Table Of Content

>U ·a 0 8 -"»"' ·(/")- -o� �...... (1) Q.) Ethnography ofP rotected Areas Endangered Habitats Endangered Cultures Ljubljana 2006 Ethnography of Protected Areas Endangered Habitats - Endangered Cultures http://www.ff.uni-lj.si/oddelki/etnologija/pohorje/default.htrri UrednikjEditor: Peter Simonic Uredniski odbor/Editorial board: Bozidar Jezernik, Rajko Mursic, Peter Simonic, Prabhu Budhathoki, HelenMcBeth, Mladen Berginc, Grazia Borrini-Feyerabend I;:dajateij in ;:aloinikjPublished by: Univerza v Ljubljani, Filozofska fakulteta, Oddelek za etnologijo in kulturno antropologijo ter Drustvo za raziskovanje, trzenje in promocijo varovanih obmocij Slovenije/University of Ljubljana, Faculty of Arts, Department of Ethnology and Cultural Anthropology, and Association for Re search, Marketing and Promotion of Protected Areas of Slovenia. ZbirkajBook series: Zupaniceva knjiznica, st. 16/ZupaniC's Collection, Vol. 16 Urednik birkejEditor of the series: Jaka Repic :.: Uredniski odbor ;:birkejEditorial board of the series: Joie Hudales, Bozidar Jezernik, Rajko Mursic, Zmago Smitek Naslov i;:dajateijajPub!isher' s address: Univerza v Ljubljani, Filozofska fakulteta, Oddelek za etnologijo in kulturno antropologijo, Zavetiska 5, p.p. 580, 1001 Ljubljana, Slovenija LektorjLanguage editor: Helen Macbeth and AMIDA S d.o.o. Oblikovanje ;:birkejDesign: Mojca Turk Fotografija na naslovnici/Cover photograph: Anze Tavcar Prelom, oblikovanje in priprava ;:a fisk/Layout: Tamara Siladi, PG Group d.o.o. Tisk/Printed by: Tiskarna Utrip d.o.o. NakladajNumber printed: 600 CIF-Katalozni zapi s o publikaciji Narodna in univerzitetna knjiznica, Ljubljana 712.23( 100 ):39(082) 719(100)(082) 502.7(100)(082) ETHNOGRAPHY of protected areas: endagered habitats-endangered cultures/ edited by Peter Simonic.-Ljubljana: Filozofska fakulteta, Oddelek za etnologijo in kulturno antropologijo, 2006.-(Zbirka Zupaniceva knjiznica Book series ZupaniC's collection ; vol. 16) = ISBN 961-237-150-4 225271552 Contents 7 Introduction Legislation 11 Marija Zupancic Vicar, Application of the Protected Areas Management Categories of IUCN, Slovenia 19 Zvezda Delak Kozelj, Ethnology, Cultural Heritage and Protected Areas, Slovenia 31 Agustin Coca Perez, The Value of Cultural Heritage in the Natural Spaces, Andalusia, Spain Landscape 49 Bostjan Kravanja, Sacred Meaning: The Significance of Extraordinary Places in Ordinary Settings, Breginjski Kat, Slovenia 71 Matej Vranjes, Cultural Landscape and Triglav National Park from »The Native Point of View«, The Case of Trenta Valley, Slovenia Diversity 85 Szab6 T. Attila, Ethnobiodiversity, A Concept for Integrated Protection of Endangered Habitats and Cultures 101 Antonia Young, Cross-Border Balkans Peace Park, Albania, Montenegro, Kosovajo Subsistence 111 Javier Escalera Reyes, Gardens of Pegalajar, Sustainable Development in Andalusia, Spain 121 MichaelJ. Day, Stakeholder Reaction to the Proposed Establishment of the National Park, Cockpit Country, Jamaica 133 Sandro Piermattei, Some Reflections on the Agricultural Sustainability of Nature Conservation Policies, Ecopolitical Strategies in National Park Monti Sibillini, Italy 147 Britta Heine and Sina Arnold, »One Day the Government Became Clever ... «, The Arusha National Park and Ngurdoto Village, Tam;ania 163 Dihider Shahriar Kabir and Sabir Bin Muzaffar, People and Sustainability of Natural Resources, Sundarban-World Heritage Site of Bangla desh Management 175 Helen Macbeth, The Creation of New National Parks in Scotland 191 Prabhu Budhathoki, Connecting Communities with Conservation: Poli- cies and Strategies, A Case Study of Nepal 201 Peter Meurkens, How to Preserve the Natural State and Make the Park Fit for Public Recreational Use?, The Dutch Belvedere Program Fac ing the Dilemma of the Park 217 Peter Simonic, Writing Culture for Nature Conservation, Human Resources and Network Analysis on Pohorje, Slovenia 239 Index 5 Peter Simonic t c t t r l s c a t c V e c iJ s le s Peter Simonic Introduction Ecological distress has forced the international public to protect nature -all over the world, nature preserves, land scapes and parks have been established. Twelve percent of the Earth's surface has already been protected. During the 20th century these areas were managed by biologists, environmentalists, economists and lawyers who tried to protect nature from humans, mostly the residents of these areas. This in some cases amounted to a direct attack on their subsistence. There is still miscommunication be tween nature conservationists and the inhabitants of pro tected areas. Attending the Sth World Park Congress in Durban in 2003, I was astonished and disappointed that half a century after the Declaration on Human Rights it is still necessary for rep resentatives of different ethnic groups in Asia, Africa and America to persuade the international community that their voices should be heard and that they wish to be involved in the management of protected areas -their homelands. Parks should really be protected for people. The European history of protected areas may have been different, but it serves as a example of the paradigm exported around the world. Kings and the Church invented justifica tions for the exclusive exploitation of hunting resorts and other forms of privatisation. Peasants fought to regain pre vious rights for public use of these areas. Robin Hood is an excellent example of this struggle. In the 20th century, European parks were implicated in the depopulation of rural, mostly mountain areas. Conflict of interest was internal in the sense that they all felt a partofthe same (national) community. Intensive colonisation (and rac ism) was yet to come: outside Europe, migration generally fol lowed the establishing of parks and not the other way around. Pressure on natural resources has been increasing ever since the beginning of man and the centralisation of large- 7 scale societies, but western industrial society has made nature even more tionship betwec functional. It is obvious that it was not (only) ecological awareness that economy, etc. M forced the nation states at the end of 19th century and later the interna edge and science tional community (IUCN) to protect nature. Establishing protected areas did not only pre was also a matter of the control of resources important for the develop with protected a ment of the timber industry, medicine, tourism, etc. Protected areas can to overcome ther be seen as an economic category within the framework of national and Thebookisc international trade. sity, subsistence With respect to the asymmetrical relation of power, I believe that ments of all the: societies and cultures in these areas are »endangered(( and therefore »need(( emphasise the m to be protected. This is an anthropological response to contemporary tion (of protectec ecology, politics, economy and human rights. Of course, we should not and national cm stop by involving humanities and social science in these areas. We must and involvemer basically educate and equip inhabitants and other users for self-and eo tural and social governance. living environrr The world's human population is almost 6. 5 billion at the moment, modern science, rising at the rate of approximately 3 births per second. Even though sistence sectior financial capital is supposed to be the most promising key to one's wanted to put tr future, it is still land (as real estate and resource) that guarantees the core not an anthropc existence and development of many individuals, ethnic groups and na course, manage tions. Is a park a paradigm for the new millennium, or just a tool for tional societies. continuous domination and exploitation? sponsors and th AttheendoJ * to establishing t Areas, which, b: In October 2003, the Department of Ethnology and Cultural Anthro parks(<. I believe pology (Faculty of Arts, University of Ljubljana), the Association for Finally, I she Research, Marketing and Promotion of Protected Areas in Slovenia try of Higher Ec (Ljubljana) and the Public Economic Institute for Tourism in Maribor ulty of Arts in L organized an international symposium on the Ethnography of Protected Eastern Europ1 Areas, with the subtitle Endangered Habitats j Endangered Cultures. It Bistrica, Lovrer was our wish to learn about experiences in other parts of the world, in port. Thanks a!: view of the plans of the Slovenian environmental administration to in Ljubljana for extend the protection of the national territory from 8 to almost 30 Macbeth from 1 percent, following the trend in certain other European countries. The and a good frieJ response to our invitation was great, confirming that the topic is rel evant for the international anthropological (scientific) community. The symposium was held on Poho*, in one of the regions that is destined to be protected in the near future. It is important to mention that all contributors have noticed the clash of interests between different »stakeholders(( involved in parkg ov ernance, internal and external forces, ideology and practice, nature and culture, etc. The symposium brought up many questions about the rela- 8 tionship between anthropology and natural science, politics and economy, etc. Multivocality is essential for the development of knowl edge and science. It was especially encouraging that most contributors did not only present the problems (of local communities) connected with protected areas, but also gave some hints and suggestions of how to overcome them. The book is divided into five sections: legislation, landscape, diver sity, subsistence and management. Of course it is possible to find ele ments of all these topics in almost every article. My intention was to emphasise the main directions of contemporary anthropological percep tion (of protected areas). Legislation is a framework of the international and national community, a starting point that provokes our reactions and involvement. Landscape studies are a trend in contemporary cul tural and social anthropology connecting people and shaping of their living environment. Diversity is another major theme and motive of modern science, applicable to natural and cultural phenomena. The sub sistence section could just as well be called »advocacy«, except that I wanted to put the survival strategies of »Stakeholders« in the forefront, not an anthropological statement on this matter. And there is also, of course, management, a subject almost unavoidable in goal-oriented na tional societies. Science must serve their objective, in the minds of (our) sponsors and the public. At the end of the symposium the participants committed themselves to establishing the International Network for Anthropology of Protected Areas, which, by the way, can have a much broader scope than »nature parks«. I believe this is a very promising start. Finally, I should like to express my gratitude to the Slovenian Minis try of Higher Education and Science, the Scientific Institute of the Fac ulty of Arts in Ljubljana, the Austrian Institute for Eastern and South ;-fled Eastern Europe and the municipalities of Ruse, Maribor, Slovenska - It Bistrica, Lovrenc na Pohorju and Slovenj Gradec for their financial sup in port. Thanks also to Professor Bozidar Jezernik from the Faculty of Arts . to in yubljana for yet another fruitful inspiration and to Professor Helen 30 Macbeth from Oxford Brookes University for being persistent, precise • ne and a good friend. rei Maribor, February 2006 The :d. to .;:_:the gov - �and -rela- 9 Marija ZupancicViear AppliG 0) M Oj Slo Keyt Man gr01 ratio tom torr re cc pro nab mer and wa� see) tha tior pro spo tior tec1 rati Marija ZupancicVicar Application of the ProtectedA reas Management Categories of!UCN Slovenia Keywords: Conventions, Legislation, Zoning, Public awareness, Management In the past the creation of parks was based on aesthetic grounds: we now advance scientific, economic and cultural rationales as well. Park visitors, engaged in recreation and tourism, were once seen as the protected area's principal cus tomers: increasingly the local community is more often recognised as the key stakeholder. Where previously most protected areas were strictly protected as national parks or nature reserves, we now believe that they should be comple mented by other kinds of protected areas in which people live and use resources sustainably. Formerly, each protected area was seen as a unique investment in conservation: we now seek to develop networks and systems of protected areas so that the conservation of biodiversity and ecosystem func tions can be secured at the bioregional scale. Fifty years ago protected areas were almost entirely seen as a national re sponsibility; now many are regarded partly as an interna tional concern. Historically protected areas were about pro tection; now there is also a need to focus on ecological resto ration. The question is to what extent the new approaches are applied at a national level, in the management of existing 11