|
Latest
news: Members of CEESP/WGSL
reported on the Dana Declaration at a Side Event at the
UNCCD CRIC 1 in Rome, November 2002, and at UNCCD Thematic
Programme Network 3 (Rangenet) Workshop on Best Practices
for Rangeland Management and Sand Dune Fixation in Tehran
in December 2002.
Background
In April
2002, some 30 experts from around the world, with various
professional backgrounds, attended a five-day conference in
the Dana Nature Reserve, Jordan. They came together to address
a difficult and sensitive issue- the relationship between
mobile peoples and conservation.
The undertaking
grew out of an earlier conference held in 1999 at the Refugee
Studies Centre, University of Oxford, which identified a need
to
bridge disciplinary divides between social and natural scientists.
Settled communities have been the focus of most debate concerning
conservation
and sustainable development and the special case of mobile
communities had not been widely explored. With the World Summit
on Sustainable
Development (2002) and the World Parks Congress (2003) on
the horizon, the 1999 conference stressed the concerns about
mobile communities
and conservation.
IUCN was
pleased to be associated with the Dana event. WCPA played
a part in its planning and cosponsored it. CEESP was represented
by its Chair and by the Chair and several members of the Collaborative
Management Working Group and the Working Group on Sustainable
Livelihoods. The IUCN Chief Scientist was a keynote speaker.
After intensive debate in which contrasting perspectives
were offered, the Dana Conference successfully developed a
common ground around an agreed statement- the Dana Declaration
on Mobile
Peoples and Conservation.
For further
information, translations of the Declaration and opportunities
to endorse it, please consult www.danadeclaration.org
or contact Dawn
Chatty at dawn.chatty@queen-elizabethhouse.oxford.ac.uk
or Adrian Phillips at adrianp@wcpa.demon.co.uk
. Dawn is Deputy
Director of the Oxford Refugee Study Center and a member of
CEESP/ WGSL. Adrian is the former Chair of WCPA and a member
of CEESP/ CMWG.
By
"mobile peoples," we mean a subset of indigenous
and
traditional peoples whose livelihoods depend on extensive
common property use of natural resources over an area, who
use mobility as a management strategy for dealing with
sustainable use and conservation, and who possess a distinctive
cultural identity and natural resource management system.
The
Declaration
The world
faces unprecedented threats to the conservation and sustainable
use of its biodiversity. At the same time, its cultural and
linguistic diversity, which includes an immeasurable and irreplaceable
range of knowledge and skills, is being lost at an alarming
rate.
The linked
pressures of human population dynamics, unsustainable consumption
patterns, climate change and global and national economic
forces threaten both the conservation of biological resources
and the livelihoods of many indigenous and traditional peoples.
In particular, mobile peoples now find themselves constrained
by forces beyond their control, which put them at a special
disadvantage.
Mobile
peoples are discriminated against. Their rights, including
rights of access to natural resources, are often denied and
conventional conservation practices insufficiently address
their concerns. These factors, together with the pace of global
change, undermine their lifestyles, reduce their ability to
live in balance with nature and threaten their very existence
as distinct peoples.
Nonetheless,
through their traditional resource use practices and culture-based
respect for nature, many mobile peoples are still making a
significant contribution to the maintenance of the earth's
ecosystems, species and genetic diversity - even though this
often goes unrecognised. Thus the interests of mobile peoples
and conservation converge, especially as they face a number
of common challenges. There is therefore an urgent need to
create a mutually reinforcing partnership between mobile peoples
and those involved with conservation.
In the
light of this understanding, we commit ourselves to promoting
conservation practices based on the following principles:
PRINCIPLE 1. RIGHTS AND EMPOWERMENT
Conservation
approaches with potential impact on mobile peoples and their
natural resources must recognise mobile peoples' rights, management
responsibilities and capacities, and should lead to effective
empowerment. These rights include:
1.1 Human
rights: civil, political, social, economic and cultural;
1.2 Land and resource rights, including those under customary
law;
1.3 Cultural and intellectual property rights;
1.4 The right to full participation in decision-making and
relevant negotiation processes at different levels;
1.5 The right to derive equitable benefits from any consumptive
or non-consumptive use of local natural resources.
To this
end, appropriate legislative reforms should be promoted as
needed, at national and international levels. In addition,
because mobile peoples often move through different territories,
transboundary co-operation between national authorities may
be required.
Recognition
of mobile peoples' rights should lead to effective empowerment,
and include consideration of gender and age.
PRINCIPLE 2. TRUST AND RESPECT
Beneficial
partnerships between conservation interests and mobile peoples
should be based upon mutual trust and respect and address
the issue of discrimination against mobile peoples. To this
end partnerships should:
2.1 Be
equitable;
2.2 Fully respect and acknowledge mobile peoples' institutions;
2.3 Balance the exercise of rights by all parties with the
fulfilment of responsibilities;
2.4 Recognise and incorporate relevant customary law;
2.5 Promote the accountability of all parties in relation
to the fulfilment of conservation objectives and the needs
of mobile peoples.
PRINCIPLE 3. DIFFERENT KNOWLEDGE SYSTEMS
In planning
and implementing conservation of biodiversity with mobile
peoples, there is a need to respect and incorporate their
traditional knowledge and management practices. Given that
no knowledge system is infallible, the complementary use of
traditional and mainstream sciences is a valuable means of
meeting the changing needs of mobile peoples and answering
conservation dilemmas. In particular:
3.1 Traditional
and mainstream sciences and management practices should enter
into dialogue on a basis of equal footing and involve two-way
learning;
3.2 Traditional and mainstream sciences should be appropriately
valued and their dynamic nature acknowledged.
PRINCIPLE 4. ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT
Conservation
of biodiversity and natural resources within areas inhabited
or used by mobile peoples requires the application of adaptive
management approaches. Such approaches should build on traditional
/ existing cultural models and incorporate mobile peoples'
worldviews, aspirations and customary law. They should work
towards the physical and cultural survival of mobile peoples
and the long-term conservation of biodiversity.
More particularly,
such adaptive management approaches should:
4.1 Build
on areas of common interest between the chosen lifestyles
of mobile peoples and the conservation objective of sustainable
resource management;
4.2 Allow for diversification of livelihoods, and ensure provision
of a variety of benefits at all levels, including mobile services;
4.3 Recognise the diversity of systems of tenure and access
to resources, including the customary sharing of resources;
4.4 Recognize and support the contributions made by mobile
peoples to conserving and enhancing the genetic diversity
of domesticated animals and plants;
4.5 Learn from the flexible management practices of mobile
peoples to enrich conservation;
4.6 Develop conservation planning at a larger landscape scale,
using the notion of mobility as a central concept, and incorporating
both ecological and cultural perspectives.
PRINCIPLE 5: COLLABORATIVE MANAGEMENT
Adequate
institutional structures for adaptive management should be
based on the concept of equitable sharing of decision-making
and management responsibilities between mobile peoples and
conservation agencies. This is only possible if the existing
decision-making mechanisms for biodiversity conservation become
more democratic and transparent, so as to allow for the full
and open participation of civil society and mobile peoples
in particular, and for the establishment of co-management
and self-management systems. This requires that the relevant
parties:
5.1 Develop
processes and means that foster cross-cultural dialogue directed
towards consensual decision-making;
5.2 Incorporate culturally appropriate conflict-management
mechanisms and institutions;
5.3 Recognize the time-scale appropriate to cultural processes
and the time required to build intercultural partnerships
for adaptive management;
5.4 Foster locally agreed solutions to conservation problems;
5.5 Encourage diverse and pluralistic approaches to conservation
planning and implementation;
5.6 Develop their capacities to enter into mutually beneficial
partnerships.
|
