Conservation at Stake: Institutionalized Environmentalisms and Indigenous Knowledges About How to Protect the Brazilian Atlantic Forest

IF 0.7 Q3 ANTHROPOLOGY
Laila Thomaz Sandroni
{"title":"Conservation at Stake: Institutionalized Environmentalisms and Indigenous Knowledges About How to Protect the Brazilian Atlantic Forest","authors":"Laila Thomaz Sandroni","doi":"10.14237/ebl.14.2.2023.1832","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper aims to compare two different sets of solutions on best pathways for biodiversity conservation present in a specific territory in the Brazilian Atlantic Forest, in southern Bahia.  We look specifically at three interconnected administrative instances:  the Tupinambá de Olivença Indigenous Land; the Una Biological Reserve; and the Una Wildlife Refuge. We show that different perspectives regarding what it means to preserve nature come into focus in this territory. These are intertwined with power relations that highlight the inequality in the legitimacy of different groups in decision making for environmental governance. We map the causes and solutions for biodiversity degradation proposed by two contrasting narratives: the Indigenous perspective and the institutionalized western science-based environmentalism developed by state agencies and non-governmental organizations that work with conservation projects in the region. We expect to equalize these contrasting perspectives that are commonly seen in hierarchical terms. We conclude by advocating for managing combinations of diverse sets of knowledge and for pluralism in conservation efforts that accounts for underlying power relations.","PeriodicalId":43787,"journal":{"name":"Ethnobiology Letters","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ethnobiology Letters","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14237/ebl.14.2.2023.1832","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ANTHROPOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

This paper aims to compare two different sets of solutions on best pathways for biodiversity conservation present in a specific territory in the Brazilian Atlantic Forest, in southern Bahia.  We look specifically at three interconnected administrative instances:  the Tupinambá de Olivença Indigenous Land; the Una Biological Reserve; and the Una Wildlife Refuge. We show that different perspectives regarding what it means to preserve nature come into focus in this territory. These are intertwined with power relations that highlight the inequality in the legitimacy of different groups in decision making for environmental governance. We map the causes and solutions for biodiversity degradation proposed by two contrasting narratives: the Indigenous perspective and the institutionalized western science-based environmentalism developed by state agencies and non-governmental organizations that work with conservation projects in the region. We expect to equalize these contrasting perspectives that are commonly seen in hierarchical terms. We conclude by advocating for managing combinations of diverse sets of knowledge and for pluralism in conservation efforts that accounts for underlying power relations.
危在旦夕的保护:关于如何保护巴西大西洋森林的制度化环境主义和土著知识
本文旨在比较巴伊亚州南部巴西大西洋森林特定地区的生物多样性保护最佳途径的两套不同解决方案。我们具体研究了三个相互关联的行政实例:Tupinambáde Olivença土著土地;乌纳生物保护区;以及乌纳野生动物保护区。我们表明,关于保护自然意味着什么的不同观点在这片领土上成为焦点。这些与权力关系交织在一起,突显了不同群体在环境治理决策中的合法性不平等。我们绘制了两种截然不同的叙事提出的生物多样性退化的原因和解决方案:土著视角和由国家机构和非政府组织发展起来的基于科学的制度化西方环境主义,这些机构和组织与该地区的保护项目合作。我们希望平衡这些在等级制度中常见的对比视角。最后,我们提倡管理各种知识的组合,并倡导保护工作的多元化,以解释潜在的权力关系。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Ethnobiology Letters
Ethnobiology Letters ANTHROPOLOGY-
自引率
0.00%
发文量
10
审稿时长
16 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信