The Protected Landscape Approach - Centre for Mediterranean ...

The Protected Landscape Approach: Linking Nature, Culture and Community
developing countries with the largest forest cover, over 22% of the forests are owned by or
reserved for local communities and indigenous peoples (White and Martin, 2002). Not all, but a
large part, of lands owned by communities are either protected as sacred or used in a regulated
manner. Conservation by communities or indigenous peoples is not always restricted to lands
owned by them. In most south and south-east Asian countries governments have taken over
most of the land. In such situations indigenous peoples and local communities have often taken
de facto control over the land and natural resources owned by the State to regulate management
and use and protect them from external and internal threats (see for example Mendha-Lekha
and Bhaonta-Kolyala).
The cultural, utilitarian and sacred associations with surrounding ecosystems have played a
significant role in conserving large landscapes and other elements of biodiversity. Un doubt -
edly, a tremendous amount of biodiversity still survives in these CCAs, which are often outside
of government-designated PAs, often forming important corridors for the long-term viability of
species. For example, a large percentage of wildlife in many countries still survives today
because of the efforts of local communities as they recognise the importance of conservation as
a core component of their livelihood strategies, through, for example, sacred forest groves, dry
season grazing areas, wetland and water sources – all examples of community-conserved areas.
Yet, while a lot of attention has been paid to threats faced by formal protected areas, not enough
attention or resources are being used to conserve areas outside of formal PAs. And, in instances
where CCAs and sacred sites fall within a PA, their relationship with the local communities and
local systems of management are rarely taken into consideration while formulating a
management plan for the area.
With increasing population and land pressures, it is clear that a whole range of conservation
models will be needed, ranging from those prescribing strict preservation to those supporting
sustainable use, and including a range of PAs, from those governed by the State (in situations
where appropriate) to PAs completely managed by indigenous and local communities. Such a
wide range of conservation approaches can only be devised by taking into account the
importance of cultural and spiritual values related to our landscapes and biodiversity. For -
tunately, many sacred, cultural and social values and associations have survived the in -
creasingly utilitarian cultures, the mechanistic and scientific views of nature, and adverse laws,
policies and attitudes.
Many formal religions have also ignored, or at best down-played, the importance of sacred
natural sites and their role in conservation of culture and biodiversity. They have tried either to
substitute or subsume them and their practices into formal religion, in a manner similar to how
pre-Christian sacred yew trees and groves became part of Christian churches and graveyards
across Europe. Another example is the increasing trend towards construction of cemented
temples in the sacred groves of India, rather than celebrating the spiritual elements of nature for
which these groves were con stituted.
A large number of community-conserved areas are indeed small and may not conserve
critical elements of biodiversity by themselves; however they do form a critical link between
people, their conserved and protected landscapes, and the wider ecosystem. This interrelationship
helps in creating the ecological connectivity that also maintains local cultures and
associated livelihoods. In this paper we explore how rural people view the importance of such
protected or conserved areas as key components of their landscapes, and how lessons from
these areas could provide significant clues for effective management of PAs in general. We
66