attitude is
them within the habitats created by their gen- as people reali/e that forests are really a process,
tain
(W
era] agricultural and forestry management practices a community in Hu\. not a permanent object ar-
slash-and-bum farming
Huastec about one- 1991). Traditional
(Alcorn, 1981). In the case, ner, is
third of available plant species are found in the based on the use of forest processes (Alcorn, 1 989).
90%
and depends
forest, and of forest species have specific uses It begins by slashing hurtling, but it
(Alcorn, 1983). This level of plant knowledge and on forest regeneration. Opening up a gap in the
m
maintaining useful species generally forest just one small step swid.len farming.
interest in is is
typical of indigenous forest dwellers around the Forest dwellers oiler, use long tallow systems that
world Balee, 1994; Conklin, 1954; Messer- rely on natural regeneration, which is regulated at
(cf.
For
schmidt, 1993; Warner, 1991). different rates across the original cleared plot.
among opening
forests provide food the lorin of fruits, river example, the Bora, the original in
in
and and game was planted the year often
products including fish reptiles, that the forest that first
can be shot in the forest or trapped in gardens begins regeneration in some but not all areas during
scattered in the forest. Forests provide mushrooms, the first year (Denevan et al., 1984). After several
and edible greens and roots. Studies of forest dwell- years, secondary forest covers all but the central
common
ers around the world show that for area, which left as a garden or agroforestry plot
is is
it
50% 80%
forest foods to make up between and that contains planted fruit trees, as well as native
tame were
ot nutritional intake, with the higher percentages species that up alter clearing or pro-
complex
going women, children, and poor people (Scoones tected during clearing. These kinds of
to
1992). Certain forest leaves and roots can agroforestry systems are built into swidden agri-
et al.,
he burned together produ. ash that used for culture systems around the world (Alcorn, 1990;
to
>' is
Messerschmidt, 1993; Olofson, 1983; Shepherd,
Forests also provide forage for forest dwellers'
salt.
animals and for the animals of pastoralists that 1992; Warner, 1991). Over generations, forest
move through forested areas. peoples often create complex anthropogenic forests
numbers
Beyond food, forest plants have numerous other that contain higher than expected of use-
uses. Plants with flowers that we find beautiful or ful native species, as well as introduced species,
homes Communities aware dependence on
evolutional provide are of their
insights
interesting for
for forest people. The forest itself serves as back- the forest; they have altered land use and livelihood
m
methods
yards and playgrounds lor children, and as work- strategies order to retain .rests using
I.
on
places for their parents. Forest plants are used to including intensification of agriculture non-for-
make the skeleton of a house, to lash house parts est lands, increased reliance on income from out-
more
together, to thatch roofs, and to construct walls. side jobs, and dedication of land to natural
common
Forest plants provide fibers used for producing forests. Another option is to go to a short
some
household items bags, carrying baskets, and fallow swidden svstem in order to set aside
like
bark cloth. Bark cloth has ritual importance permanent forest. In the short fallow system, fields
still
i
Alcorn
Economic
Botany,
and Development
ests against overlogging by gov-
t-sponsored concessionaires community
in
Lohmann,
1991). Yet logging continues
in
Burma
Logs are taken and stamped
d. into
aged. In these systems, agricultural fields are man- as Burmese. They are then returned across the
aged so that firewood can be harvested from native, border into Thailand and sold as imported logs,
fast-growing
trees that coppice. In other cases, since it is illegal to log in Thailand. The Thai
forest dwellers opt to intensify agriculture in per- military also finance and carry out logging
elite in
m
manent somcl m
fields, h aing labor in ere- Burma, Cambodia, and Laos from Thai
ir to profit
<
ating terraces. Intensification enables them to re- market demand. In Asian and Central African
for-
tain, enrich, and even expand permanent forests ests, logging usually done by powerful interests
is
(Padoch,
1993). with government and
links to the military.
forest products managed
,in- nut just for local Radical land use change accompanied by severe
use. Medicinal plants and trees that produce mar- depletion of biodiversity the type of land use
is
ketable fruits, resins, and other products are man- which we must compare
against the land use of
aged
for sale or trade into local or regional markets. marginalized indigenous communities
that
live in
relatively biodiverse areas. Plantations of
fast-
tlpwood trees, rubber, palm and
oil fruit,
iwl have rapidly transformed massive
biosphere from
tin- rich reservoirs of
empty
species diversity into banks of weeds
i
as. For thousands ol years, indigenous coin-
shave used and modified communities
biotic
through
their land use practices, but they are not
of another magnituil
highly unsus- responsible for the biodiversity crisis that faces the
i i
Sometimes
tainable. outsiders just gather bags of world today,
medicinal plant samples phytochemical and
for
pharmacological
testing the international mar-
loi
Property Rights
;
,
valuable, however, laborers hired by collecting firms The general patterns of forest use are
can severely reduce the populations ol thai species around the world, and there are two general
t
to the point where local people no longer have (1) use by local communities; and (2) use b
M
access to the tiled (.iiimm uin, menially oriented outsiders.
i
More come
1993). often, outsiders into forests and Communities rely on local forest lor food
—
ange
groves, plantations, or pastures. Degraded insurance, and products for sale/trade
in
natural have
forests often the potential for regen- words, a significant portion of
their livelihoo
eration, but after conversion to plantation or pas- these uses and the rights to these forests of
ture, the levels ol hiodi ei in genei low unrecognized by outsid
ills
it
and
regeneration of forest unlikely. often respond to redi
is
Community-based
logging for local use has had forest goods and servic
minimi
iifiiiti Iiim| i« n lor prof- the resource for long-
i I III <
it also has the potential to he sustainable in com- have the term mods to control
munities thai are concerned about long-term pro- forest and land use.
Commercial same
operations extract the prod-
used by local people, but they generally exploit
ts
;m
for short-term profits without concern for
ned our wilh inniii.il concern for long-term pro- long term susla The commercial harvest
inalnlil
v
.
ductivity and leaves the land with open access for of these products, particularly extraction of timber
settlement after the original tenurial rights have intimber products by large companies,
.. n in
j
been broken. Such logging often continues even il easmgK leads to de| letion ol loir All
i 1 . 1 i
after public outcry against ecological degradation of commercially valuable medicinal plants has also
and
the
loss ol l-odi n In Thailand, for ex- to depletion or local extinction ol p in
!• >l
< ,
ample, a logging ban was enacted after widespread of those species (Lewington, 1993).
A has recently been asserting
user class
third
have
ecosystems
Clonal uses of forest
ri^hls.
its
achieving
recently been recognized for
(
and carbon sequestration to
of biodiversity for
tion
The Customary tenure systems vary widely Iron, place
climate change. glo-
mitigate against global
they derive
place, yet they are similar in that
community increasingly claiming rights to to
bal is
community's
1992 legitimacy from the authority,
manage uses. At a confer- their
lon-sls for lli.se
&
complex ways, and
ence Washington, D.C. (Doyle Schelhas, Resource rights are inherited in
in
new
each
reorganized
1993), North American biologi-t- suggested that bundles of rights often get in
manuals" generation. Customary rights and obligations evolve
they should write "owners' for tropical
changing of the resource,
with the availability
orests
f
make changing demands for the resource, and changing
As paragraphs above clear, forests
the
under regulations are often estab-
and who from using and conserving are stress, local
benefits
forests
and then enforced by local forest protection
lished
Forest use has led to conflicts
biodiversity?
this
common
The
make about use and committees. effectiveness of these
over decisions forest
rights to
systems depends on widespread accep-
may "own- property
we
management, gloss as forest
rights
and adherence governing access,
While we may think of "ownership" as tance to rules
ership."
strong local institutions that administer local jus-
something," tenurial specialists
the "right to
sell
committed
and guidance by leaders to
local
ownership or tenure as a bundle of rights tice,
refer to
Some
have described
by some the values of the system.
and obligations as recognized or distributed
Ten- traditional tenurial systems as a form of "institu-
authority local authorities or the state).
(e.ii.,
because compliance
between people and me- tional capital" (Field, 1984),
ure defines relationships
(Crocombe, sustained with low investment on enforcement.
use of natural resources is
diates their
Community and
authority, rights to
between institutions,
197 tenure does not define relationships
1 );
when
however, are almost invariably ignored
people and property. Those with tenurial rights forests,
Such
"who" can (and cannot) "do what" and "under level or in the context of colonial expansion.
national-level decisions lead to conflicts both be-
what circumstances" with the property in question.
community and and
have the tween the state and the within
over resources led to
Local conflicts
between communities. These conflicts are very old.
systems and supportive
evolution of local tenure
Guatemalan
and For example, in the late 1500s, corn-
mores appropriate to the culture socio-
social
community (Berkes, munities argued in Spanish colonial courts that
organization of the
political
should not be given over to Spaniards
1989). What are some of the characteristics of their forests
systems? And why are they for conversion to pasture, because these forests
tenure
these local
belonged them and were an integral part of their
systems to
tenure
vative? Traditional
MacLeod,
productive base (M. pers.
J.
The
1992).
base by access and imposing restrictions historical
limiting li
on forest use. Traditional tenure systems are ex- Africa (Poi
comm
Today,
and
complex mixtures of private
tremely variable,
community (Crocombe, 1971). not sim-
rights It is
members share owner-
commut.it joint
ply that
n
am
community members have
tions,
ship; rather, different
1993
And kinds In
and obligations. different
different rights
Panama mapped
munities the Darien region of
are exercised over different kinds of re- in
of rights
example, are often their forests in an effort to register their rights to
sources. Agricultural lands, for
encroachment
held by individual families, while rights to forest ancestral lands in the face of settler
segment
more These and the threatened completion of the last
or pasture lands are likely to overlap.
Panamerican Highway (Denniston, 1994).
of the
overlapping rights result in a sharing of benefits
The protection committees established by
community. Claims forest
across broad range of the to
a
communities exclude neighbors and reg-
their
given patch of forest or even particular trees to
a
community unable
use are usually to
may be held by several different people, or different ulate forest
keep out powerful outsiders.
times of the year,
groups of people, at different
The around the world.
work trend similar
example. These overlapping claims to historical is
for
Volume Number
82, Alcorn
1
1995
Economic
Botany, Conservation,
and Development
c^>i
e
'
x
__
\y
People
Local
(f
«c
State
>|
—
^f>
<NHunger, Needs
/
I
/
//
Aesthetics
tor\\
Protector\
Tribes
\^^^^\ Exotic
and
ure
b\ people sn the plant- arc sustainable. ha\e
!'<•«.( >U-
developed complex
agricultural systems that
in-
guages, and claimed by own
local peoples, colonial an- veloped their systems of tenure to govern the
and/or common
thorities the neocolonial state limited corn- extraction of plants under property
re-
riiunilics to certain ceil duel' lisufnx pities, lint eoiiinion property regimes have been
i . I
rights" which were then downgraded to "privi- overridden by states who have claimed rights over
Cuha
leges." (l ( )8"'>) In. „jl, described ||„ S process those resources.
How
in India, for example. Eventually, states deny res- docs tins information into the ways we
lit
communities commonly
ident an rights or privileges the think about depletion and conservation
v in
state's forest, except perhaps temporary employ- of biodiversity? Figure shows the standard con-
1
—
merit as laborers. In other cases, the forest is turned servation discourse frame the way that people
directly over government-sanctioned usually about
to conces- talk biodiversity loss and plan what
communities
immediately
lose rights to their forest identified as slate, nature, and the hungry,
tin-
growing The
population. state envisioned as the
is
protector of nature through enforcement
of rules
became The
lity property transformed into state enacts regulations and sets aside land for
sanctuaries,
wildlife
long-term management,
forest
a
dation ensued. Hardin's (1968)
f
Commons"
of the model was really about the
tr
edy "open
of access" (Berkes 1989,
et
al.,
i
Many
others). were managed
forests well
un<
common
property regimes, hut were Irans- increase, the model predicts that rural
tin-
\ r
formed into open access forests alter logging or extract more and more goods until nature de-
is
development and sieved.
projects ignored, thereby inval- ores dwellers are included in the anal-
II
I t
idated, local systems of forest control. Once under ysis, the standard discourse frames them as exotic
open
access, their biodiversity has been depleted tribes having aesthetic value "ethnic"
in their cus-
by and sundry, and toms and costumes whose
all locals outsiders. colorful aesthetic eth-
nicity should be protected. Business, men-
if it is
seen minor
tioned, as a player. Corruption of
is
Anai Frameworks
YTK'AI
state performing
officials in their responsibilities
,
summary,
who
In plants are useful people sometimes an
to raised as issue, but rural people living
s^
>^
Many
dwellers around the world say
forest
^-""~
/
/
^^\^
N. thing loosely translated into English as, "t
/
\
RuleS
X,^^ cestors punish us we do not take c
will if
/ \
/ 3nd \
what they have given us." The nature-comi
/
/ \
EthiCS \ eirele the key to personal identity. As one
is
Solomon
/ / \ \ in the Islands said lonlell. pers. coi!
(J. <
~^/
my w
1991), "I couldn't land to you,
sell it
[ | LOCal
my
arm yo
Local he ike cuttmg an( selling to
j it
flf
j
Nature
Community
wou be of no use to you." Parting with his
id
,hat anyone could use that ,and and its resou
Process
\ /
\ /
\ /
\ / without being part ind
ol In- trallini
in< ig<
\
/
H i
\ /
/ community.
« of his Indig
\\.
/
.
PrOdUCtS
example,
generally
for
"^
man
\y/
as havin vertic
XsJ^"
g y
When com
iolomhian indigenous
liderground
(
.<>.» Mij.porl y;.>ni were recenlb awarded lenuiial rights to
V , aitiilies
, ,
serves for which they had been fighting, they
gave
ere startled to learn that the reserves only
not the forest,
"«
righl id
,, I,, "I • I I I 1
l I
away
hey were upset what had been taken
at
for forest dest
om
them. The) had gined that territory
ao1 b
I
way
figure hows an alternative the )uld be carved up in that (E. Reichcl, pers.
"
imn^n
used by envir leuta uental org )mm., 1992).
«-i
i
i
NGOs human
(NGOs), particularly nationaldevel As Figure 3 illustrates, at the local level
/..lions
in developing countries. This frame of discourse is s adapt dillerei lis Iron dieii neighbors.
mm
cu
and according to their
local level, vei old o|i|< nidi;
is \
.1 |>< 1
nature
nous to a particular locality. In this circle,
me
community,
and processes are used hy the but the rieighbni
.
Warfare
resources.
feedback from poor management practic- iieijhl-.i <arcles. hut the liorders are
priated. |>.-iwc.-ii II-
recognized and new controls are en- flexible and shill *ilh tune lading uetwoi le id
es locally, Ik:-
'I
is
modify use so the ecosystem can rebound. to exchange of resources between circles. This model
ted to
a<
atedi adequate to dosci ibe most relationships pi 101 to
;s
nature passes judgment the colonial era and subsequent expansion of the
state:
.
wha economy.
he table" for negotiation of global
among
unacceptable behavior
I f
m shown
hangei Figure
ha in
like
tl
1 1 1
diagram economic develop
A marker kind of frame of discou 4. This illustrates the
for this
On
often the use of words like "harmony with nal ment process from a global perspective. the
or "balance with nature," but probably right are the local circles from the previous figures.
is 1
it
On
dynamic the the state-based Eurocentric elite
to think of this circle as a relations! left is
back and over
which the balance shifts forth
"developed countries" as well as the elites of "de-
The
populations of plants and ani veloping countries." elites of the world's states
local
mammals, does
but generally
large
lime present, f urocentl
lower overall local levels of biodiv !• iron, colonial lo lh. llie ie
immnil led mder market ethics and used
i«
I
and products
ami reinforce an violence, speed (sensu Virilio, 1978),
local histories
toe
each other nature. Local
relationships with
.....J
^\.
f^\
Community "™i'
\\prcwiucts//
n-laiionships prior to 1500. This model
<
from
labor
weakens
local c
Economic
botanists participated
i
and
of information genetic resour
market
ket ethics, the allowed
is
t
allocator of resources without
or environmental impacts of that allocation
cial
Europeans and then neocolonial states have
fol
lowed process of breaking
a against the larger c
t
i
broken and bottom They
the top circles in Fig. 4).
broke the authority of local organizations, local
feedback processes, and local rules and ethics in
Market
Ethics
State-Based
Speed, Product
Violence,
s;
|
Eurocentric
Elite
Community
O
National
Park
We
we buy. do not see how what we buy affects
reased resource legradation ai
often led to inci
i
Th aw
loss of forest. e state usually
we damaging
one of those who have claims on tin- propertv is mo 1,-e.lhack loop to warn us that are
according
natural resource base, yet, to
question in orde r to bring the rt:source into tl their local
20%
commodity Those seekn Paul KrhlHl.d the richest of the world's
system as a <><).}),
capitalist
.
(we Eurocentric are responsible
entrepreneurs wr then population elites)
are often 10 sell
titles tl
nature shrinks
maintaining the forest. In other cases, indigenous ment. At the national level, as in
in
encouraged by conser-
community reorganized by de- the landscape, states are
lands are actively
parks and
velopment programs that award individual holdings vation interests to establish national re-
and add the com- serves, which we know are essential but at best
current residents settlers to
to
and
munity mix, a practice that has had negative im- only protect a small bit of biodiversity are
On
on and other natural resources (Porter often only paper parks. the far righthand side
pacts forest
community blocking
diagram
of the the intact
1991). is
et
al.,
most states have directly usurped the extraction process and protecting local nature,
Historically,
one are usually found
from communities by assuming state's Resistant circles like this in
forests local
the
remote areas, the forests of the Philippines,
rights over forests in order to increase their tax in
New Panama,
and
have Amazon, Papua Guinea, Zaire,
base and export revenues from crops; they
On
there are fewer
extracted resources directly or promoted the con- for example. a global scale,
many and fewer of such circles
version of forests to agricultural lands. In left.
many
This community takes forms,
are executive committees of elites resistant
places, states
who make and laws enabling themselves to While might initially appear that this circle is
policies it
same nature-community
use their powers for their own personal benefit, not the as the earlier local
Communities have
these circles
for the public good. States often claim authority circles, it is not. in
over
engaged various acts resistance
manage but they seldom take often in oi
replant or forests,
to
any Today,
responsibility for that obligation. Few states are the past centuries without outside help.
full
however, commun.l.es are often support-
meeting resistant
held publicly accountable for their obli-
Sometimes
Eurocentric that assistance
the
de open access conditions. In addition to elites.
facto
many about struggles over rights to
coun- includes publicity
state-sponsored deforestation, in
direct
and Latin
resources. In Asia, Africa,
there what has been called "institutional biological
tries
is
Murray, 1988, America, desperate people continue to risk losing
of deforestation" (G.
legitimization
by standing up before the most powerful
For example, are often only their lives
unpublished). titles
power
governments and
granted deforested land, because by deforesta- elements of their local
to
the owner demonstrates that he will put the structures in order to save forests upon which they
tion
depend and The story of
land to a use that will generate tax revenue for the for livelihood identity.
move Chico Mendez's murder was made famous by
encouraged in-
state. Settlers are often to into
he
The conservation organizations, but
lands claimed by indigenous peoples. state's ternational is
community one of thousands who have died defending their
recognize rights to forests,
failure to
and carry out obligations to defend community rights to tropical forests.
its
under conservation
recognized, has contributed to the loss of biodi- signifying supportive input
The The feedback and authority the resistant
shown Figure ultimate result of ethics. in
versity in 4.
process that communities are broken, and circle remain local, but outsiders bring in capital,
this is
and commitment to maintaining their speed, information, and market linkages to support
their ability
natural base weakened. This shown in the local community in maintaining significant con-
local is is
forming
the diagram as local circles ofhio.hversity shrinking trol over its piece of nature, in effect
Communities partnerships. This includes partnerships with the
and disappeanui; (right to left). at-
tempt to adapt to the above stresses while main- state. The role of the state can be negative, as I
enough" are down-graded as they ac- itive role to play in legitimizing and defending corn-
biodiversity
manage
munities that are trying to their forests,
cede to the shrinking process depicted in the dia-
gram (Lynch & Alcorn, press). That includes recognizing and defending c
in
On our side of this equation, on the left, we do tenurial rights, recognizing rights to forests
economic, anc
our choices about what other IK vain .hie biodiversity,
not realize the effects of
Alcorn
Economic
Botany, Conservation,
and Development
State-Based
Violence, Speed, Product s)
|
v
Eurocentric
^
Elite
Community
O
National
Park
Information, Speed, Partnerships
Capital,
Conservation
Ethics
model of global nature-community relationships. This model offers
i
suring that benefits from property rights development and respect Various
for local rights.
,
are distributed '"I' mii irlics. mi hiding ihr So-
ii i I I 'I' ii i
I
rersity is found. India and Nepal, for ex- ciety for Economic Botany, have drafted cilucal
ample, have pioneered some unique forest "co- guidelines to encourage members to respect local
management"
partnerships appropriate South The World Wide Fund Nature
for rights. for (Cun-
Asia. Another option found in the forest leases ningham, 1993) recently published a review of
is
being implemented and considered and
in Indonesia, itives. the issues, allei natives tot
ill
and
the Philippines, Thailand (Fox, 1993). In the creating equitable partnerships new natural
in
Pin mcs, the state has prevented migrant farm-
i|.
from The
ers entering forests that are formally leased most and
high-profile controversial
effort
to indigenous peoples. Other options include the to address these issues the promotion
is ol inlel
extractive reserves and indigenous reserves of Lat- iperty rights to plants or knowledge about
Mex
America.
in ohts, or IPR, has
1
ommunal
id< tenure and a haven for biodivei appeal, because attempts to address equit\ issues
\ it
il
70%
(Toledo, 1992). Fully of Mexico's forest cover and recognize the rights of disenfranchised groups.
on communally owned On many
is lands (Bray, 1991), but the other hand, there are questions about
now
those forests are in jeopardy under new Mex- rher I'M the appropriate tool for achieving
is
• i s I
ican privatization policies being enacted in support these objectives (Axt et 1993). There
al., is little
of the North American Free Trade Agreement evidence
that states will be able to effectively dis-
(NAFTA).
communities
inl.nl. in .- to the rural that
r I
were
the original source of the plant or the knowl-
Oiven
edge. states' past behavior, unlikely that
New is
The it
Connection to Economic Botany
benefits be shared with marginal groups or used
will
What
new
does this trend of partnerships under
are larger questions about whether species or
knowledge about them should be owned anyone.
li\
Representatives from some
indigenous peoples' or-