Biodiversity and indigenous communities

This chapter concentrates on two key issues relevant for anthropological analysis.

First, it deals with the links between indigenous resource-use patterns and biodiversity conservation. It then proceeds to selected aspects within the framework of the CBD aimed at in situ conservation through protected area management and the acknowl-edgement of specific knowledge systems generated by local and indigenous communi-ties whose existence is largely determined by their natural environments.

2.1 Biodiversity and indigenous communities

The core idea [...] is that the existence and the future course of biodiversity is dependent upon both biologi-cal and socio-cultural processes. [...] it is essential to see biodiversity in its multilevel process of conditions and impacts. (Kamppinen & Walls 1999: 14f.)

As the highest densities of natural diversity occur in tropical forests, so called biodi-versity ›hotspots‹ are found almost exclusively in marginal areas of developing coun-tries in what used to be called the ›Third World‹. The great majority of these ›hotspots‹

are located in areas inhabited by indigenous and/or bordering farming communities (Christie & Mooney 2000: 321).¹⁰ Access to these centres located at the peripheries of the global ›South‹ by the more industrialised ›North‹ has been conventionally justified by the »common human heritage« argument, which posits that biological resources are the legacy of all humankind. Such views, as argued here by Nazarea (1998: 115f.), are based on the notion that biodiversity, though being a product of evolution, reflects the combined influence of specific physical environments and human impacts. Flora and fauna make up not only the natural but also the cultural characteristics of a region in the way that they are used and domesticated over centuries or millennia. This line of reasoning suggests the widely acknowledged fact that »the concentration of biodi-versity at the periphery of the global system is not accidental« (Dove 1996: 47). In par-ticular, the significant spatial correlation of regions characterised by high levels of bio-diversity and territories inhabited by indigenous communities are argued to be evi-dence of a close interdependency of natural resources and human ecology. In this re-spect, the role of indigenous cultures is widely discussed in the literature on biodiver-sity protection because of the different relationship that small-scale societies are said to have developed with the environment.

Before going further into the analysis of connections between biodiversity and human resource use patterns, the term ›indigenous‹ should be taken into considera-tion. Put simply, the term denotes »anything produced, growing, or living naturally in a particular region or environment« (Grim 2001: xxxvii). Yet, it is a highly contentious term. Having been discussed over decades within international law and human rights contexts, the question of how to define the term has become politicised and is still far

10 For a general view of the global distribution of areas abundant in biodiversity, see the map pro-vided by Mittermeier and Konstant (2001: 17).

The cultural context of biodiversity conservation 22

from being clarified. The UN have undertaken to lance an approach passed on the widely accepted definition elaborated by José Martínez-Cobo:

Indigenous communities, peoples and nations are those which, having a historical continuity with pre-invasion and pre-colonial societies that developed on their territories, consider themselves distinct from other sectors of the societies now prevailing in those territories, or parts of them. They form at present non-dominant sectors of society and are determined to preserve, develop and transmit to future genera-tions their ancestral territories, and their ethnic identity, as the basis of their continued existence as peoples, in accordance with their own cultural patterns, social institutions and legal systems (cited in Oviedo 2002: 40).

The criterion ›self-identification‹ tends to be regarded as a central aspect that has been emphasised in other international agreements such as the ILO-Convention 169 that recognises indigenous rights to the use, ownership, management and control of tradi-tional lands and territories.¹¹ This debate is not without meaning, as the term ›indige-nous‹ implies a fundamental notion of »aboriginality« to a particular place, i.e. the

»original belonging« or the »first presence«, which in turn leads to the recognition of

»primary rights« for those found to be aboriginal, as outlined by Oviedo (2002: 4ff.).

Referring to the context of biodiversity conservation, he has undertaken to summarise the essential characteristics of indigenous peoples. These include: historical continuity (traditional inhabitation of lands); strong link to territories (expressed in traditional management practices and in a sense of care for the land); distinct social, economic or political systems rooted in tradition (especially in terms of self-management, control, participation and government institutions); distinct language, culture and beliefs (in-cluding traditional ecological knowledge and cultural practices related to the manage-ment of homelands); belonging to non-dominant sectors of society (local-level inter-actions are therefore important, since national, dominant institutions are not necessar-ily reflective of their interests); self-identification as different from national society;

traditional systems of control, use and management of lands and resources; predomi-nantly subsistence systems that are largely dependent on a diversity of resources; col-lective rights over at least some of the resources available; traditional practices of deci-sion-making on matters of their concern and traditional systems of redistribution.

On a global scale, it is estimated that at least 200 million people may be defined as indigenous, comprising about four percent of the world's total population, but 90 to 95 percent of contemporary cultural diversity (Howitt 2001: 27). Language is conside-red one of the major indicators of cultural diversity. As estimated by UNESCO, 4,000 to 5,000 of the 6,000 distinguished languages in the world are spoken by indigenous peoples (Posey 2000b: 3). An analysis of the correlation between biological and

cultu-11 According to the ILO-Convention 169, groups are considered ›indigenous‹ if they are »regarded by themselves or others as indigenous on account of their descent from the populations which inhab-ited the country, or a geographical region to which the country belongs, at the time of conquest or colonization or the establishment of present state boundaries and who, irrespective of their legal status, retain, or wish to retain, some or all of their own social, economic, cultural and political char-acteristics and institutions« (cited in Posey 1996b: 54).

The global context 23

ral diversity has been refined by Maffi (2001). In examining the role of language in human-environment relationships, she discusses global cross-mappings of the world's biological and linguistic diversity, which indicate remarkable overlaps between these two different forms of diversity. Accordingly, ten of the twelve so called biological

›mega-diversity‹ countries figure equally among the top twenty-five for endemic lan-guages (2001: 26).¹²

Apart from areas with high numbers of species endemism, indigenous peoples oc-cupy a wide geographical range varying from the polar regions to the tropical zones in Africa, Asia, Australia and the Americas. In these areas of more than 70 countries, in-digenous resource management systems have evolved over time as adaptive responses to the specific natural conditions of particular local settings (Beltrán 2000: 21). In this way, ecosystems in regions of particularly high conservation priority have been shaped by indigenous resource use related to subsistence patterns like agriculture, forest ex-traction, hunting and gathering practices. Living in close relation to complex ecosys-tems, indigenous communities have developed an understanding of the diverse reci-procal interactions of such systems. Thus, extensive knowledge related to local envi-ronments has often conserved and even enhanced biodiversity (Laird 2000: 348). As most indigenous ecological principles are largely attached to experience and prediction in relation to human subsistence, indigenous peoples living in small-scale cultures have been better able to maintain long-term, relatively resilient relationships with the natural environment than people living in larger scale cultures (Bodley 2002: 163).

These principles also include values, norms and beliefs regarding the maintenance of the »balance of nature«, which imply specific conservation methods and practices, as noted by Slikkerveer (2000: 174) and lead to the notion that the world's cultural diver-sity is part of the broader biodiverdiver-sity that must be protected (Chatty & Colchester 2002: 15). However, in discussing the widely emphasised ›inextricable link‹ between biological and cultural diversity, Posey (2000b: 6) admits that not all human impacts on the environment have had positive effects, as an increasing number of indigenous, peasant and local communities are abandoning sustainable traditions in favour of de-structive activities. The acknowledgement of the positive links between indigenous peoples and biodiversity has been increasingly tempered by the recognition that under certain circumstances (i.e. high population densities, market pressures, unsuitable technologies, local disorganisation) indigenous resource use practices have depleted or destroyed valuables resources, often for individual profit (Booth & Kessler 1996: 241).¹³

12 Although a discussion of hypotheses concerning the co-evolution of cultures and ecosystems is not intended here, it is worth noting that the diversity of indigenous languages is undergoing severe erosion: 2,500 of the 6,000 spoken languages worldwide are considered to be in immediate danger of extinction (Posey 2000b: 3). According to DeWalt (1994), the cultural diversity of human experience is being eroded even faster than biological diversity. For details on language diversification, see also Harré et al. (1999) and Oviedo et al. (2000).

13 Ellen and Harris (2000) warn of an over-idealised view of indigenous peoples. In discussions on indigenous environmental concerns, anthropologists have been prone to stereotyping and romanti-cism, creating a late-twentieth-century version of the ecological ›noble savage‹. This issue will be re-turned to in chapter 3.1.3.

The cultural context of biodiversity conservation 24

Causes of progressive environmental degradation like deforestation, erosion, degen-eration of soils and loss of wildlife habitat are commonly traced back to rates of popu-lation growth, pressure on scarce resources, extractive activities or even to ignorant at-titudes of rural peasants being incapable of coping with external changes (Banuri &

Apffel Marglin 1993: 4). Nevertheless, field-based research findings give evidence that in most cases, environmental degradation based on unsustainable resource use pat-terns are more likely to be traced back to social conditions such as inequality rather than to structural factors such as population pressure (Bodley 2002).

In her discussion on Socioeconomic Root Causes of Biodiversity Loss as crucial step in developing effective conservation strategies, Stedman-Edwards (1998) asserts that it is essential to understand what lies behind the mentioned proximate causes in order to understand why such an extensive environmental degradation is occurring. As a com-plex overlay of political, economic and social factors on a local, regional, national and international scale driving environmental change, she emphasises the need to take a broader look at these multi-layered conditions causally related to the process of biodi-versity loss. Even in isolated areas, where the erosion of natural dibiodi-versity is occurring, a number of circumstances beyond the local level are likely to be at work. Conse-quently, it is necessary to step back and look at the broad range of influences on local resource use in order to find successful conservation strategies that could reduce the pressure on biodiversity. The deforestation process in the tropics, for instance, is con-ventionally attributed primarily to the increased practice of shifting agriculture among other human activities such as the establishment of plantations for cash crop cultiva-tion or the use of cleared forested areas for cattle ranching (Jackson & Jackson 1996).

A closer examination, as argued by Stedman-Edwards (1998), reveals much broader categories of root causes that need to be taken into account. Above all, these include factors such as demographic change, inequality and poverty, public policies, macroeconomic policies and structures, social change and development biases. Ac-cording to Slikkerveer (2000: 17), the loss of cultural diversity in many countries is due largely to »unbalanced historical processes« of acculturation in which traditional and indigenous societies have been dominated by knowledge and technology from the

›West‹.¹⁴ The underlying mechanisms of forest degradation have also been assessed critically by Laird (2000) in terms of broader socio-economic conditions and political impacts. More precisely, she points to the failure of governments and other institu-tions to recognise and respect the rights of forest-dependent peoples to their territo-rial lands and other resources. She also mentions the increasing problem of landless-ness among impoverished peasants due to inequitable land tenure patterns and poli-cies of state and private agenpoli-cies that are geared to exploit natural resources for eco-nomic profit (2000: 354).

14 In anthropology, the term acculturation was originally used to refer to changes in cultures as they came into contact with each other. It later became synonymous with the idea that indigenous cul-tures went into decline after contact with industrial ones (Gardner & Lewis 1996: xiv).

The global context 25

In this context, Wilshusen et al. (2003: 1) recall that most of the areas considered to be of high conservation priority are also social and political ›hotbeds‹. In addition to the disturbing ecological trends described above, the majority of developing countries in tropical regions face significant social, economic and political challenges that compli-cate both nature conservation and social justice. Locompli-cated in countries such as Colom-bia, Brazil, Indonesia, Mexico, the Philippines, or the Ivory Coast, these areas feature high levels of poverty, insecure land tenure and landlessness, unstable political sys-tems, social injustice and histories of state-sponsored repression. Due to historical cir-cumstances, many indigenous peoples became subordinated to a marginal existence on the social and political peripheries of the dominant societies in the postcolonial na-tion states in which they live. The colonial interplay of social and religious transforma-tion and economic exclusion fragmented many of these societies and enhanced the difficulty to maintain cultural identities. With the increasing globalisation of capitalist economies in the late 20^th century and diverse forms of modern internal colonialism, indigenous peoples have come under another wave of pressures to assimilate into mainstream cultures and to open their homelands to resource exploitation (Grim 2001: xl). Based on the continuity of past and contemporary threats, the access and control over natural resources between indigenous communities and nation states have become a common arena of social conflict.¹⁵