Meaning and motivations for conservation in Southeast Brazil

Conservation is a word with multiple meanings and used in different contexts, in Brazil, ranging from strict preservation of biodiversity to conservation through use of natural resources, to maintenance of cultures. It is also... [ view full abstract ]

Conservation is a word with multiple meanings and used in different contexts, in Brazil, ranging from strict preservation of biodiversity to conservation through use of natural resources, to maintenance of cultures. It is also a technical word used in environmental legislation: the National System of Conservation Units (SNUC for its Portuguese Acronym) (Federal Law 9985/2000) encompasses 12 categories of biodiversity protected areas (PA) (5 no-take PA and 7 sustainable use PA). Conservation was not a word commonly used by local people until the early 1990’s, when biodiversity reached the media through the Rio 92 Summit; only in recent decades, it has been incorporated in people’s discourses. In this research, we investigated the meaning and motivation for conservation in two CCRN sites in southeast Brazil (Paraty and São Luis do Paraitinga (SLP)). Research methods included structured interviews, semi-structured interviews (with individuals and small groups) and focus groups. The word ‘conservation’ is used nowadays by the different social actors and at different environmental governance arenas and it varies according to the background of each actor. It may be both a fragmented concept (e.g., ‘untouchable nature’ or ‘static culture’) or an integrated one (‘human-in-nature’). A community member whose livelihood has been restricted due to ‘conservation efforts’ (e.g., protected areas) may use it as synonymous of preservation (“untouchable nature”), but also may use it in the sense of ‘static culture’ as an argument to claim access rights over traditional lands. In Brazil PA managers are commonly classified as preservationists or social-environmentalist and much of that is related to the meaning they give and their practices of conservation (respectively, ‘untouchable nature’ paradigm and ‘human-in-nature’ paradigm). Community leaders, who had experiences in different arenas interacting with NGOs, scientists, and government staff tend to understand it as ‘conservation through use’ i.e., integrating it with community development. The motivation for conservation may regard both conserving biodiversity and/or ‘conserving’ communities’ livelihoods. In both sites, communities are struggling to conserve their livelihoods (particularly fishing in Paraty and farming in SLP). At the same time, in SLP, some community members are changing their farming towards more sustainable practices in order to increase the provision of ecosystem services (including water and food provision). In Paraty, a tourism hotspot, motivation for conserving is strongly linked to the relational value local people have with nature as well as to its utilitarian value (economic value derived from conserved nature).