UZH-Logo

Maintenance Infos

Who gains from community conservation? intended and unintended costs and benefits of participative approaches in Peru and Tanzania


Haller, Tobias; Galvin, Marc; Meroka, Patrick; Alca, Jamil; Alvarez, Alex (2008). Who gains from community conservation? intended and unintended costs and benefits of participative approaches in Peru and Tanzania. Journal of Environment and Development, 17(2):118-144.

Abstract

Who are the beneficiaries from participative approaches in conservation? The authors compare two protected areas Amarakaeri Communal Reserve in Peru and Selous Game Reserve in Tanzania and show how in similar institutional settings local interest groups react very differently to the possibility of participation. The difference, however, does not regard economic benefits. In the case of Peru, local groups defining themselves as indigenous peoples see a political gain in participatory conservation, which seems to offer the possibility for securing land rights in their area. In Tanzania, however, local actors oppose participative conservation strategies or passively resist those forced on them because they cause high-economic costs and no political gains. By comparing both cases based on a new institutionalism analysis, the article reveals how intended and unintended costs and benefits can explain different attitudes of local groups to participative conservation.

Who are the beneficiaries from participative approaches in conservation? The authors compare two protected areas Amarakaeri Communal Reserve in Peru and Selous Game Reserve in Tanzania and show how in similar institutional settings local interest groups react very differently to the possibility of participation. The difference, however, does not regard economic benefits. In the case of Peru, local groups defining themselves as indigenous peoples see a political gain in participatory conservation, which seems to offer the possibility for securing land rights in their area. In Tanzania, however, local actors oppose participative conservation strategies or passively resist those forced on them because they cause high-economic costs and no political gains. By comparing both cases based on a new institutionalism analysis, the article reveals how intended and unintended costs and benefits can explain different attitudes of local groups to participative conservation.

Citations

Altmetrics

Additional indexing

Item Type:Journal Article, not refereed, original work
Communities & Collections:06 Faculty of Arts > Department of Social Anthropology and Cultural Studies
Dewey Decimal Classification:790 Sports, games & entertainment
390 Customs, etiquette & folklore
300 Social sciences, sociology & anthropology
Language:English
Date:2008
Deposited On:05 Mar 2009 15:15
Last Modified:04 May 2016 07:49
Publisher:Sage Publications
ISSN:1070-4965
Publisher DOI:https://doi.org/10.1177/1070496508316853

Download

Full text not available from this repository.View at publisher

TrendTerms

TrendTerms displays relevant terms of the abstract of this publication and related documents on a map. The terms and their relations were extracted from ZORA using word statistics. Their timelines are taken from ZORA as well. The bubble size of a term is proportional to the number of documents where the term occurs. Red, orange, yellow and green colors are used for terms that occur in the current document; red indicates high interlinkedness of a term with other terms, orange, yellow and green decreasing interlinkedness. Blue is used for terms that have a relation with the terms in this document, but occur in other documents.
You can navigate and zoom the map. Mouse-hovering a term displays its timeline, clicking it yields the associated documents.

Author Collaborations