Student: Ariel Moyal
Graduation date: May 2019
Type: Concentration (single major)
Date approved: December 2016
Go to concentration landing page
Summary
Conflicts arise in the process of land transformation as different actors vie for their vision or claim. Land holds endless possibilities for development with various intentions, my interests lie in exploring how land comes to be agricultural or preserved area, or a combination of them both.
The delineation between agricultural or preserved land is not as clear as one would think. First “protection” may often fall under two categories, conservation and preservation. The conservation movement was founded by Gifford Pinchot with the utilitarian and anthropocentric objective of “coupling resource extraction with resource management and preservation” (Brown 1999). Preservation, on the other hand, is rooted in John Muir’s sacred view of nature, and advocates restricted resource extraction and humans as visitors, not residents. Both of these divergent protection strategies have been incorporated into an American land use management system and exported overseas.
In reflection of this ideological debate, land protection plays out in very diverse ways when brought to fruition. According to the International Union for Conservation of Nature, the United States alone has 11 categories of protected lands ranging from “strict nature reserve” to “protected area with sustainable use of natural resources”. For the purpose of this concentration, I will not focus on either solely conservation nor preservation, but rather include both with the intent to understand the benefits and drawbacks of the two divergent ideas. I will focus on protected areas in which biophysical features have been preserved for the purpose of human interaction and enjoyment, for integrity of soil or biodiversity, or for future use, including when these qualifications are in coordination or at odds with one another. However, agriculture, in terms of cultivating land for anthropocentric consumption is not always separate or antithetical to this preservation purpose.
I have decided to situate my research within land use models in forested tropical climate regions, these regions include case studies from India, Amazon, and East Africa. Forests are important ecosystems for both protection and agricultural lenses since forests, “particularly those in the tropics” are ecologically important as places of intense biodiversity and providers of ecosystem services, as well as often culturally sacred or reified places (Shvidenko 2016). Forests are also resource rich, with resources extracted in both a local and global context. One of the main direct drivers of tropical deforestation are agricultural expansion, high levels of wood extraction, and the extension of roads and other infrastructure into forested areas.” Based on my research, important case studies within this area of study include community-conservation projects such as “integrated conservation and development projects” and “multi stakeholder initiatives” (Lambin et al. 2014). In addition, major co-existing populations of domesticated and undomesticated flora and fauna, such as East African rangelands, introduce important question between the delineation of wild and agricultural, and the management strategies that engage this debate (Niamir-Fuller et al. 2012). In order to understand the complexities of this global system, I will compare tropical agricultural and protection models to a U.S. model, such as Hawaiian agricultural practices and impacts. This is a useful comparative case study as it is a tropical climate with a significant ecotourism sector and agricultural production (Kasturi and Agthe 1990).
In grappling with land use choices and power dynamics, unique land use models have been implemented, for example “conservation agriculture” projects in tropical regions of Eastern Africa, areas of the Amazon, and India. Referring back to Pinchot’s conservation ideology, these projects vary in scale and outcomes but share a similar objective of “accommodat[ing] populations’ demands to land access with the aim of protecting the environment” (Arnauld et al. 2012). In this context, the definition of “protection” relates to maintaining community agency and decision making power over their farmed land, as well as maintaining the integrity of the land to be able to reproduce the system in future years (Arnauld et al. 2012). In other contexts, conservation agriculture relates to the management of land for both livestock and wildlife (Niamir-Fuller et al. 2012). It is important to note, these projects are not always successful in their goal of conserving biodiversity or empowering community access to land decisions compared to other conservation models, such as strictly protected areas, since the objective of the land can easily be lost or different for separate parties (Shahabuddin and Rao 2010). I will explore these land use models and other structures that drive land transformations such as “integrated conservation and development projects”, litigation, and lobbied interests as they deal with power structures (Lambin et al. 2014). Also actors may hold different commitments within these projects, such as ecological soil integrity or monetary gain, which affect how land decisions are made and how models are implemented.
The actors involved in this decision-making process include community members, NGOs (both coming from within community and from outside of community), governmental institutions, domesticated and undomesticated flora and fauna, agricultural commodities, farmers, commodity sellers, and tourists. These actors do not all exercise equal power, creating complex equity implications that I would like to explore. For example, community members in rural areas where these projects are taking place often benefit from financial and cultural support from NGOs, because of a systemic lack of resources. However community members may not share the same goals for the partnership but lack the agency to negotiate new objectives (Arnauld et al., 2012). Undomesticated and domesticated plants and animals also hold different power interests as is illustrated in the case of East African rangelands with potentially conflicting claim of livestock and wildlife to the same land and different groups supporting each party (Niamir-Fuller et al., 2012).
As numerous actors vie for power in this process of land transformation to agricultural use or protected area, the drivers of the two land models become more clear. On one vein, as land is transformed for agricultural use, concerns of population come into question. Food security and demand drive this, as well as industry, where money and economic value is a deciding factor. Land is often looked at as a vessel for profit or resources. On the other hand, non-monetary forms of value are not inconsequential. Governmental priorities are a main driver of land protection, influenced by cultural constructions of nature, external and imported environmental values, and/or an intent to protect economic, cultural, and geophysical valuables, including water sources, charismatic landscapes, or historically important places. This brings up the question of how differing cultural and individual constructions of value affect these land decisions, and how the power of science and economics factors into a decision.
Works Cited:
Arnauld de Sartre, Xavier, Vincent Berdoulay, and Raquel da Silva Lopes. 2012. “Eco-Frontier and Place-Making: The Unexpected Transformation of a Sustainable Settlement Project in the Amazon.” Geopolitics 17 (3): 578–606. doi:10.1080/14650045.2011.631199.
Brown, Susan Jane M. “The Forest Must Come First: Gifford Pinchot’s Conservation Ethic and the Gifford Pinchot National Forest – The Ideal and the Reality.” Fordham Environmental Law Journal 11.1 (1999): 137-206.
Lambin, Eric F., Patrick Meyfroidt, Ximena Rueda, Allen Blackman, Jan Börner, Paolo Omar Cerutti, Thomas Dietsch, et al. 2014. “Effectiveness and Synergies of Policy Instruments for Land Use Governance in Tropical Regions.” Global Environmental Change 28 (September): 129–40. doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2014.06.007.
Kasturi, Prahlad, and Donald E. Agthe. 1990. “Environmental Externalities in Hawaii Agriculture: Potential Remedies and Trade-Offs.” Journal of Environmental Systems 20 (3): 269–85. doi:10.2190/D61T-HJTP-VB0C-8J8U.
Moseley, William G. 2009. “Beyond Knee-Jerk Environmental Thinking: Teaching Geographic Perspectives on Conservation, Preservation and the Hetch Hetchy Valley Controversy.” Journal of Geography in Higher Education 33 (3): 433–51. doi:10.1080/03098260902982492.
Niamir-Fuller, Maryam, Carol Kerven, Robin Reid, and Eleanor Milner-Gulland. 2012. “Co-Existence of Wildlife and Pastoralism on Extensive Rangelands: Competition or Compatibility?” Pastoralism: Research, Policy and Practice 2 (1): 8. doi:10.1186/2041-7136-2-8.
“Protected Areas Categories.” IUCN. 2016. Accessed September 22, 2016. https://www.iucn.org/theme/protected-areas/about/protected-areas-categories.
Sayer, Jeffrey, Terry Sunderland, Jaboury Ghazoul, Jean-Laurent Pfund, Douglas Sheil, Erik Meijaard, Michelle Venter, et al. 2013. “Ten Principles for a Landscape Approach to Reconciling Agriculture, Conservation, and Other Competing Land Uses.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 110 (21): 8349–56. doi:10.1073/pnas.1210595110.
Shahabuddin, Ghazala, and Madhu Rao. 2010. “Do Community-Conserved Areas Effectively Conserve Biological Diversity? Global Insights and the Indian Context.” Biological Conservation, Conservation and management in human-dominated landscapes: Case studies from India, 143 (12): 2926–36. doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2010.04.040.
Shvidenko, Anatoly, et al. 2016. “Forest and Woodland Systems.” Ecosystems and Human Well-Being. Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. Accessed October 4.
Questions
- Descriptive: How has protected wilderness been defined in different biomes/cultural settings? How much land, globally, is designated as any form of “protected wilderness” and how much is agricultural land? How does this amount differ in tropical forested regions as opposed to other biomes? Who are the decision makers in the land designation process?
- Explanatory: What value markers lead to land designation as governmentally recognized “protected” lands in tropical regions? In what way does ecotourism interact with protection and agriculture in tropical forests? How do we determine the “value” of the land and how does this value change in different cultural contexts and between different ecosystems?
- Evaluative: What are the benefits and critiques of some land use models that combine agriculture and protection? In what ways are such models implemented in tropical forested regions? What are the effects of land protection on community members? How do different voices and their values vie for power when making land use decisions? Who is affected when land use changes? If land is used for agriculture who benefits who is excluded (in what ways)?
- Instrumental: Among the varieties of models that combine protection and agriculture , are there more or less effective practices in terms of economic, social, or ecosystem viability; what are the ramifications of these approach?
Concentration courses
- IA 340 International Political Economy (4 credits) Spring 2017 or 2019. This course will provide background to understand how politics interact with economic goals on a broad scale.
- IA 257 Global Resource Dilemmas (4 credits) Spring 2017. I want to take this course in order to explore the structures of resource use.
- ENVS 499 (Independent Study, 4 credits) Fall 2017/2018, 2+2 for expected study abroad in New Zealand Spring 2018, concentration-related research dealing with ecological aspect of resource management.
- SOAN 265 Critical Perspectives in Development (4 credits). Spring 2017. I hope this course provides theoretical background to my questions about actors involved development projects, and the wider impacts of the development sector.
- GEOL 340 Spatial Problems (4 credits) Spring 2019. This course provides background for the spatial analysis aspect of my concentration.
Arts and humanities courses
- HIST 261 (Global Environmental History, 4 credits). Pre-approved A&H course; no justification required.
- PHIL 215 (Philosophy and the Environment, 4 credits). Pre-approved A&H course; no justification required.