Opional Secion Indigenous peoples’ systems of resource management and conservaion
RIGHTS AIPP
AIPP Regional Capacity Building Program - Training Manual on the UNDRIP
83
5. Traditional indigenous economies are usually based on the utilization of a broad range of wild and domesticated animal and plant species. Indigenous peoples manipulate
their natural environment accordingly. This increases the complexity of an ecosystem’s microhabitat pattern and thereby often enhances, rather than reduces, biodiversity.
Many of the so-called ‘wildernesses’ – like the savannas of East Africa, the woodlands of Northern Australia, the dry forests of mainland Southeast Asia or even the Amazon
rainforests – should rather be called ‘cultural landscapes’ inasmuch as they have been created or at least shaped, and in any case maintained, for centuries through indigenous
peoples’ constant interaction with their natural environments.
6. Closely related to, and in some cases the result of the use of a broad variety of species and microhabitats is the high degree of decentralization of indigenous peoples’ resource
use systems mentioned above. Indigenous communities are, generally, to a large extent economically self-sufficient. They are able to satisfy most household needs locally; both
production and consumption occur locally. Little energy and matter leave the local sys- tem.
In general, most traditional indigenous resource use systems show properties which largely correspond to those identified as the fundamental principles found in highly sus-
tainable self-regulated systems, like the utilization of existing natural processes, recy- cling, symbiosis and small-scale spatial diversity; a high structural and functional com-
patibility with the organizational principles found in nature, etc.
7. What is crucial about such small autonomous systems is that they are clearly more sensitive to ecological problems than larger, more complex ones.
For indigenous peoples, to be sensitive to ecological problems is a question of survival. What this, of course, requires is an intimate knowledge of the natural environments and
processes.
In indigenous cultures, experts exist who are peculiarly aware of Nature’s organising principles, sometimes described as entities, spirits, or natural law Posey 1996: 31.
Although Indigenous Knowledge is highly pragmatic and practical, Indigenous Peoples generally view this knowledge as emanating from a spiritual base: all Creation is sacred,
the sacred and the secular are inseparable, spirituality is the highest form of conscious- ness, and spiritual consciousness is the highest form of awareness. In this sense, a di-
mension of Indigenous Knowledge is not local knowledge, but knowledge of the univer- sal as expressed in the local. Clarke: 382.
8. Indigenous peoples’ traditional economies are so-called subsistence economies, whose functional logic differs fundamentally from the now globalised model of the capi-
talist market economy. Indigenous subsistence economies are need-oriented, which means that production aims – and therefore the overall level of production is geared
– at fulfilling the totality of individual and communal needs, as defined by the prevalent values of the society.
The crucial implication is that in contrast to the logic of capitalist commodity produc- tion, which is based on the primacy of profit maximization, production stops when
needs are met. Especially in non-monetized indigenous economies, driving production beyond this level just does not make sense, as there is simply no use for accumulated
surplus. The self-amplifying mechanism of profit maximization, capital accumulation
Module-4
RIGHTS AIPP
AIPP Regional Capacity Building Program - Training Manual on the UNDRIP
84
and reinvestment in production, leading to exponential growth, is absent. Therefore, subsistence economies have an inherent tendency to rather ‘underuse’ than fully exploit
or over-exploit natural resources. This is provided, of course, that the resource base is still sufficient, which again in most cases depends on whether the respective indigenous
community retains uncontested control over its territory.
9. But even then, over-exploitation of certain resources is possible – and at times has oc- curred among many indigenous communities. However, because of their intimacy with
their natural environment, and their direct and vital dependence on it, self-regulation processes are more likely to occur in time. Explicit and implicit conservation rules, both
age-old and recent, can be found among indigenous peoples all over the world. Often, they are embedded in ritual practices and regulations.
Nevertheless, just as often, neither explicit nor implicit conservation rules may be found, or, even where prevalent, there may be “little correlation between beliefs prescribing
certain practices and actual behavior” Colchester 1994: 27. And yet, as among Amazo- nian Indians, balance is achieved.
Many Amazonian Indians, it has been found, have an opportunistic rather than conserva- tion attitude to the environment and achieve ecological balance because their traditional
political systems and settlement patterns encourage mobility. Indians thus move their vil- lages, fields and hunting expeditions to fresh areas once localities are exhausted because
it requires less effort than does obtaining diminishing returns from the present locations. Balance is thus achieved unintentionally by negative feedback rather than through con-
scious concern with excessive use. Market demands and other pressures that sedentarize and enlarge these communities, thus disrupting traditional residence and settlement pat-
terns, coupled with new technologies such as outboard engines that cut travel times and machines to process crops, may upset these negative feedback cycles and cause indigenous
communities to over-exploit their locale. Ibid.
Under such drastically changed conditions, affected indigenous communities also have to devise explicit conservation rules. It has been found that self-imposed conservation
rules are more likely to emerge among indigenous communities than elsewhere. In In- dia, for example, a “forestpovertytribal interface” Poffenberger et al. 1996:4 has
been identified with respect to successful community forest management: Forest protection activities appear most common in areas that are characterised by signif-
icant concentrations of forest, poverty, and high tribal populations. Cultural and economic ties to the forest often lead tribals to play a leadership role in establishing controls over
degrading forests, although low-caste and low-income groups are also active. Ibid.
Some of the decisive factors that ensure compliance with self-imposed conservation rules are the small size of traditional communities ‘where people know each other’, the
prevalence of customary law, traditional authority, and social control exerted and sanc- tions imposed by the community. Society for Promotion of Wasteland Development:5
Module-4
RIGHTS AIPP
AIPP Regional Capacity Building Program - Training Manual on the UNDRIP
85