|
Biosphere reserves have been promoted
as ideal solutions for environmental degradation and poverty
in Third World countries. This paper examines the prevailing
biosphere reserve model and analyzes its implementation in the
Maya Biosphere Reserve, in the PetĖn, Guatemala. I suggest that
the biosphere reserve model encourages the creation of 'NGO
landscapes,' in which local cultural and political structures
are replaced by NGO structures.
THE BIOSPHERE RESERVE MODEL
Environmentalists and development planners have advocated a
variety of conservation models in Latin American countries,
to protect remaining wilderness areas from degradation and depletion.
In an endeavor to address economic as well as environmental
needs, UNESCO's Man in the Biosphere Program developed the biosphere
reserve model as an alternative to prevailing conservation models
(Batisse 1986). In the 1970s, the creators of the biosphere
reserve model saw conservation as a technical issue; they believed
that scientific research and resource management would solve
existing environmental problems (Vernhes 1987). The initial
model was based upon the assumptions of island biogeography,
to ensure the viable reproduction of species within the reserve
(Diamond 1975). Thus, the 1974 biosphere reserve model was designed
to encompass a large circular area divided into a series of
concentric zones--nuclear zone, multiple use zone, buffer zone--each
having different ecological functions, uses, and management
structures (Goodier and Jeffers 1981).
A review of biosphere reserves created between 1974 and 1983
revealed that the research conducted at reserves was of an academic
nature and did not address the source of environmental problems.
Therefore, the First International Biosphere Reserve Congress
adopted the "Action Plan for Biosphere Reserves" in 1984, which
states that biosphere reserves should be "models of the harmonious
marriage of conservation and development" (UNESCO 1984). As
such, the management plans are to include non- governmental
organizations (NGOs), with projects designed to balance community
needs with the conservation of natural resources. Today, biosphere
reserves are commonly perceived as a viable strategy to promote
sustainable development at the local level (Annis et al. 1992;
Batisse 1986; Vernhes 1987).
Although the biosphere reserve model is very seductive, it
poses many challenges to those involved in its implementation.
First, the process of spatial abstraction imposes random boundaries
upon a complex landscape. Secondly, the model attempts to de-politicize
the relationship between three complex and dynamic phenomena,
the state, NGOs, and local communities, and their relationship
with the environment--which is "strategically relevant" to all
three human institutions (Knapp 1991). Due to this process of
abstraction and de-politization, the biosphere reserve model
does not provide a framework for dealing with the many layers
of complications which arise throughout the implementation process.
THE CREATION OF THE RESERVE
To examine the model's implementation, I conducted fieldwork
in the Maya Biosphere Reserve, in the PetĖn, the northern most
department of Guatemala. In the 1970s, the department experienced
dramatic changes in population and land use practices due to
the government's policy of colonization, drawing thousands of
migrants. The population jumped from 25,207 in 1964 to an estimated
311,314 in 1990 (Schwartz 1990:11; SEGEPLAN 1993a:1). Widespread
and rapid deforestation led to national and international concern
for the PetĖn's ecology. With the encouragement of environmentalists
and international lending institutions, President Vinicio Cerezo
signed legislation in 1990, creating the Maya Biosphere Reserve,
which encompasses approximately 1.6 million hectares of Guatemala's
tropical lowland forest and wetland ecosystems. The Reserve
is administered by the Guatemalan National Council of Protected
Areas (CONAP), in coordination with the United States Agency
for International Development, The Nature Conservancy, Conservation
International, and CARE International.
The primary goal of the Maya Biosphere Reserve's Master Plan
is the following: "...to yield a harmonious and sustainable
development in the region, guaranteeing the stability of the
present natural and cultural resources" (CONAP 1996:11). The
estimated cost of the seven year implementation process is $22,410,000
(CONAP 1993). The three NGOs are charged with providing institutional
and financial support, as well as promoting sustainable resource
management and environmental education through participatory
projects at the community level. The Reserve has attracted a
plethora of other NGOs to the PetĖn.
NGO PROJECTS
Myriad complications have arisen throughout the implementation
process. For example, each NGO claims jurisdiction over a portion
of the Reserve, leading to a 'balkanization' of the landscape.
Secondly, individual NGO projects are too localized, creating
economic and resource disparities between communities. Thirdly,
the Reserve's spatial boundaries create a resource division
between the northern and southern PetĖn, undermining the goals
of the Reserve by attracting migrants to the Buffer Zone. Finally,
I suggest that NGO projects are leading to the homogenization
of two critical social realms: local cultural landscapes and
the political actors within them. Today I would like to discuss
the creation of NGO landscapes by analyzing the effects of development
projects on local cultural and political landscapes.
Cultural landscapes embody the identity of the people that
inhabit a given geographical area--they are both the arena of
cultural practices and are constituted by beliefs and practices
that are constantly reproduced and contested (Cosgrove 1993).
A cultural landscape retains personal memories of a place; yet,
its significance moves beyond the individual to affirm group
identity (Butzer 1994; Knapp 1994). Particular places are given
significance, as are everyday practices. Local resources and
farming practices, planting and harvesting calendars, as well
as the overall understanding of how the ecosystem functions,
all form an integral part of the culture and the cultural landscape.
Changes tend to occur incrementally, and may not result from
formal planning processes (Doolittle 1984; Williams 1990); these
changes are gradually incorporated into the cultural landscape.
NGO projects are often designed to alter various aspects of
a given cultural landscape. Through participatory projects,
NGO personnel attempt to impart their vision of natural resource
management, environmental education, and community structure,
and replace existing patterns with improved and more efficient
practices. The implementation of these projects leads to cultural
landscapes which reflect NGO conservation and development goals,
and risks undermining existing local resource management strategies
and community structures. Just as Escobar suggests that the
"'development encounter' produces forms of consciousness that
are more the property of organizations and ruling groups..."
(Escobar 1991), I propose that the conservation encounter produces
NGO landscapes.
The people living within the Maya Biosphere Reserve practice
shifting cultivation; many collect the three non-timber resources--chicle,
all-spice, xate palm--which are sold on the international market.
Most supplement their diet with local flora and fauna. These
communities are approximately ten to twenty years old, dating
from the initial colonization period. A recent study found that
the migrants are experimenting with strategies to meet their
changing needs, including agroforestry techniques (CARE 1993b).
The NGO literature, however, portrays these individuals as recent
arrivals, whose unfamiliarity with the tropical forest environment
has led to inappropriate land-use patterns. These communities
are the 'targets' of NGO projects in the Maya Biosphere Reserve.
Each NGO employs slightly different management techniques
and prioritizes selected species. For example, Conservation
International promotes natural forestry management which features
the sustainable collecting of non-timber products, and encourages
the harvesting of a wider variety of tree species for timber
needs (CI 1994). The Swedish and Norwegian Conservation Project
for Sustainable Development in Central America has developed
a complex thirty year model for the harvesting of valuable timber
species such as cedar and mahogany (CATIE 1992). These NGO landscapes
are visibly different from the surrounding landscapes. Several
years from now, it may be possible to map the Reserve by examining
the type of forestry management associated with each NGO.
CARE'S DEMONSTRATION AREA
In the Reserve, CARE International's agroforestry project is
generally regarded as the most effective because it makes use
of local knowledge and strategies. CARE collected information
on both ancient and current practices throughout the PetĖn;
this information was used to develop an ideal and supposedly
appropriate agroforestry system which is combined with subsistence
agriculture and livestock (CARE 1993a, 1993b). Local strategies
are reformulated according to Western notions of resource management,
and returned to communities with introduced innovations. Extensionists
present farmers with a static subsistence package. The Buffer
Zone of the Maya Biosphere Reserve is dotted with replicants
of CARE's idealized landscape. Although it includes local strategies,
the project's methodology excludes individual innovation and
incremental change, which may be essential features of traditional
resource management. Finally, the project attempts to impose
a homogeneous landscape in an area thriving with highly individualistic
and ethnically diverse people.
NGO AUTHORITY
After the creation of the Maya Biosphere Reserve, officials
from the Guatemalan National Council of Protected Areas (CONAP)
and international development personnel arrived in the northern
PetĖn to introduce the new hierarchy of power. This process
has reshaped space and society. Although cultural landscapes
embody "relationships of power and authority" (Hugill and Foote
1994), the biosphere reserve model tends to de-politicize local
political landscapes. As such, NGO personnel also tend to gloss
over community power structures and inter-personal power struggles
(Brower 1992; Glesne 1984).
During the first phase of a community project in the Maya
Biosphere Reserve, NGO personnel visit the village to assess
the leadership structure and identify potential leaders (CARE
1994; IUCN 1994). Enthusiastic strong men and women who fit
Western ideals of leadership are targeted, encouraged, and supported
(Van Orman 1989). The existing social and political fabric is
disrupted by the changes in power structures; community leaders
and specialists are often replaced by new leaders who conform
to NGO standards. This process may engender intense conflict
at the local level. Furthermore, the community is reorganized
according to people who agree or refuse to participate in NGO
programs. NGOs then establish separate projects for men, women,
and children, thereby altering inter-personal relationships.
Finally, once the community becomes identified as an NGO community,
signs are often set up to publicly proclaim the community's
allegiance and NGO authority in the area.
An example of local political conflict comes from San JosĖ,
a lake-side village composed of Maya-Itzaj and immigrants. In
1992, six Itzaj leaders established the BioItza, a forest reserve
on thirty-six km2 of municipal land, and then sought outside
assistance to protect the reserve and create park facilities.
A botanist with support from the Austrian government promised
one million dollars to the BioItza over a three year period.
During this time, San JosĖ was undergoing a cultural revitalization
movement, which included the Itzaj Maya Language Rescue Project
- an attempt to teach the dying Itzaj language (Hofling 1996).
Local enthusiasm about language and cultural revitalization
prevailed in San JosĖ until the situation came to a head in
1993, when the mayor was removed from office for selling timber
from the Reserve and selling municipal land along the lakeshore
to foreigners. Furthermore, the Austrian funding had been lowered
to $500,000 and had not yet arrived (Hofling 1996). The BioItza
guards were working without pay. The motives of the various
project personnel became suspect; there was a political split
between two Itzaj leaders involved in the language project and
the BioItza. One man withdrew from the language project but
remained active in the BioItza. The other took over the language
project and withdrew from the BioItza. The locals were disillusioned
with the leaders, as well as the outsiders. In the end, a much
lower sum arrived in 1994. A year later, the Austrian was accused
of embezzling funds from the BioItza. Today, San JosĖ continues
to be embroiled in political conflict over this issue.
Another example from San JosĖ involves Ixchel, a local women's
organization, involved in the cultural revitalization of Maya-Itzaj
cosmology and agrotechnologies. Ixchel has a 30 year contract
to rent 50 acres of municipal land on which to carry out their
activities. In 1994, a Guatemalan NGO--claiming to have millions
of dollars--approached San JosĖ's municipal leader (alcalde),
promising to build a university specializing in tropical forest
ecology and management. The NGO selected Ixchel's land parcel
as their ideal starting point.
Tempted by the NGO's promises of grandeur and financial reward,
the alcalde began to pressure Ixchel to leave the property,
assuming that the women would capitulate under threats of violence.
The alcalde, and several important community leaders began to
claim that Ixchel was standing in the way of the PetĖn's development
and progress. This case engendered fear throughout San JosĖ;
the community divided over the issues of local self- determination,
progress, and financial rewards. Although Ixchel took this case
to court, the alcalde prevailed. In the end, the conflict led
to personal problems within the organization, the women stopped
participating in the fall of 1995, and the group dissolved.
DISCUSSION
In conclusion, I suggest that the biosphere reserve model for
conservation and development has several built-in contradictions.
The model's framework has enabled NGOs to alter the dynamics
of local politics, and transform the face of the landscape.
In their attempts to conserve the northern PetĖn's forest, NGOs
have set out to change local people's environmental consciousness
and land management practices. These changes undermine many
local structures and strategies that have emerged to deal with
social and environmental changes. Some of the introduced techniques
have no historical or cultural relevance; they become anomalies
in local cultural landscapes. Due to their neglect of power
structures, individual innovation, and cultural landscapes,
NGO landscapes may not provide long-term solutions to environmental
degradation.
The majority of people involved in the implementation of the
Maya Biosphere Reserve regard the process as an experiment;
it is a learning process within the international field of sustainable
development. Projects are eliminated or adjusted as problems
rise to the surface. The impact of experimentation, meanwhile,
is deeply felt in local communities, wherein individuals have
been asked to restructure their lives around NGO projects. My
research has suggested that people have suffered from time lost
in projects subsequently abandoned; raised expectations and
unkept promises; indifference to local knowledge and practices;
local dissent, and in several cases, increased violence. This
leads me to question the ethics of experimentation within the
field of conservation and development.
Although the success of the biosphere reserve model is problematic,
the Maya Biosphere Reserve will not determine the fate of the
PetĖn. In the end, solutions to resource depletion hinge upon
changes in global social and economic structures, the commitment
of the Guatemalan government, and the experience and creative
energies of local people. Those of us interested in these issues
must begin to question Western models of conservation, and challenge
NGOs to support local people without undermining their knowledge
and self-determination.
|
