Gender, Community, and the Politics of Com munity-based Rural Ecotourism in Belize

Transcription

1 88 PETER R. WILSHUSEN 8. Propucsta de R eform uladdn, o p d t, See chapter 1 o f th e G E F ' s O perational Strategy, T en O perationa! Principles for D evelopm ent and Im plem entation o f th e G E F ' s W o rk Program. Available at w u w.g ejio eb.o rg a o f M a y B y th e end o f 1997, Biopacifico had dedicated approxim ately 40 percent o f its to tal b u dget o n com m unity-level projects. Following com pletion o f th e negotiated operative plan, th e project pursued su b contraas alm ost exclusively w ith com m unity - level groups (Rios and W ilshusen 1999). 11. T h e initial agreem ent o f th e equipo amphado at Piangua G rande offered two g u id in g principles th a t touch on th e im portance o f m utual respect am ong black and indigenous peoples: A s black and indigenous peoples, w e jointly assum e th e defense o f o ur ancestral territories o f th e Pacific C oastal region built upon m utual respect and tolerance as a foundation for living together and strengthening th e unity o f action. " In addition, th e statem ent proclaim s, W e affirm th e rig h t to recognize and respect our differences, am ong ourselves and w ith th e rest o f C olom bian society. A m o n g th e eth - n ic groups o f th e Pacific C oastal region are black com m unities, in th eir diversity, and distinct indigenous peoples:t ules, Ratios, W oaunan, Eperara-Siapidara, C ham i, Awa, Z cnues and Em beras. " csapter Six U n m a s k i n g t h e L o c a l Gender, Community, and the Politics of Com munity-based Rural Ecotourism in Belize JILL M. BELSKY Com m unity-based conservation has e m e r^ d over the last decade in response to critiques th a t strategies for environm ental protection have been developed at the expense o f concern for people, especially historicauy m arginalized peoples or the dispossessed." T h e rationale for en\dsioning local com m unities as partners in conservation rather than as in the past as passive recipients o f th e latters design, builds on th e assum ptions o f integrated conservation and developm ent program s (IC D Ps). T h e goal o f IC D P s is to increase the economic opportunities o f resource-dependent rural com m unities as a m eans o f increas ing nature protection w ithout th e social problem s caused b y strictly protec tionist approaches. W ith in the umbrella o f IC D P s, com m unity-based conser vation attem pts to locate design o f local developm ent strategies and m anagem ent w ithin the com m unity in collaboration w ith other governm ent and nongovernm ental actors. T h e rationales for com m unity conservation include: th a t local or resident groups have a strong, vested interest in the sustainable use o f natural resources upon w hich their livelihood or cultural survival rests, th a t they have experiential Imowledge th a t can assist in the identification and design o f environm ental m anagem ent strategics, and that they are more capable o f managing local resources th an distant state or corporate managers

2 90 UNMASKING T H E LOCAL 91 (Rao and Geisler 1990, W est and Brechin 1991; W estern and W right 1994). Case studies o f long-term com m unity m anagem ent o f forests in Asia (Poffenbcigcr 1990) and in L atin America (Alcorn 1993) have been instrum ental in docum enting the value o f local com m unities and local knowledge in natural resource m anagem ent. T o date, evaluations o f IC D P s have yielded mixed results, especially in reaching significant environm ental protection goals (Brandon and Wells 1992). T h e failure to successfully achieve environm ental protection goals has led observers to suggest returning to a more strictly environm ental protectionist paradigm (Kram er 1997; H ackel 1999; Robinson 1993). B ut supporters o f integrated conservation and developm ent projects in general, and those that prom ote com m unity-based and collaborative approaches in particular, claim it is too early to discard them. T hey strongly caution about returning to w hat they refer to as a new protectionist paradigm" and the social injustices as well as practical pitfells associated w ith these approaches (W ilshusen et al. 2002). Instead, w hat they aigue as critically needed are deeper and more com prehensive understandings o f intem arional biodiversity conservation approaches themselves as social and political process (Z em er 2000; Brechin et al. 2002). Social science scholars and practitioners as well as conservation biologists have been raising im portant insights into the opportunities and constraints of integrated conservation and development approaches including com munitybased efforts. In an insightful article, Brosius et al. (1998) brought attention to the fact that despite sim ilar labels and claims, com m unity-based conservation and natural resource m anagem ent program s are constituted differently and defended by claims and concepts th a t arc often ill defined and not empirically well grounded. Furtherm ore, they highlight the problem s encountered when advocates and practitioners, while deeply com m itted to the goals o f devolution and com m unity conservation, are unwilhng or unable to approach resource m anagem ent efforts w ith a nuanced understanding o f resource conflicts in their areas. Adams and H ulm e (2001) also argue that com m unity conservarion is not one thing b u t many, and is evolving both conceptually and practically. Im portantly, these authors conclude that the key questions about com m unity conservation are w ho sets th e objectives on the ground and how trade-offs between the diverse objectives are negotiated. Li (1996) also warns that comm unity conservation efforts are too frequendy based on generic models that arc neither sufficiently attuned to parricular historical contexts and political struggles, nor critical o f the multiple m eanings and strategic deploym ent o f concepts that guide such efforts. Agrawal and G ibson (1999) in another h ^ h ly significant w ork caution th a t the image o f com m unity in conservation historically has vacillated between th a t o f two extremes: either the cooperative and ecologically knowledgeable enchanted" com m unity or the tradition-bound and ecologicauy destructive disenchanted community. In the former archetype, the one com m only evoked in com m unity conservation efforts, the rural com m unity is represented as a socially hom ogenous and conflict-less entity, despite th e historic reality o f intracom m unity divisions, s tr u ^ e s, and conflicts (Agrawal 1997; D upuis and Vandergeest 1996). A nother assum ption th a t is rarely acknowledged or eqilored in com m unity-level efforts is w hether com m unities can participate and operate successfully in resource m anagem ent efforts in light o f inequities and disincentives for conservation that persist at broader political, economic, and institutional scales (Little 1994). In this chapter, I revisit a study that I have w ritten about elsewhere (Belsly 1999,2000). I t explores a com m unity-based rural ecotourism project begun in the early 1990s in Gales Point M anatee, Belize, th a t I, along w ith groups o f A m erican and Belizean students, examined over the course o f six years. M y writings on this project have been critical o f an undifferentiated and apolitical understanding o f this small. Creole community, including w ho/w hat constitutes the lo c al.'t h c y have also been critical o f reserving analytical and m anagem ent attention solely to the local or com m unity level o f social action w ithout acknowledging the im portant and instrum ental ways that the local" is shaped by extralocal social and political forces. In the case o f Gales P oint M anatee, Belize, these extralocal forces include: th e history o f British colonialism, state form ation in British H onduras, now known as Belize, developm ent aid and debt restructuring, institutionalized racism, tourism, and the contested discourses o f the causes and presum ed solutions to environm ental degradation, including the role o f com m unity-based rural ecotourism itself (Bclsky 1999, 2000). M y objective here is to discuss the variable ways m en and w om en from Gales P oint participated in a com m unity-based rural ecotourism project, and the reasons w hy this effort was only partially successful a t integrating conservation and local economic developm ent. I particularly w ant to highlight gender and its politics in this volume because there has been insufficient and uncritical attention to these forces in analyses o f biodiversity conservation efforts on the ground. In contributing to this discussion, I will discuss the ways that local politics including gender relations are intricately linked to inequities operating vrithin and extending beyond the local community, w hich I subm it lie at the root o f problems w ith integrated conservation and developm ent programs including com m unity conservation. M y position is that the obstacles facing IC D P s often have less to do w ith problems inherent in the m odel per se, b u t in the social and political systems in w hich they arc em bedded, w hich continue to deny the poorest and m ost vulnerable peoples access and control over resources to secure their livelihood and craft their own futures. G E N D E R, C O M M U N IT Y, A N D B IO D IV E R S IT Y C O N S E R V A T IO N Few assessments o f com m unity-based conservation have explicitly taken up the question o f w ho specifically w ithin a com m unity has benefited fi"om these

3 92 UNMASKING THE ' LOCAL" 93 efforts and w hat effect it has had on natural resource m anagem ent. In particular, there has been lim ited attention to how gender influences these efforts. Indeed, some fem inist scholars have questioned w hether w om ens interests are enhanced o r subm erged w ith a com m unity-based approach to conservation (Leach 1992; L i 1996). Biodiversity conservation, especially as practiced in N o rth A m erican-influenced models, has largely been based on the environm ental understandings and actitdst strategies o f middle-class white males (Taylor 1997). Some suggest th a t w hen gender has been considered in international environm ental m anagem ent broadly defined, th e design o f interventions has largely been based on popular and partial understandings o f w om ens interests and activities, w ith unfortunate results (Leach 1992). T his is despite the fact that developm ent institutions and park m anagers have been urged to recognize rural w om en s m ultifaceted and crucial roles in resource extraction and environm ental m anagem ent (Agarwal 1986,1989; D ankelm an and D avidson 1988; Shiva 1989). W om en are stul largely depicted as victims o f environm ental degradation or uncritically assum ed to benefit uniform ly by environm ental program s (Leach 1992). Few studies em phasize th e differences am ong rural w om en and how they creatively th in k and reshape developm ent and conservation program s to m eet their own strategic goals and agendas (Johnson 1997,1998; M om sen 1993). T h e assertion o f a biological connection betw een w om en and nature has also been controversial and contested. Som e ecofem inists suggest an inherent o r esscntialist w om an/nature relationship involving harm ony am ong w om en as weu w ith nature (M ies an d Shiva 1993; W arren 1990). O thers focus on a fem inist critique o f developm ent em phasizing the perils o f m odern technology. W estern developm ent, and patriarchy for w om en (Shiva 1989; H arco u rt 1994). A n o th er group o f fem inist socisj scientists are highly skeptical o f esscntialist and universal argum ents, preferring instead to under stand w om en s relationship to each other, to m en, and to th e physical envi ronm ent as socially and historically constructed (Jackson 1993; L each et al. 1995; Rocheleau 1995). T h eir position argues the need to disaggregate the category o f wom en" an d start from real-life situations and problem s o f resident people w ithin concrete social and historical contexts. T h e answers to such questions as how does gender influence biodiversity conservation/protected area m anagem ent including com m unity conservation efforts and how is nature understood, used, and m anaged by m en and w om en and for whose benefit, are largely contingent and need be answered thro ug h a context-specific, historically grounded approach. W h e th e r and how particular groups o f m en and w om en and environm ental interests arc com plem entary or n o t cann o t be theorized a priori, b u t m ust be exam ined em pirically for a particular people, place, and tim e. T o do so dem ands individual and m icropolitical analysis, b u t also how these arc linked to broader political, economic, and ideological projects. COMMUNITY-BASED RURAL ECOTOURISM IN GALES PO IN T MANATEE, B EU Z E T h e com m unity o f Gales P oint M anatee, Belize, is located on a narrow peninsula extending into the Southern Lagoon, a four-hour boat ride from Belize City, the nation s largest city. Since the early 1990s, A m erican wildlife biologists and other long-term visitors to G ales P oint w orked to designate approxim ately 175,000 acres Including th e com m unity o f G ales P oint M anatee as a biodiversity reserve kncw n as the M anatee Special D evelopm ent A rea (M SD A ). T h e M S D A has since been recognized by the Belize state and entails a comprehensive plan for protecting endangered species, particularly the m anatee and sea turtle. Inform ed by th eir earuer w ork in the C om m unity B aboon Sanctuary, the planners sought to foster conservation in the M S D A through an IC D P approach built around rural ecotourism, com m unity m anagem ent, and close collaboration betw een the private and public sectors (H orw ich and Lyon 1998). W orking w ith the support o f Belizean governm ent officials and th e Belize A udubon Society, they organized residents into five associations based on th e m ajor ecotourism activities; a bed and breakfast (herein B& B) association; a tour operators and guides association; a farm ers association; and a craft association. These associations w ere m anaged through an um brella cooperative know n as the Gales P oint Progressive Cooperative com prised o f the chairs o f each o f the associations along w ith local tillage council leaders. T h e planners organized a M anatee A dvisory T eam to provide technical and logistical support during the first few years (H orw ich an d Lyons 1998). T h e project leaders (whose training was largely in th e biological sciences) acknowledged the presence o f complex social and political dynamics (H orw ich, pers. com m. 1996; Greenlee, pers.com m. 1996). In the early 1990s w hen the rural ecotourism project was being form ed, Gales P oint M anatee consisted o f approxim ately 350 individuals living in seventy-seven perm anent households, in addition to vacation cottages ow ned by w ealthy residents o f Belize City. T h e com m unity was largely a mbrture o f older and young people, w ith m any people in th eir m iddle years absent for m onths o r years at a tim e seeking em ploym ent in th e U nited States or Belize C ity (G P P C 1992). W hile m any households farm ed, fished, an d hunted in the nearby karst m ountains, forests, savannas, rivers, lagoons, an d ocean, these activities provided supplem entary food and incom e. T h e vast m ajority o f households obtained their staple food o f beans, rice, and vegetables through purchase from markets in Belize City. In telling stories about rural and environm ental change in the area, residents em phasized the links betw een declines in local natural resources and com mercial fishing, logging, an d huntin g by nonresidents. Residents accounts differed strongly from those o f local and foreign environm ental groups w ho explained resource scarcities solely as the result o f the nonsustainable local livelihood activities and th e m aladapted

4 94 UNMASKING T H E LOCAL" 95 values o f Gales Point residents. T h e m ajority o f households in Gales Point earned food and incom e from hunting and selling bush m eat and fishing. A smaller m inority found em ploym ent in governm ent service, nearby citrus farms, and tourist lodges, and wove baskets from local vines and prepared snacks for sale to tourists for supplem entary incom e. M ost families relied on rem ittances from em ployed children in Belize C ity or the U nited States for th eir income. G iven the sparse econom ic opportunities available in Gales P oint and awareness o f th e incom e being generated in the C om m unity Baboon Sanctuary, m any G ales P oint residents welcom ed the efforts o f outsiders to assist th em w ith developing ecotourism. In exchange, those participating in the ecotourism associations agreed to lim it hunting o f threatened wildlife species, to cooperate w ith boating regulations to protect m anatee habitat, and to provide labor on a lim ited basis to scientific studies conducted in the area. A s reported in more detail elsewhere (Belslg' 1999), B6cfi operators increased their incom e considerably in the first few years o f the ecotourism project ( ). O f particular econom ic im portance were student groups (such as o u n ) w ho stayed in a large num ber o f BScBs for longer than a few days. However, after 1994 the num ber o f tourists visiting Gales Point declined, as did state funding. Additionally, the support o f outside organizers becam e m ore sporadic, and the project floundered for a num ber o f years. Nonetheless, the rural ecotourism project generated im portant links between conservation and development am ong a handful o f Gales Point households, but it also exacerbated rivalries and divisions across the community. I aigue that the lim ited benefits as well as associated conflicts cannot be traced to singular causes, but rather to a complex intersection o f gender, age, class, family allegiance, and political party affiliation that predated but were intensified as a result o f the ecotourism effort. W ith in this matrix, the social construction o f gender was pivotal though n ot sufficient to explain w hat happened. G E N D E R, C L A SS, A N D FA M IL Y IN T E R E S T S IN E C O T O U R IS M A S S O C IA T IO N S N o t surprisingly, gender influenced the com position o f rural ecotourism activities and m em bership in the various associations in im portant ways. T he socialization o f w om en as the m ajor caretakers o f hom e and dom estic activities underlies their control over B&B enterprises and in the craft association, as both hom e care and weaving baskets were historically taught to and expected from females. In contrast, males were m ore likely to fish, hunt, and be hired by com mercial firm s such as l o ^ r s. H ence, their knowledge o f boating and the surrounding m arine and forest environm ents led males to dom i nate the boat operators and nature tour guide associations (there was only one female m em ber in the tour boat association). M oreover, the potential for intra-household conflict, w hich could have arisen w ith w om ens increased incom e as a result of BStB enterprises was m itigated by the opportunity for males to earn income through com plem entary activities as nature and boat tour guides. Indeed, it was w om en and m en o f the same handful o f households w ho had the material resources and interpersonal networks to enable them to take advantage o f new opportunities. Females welcomed the opportunity to operate B& Bs because there were few other econom ic opportunities in the com m unity and this enterprise com plem ented their hom em aking skills and responsibilities. O n e young w om an explained that she began the B8cB because it can be done while I keep the house, cook, and w atch the little ones, and don t put out my m an. A n older w om an w ith three teenagers said she joined because it based on skills 1 know and it s a way to make a dollar where I say w here to p u t i t... to help the children go to school in Belize C ity and [husband] don t always agree to it being spent th a t way. They enjoyed th e fact th a t their dom estic skills were honored and financially rewarded. B u t gendered knowledge o f housekeeping and cooking or o f nature and boat touring were not sufficient to perm it all w om en and m en to operate BScBs, becom e nature/boat guides, or to participate in m anagem ent associations. T here were im portant econom ic entry costs to operating BScBs and serving as a nature and boat guide th a t excluded poor w om en and m en. To operate a B& B, there had to be an extra bedroom or the ability to tem porarily displace family m em bers from their bedroom s. A ccording to standards set by the project, guest bedroom s had to have walls and standard furniture such as beds w t h sheets, m osquito nets, and fans. C ooking and bathroom fecilities also had to m eet basic sanitation standards. W allpaper and cheerfiil decorations were also desirable. To be a boat operator/nature guide required access to a boat, engine, life jackets, and fuel. Clearly, w om en and m en w ho had access to these material resources were not from the lowest econom ic stratum. In addition to economic prereqtiisites for entry, the ability to gain access to clients and wield power w ithin the ecotourist association and com m unity at large was also influenced by one s family ties. I t is com m on am ong w om en s groups in Belize for social and m aterial barriers to im pede som e w om en s m em bership (M cc laurin 1995/1996). In G ales P oint, the W elch clan extended their historic leadership to the new ecotourism trade. H ortense W elch chaired the B&B association for its fust five years o f operation. H er long-tim e partner, M oses A n d rew n, was the lead boat operator and nature tour guide. T heir son, Kevin, was the boat operators association chair, and their relatives Ivan W elch, O sm ond W elch, and G ibert W elch com prised a large share o f the association itself. H ortense was also a long-term m em ber o f the Gales Point village council. N o t surprisingly, W alter G off, w ho chaired the G P P C, th e um brella ecotourist cooperative, also was the village council chair.

5 96 UNM ASKING T H E LOCAL 97 T o provide a m echanism for prom oting equal access to ecotourist guests, one o f th e planners organized the use o f a rotation schedule. A sign was located at the entry to the village (via the road) instructing tourists to locate ecotourist association leaders for B6cB and boat operating/tour guiding assignm ents. T h e leaders assigned tourists to particxilar providers in turn, following a list. Initially, m any B& B providers com m ended the rotation schedule. T h ey appreciated the assistance o f project planners w ho m ade reservations and arranged for prepaym ent so B & hostesses could purchase food before the arrival o f guests. B ut especially w hen the num ber o f student groups and ecotourists declined and the assistance o f project planners decreased, the use o f the rotation schedule became hotly debated. A major com plaint was that form al procedures were n o t followed and that the B&B association chair, H ortense W elch, was unfair in her assignm ent o f ecotourist guests. H ortense always fiivor her relatives, and herself, and anyway th e real decision are made by H ortense s family m em bers oubide o f the associations m eeting. H ortense countered th a t m any B& B operators were not hom e to receive guests w hen they were assigned, do n o t publicly share their concerns at association m eet ings, and do not appredate her w ork burden as assodation chair and the insuf ficient measures the project provided as com pensation. She said she had tired o f the other w om en com plaining and n o t telling their troubles in front o f all b u t only behind m y back. A ccording to H ortense, the planners told her she could take an extra guest here and there as paym ent for her services as assodation chair. H ortense said. The trouble with the rotation system is that when tourists enter the village they don't always get to me first. Sometimes someone else invites them to stay at their house. O r when I figure out whose tum it is, that person is in Belize City or not prepared to have a guest for that night either they don't have enough food, or are too tired firom doing some other works and don t want to cook and clean for a guest that night. So I keep going down the list. But the members don t remember this and complain I don t do it fiur. A fter three years as assodation chair, she said she was burnt out and admitted: I don t like to call meetings anymore because not even half o f the mem bers come, the others are either out o f the village or too busy with other activities. I'm tired of making all the dedsions and being critidzed later when someone doesn t like them. 1 was told in the beginning I could take a few extra guests because of the planning work I do, but the members don t like this. A s th e project progressed, m any o f th e B& B providers found employm ent in nearby tourist lodges th a t were also developing to take advantage o f the tourism trade. B ut com bining regular em ploym ent, their dom estic duties. and m aintaining a B&B created tensions an d difficult choices for B& B operators and their families. T hose w ith access to fem ale extended supfw rt transferred BScB hosting duties to daughters, sisters, o r m others. A young daughte r in such a hom e com m unicated to us her strong dism ay over her increased workload, though the burden was m itigated som ew hat by the opportunity to interact vrith A m erican students. A nother strategy taken by a B& B operator w ith an outside job was to leave a cold, bag lunch on the table for guests rather than provide the custom ary h o t cooked lunch o f rice, beans, and m eat (traditionally bush m eat or fish). T his coping practice raised contradictions between the advertised authentic C reole experience o f rural ecotourism and the reality o f being served a sandwich m ade from im ported Spam and mayonnaise. Inauthenticity arose also over the im plications o f hunting prohibitions th a t foreclosed serving traditional cuisine based on local w ild gam e (B elsl^ 2000). GENDER. RURAL ECOTOURISM, AND NATIONAL PARTY PO U T IC S Peoples participation in the com m unity ecotourism project was skewed not only as a result o f gender and class, but also by connections to national politics. Historically, Gales P oint has been know n for its support o f the P U P national party (Peoples U nited Party), rather than for the other m ajor party know n as the U D P (United D em ocratic Party). T h eir close connection to the P U P and to the m inister o f th e environm ent at th e tim e was w idely understood as a reason for strong, initial P U P governm ental support for th e project (Belslw 1999). M o st o f the m en and w om en w ho assum ed key roles in the ecotourism associations were strong supporters o f the PUP. T hose w ith party affiliation to the U D P claim ed th a t their party ties restricted their ability to participate in the rural ecotourism efforts, despite the fact th a t com m unity associations were technically opened to any local resident. A fem ale U D P supporter explained; I know I can t work with Hortense and the other women. I have to go it alone if] want to run abscb. But that s okay with me because I know] have the ability, and (her partner) knows many people through his work as a boat operator. We don t need the community nor the PUP to get tourists. In 1994, th e U D P regained political pow er (orjy to lose it again to the P U P in 1998). Starting in 1994 political and financial govem m ental support for the M S D A and ecotourism project declined (though it rekindled at the end o f th e decade to some degree because o f resum ed P U P patronage). T h e w ithdraw al o f governm ental backing in 1994, coupled w ith the sporadic presence o f project advisors (who turned the project over to the com m unity), took

6 98 JILL M, BELSKY UNMASKING T H E LOCAL" 99 Its toll on the ecotourism project and community. M anagem ent o f both the local village council and the Gales Point Progressive Cooperative faltered. In 1997, P U P backer W alter G o ff resigned his positions as chair o f the village council and the Gales Point Progressive Cooperative (G P PC ). N o t knowing the PU P would regain power so soon, both H ortense W elch and her son, Kevin A ndrewin, switched political party affiliation to back th e UDP. Kevin was elected chair o f the G P P C in 1997, only to lose the seat the following year. Participation in com m unity-m anaged associations continued to slide: few people attended meetings, paid dues, were willing to provide regular w ater transporta tion to and from Belize City, or take responsibility for producing and distribut ing brochures to m arket Gales Point as an ecotourist destination (Belsky 1999). Indeed these intra-com m unity conflicts produced further backlashes and resistance. N on-association m em bers refused to carry phone messages and reservation requests for ecotourist providers. Som e also refused to pay their share o f the com m unity electricity bill claim ing that ecotourist hom es w ith refrigerators and fiins used m ore power. In addition, som eone torched the craft center. M en and w om en n o t benefiting from ecotourism were particularly resentful th a t they were expected to abide by restrictions on hunting, fishing, and farm ing while other com m unity m em bers received some alb^cit s m ^ com pensation through tourism. A particular source o f anger and resentm ent was the presence o f state and state-backed com mercial entrepreneurs w ho flouted environm ental regulations and logged, dredged, and purchased threat ened wildlife in the M anatee Special D evelopm ent Area. T hey were also greatly angered over state backing for developm ent o f commercial agriculture by foreigners in the area over assisting local fkrmers. A few stories circulating in the com m unity at th a t tim e attested to these strong feelings. O n e story involved govem m ent officials w ho visited Gales Point to purchase threatened and prohibited sea turtle m eat. A nother entailed governm ent officials w ho suggested that, in exchange for supporting the com m unity ecotourism project, residents w ould receive legal access to farm land m ade available by the construction o f the new M anatee road linking Gales Point to two major highways. B u t by 1999 no land titles had materialized for residents and, in feet, one G ales P oint farm er w ith m ature perennial crops, b u t no form al title, lost his land w hen the governm ent sold it to a twealthy Jam aican farm er eager to establish a citrus plantation. T h e lessons were obvious: this poor rural com m unity had little political voice, w hether m ale o r female, P U P or U D P: W e all vying to be close to th e govem m ent. B ut it don t m atter P U P or U D P either one going to sell th at land to make big money. B ut w ithout land to farm w e in Gales P oint never be able to g et ahead. Food is expensive and now th e govem m ent don' t w ant us to h u n t anymore. W h a t are our kids going to eat? W h y should w e respect th e govem m ent and its rules for h u n tir^ w hen they are cutting in th e reserve? T h ey don t care w h at happens to us. G iven this situation, one can understand w hy gender m ust be viewed in connection w ith national position, class, and race. As a w om an in G ales Point sum m ed it up for me. It h ard being a w om an here. B u t it harder being p o o r and from this place w here no one really care w h at happening to us. W e hoped th at th e tourists m ake others see th at vre here. B ut it ju st th e sam e, th e sam e as always it hard to g et by. IM P U C A T IO N S F O R G E N D E R, JU S T IC E, A N D IN T E R N A T IO N A L B IO D IV E R S IT Y C O N S E R V A T IO N T h e case study o f Gales P oint M anatee, Belize, raises a num ber o f issues that are germ ane to current debates in international biodiversity conservation and especiauy to the opportunities and constraints o f IC D P s and com m unitybased conservation. Above all, this example reinforces the fact th a t biodiversity conservation/protected area m anagem ent is n o t a neutral b u t a highly social and political process. Every approach to conservation is constructed on a particular understanding o f the forces selected as significantly shaping rural and environm ental change in a particular area. In G ales P oint and in many other cases, different accounts em erged th a t were hotly contested. T he accounts given by poor, rural residents (and especially by poor, rural wom en) d id n o t iidbrm the objectives or procedures o f biodiversity conservation policies and program s. H ad they been given consideration in Gales Point, the project w ould have included the following: protection o f threatened wildlife and habitats from state-supported logging, dredging, com m ercial fishing, and agricultural development; assistance to local residents to keep control o f tourism fi"om nonresident entrepreneurs and cruise ships; attainm ent o f land titles for local farmers; developm ent o f m arkets for local goods and han d i crafts; and im provem ent o f basic com m unity infrastructure. T h ey also m ight have incorporated vrays to m inim ize the econom ic and political costs th a t prohibited the m ost impoverished w om en and m en from participating in and benefiting from the activities th a t were im plem ented in th e com m unity. Som e loans were available b u t the term s and conditions were highly problem atic especially for th e least well o ff (Belsky 1999). Second, this analysis recognizes and applauds the goals o f project planners, Belizean nongovernm ental organizations, and their backers in th e governm ent to develop a project th at assisted G ales P o in t residents w ith econom ic developm ent to support wildlife and habitat conservation. This coalition did try to develop local m anagem ent capacity and control and assisted w ith econom ic activities th a t included w om en as weu as m en. A nd a handful o f families achieved th e hoped-for links betw een local developm ent

7 100 JILL M. BELSKY UNMASKING T H E LOCAL* 101 and conservation, though it was not clear w hether these could be sustained. Should we criticize the IC D P /com m unity conservation m odel for its limited success or should we look to the complex and intersecting forces in that particular place and tim e th a t m itigated full com m unity involvement and significant environm ental m anagem ent? P trhaps both. O ne problem is th a t developm ent programs IC D P or otherwise need to build on existing development practices, especially those th a t are the m ost economically valuable. B ut their econom ic value also makes them o f interest to elites w ho are usually unwilling to give them over to local residents. In the case o f Gales Point, im portant opportunities for local developm ent were missed by n o t building on local experience and keen interest to further develop sustainable &rming, fishing, hunting, and possibly logging in addition to rural ecotourism. A nother issue regards variability in com m unity governing capacity. W hile a village council protdded local governance in Gales Point, there were no com m unal o r custom ary natural resource m anagem ent rules or traditions upon w hich to budd com m unity resource m anagem ent. Indeed, resource use and m a n ^ m e n t w ere open access, and strategic opportunism based on individuals an d their families characterized the livelihood strategies o f residents. T he com m unity is also rem ote, n o t well connected to transportation and com m u nication infrastructure, and crisscrossed w ith historic rivalries and tensions. W h ile its ecological conditions suggest the Gales Point area as a biodiversity h o t spot w orthy o f conservation attention, it is a socially complex place to develop a com m unity conservation effort. F or such an effort to succeed, the com m unity w ould require additional support and assistance th a t was not provided during earlier attem pts. Indeed there were no special efforts m ade to understand th e history o f econom ic developm ent activities in the area, and especially from the residents perspectives. Related to the above, it is likely th a t th e m odel for biodiversity/protccted area m anagem ent im plem ented in Gales P ain t M anatee em anated from the m inds and representations o f its outside plaimcrs rather than fiom ongoing dialogue w ith m em bers o f the Gales Point rural community. A dialogue could have generated a different o r m odified approach or at least suggested ways to provide the social support and assistance structures noted above. Even so, there are no guarantees. U nanticipated o r unintended consequences will always emerge. B ut no effort can survive, let alone succeed, if the m ajority o f local residents continue to bear the large proportion o f the costs o f environm ental conservation while marginally sharing in its benefits. T his seems to be w hat has largely happened for so m any attem pted IC D P s, social and com m unity forestry program s, and participatory-based developm ent efforts" o f th e past. T h e ideal m odel never really gets played out on the ground. Social and political forces operating from w ithin but also fiom beyond, the local com m unity rarely perm it control over valuable resources from sustainable econom ic developm ent to be controlled o r even significandy shared w ith and across poor, rural com m unities. W h ile com m unity dynamics, including the intersection o f gender w ith o th er sociopolitical forces, are critical to understanding th e m icro operation o f conununity efforts, it is these larger inequities that seem to represent the real obstacles to IC D P s and to the sym ptom s we identify and lam ent in com m unity-based efforts.