News 233 of 431

Resolving Conflicts Over Natural Resources in the Galapagos Islands

1999-12-17

In the century-and-a-half since Charles Darwin returned from the Galapagos Islands aboard HMS Beagle, these islands have come to be regarded as a living laboratory in evolution. Now, they're also becoming a laboratory in conflict resolution.
"The conflict in the Galapagos is the result of the [traditional] approach to protected areas," says Paola Oviedo, a consultant who chronicled the islands' conflict resolution process at a May 1998 workshop in Washington D.C. (The workshop took place during an international conference on community-based natural resource management, organized by the Economic Development Institute of the World Bank, the International Development Research Centre (IDRC), the Ford Foundation, and other agencies.) Proceedings of the workshop were published in 1999 by IDRC and The World Bank.

Protected areas

According to Oviedo, under old-style conservation approaches, pioneered in North America, protected areas were established as uninhabited islands of wildlife. "This was perhaps feasible in the USA, where national parks have no surrounding population. But in Latin America, 86 % of protected areas shelter a human population that is generally rural and poor," she notes. "In the case of Galapagos, although the interests of local people were at stake, they were neither duly informed nor asked to give their consent prior to the establishment of a national park, nor to participate in or benefit from its management."

From the beginning, residents of the Galapagos Islands felt shut out of the process that had imposed conservation measures, says Oviedo. As a result, they felt few qualms about ignoring the measures, especially when fishing protected areas. Some people even threatened to kidnap tourists and torch some spots of the island chain's protected area.

Seeds of conflict

The seeds of local conflict were sewn in the late 1970s, when boundaries and regulations for a park covering all but 3% of the islands were set. Problems grew in 1986, when a marine reserve was set up and commercial fishing was restricted. As well, successive national governments in Ecuador have passed laws that created vague jurisdictions for the different government levels and agencies responsible for administering the Galapagos and their 10,000-odd inhabitants.

Perhaps inevitably, there was confrontation — sometimes violent — particularly between those whose income came from tourism and those who fished. Some local fishers felt that to survive, they had no choice but to fish illegally in protected areas.

From confrontation to compromise

While the conflict hasn't ended, confrontation is gradually evolving into dialogue and compromise, says Oviedo. "The Galapagos experience, although complex, is reconciling the economic aspirations and social welfare of various groups with conservation and the sustainable use of natural resources."

According to Oviedo, the key to a successful conflict resolution process was to make it truly participatory. The challenge was that stakeholders represented a complex mix of local, national, and international agencies; powerful and weak interests; government and private interests; and pro-development and pro-conservation interests. For example, conservationists were at odds with local and commercial fishers. Local fishers were in conflict with mainland fishers, who — they believed — wanted a majority share of the local fishery. Similarly, local authorities were aligned against tourism operators. And a number of civil, provincial, and national authorities were squabbling over jurisdictions.

Breaking the impasse

In 1996, rumours surfaced that the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) would revoke its prestigious World Heritage Site designation from the Galapagos Islands. The perceived threat helped break the impasse, perhaps because ecotourism in the islands generates US$60 million yearly, more than a quarter of Ecuador's tourism total.

For the first time, large influential groups such as the mainland fishing and tourism industries agreed that smaller local interests should join in discussions concerning the islands' problems. Ecuador's Congress then legislated official status for the previously unrecognized local groups, granting them power to set their own goals for sustainable resource use. Along with these breakthroughs came an agreement by all parties to seek professional help in resolving conflict.

Local consultations

Once local fishers and tourism operators entered discussions, they felt more responsibility for making things work. Local consultations and joint strategies for building consensus helped resolve some of the conflicts, as did the creation of joint management committees and resource use schemes, says Oviedo.

Another positive factor was the involvement of the Ministry of Agriculture as a 'neutral broker' that everyone could respect. (Earlier mediation attempts by the National Fisheries Institute had failed because the Galapagos community distrusted it — the institute had once been funded by commercial fishing interests.) "The key thing was to build trust among local people and send the message that their concerns would be taken into account," says Oviedo.

Unresolved issues

Today, some issues remain unresolved. For example, the negotiators still haven't agreed where each group can fish. And doubts persist that the commercial fishing industry will cede its considerable influence to local interests. Moreover, Ecuador is facing its deepest economic crisis this century. Oviedo believes the crisis may cause unemployed mainlanders to migrate to the islands to find jobs, or tempt the central government to seek a share of Galapagos tourism revenues that are now reserved for conservation and local sustainable development efforts.

But she stresses that the Galapagos, while unique in many ways, offers a blueprint for other places that are trying to balance conservation with local sustainability. "Decentralization is the fundamental element for managing local conflicts in many parts of the world, particularly in protected areas where, traditionally, the decision-making power, authority — and the money — have been heavily centralized."

Empowering people

According to Oviedo, decentralization and laws that make local authorities more accountable result in more money and more power for local interests to solve their own problems. The key is to empower people whose potential is normally underestimated. "They have the potential to make a difference where conservation and sustainable use of natural resources depends largely on their willingness to collaborate," she concludes.

Keane J. Shore is an Ottawa-based writer and editor. (Photo: E. McCowan)

Resource Person:

Paola Oviedo, Msc, Independent Consultant, 10, ch. de la Redoute, 1260 Nyon, Switzerland; Tel/Fax: (41-22) 362-3804; Email: psylva@swissonline.ch

Alternative Approaches to Managing Conflict Over Natural Resources, by John Eberlee

Reconstructing War-Torn Societies, by Jennifer Pepall

The War-torn Societies Project in Guatemala, by John Eberlee

The War-torn Societies Project in Somaliland, by Mike Crawley

Cultivating Peace: Conflict and Collaboration in Natural Resource Management

Peacebuilding and Reconstruction Program Initiative

E-mail subscriptions

By subscribing to REPORTS-DL you will receive a new feature article from IDRC Reports in your mailbox every week. Just send a message to lyris@lyris.idrc.ca with the command SUBSCRIBE REPORTS-DL firstname lastname in the body of the message.

Top of Page

News 233 of 431