The Protected Landscape Approach - Centre for Mediterranean ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

The Protected Landscape Approach: Linking Nature, Culture and Community Gram sabha (village assembly) meeting in village Mendha-Lekha, India, where all decisions are taken on consensus. This has been one of the main reasons for the success of the movement towards adivasi (tribal community) self-rule. Vivek Gour-Broome and approaches used for conservation by the communities are illustrated by the following (Pathak et al., 2003): Mendha-Lekha forests (India). In the 1970s, successful mobilization by indigenous (adivasi) people against a dam in the thickly forested central highlands of India, united the communities into a campaign towards tribal self-rule. Villages began to be declared as small republics within the Constitution of India. Mendha-Lekha was one such village, with about 400 adivasis called Gonds. The move led to their re-establishing de facto control over about 1,800ha of forests that had been taken over by the government in the 1960s (for revenue through logging, charcoalmaking and bamboo extraction). The crucial act was the establishment of the Gram Sabha (Village Assembly) including all adult residents, and other institutions including a Forest Protection Committee. Villagers declared that henceforth all major local initiatives required the permission of the Gram Sabha. Decisions in the Gram Sabha are taken unanimously and implemented through unwritten yet strong social rules. Informal abhyas gats (study circles), where villagers gather and discuss information with or without outsiders, help make informed decisions in the Gram Sabha. By adopting transparent and open decision-making processes and assuming social and ecological responsibility, Mendha-Lekha’s residents have developed the capacity to deal with a range of natural resource issues. They are documenting the local biodiversity, and are handling tedious financial dealings and official procedures. All logging and other commercial exploitation of forests by outside agencies have been stopped. Non-timber forest products and bamboo are currently extracted in a strictly regulated manner (after a decade-long moratorium), 68
5. Conserving “unprotected” protected areas jointly by the forest department and villagers. Most encroachment on forests by the villagers and forest fires have been stopped. Women, youth and economically weaker members of society have equal status in the decision-making process. Through non-violence, strong relationships have been established with government officials, who in turn have helped the villagers at many crucial points. Livelihood security is assured through access to forest resources or employment opportunities. Bhaonta-Kolyala village in Rajasthan and the Arvari Sansad, or Arvari River Parliament (India). In the drought-prone area of Rajasthan in India, Bhaonta-Kolyala twin villages have revived their traditional system of water harvesting through small earthen dams and conserved catchment areas with the help of the NGO, Tarun Bharat Sangh. The villagers’ efforts have revived the river Arvari which had become seasonal. As a result of improved livelihood security, villagers no longer move out in search of employment any more (Shresth and Devidas, 2001). Bhaonta-Kolyala are not the only villages in this region to have done so. Tens of villages along the catchment of River Arvari have conserved their forests, regulating its internal use through social sanctions and protecting it from outsiders. A few years ago about 70 such villages met and decided to form Arvari Sansad, or a people’s parliament, to oversee matters related to the river and its catchment. The sansad meets every year and takes decisions related to forest conservation, prohibition on hunting, regulated use of water and so on. This is an excellent example of a river landscape and associated biodiversity being managed and conserved by the local people. Coron Island (Philippines). The Tagbanwa people of the Phillipines inhabit a stunningly beautiful limestone island called Coron Island, for which they have established strict use regulations. The forest resources are to be used for domestic purposes only. All the freshwater lakes but one are sacred and entry there is strictly restricted, except for religious and cultural purposes. The only lake accessible for tourism is Lake Kayangan, albeit with strict regulations concerning garbage disposal, resource use, etc. Until recently, the Tagbanwas’ territorial rights were not legally recognised, leading to encroachment by migrant fishers, tourism operators, politicians seeking land deals and govern - ment agencies. This caused a number of problems, in particular the impoverishment of the marine resources essential for local livelihoods. In the mid-1980s, the islanders organized themselves into the Tagbanwas Foundation of Coron Island (TFCI) and applied for a Community Forest Stewardship Agreement (CFSA). In 1990, the stewardship agreement was granted over the 7,748ha of Coron island and a neighbouring island called Delian, but not over the marine areas. In 1998 the islanders managed to get a Certificate of Ancestral Domain Claim (CADC) for 22,284ha of land and marine waters, and in 2001, with the help of a high quality map and an Ancestral Land Management Plan (ALMP), obtained a Certificate of Ancestral Domain Title (CADT), which grants collective right to land. Despite successful community management, in 2001 the Tagnabwa CATD was put under review, as the national policies and systems were being restructured. A governmental proposal was advanced to add Coron Island to the National Integrated Protected Area System (NIPAS). The Tagbanwas resent these moves, as they fear that they will lead to the loss of control of their natural resources. From being owners and protectors of their territories, they would become only one of the management actors. 69
Page 1 and 2:
IUCN World Commission on Protected
Page 3 and 4:
The Protected Landscape Approach Li
Page 5 and 6:
Dedication This publication is dedi
Page 7 and 8:
The Protected Landscape Approach: L
Page 9 and 10:
Page 11 and 12:
Page 13 and 14:
Page 15 and 16:
Part I Introduction and global over
Page 17 and 18:
Page 19 and 20:
Page 21 and 22:
Page 23 and 24:
Page 25 and 26:
Page 27 and 28:
Page 29 and 30: The Protected Landscape Approach: L
Page 49 and 50: 3. World Heritage Cultural Landscap
Page 59 and 60: 4. From pre-assumptions to a ‘jus
Page 77 and 78: 5. Conserving “unprotected” pro
Page 79: 5. Conserving “unprotected” pro
Page 93 and 94: Part II Case studies from around th
Page 117 and 118: 8. Pastoralists, conservation and l
Page 129 and 130: 9. Protected landscapes in the Unit
Page 131 and 132:
9. Protected landscapes in the Unit
Page 133 and 134:
Page 135 and 136:
Page 137 and 138:
Page 139 and 140:
Page 141 and 142:
10. Sustaining rural landscapes and
Page 143 and 144:
Page 145 and 146:
Page 147 and 148:
Page 149 and 150:
Page 151 and 152:
Page 153 and 154:
Page 155 and 156:
Page 157 and 158:
11. Cultural landscapes of the Ande
Page 159 and 160:
Page 161 and 162:
Page 163 and 164:
Page 165 and 166:
Page 167 and 168:
Page 169 and 170:
Page 171 and 172:
Page 173 and 174:
12. Protecting landscapes and seasc
Page 175 and 176:
Page 177 and 178:
Page 179 and 180:
Page 181 and 182:
Page 183 and 184:
Page 185 and 186:
Page 187 and 188:
Colour plates The terraced landscap
Page 189 and 190:
Colour plates Sagarmatha National P
Page 191 and 192:
Colour plates Ebey’s Landing Nati
Page 193 and 194:
Colour plates Artisan, Mata Atlanti
Page 195 and 196:
Colour plates Forest of Bowland Are
Page 197 and 198:
Colour plates Fruit orchards are a
Page 199 and 200:
13. Protected landscapes and seasca
Page 201 and 202:
Page 203 and 204:
Page 205 and 206:
Page 207 and 208:
Page 209 and 210:
Page 211 and 212:
Page 213 and 214:
Page 215 and 216:
Page 217 and 218:
Page 219 and 220:
Page 221 and 222:
Page 223 and 224:
Page 225 and 226:
Page 227 and 228:
Page 229 and 230:
Page 231 and 232:
Page 233 and 234:
Page 235 and 236:
Page 237 and 238:
Part III The way forward
Page 239 and 240:
Page 241 and 242:
Page 243 and 244:
Page 245 and 246:
Page 247 and 248:
Page 249 and 250:
Page 251 and 252:
Page 253 and 254:
Page 255 and 256:
Page 257 and 258:
Page 259 and 260:
Page 261 and 262:
Page 263 and 264:
Page 265 and 266:
Page 267 and 268:
Page 269 and 270:
Page 271 and 272:
Page 273 and 274:
Page 275 and 276:
Page 277 and 278:
Page 279 and 280:
Appendix 1 IUCN Protected Area Mana
Page 281 and 282:
Appendix 3 Guidelines for Category
Page 283 and 284:
Appendix 5 Evaluation of Cultural L
Page 285 and 286:
Appendices Country Title of World H
Page 287:
IUCN - The World Conservation Union
show all

The Protected Landscape Approach - Centre for Mediterranean ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?