Introduction
Across the globe, conservationists
and policy makers alike are implementing programs that work with local
communities to protect forests (Gibson and Marks 1995; Peluso 1991; Primack,
Bray, Galletti, and Ponciano, eds. 1998). These programs are especially
vibrant near protected areas where the park model is under pressure from
local user groups. Because these groups often depend on their immediate
surroundings for subsistence, conservation organizations and government
agencies advocate alternative land use practices through integrated conservation-development
projects (Wells and Brandon 1992; West and Brechin, eds. 1991; Western
and Wright, eds. 1994). These projects tend to encourage either sustainable
harvests of forests goods or a spatial intensification of practices (such
as shifting agriculture) that entail deforestation. Overall, the projects
aim to maintain the integrity of protected areas, places where ecosystem
health is conceptualized as the absence of human activity (Hunter Jr. 1996).
In this article, I draw on fourteen
months of anthropological participant-observation carried out during 1994
and 1995 to explore challenges posed by Mexican farmers to conservation-development
projects and to the park model itself. Following Milton's call to examine
ethnoecologies for their conservationist content (Milton 1996), I consider
how people living near the Calakmul Biosphere Reserve categorize local
landscape features. Calakmul is Mexico's largest protected area for tropical
ecosystems. As such, regional conservation has received the support of
groups such as the Global Environment Facility and WorldWildlife Fund.
This global interest in Calakmul points to the way localized ideas of the
environment are enmeshed in multiple power structures (Nazarea, ed. 1999).
The proliferation of conservation-development projects in Calakmul arises
out of an acknowledgement that local people will determine the region's
future ecology (Acopa and Boege 1998; Boege 1995). An uneasy incorporation
of local environmental ideas into these projects points to tensions in
conservation that center on both power and epistemological differences.
Calakmul's
Ecology and People
Created in 1989, the Calakmul Biosphere
Reserve encompasses a nucleus of 1,787,000 acres and a buffer zone of 608,000
acres. Calakmul's forests are seasonal tropical forests. Unlike tropical
rain forests, the seasonal tropics experience marked differences in dry
and wet seasons. At Calakmul, one in four years may find rainfall below
800 mm, creating drought conditions (Folan 1991). Similar to rain forests,
Calakmul is home to threatened species such as jaguars, toucans, and tapirs.
While the size of Calakmul alone is impressive, the region also connects
with protected areas in neighboring Guatemala and Belize that collectively
cover five-million acres of lowland forest (Mansour 1995). Since the 1980s,
conservation and tourist groups have promoted this area's ecological and
historical characteristics under the Ruta Maya program--the Maya Route
(see Garrett 1989).
Calakmul is home to numerous archaeological
ruins. The region's recent occupants, however, differ significantly from
its pre-Columbian inhabitants. Calakmul was relatively depopulated until
this century when the chicle (the original chewing gum obtained from tree
sap) and timber industries imported laborers to work the forests. Chicle
production peaked in the 1930s (Ponce Jiménez 1990), while timber
extraction began in earnest in the 1940s. Chicle production declined with
the invention of a synthetic substitute in the 1940s. Timber extraction
continued into the 1980s when regional mills ceased to operate because
of a lack of quality timber in Calakmul's forests. A third wave of migration
into Calakmul began in the 1960s, when Mexican authorities opened the tropics
to land-hungry farmers (Arizpe, Paz, and Velázquez 1996; Haenn 1999).
Through their work in swidden agriculture, these migrants changed the region's
economy from one based on forest products to one that emphasizes deforestation.
Still, Calakmul and its buffer zone continue to be heavily forested. Recent
population estimates note approximately 25,000 people living in the municipio
of Calakmul (roughly equal to a U.S. county). Regional population density
is just 2.5 persons per square kilometer (Ericson 1999).
Table 1 shows how researchers characterize
Calakmul’s forests according to height and amount of leaf loss in the dry
season. These categories offer only a rough guide as much remains to be
learned about Calakmul's forest. Apart from work published in the 1950s
(Beltrán, ed. 1958), intensive studies of the region's botany began
only in the 1990s. Since the 1950s, Calakmul's forests have been heavily
exploited, so more recent research examines a forest that has been considerably
altered. As investigators piece together the precise qualities of Calakmul's
ecology, Calakmul's people receive general admonitions to protect the forests.
Especially in the context of conservation-development projects, governmental
and non-governmental administrators talk about the need for protection
without discussing the scientific data supporting why farmers should do
so. This generality raises suspicions of outsiders' intent to control forests,
while it obscures important differences in how Calakmul's people and managers
view appropriate land management.
Table 1
Type |
Description |
High evergreen
Medium semi-evergreen
Medium subdeciduous
Low semi-evergreen
Low subdeciduous |
Canopy greater than
30 meters
25-50% leaf loss in
dry season; canopy 15-30 m.
50-75% leaf loss in
dry season; canopy 15-30 m.
25-50% leaf loss in
dry season; canopy less than 15 m.
50-75% leaf loss in
dry season; canopy less than 15 m. |
Source:
(Gates 1993)
Working
Forests
Finding commonly held ideas on
anything in Calakmul is a challenge. Calakmul's people represent virtually
all Mexican states and include a number of indigenous groups. With a dynamic
frontier atmosphere, Calakmul's farm community is often contentious and
deeply divided. As such, I was surprised by the commonalities in how people
think about the environment. These findings came about during interviews
with ten men of distinct state and ethnic origin. Through piles sorts,
I asked them to group twenty-seven landscape features (taken from their
descriptions of their villages and farm plots) according to whatever categories
seemed relevant to them. Throughout these sorts, the men unanimously grouped
areas currently under cultivation and described these as "where we work."
They grouped forest categories (see below) separately and described these
as future farmlands, "where we're going to work." Furthermore, they grouped
protected areas according to concepts of work. In this case, they joined
protected areas with archaeological ruins which Mexican federal law also
prohibits them from altering. They described these places as "where we
cannot work."
The specific kinds of forest described
followed a height categorization similar to that found in Table 1. However,
rather than evaluate forest height in terms of the absence of humans, these
men placed people and human activity firmly at the center of their considerations.
Travelling across forested land, they pointed out acahual, forest felled
within the last five to ten years. An acahual harbors narrow trees and
is the most preferred site for future farming. Farmers also pointed
out forests that are monte. The word monte applies to all natural growth,
but one if its specific meanings is “forest felled roughly within the last
ten years”. Because it requires greater effort to clear, monte is of secondary
preference in farming. Finally, montaña is forest that has never
been cleared. Without access to a chainsaw, farmers must exert considerable
labor in axing montaña. Thus, montaña is the least preferred
site for farming.
This variety of landscape features
plays an important role in regional household economies. Calakmul's people
work in one of Mexico's most poorly remunerated sectors. While farming
for subsistence and cash crops, Calakmul's people are also highly dependent
on government subsidies (Haenn 1998). They self-consciously diversify within
what they see as subsistence, market, and state-directed economies. This
diversification has a concomitant ecological element. Having a variety
of forests on hand helps people respond to changing economies by switching
resource use patterns. As I will show, conservation itself has contributed
to changing economies. Calakmul's farmers benefited directly from standing
forests for a brief while, however the future value of regional forests
remains unclear.
A Local Environmentalism
During the early to mid-1990s,
Calakmul's people voiced support for sustainable resource use through their
participation in a farmer organization, the Xpujil Regional Council, as
well as through their work with the Biosphere Reserve. During the time
of this research, the two institutions were so closely aligned as to be
nearly indistinguishable. With the aid of the first Reserve Director, Deocundo
Acopa, the Council received funds from federal and non-governmental agencies
to carry out conservation-development projects in the buffer zone. With
this aid, the Council's budget rivaled that of any (formally) governmental
agency in the region. The Reserve Director also required that local residents
occupy Reserve jobs whenever possible. To outsiders, this alliance gave
the appearance of a home grown conservationism.
More than 40 villages were members
of the Council where they chose from a variety of programs, including agroforestry,
organic agriculture, reforestation, wildlife management, and environmental
education. Implementation of these programs through the Council's democratic
structure gave the group a grassroots appearance. Member villages voted
representatives to the Council's monthly assemblies. These representatives
oversaw project implementation and debated the programs' merits. The Council's
funding was always "top down" and programs emphasized the interests of
donors. At the same time, the group boasted a strong "bottom up" component
in which members voiced their development needs to an elected board which
ideally acted on behalf of its constituency.
Under Acopa's close supervision,
the Council became a site where people connected resource use to conservation.
Acopa encouraged people to take advantage of conservation funding on the
grounds that these programs aimed to protect the environment so people
might use it. This message neatly coincided with the above ethnoecologies,
and Acopa found broad support for his overall vision of conservation. He
described biodiversity as "diversity in use," noting that people would
only protect the array of natural resources from which they received benefits.
As the most powerful office holder
in the Region, Acopa further pressured non-governmental groups and researchers
to cultivate support within the Council assembly. This allowed people the
opportunity to comment on and shape local conservation efforts. For example,
when the state governor and the Canadian ambassador to Mexico attended
a Council assembly to sign a bi-national agreement funding conservation-development
projects, they were greeted by an elated audience which gave them a standing
ovation. State fire fighters were not so warmly welcomed. During the burning
season, when farmers prepare their fields for planting, a number of smaller
fires got out of control and affected hundred of acres of forest. Fire
fighters met with the assembly to discuss fire control techniques only
to be rebuffed by an audience who declared that building firebreaks required
too much effort for which they would not be reimbursed. In general, assembly
delegates supported programs that reinforced or expanded existing farming
operations. They resisted projects requiring additional labor as well as
programs they judged too risky to their farming. This ambivalent reception
reflected a deeper concern about the motivation of conservation proponents.
Calakmul's people asked themselves why outsiders were so interested in
protecting the forests. Their answer to this question lies partially in
their understanding of the environment as a place of work.
Conservation
and Class Conflict
If land is a place of work, then
Calakmul's residents surmised that outsiders must have some use in mind
for the Biosphere Reserve. Along these lines, farmers viewed protected
areas as attempts by government agents and urban environmentalists to control
forests for their own ends. This analysis could be quite sophisticated.
It ranged from an understanding of the localized gain to be had from conservation
to an awareness that environmental advocates parlayed their work at Calakmul
into success in other social realms. Two examples demonstrate this understanding.
In 1995, farmers in one village
killed a government agent who was checking on whether they were felling
older growth forest. Although reported in the press as an act of poachers
bent on depleting resources, the killer (who fled the region and was never
prosecuted) was known locally as an average farmer. His actions received
some support within the farm community as the agent was rumored to be extorting
from farmers. Whether or not the rumors were true, it's important that
Calakmul's people link conservation to government corruption. They see
conservation as a new area for illicit government activity. Thus, when
I asked one man if he saw that animals were becoming extinct, he replied
no "The [Mexican] President invents these things, or he's taking advantage
of something."
Members of national and international
environmental groups received similar criticism. Calakmul's residents are
aware of the gain made by tapping into the financial structures associated
with conservation and development planning. In the words of a former board
member of the Regional Council, these structures are the principal domain
of non-governmental groups. He said, "That's why the money ecologists have
for conservation doesn't arrive here. It all goes to rock concerts, exotic
meals, and travel." While these assessments include a strong critique of
Mexican and international class structures, they also relate to local ethnoecologies.
Calakmul's residents presume everyone has some use in mind for the Reserve.
They believe governmental and private sector agents disguise their desired
plans because these plans entail promoting themselves at farmers' expense.
Conclusions
The case of Calakmul raises challenges
to conservation practices throughout the world. Historically, both Mexico
and the United States have struggled with the issue of whether "wise use"
or preservation is the best way to ensure that current resources last into
the future (Simonian 1996). In rejecting preservation, Calakmul's residents
challenge Mexican and international environmentalists who have been hard
pressed to develop alternatives to the widely implemented park model (see
also Adams and McShane 1992).
Even if such models existed, the
situation at Calakmul points to the need for consistent implementation
of any conservation program that includes local people. Since 1995, when
this research took place, Calakmul's pervasive conservation-development
programs have ceased to exist. After federal funding cycles ended, international
groups supported the Regional Council. Exasperated by corruption, a slow
pace of change, and an apparent lack of local commitment to conservation,
these groups have also failed to renew funding. The Regional Council now
includes a handful of people who carry on in name only. While Calakmul's
people fault Council leaders for creating a corrupt atmosphere that offended
donors, the nearly complete withdrawal of federal and non-governmental
funds for conservation-development also adds to local doubts about outsiders'
own commitment to conservation.
Despite this turn of events, widespread
promotion of conservation-development was effective in raising consciousness
about environmental issues. The possibility still exists for a localized
environmentalism at Calakmul. I met farmers opposed to government appropriation
of land for parks who, nevertheless, maintained part of their farm parcels
in forest for hunting or to collect some other product. Perhaps policy
planners have the most to learn from these opponents of conservation. What
might their environmentalism look like? Given that Calakmul's people experience
deep economic insecurity and skepticism toward government authority, I
believe this environmentalism would likely build on notions of work to
stress political autonomy and secure access to natural resources. This
local environmentalism might include an attitude toward the physical environment
not unlike that of U.S. hunters and fishermen whose interest in resource
use has generated numerous protection programs.
References
cited:
Acopa, Deocundo and Eckart Boege
1998 The Maya Forest in Campeche,
Mexico: Experiences in Forest Management at Calakmul in Timber, Tourists,
and Temples: Conservation and Development in the Maya Forest of Belize,
Guatemala, and Mexico. Primack, Richard, David Bray, Hugo Galletti, and
Ismael Ponciano, eds. Pp. 81-97. Washington, D.C.: Island press.
Adams, Jonathan and Thomas McShane
1992 The Myth of Wild Africa: Conservation
without Illusion. New York: Norton.
Arizpe, Lourdes, Fernanda Paz, and
Margarita Velazquez
1996 Culture and Global Change:
Social Perceptions of Deforestation in the Lacandona RainForest in Mexico.
Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
Beltrán, Enrique, ed.
1958 Los recursos naturales del
sureste y su aprovechamiento. México, D.F.: Instituto Mexicano
de Recursos Naturales Renovables, A.C.
Boege, Eckart
1995 The Calakmul Biosphere Reserve,
Mexico. Working Paper No. 13, UNESCO South-South Cooperation Programme
on Environmentally Sound Socio-economic Development in the Humid Tropics.
Paris: United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization.
Ericson, Jenny, Mark S. Freudenberger,
Eckart Boege
1999 Population Dynamics, Migration,
and the Future of the Calakmul Biosphere Reserve. Washington, D.C.: American
Association for the Advancement of Science.
Folan, William, et al.
1991 Programa de Manejo de la Biosfera
Calakmul Campeche. Campeche: Secretaria de Desarollo Social.
Garrett, Wilbur E.
1989 La Ruta Maya. National Geographic
Magazine 176(4):424-479.
Gates, Marilyn
1993 In Default: Peasants, the
Debt Crisis, and the Agricultural Challenge in Mexico. Boulder, CO: Westview
Press.
Gibson, Clark and Stuart Marks
1995 Transforming Rural Hunters
into Conservationists: An Assessment of Community-Based Wildlife Management
Programs in Africa. World Development 23(6):941-957.
Haenn, Nora
1998 "The Government Gave Us the
Land": Political Ecology and Regional Culture in Campeche, Mexico. Ph.D.,
Indiana Univ.
1999 Community Formation in Frontier
Mexico: Accepting and Rejecting New Migrants. Human Organization 58(1):36-43.
Hunter Jr., M.
1996 Benchmarks for Managing Ecosystems:
Are Human Activities Natural? Conservation Biology 10(3):695-697.
Mansour, Jane, ed.
1995 Parks in Peril Source Book.
Arlington, VA: The Nature Conservancy.
Milton, Kay
1996 Environmentalism and Cultural
Theory: Exploring the Role of Anthropology in Environmental Discourse.
New York: Routledge.
Nazarea, Virginia, ed.
1999 Ethnoecology: Situated Knowledge/Local
Lives. Tucson: University of Arizona Press.
Peluso, Nancy
1991 Rich Forests, Poor People:
Resource Control and Resistance in Java. Berkeley: Univ. of California
Press.
Ponce Jiménez, Martha
1990 Montaña chiclera
Campeche: vida cotidiana y trabajo (1900-1950). México, D.F.:
Centro de Investigaciones y Estudios Superiores en Antropología
Social.
Primack, Richard, David Bray, Hugo
Galletti, and Ismael Ponciano, eds.
1998 Timber, Tourists, and Temples:
Conservation and Development in the Maya Forest of Belize, Guatemala, and
Mexico. Washington, D.C.: Island Press.
Simonian, Lane
1996 Defending the Land of the
Jaguar: A History of Conservation in Mexico. Austin, TX: Univ. Texas Press.
Wells, Michael, and Katrina Brandon
1992 People and Parks: Linking
Protected Management with Local Communities. Washington, D.C.: The World
Bank.
West, Patrick and Steven Brechin
1991 Resident Peoples and National
Parks: Social Dilemmas and Strategies in International Conservation. Tucson:
Univ. of Arizona Press.
Western, David and Michael Wright,
ed.
1994 Natural Connections: Perspectives
in Community-Based Conservation. Washington, D.C.: Island Press.
|