Abstract
Integrated conservation and development projects (ICDPs) have recently been criticized for their ignorance of community heterogeneity, mismatch between project output and expectations, and lack of connection between conservation and development initiatives. Using Nepal’s Annapurna Conservation Area Project (ACAP) as an example this paper examined how perceived benefits from one ICDP varied between stakeholder groups and how local resources were allocated. Data collection for this research was conducted through 96 interviews with three groups, that is, ICDP staff, local management committee members, and marginalized peoples. Results showed that the programs introduced by ACAP and their resource allocations were not perceived as having a fair and equitable impact across all households, community, and regions within the protected area. Moreover, there was a perceived discrepancy between ACAP allocation of resources in certain sectors, local residents’ expectations from ACAP and outcomes of the funding, that is, conservation vs. tourism. Future research is suggested for collecting more data from additional residents, communities and with other ICDPs. Key words: Annapurna conservation area, conservation, development, integrated conservation and development project, marginal groups.
Highlights
Within the framework of community-based conservation, the integrated conservation and development project (ICDP) has been adopted by various national and international organizations to achieve more sustainable and equitable governance of protected areas
The groups differed in several areas in how they perceived these benefits (Table 2). These benefits are based on the groups‟ perception which may differ from on the ground facts, e.g., actual funds distributed. How they view their relationship with the stakeholder groups within the Annapurna Conservation Area (ACA) is critical in the future relationship they have with Annapurna Conservation Area Project (ACAP)
This study is important because it reinforced some of the strengths/weaknesses that have been identified about ICDPs and sheds some light on some of the challenges researchers face in trying to assess how social, governmental and cultural structures, e.g., caste systems, impact communities so they can be empowered to develop entrepreneurial activities that can be sustained
Summary
Within the framework of community-based conservation, the integrated conservation and development project (ICDP) has been adopted by various national and international organizations to achieve more sustainable and equitable governance of protected areas. These projects combine the dual agenda of conservation and development and are based on the basic assumption that local people are more likely to develop favorable attitudes. Due to the need to reduce the pressure on natural resources development, options such as tourism, roads, and infrastructure are frequently offered as compensation for benefits restricted to local residents in protected areas (Hughes and Flintan 2001; Wells et al, 2004; Zinda et al, 2014). The issue of a heterogeneous community becomes even stronger in developing countries due to well-defined differences based on wealth, gender, caste, ethnicity, age, etc., which have implications for how natural resources are appropriated, used, regulated and controlled by various entities
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
