[Gender] BioSoc 6: Setting New Standards for Conservation: Displacement Redefined
Paula Zuñiga
paula.zuniga at iucn.org
Wed Sep 6 16:23:13 CDT 2006
Dear Colleagues:
Thanks for your interest and/or participation in our recent Africa
Biodiversity Collaborative Group (ABCG) meeting on “Parks and Poverty: Costs
and Benefits to Local Communities”. I hope that you saw the attached
meeting notes and presentations that were posted on the ABCG website
(www.abcg.org <http://www.abcg.org> <http://www.abcg.org> ) or directly at:
http://www.frameweb.org/ev.php?ID=15835_201
<http://www.frameweb.org/ev.php?ID=15835_201&ID2=DO_TOPIC> &ID2=DO_TOPIC
<http://www.frameweb.org/ev.php?ID=15835_201&ID2=DO_TOPIC>
<http://www.frameweb.org/ev.php?ID=15835_201&ID2=DO_TOPIC> .
I thought that you might be interested in the following BioSoc bulletin
that further highlights the issues about protected areas and displacement
that Michael Cernea presented at our meeting. I also wanted to make sure
that you had the weblink to the recent GEF Evaluation Office publication
that both Michael Cernea and Kai Schmidt-Soltau discussed entitled, "The
Role of Local Benefits in Global Environmental Programs."
<http://www.thegef.org/MonitoringandEvaluation/MEOngoingEvaluations/MEOLocal
Benefits/meolocalbenefits.html>
<http://www.thegef.org/MonitoringandEvaluation/MEOngoingEvaluations/MEOLocal
Benefits/meolocalbenefits.html> (GEF 2006) that is available on the Internet
at:
www.thegef.org/MonitoringandEvaluation/MEOngoingEvaluations/MEOLocalBenefits
/meolocalbenefits.html
<http://www.thegef.org/MonitoringandEvaluation/MEOngoingEvaluations/MEOLocal
Benefits/meolocalbenefits.html>
<http://www.thegef.org/MonitoringandEvaluation/MEOngoingEvaluations/MEOLocal
Benefits/meolocalbenefits.html>
ABCG is planning some follow-on meetings on human rights, poverty and
conservation linkages. Please let us know if you have any suggestions for
specific topics to explore, or any comments from our 13 July Parks and
Poverty Meeting.
Sincerely, Nancy
Nancy Gelman
Africa Biodiversity Collaborative Group
1250 24th Street, NW
Washington, DC 20037 USA
home: 301-445-5550
phone: 202-778-9736 ; fax: 202-861-8377
nancy.gelman at wwfus.org
www.abcg.org
<https://email.wwfus.org/exchweb/bin/redir.asp?URL=http://www.abcg.org
<http://www.abcg.org%3e> >
_____
From: biosoc-bounces at povertyandconservation.info on behalf of BioSoc
Sent: Thu 8/31/2006 12:42 PM
Subject: [Biosoc] BioSoc 6: the Biodiversity and Society Bulletin
BioSoc: the Biodiversity and Society Bulletin
Research highlights on biodiversity and society, poverty and conservation
ISSUE 6: AUGUST 2006
SETTING NEW STANDARDS FOR CONSERVATION: DISPLACEMENT REDEFINED
Displacement of local people has been one of the most contentious negative
impacts of protected areas. The World Bank was one of the first agencies to
address this issue, developing a policy on involuntary resettlement in 1980.
Michael Cernea, architect of the World Bank resettlement policy describes,
in articles published recently in the Journal of Social Change and IUCN's
Policy Matters, how the mounting criticism of forced, physical relocation
from protected areas brought about a slight "tactical shift" in the
establishment of conservation areas whereby a strategy of restrictions on
local access to, and use of, resources within the park was employed in place
of geographic displacement. While physical displacement brought with it (at
least theoretically) an obligation to compensate and resettle those
affected, restricting access to resources has not been accompanied by any
counter measures to address the subsequent local impoverishment that this
strategy has caused.
In response to this, researchers have documented evidence of the adverse
socio-economic impacts of resource restrictions and argued that this is
tantamount to "occupational displacement with imposed impoverishment." The
World Bank and other development agencies have taken note of this weight of
evidence. The Bank's resettlement policy has now been revised and extends
the concept of displacement to include "involuntary restriction of access to
legally designated parks and protected areas, resulting in adverse impacts
on the livelihoods of the displaced persons." This applies not just to World
Bank-funded projects but also to GEF projects executed by the Bank and
private sector projects that have IFC financing. Meanwhile, the African and
Asian Development Banks have rapidly followed suit with similar policies.
What are the implications of this new approach? The Bank is adamant that it
is meant to be good for conservation and good for people. Its policy is not
intended to oppose the use of restrictions per se but to challenge the
effectiveness of using this approach without taking account of its
potentially devastating impacts on local peoples' livelihoods. It is argued
that unless local people are compensated for any resource restrictions that
are imposed - and unless these compensatory benefits exceed the costs the
restriction implies - they will seek to undermine the conservation
initiative. Successful implementation, Cernea points out, should therefore
be in the interests of both affected people and conservation supporters.
Turning this policy approach into a practical reality will require more
detailed socio-economic assessments prior to protected areas establishment,
and it will also require increased financial resources as affected people
will be entitled to fair compensation for land and assets foregone. These
resources will be made available as a result of changes to the Bank's land
financing policy that provides new flexibility for using Bank funds to
assist with land acquisition in displacement situations. We should also
remember that this new policy currently only applies to projects financed or
executed by the multilateral development banks. Changing the nature of the
protected areas and poverty relationship will require adoption of similar
policies by international conservation organisations and other agencies
concerned with biodiversity protection. The Banks have set a new standard.
Is it one that others are prepared to rise to?
SOURCE
Cernea, M (2006) Population displacement inside protected areas: a
redefinition of concepts in conservation policies. Policy Matters 14, 8-26
Please direct queries or comments for the authors to Michael Cernea:
mcernea at worldbank.org
The full paper can be downloaded from
http://www.iucn.org/themes/ceesp/Publications/newsletter/Section%20I-part%20
1.pdf
BIOSOC
BioSoc is a new monthly email bulletin from the Poverty and Conservation
Learning Group (PCLG), hosted by the International Institute for Environment
and Development (IIED). BioSoc highlights key new research on biodiversity
and society, poverty and conservation and is available in English, Spanish
and French.
All issues are available online at: www.povertyandconservation.info
<http://www.povertyandconservation.info/>
<http://www.povertyandconservation.info/>
Please let us know about other networks that might be interested in
subscribing by emailing us at: BioSoc at iied.org
POVERTY AND CONSERVATION LEARNING GROUP (PCLG)
The PCLG aims to share key information, highlight new research highlight and
promote learning on poverty-conservation linkages. For more information
visit: www.povertyandconservation.info
<http://www.povertyandconservation.info/>
<http://www.povertyandconservation.info/>
______________________________________________________________________
_____
From: Gelman, Nancy
Sent: Fri 6/23/2006 9:45 AM
Cc: Mcernea at worldbank.org; ksebunya at awf.org; Goeltenboth, Philipp;
mthaxton at prb.org; Mascia, Michael; peterv at wri.org; bkinder at wri.org;
Oglethorpe, Judy; SchmidtSol at aol.com
Subject: 13 July “Parks and Poverty: Costs and Benefits to Local
Communities” Meeting
Dear Colleagues:
Please join the Africa Biodiversity Collaborative Group (ABCG) for a meeting
on “Parks and Poverty: Costs and Benefits to Local Communities”. Please see
the attached agenda.
Date: Thursday, 13 July 2006
Time: 9am to 12pm
Location: Conservation International
1919 M Street, NW, Conference Rooms 6011 and 6012
Washington, DC 20036
Meeting Objectives:
· To discuss the linkages between protected areas and poverty.
· To identify the direct social, cultural and economic consequences
to local communities caused by the establishment, expansion, or upgrading of
protected areas [considering major impoverishment risks such as impacts to:
1) land (assets and access); 2) jobs (or loss of income sources or means of
livelihoods); 3) homelessness (relocation or loss of shelter); 4)
marginalization; 5) food insecurity and health; 6) increased morbidity and
mortality; 7) loss of access to common property; and 8) social
disarticulation (security, vulnerability, empowerment, governance, and
disruption of social institutions)].
· To hear case studies about the distribution of costs and benefits
of protected areas to local communities and households (with respect to
direct financial benefits, equity, enabling policies, governance,
institutional and socio-economic environment, and financing).
· To consider strategies to improve the role of protected areas in
poverty reduction such as building assets in terms of opportunities for
growth, empowerment, and increasing security.
Please RSVP to nancy.gelman at wwfus.org by Monday, 10 July, so that we know
how many people to expect. Please help to circulate this announcement to
others interested in participating. All are welcome to attend.
We look forward to your participation on the 13th.
Sincerely, Nancy
Nancy Gelman
Africa Biodiversity Collaborative Group
1250 24th Street, NW
Washington, DC 20037 USA
home: 301-445-5550
phone: 202-778-9736 ; fax: 202-861-8377
nancy.gelman at wwfus.org
www.abcg.org
<https://email.wwfus.org/exchweb/bin/redir.asp?URL=http://www.abcg.org
<http://www.abcg.org%3e> >
The Africa Biodiversity Collaborative Group (ABCG) comprises U.S.-based
international conservation non-governmental organizations (NGOs) with
field-based activities in Africa. ABCG organizations include: African
Wildlife Foundation, Conservation International, IUCN-The World Conservation
Union, Wildlife Conservation Society, World Resources Institute, and World
Wildlife Fund. ABCG meets regularly to explore emerging conservation issues,
share lessons learned, and seek opportunities for collaboration. Recent
issues explored by ABCG include: Payment for Ecosystem Services; Legal and
Social Issues When Establishing Protected Areas; Sustainable Financing of
Protected Areas; Conservation Enterprise Development in Africa: What Works?;
Compensation for Land Lost for Protected Areas, etc. ABCG has been funded by
The John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation, The Critical Ecosystem
Partnership Fund, and the U.S. Agency for International Development. See:
www.abcg.org
<https://email.wwfus.org/exchweb/bin/redir.asp?URL=https://email.wwfus.org/e
xchweb/bin/redir.asp?URL=http://www.abcg.org <http://www.abcg.org%3e> >
------ End of Forwarded Message
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: /pipermail/gender_generoyambiente.org/attachments/20060906/5ed86f91/attachment.html
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: 13 July 06 Parks and Poverty Meeting Notes.doc
Type: application/octet-stream
Size: 198656 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : /pipermail/gender_generoyambiente.org/attachments/20060906/5ed86f91/attachment.obj
More information about the Gender
mailing list