Hanne Svarstad

ADVANCING A POLITICAL ECOLOGY OF GLOBAL ENVIRONMENTAL DISCOURSES

In the past decade international and national environmental policy and action have been dominated by issues generally defined as global environmental problems. In this article, we identify the major discourses associated with four global environmental issues: deforestation, desertification, biodiversity use and climate change. These discourses are analysed in terms of their messages, narrative structures and policy prescriptions. We find striking parallels in the nature and structure of the discourses and in their illegibility at the local scale. In each of the four areas there is a global environmental management discourse representing a technocentric worldview by which blueprints based on external policy interventions can solve global environmental dilemmas. Each issue also has a contrasting populist discourse that portrays local actors as victims of external interventions bringing about degradation and exploitation. The managerial discourses dominate in all four issues, but important inputs are also supplied to political decisions from populist discourses. There are, in addition, heterodox ideas and denial claims in each of these areas, to a greater or lesser extent, in which the existence or severity of the environmental problem are questioned. We present evidence from location-specific research which does not fit easily with the dominant managerialist nor with the populist discourses. The research shows that policy-making institutions are distanced from the resource users and that local scale environmental management moves with a distinct dynamic and experiences alternative manifestations of environmental change and livelihood imperatives.

The Death of an Elephant: Conservation Discourses Versus Practices in Africa

Environmental conservation in Africa is predominantly presented by key actors in terms of a win–win discourse involving community participation and benefits. By using two case studies from Tanzania and South Africa, we demonstrate how the conservation practices observed do not fit the win–win discourse, but are more in line with the ‘fortress conservation’ that previously dominated both discourse and practice. The Tanzanian case shows how conservation practices may be associated with recentralization instead of devolution and economic marginalization instead of poverty alleviation. The South African case demonstrates that even in a clear‐cut case of fortress conservation, the rhetoric of the win–win discourse is applied. Furthermore, we argue that international conservationists as well as African authorities have their interests served by a presentation of conservation as advantageous to local people. Conservation NGOs are primarily concerned with extending large‐scale protection of landscapes even if poor people have to bear the costs. African governments also try to attract tourist investments. In addition, in the Tanzanian case, the wildlife sector provides an opportunity for personal rent‐seeking for government officials. Both conservation NGOs and African governments apply the win–win discourse to justify their interventions. One may argue, however, that practising the fortress approach might be counter‐productive to wildlife conservation, for instance by producing more opposition to conservation in the form of local killings of elephants.

A case of conflicts in conservation: Two trenches or a three-dimensional complexity?

Abstract Conflicts over conservation are often regarded as dichotomies of diametrical opposites. When national parks are established in Norway, two stereotypes can be sketched: (1) the ecocentric position valuing ‘pure, authentic nature’, relying on the national government as the only acceptable decision and management level; and (2) a more anthropocentric position valuing cultural landscape elements and certain traditional and future uses of the area, favouring local management. A conflict over restoring a firing range to a state of ‘authentic nature’ for future designation as a national park is examined. The case has raised comprehensive local debate. It is asked whether the relevant actors should be seen as situated in the stereotypes, or whether a more complex three-dimensional picture would provide a better interpretation.

UNDERSTANDING TRADITIONALIST OPPOSITION TO MODERNIZATION: NARRATIVE PRODUCTION IN A NORWEGIAN MOUNTAIN CONFLICT

Abstract. In Gausdal, a mountainous community in southern Norway, a conflict involving dogsledding has dominated local politics during the past two decades. In order to understand local protests against this activity, in this article we apply discourse analysis within the evolving approach of political ecology. In this way, we also aim at contributing to the emerging trend of bringing political ecology “home”. To many people, dogsledding appears as an environmentally friendly outdoor recreation activity as well as a type of adventure tourism that may provide new income opportunities to marginal agricultural communities. Hence, at a first glance, the protests against this activity may be puzzling. Looking for explanations for these protests, this empirical study demonstrates how the opposition to dogsledding may be understood as grounded in four elements of a narrative: (1) environmental values are threatened; (2) traditional economic activities are threatened; (3) outsiders take over the mountain; and (4) local people are powerless. Furthermore, we argue that the narrative is part of what we see as a broader Norwegian “rural traditionalist discourse”. This discourse is related to a continued marginalization of rural communities caused by increasing pressure on agriculture to improve its efficiency as well as an “environmentalization” of rural affairs. Thus, the empirical study shows how opposition to dogsledding in a local community is articulated as a narrative that fits into a more general pattern of opposition to rural modernization in Norway as well as internationally.

Bioprospecting: Effects on Environment and Development

The Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) was one of two legally binding treaties that were put out for signing at the Rio Summit in 1992. More than 180 nations have ratified the Convention so far. The signatories to the Convention are obliged to set up legislation and regulations to meet the objectives of the CBD, these being i) the conservation of biodiversity, ii) the sustainable use of its components; and iii) the fair and equitable sharing of the benefits arising out of the utilization of genetic resources (Article 1). The CBD introduces a new regime of source countries’ national sovereignty over genetic resources, where there has generally been open access to these resources without restrictions or regulative charges involved. The ownership, control, and distribution of benefits from the use of biodiversity have been contested vigorously—through economical, political, legal and even military means—for centuries. In recent years, especially since the coming into force of the CBD, more formalized and internationally sanctioned mechanisms have begun to emerge. Chief among these are the use of contracts and other agreements between source countries/institutions and recipients, who seek access to biological resources for the purpose of research, development, and commercialization. Today, pharmaceutical companies constitute an important group of actors focusing on bioprospecting (biodiversity prospecting). This activity includes the collection of plants taxonomically identified and/or screened for medically active components. It is well established that the tropics are rich in biodiversity. More than two thirds of all plant species are also located in the Third World, attracting bioprospectors searching for medicinal plants (1, 2). Collection is in part based on ethno-directed sampling with the use of local and/or indigenous knowledge, as well as random and taxonomically directed sampling (3, 4).

New Protected Areas in Norway: Local Participation without Gender Equality

Abstract In Norway, as in many other countries, new protected areas are currently being established and managed with strong policy references to “local participation.” Is this policy implemented in a way that incorporates the concern for gender equality? The present article provides data from a study of 2 cases in which new protected areas have recently been established. The first is the Dovre Mountains Conservation Plan ( Verneplan for Dovrefjell), which was adopted in 2002 and includes Dovrefjell-Sunndalsfjella National Park. In the second case, the focus is on an area which was established in 2004 as the Geiranger-Herdalen Landscape Protected Area (landskapsvernområde). It is argued that one could expect Norway—perhaps more than any other country—to implement local participation in protected area establishment in a way that ensures gender equality. However, the results of the study show that local participation within the context of conservation issues ignores policies and legislation on gender equality. These findings are analyzed and causes for this state of affairs are shown to reside in structural features on the one hand, and the lack of demand for female candidates in local elections and appointments on the other. It is concluded that the main factor explaining this situation is neglect by Norwegian conservation authorities of their responsibility for gender mainstreaming. Efforts to legitimate conservation with reference to local participation are seen as problematical when local women are involved only to a very limited extent.

A Local Counter-Narrative on the Conservation of Mountain Gorillas

Using social science narrative analysis, we studied how people who live next to Bwindi Impenetrable National Park (Bwindi INP) in Uganda narrate about their situation. We found a dominant ambivalence narrative, which deviates substantially from win–win and traditionalist narratives, both of which have been produced by external actors about the same case. Each of the two latter narratives is associated with a broader discourse on protected areas in Africa. The ambivalence narrative describes a situation in which villagers are forced to pay a high price for conservation of the habitat of mountain gorillas. Nevertheless, it contains hope for the future associated with economic benefits from the park through tourism. When looking at the findings of ‘realist’ studies of costs, benefits and participation, we conclude the dissatisfaction to be well-grounded. Furthermore, we highlight types of changes that would have to take place if the hope for the future is to be realised. The ambivalence narrative constitutes a counter-narrative to externally produced wisdom.

Why hiking? Rationality and reflexivity within three categories of meaning construction.

Abstract Hiking is a popular leisure activity among people in many industrialised countries. In the case of Norway, a large part of the population goes hiking through forests, mountains and cultural landscapes. What meaning do these hikers attach to their activity? An analysis has been made of letters received from 84 hikers who write about how and why they enjoy their hiking trips. Employing a grounded theory approach, three categories of meaning constructions were identified: a recreation category, a category of the simple outdoors discourse, and a belonging category. In all of these, the hikers see their trips and their further lives in relation to constitutive aspects of modern society. Concepts of rationality and reflexivity were found useful for the interpretation of the meaning contents of each of the categories.

Nothing succeeds like success narratives: a case of conservation and development in the time of REDD

ABSTRACT This article provides a case study of a project in Kondoa, Tanzania under the programme Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD). It demonstrates how a success narrative came to dominate presentations about the project as a multi-win involving not only climate change mitigation and biodiversity conservation, but also benefits for local people and poverty reduction. Based on repeated fieldwork using qualitative methods, we find that there is lack of evidence to substantiate the success claims. These claims are in particular based on the assertion that a component of ‘conservation agriculture’ was successfully implemented as compensation for forest enclosure. Gaps between claims and evidence are often exhibited in the scholarship on political ecologies of conservation in Africa, as well as by observers of development aid projects. But how can such gaps be explained? We suggest taking the interests of the actors behind the project as a point of departure, including how individuals as well as organisations have stakes in marketing a success narrative. Furthermore, we argue that an unsubstantiated success narrative of an aid project can be maintained only when there is a lack of structures to ensure independent and adequate examinations of the project by evaluators and researchers. In this case, Norway was the funder of the project, and as the dominant funder of REDD, the Norwegian government has a particular interest in reproducing REDD success narratives, since the credibility of the country’s climate mitigation policy depends on REDD being a success. In addition, the case study demonstrates how ‘success projects’ emerge in the wake of new development fads.