Abstract

Despite considerable field-based innovation and academic scrutiny, the nexus between conservation approaches, local support for parks and park effectiveness remains quite puzzling. Common approaches to understanding notions of environmental justice are to understand distributional and procedural issues, representation in decision making, and recognition of authorities and claims. We took a different approach and analysed environmental justice claims through institutional, ideational and psychological lenses. We sought to understand how the national park could have such broad support from local communities despite their acknowledgement that it severely curtailed their livelihoods. We conducted 100 household interviews in three villages that border Nam Et-Phou Louey National Protected Area. Our study found that villagers 1) hold on to broken promises by the State for agricultural activities and alternative revenues without fully changing forest use behaviours; 2) were influenced heavily by the ‘educational’ programmes by the State; 3) accepted the authority of the State and lack of participation in decision-making based on historical experiences and values; 4) justified their burdens by over-emphasising the positive aspects of the park. Our findings present a complementary framework to explain environmental justice claims, allowing for a nuanced analysis of how people respond to justices and injustices, and specifically how injustices can be identified through proven social science concepts.

Highlights

  • It is widely assumed that protected areas (PAs) will be more effective where they are well supported by local residents

  • This is not to say that everyone agreed with all the rules and regulations around the National Protected Area (NPA), but that they agreed it was important to protect the forest and accepted that the NPA is a legitimate way of fulfilling that objective

  • As we show respondents had myriad complaints about the NPA

Read more

Summary

Introduction

It is widely assumed that protected areas (PAs) will be more effective where they are well supported by local residents. To garner this support, various forms of community-based conservation became popular in the 1980s, based on the logic that people would be on the side of conservation if they were more involved in decision-making and if protected areas delivered tangible economic benefits (Hutton et al 2005). The tide has turned again, with much stronger evidence emerging, showing that community participation and livelihood benefits are more likely to contribute to conservation effectiveness than conservation without local participation (Ostrom and Nagendra 2006; Chhatre and Agrawal 2009; Persha et al 2010; Persha et al 2011; Coleman and Fleischman 2012; Oldekop et al 2015; Cinner et al 2016). The assumption that community support contributes to effective conservation appears to be standing the test of time

Methods
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (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