Industrial Conservation Refugee
By Brandon Hanson
Mark Dowie’s article “Conservation Refugee” really shows the darker side of being a conservation biologist. No one ever considers the idea of a natural park to be harmful in any way. The general idea of a natural park is beneficial act to restore or preserve the beauty of nature. Conservationists are usually supported by these Environmental Non-Governmental Organizations (ENGOs), who help them raise funds to create natural parks. Conservationists proclaim that the government and industries are doing these horrible things to people and the environment when in fact they aren't much different. The hypocrisy can be seen when one observes how they turned natural areas into natural parks. They remove every human element off of these parks, including the indigenous people that live there, violating these people’s human rights and they usually end up living in poverty. These organizations move people from their native lands, just like the industries. They take away a tribe's way of life, just like the government. All of this for the sake of some idealistic goal they have, just like the government and industries. Even when it is a noble goal such as conservation, it still ends up with some amount of collateral damage.
ENGOs are one of the main contributors to the displacement of indigenous people. They are able to remove people from their homes if the area is determined to require preservation, completely ignoring the opinions of the people who live off the very land itself. They are also able to do this because of the large amount of funding they receive from various sources. Development has severely damaged the livelihoods of many people who are displaced. Their resources such as shelter, rights and identity are taken away from them. Some of these people have lived on these lands for centuries, and when you take that away from them, they lose more than their home; they lose their traditions, culture and history. The government justifies this by saying that their presence jeopardizes the economic progress of the country. This however doesn`t allow anyone to remove people from their lands.
In the Dominican Republic, 31.5 percent of its land is considered protected, which forces people to crowd to other portions of the island. The refugee history of the Dominican Republic has had many dramatic episodes. The destruction caused by World War II have already left people in the region homeless and struggling. It seems that the conservation movement is just another hardship the people of the Dominican Republic are going through.
Conservation is also about creating commodities for foreign exchange, infrastructure, and investments that seem to fall under the umbrella of growing development. The displacement of people is often a common byproduct of development. While some conservationists may believe that what they are doing is the right thing, there are those who don't really care if what they are doing is particularly noble. The corporations that fund these ENGOs seem to view conservation as a new way for them to exploit more resources from the land. These ENGOs will never see their preserved natural world as long as they keep relying on the large corporations with their own agendas and separating humans from nature for fear that we might poison it. Conservation isn't bad but it shouldn't be used as an excuse to remove people from their lands for some kind of economic benefit.
[photo, by Katy Warner licensed by CC BY-NC-ND 2.0]
By Brandon Hanson
Mark Dowie’s article “Conservation Refugee” really shows the darker side of being a conservation biologist. No one ever considers the idea of a natural park to be harmful in any way. The general idea of a natural park is beneficial act to restore or preserve the beauty of nature. Conservationists are usually supported by these Environmental Non-Governmental Organizations (ENGOs), who help them raise funds to create natural parks. Conservationists proclaim that the government and industries are doing these horrible things to people and the environment when in fact they aren't much different. The hypocrisy can be seen when one observes how they turned natural areas into natural parks. They remove every human element off of these parks, including the indigenous people that live there, violating these people’s human rights and they usually end up living in poverty. These organizations move people from their native lands, just like the industries. They take away a tribe's way of life, just like the government. All of this for the sake of some idealistic goal they have, just like the government and industries. Even when it is a noble goal such as conservation, it still ends up with some amount of collateral damage.
ENGOs are one of the main contributors to the displacement of indigenous people. They are able to remove people from their homes if the area is determined to require preservation, completely ignoring the opinions of the people who live off the very land itself. They are also able to do this because of the large amount of funding they receive from various sources. Development has severely damaged the livelihoods of many people who are displaced. Their resources such as shelter, rights and identity are taken away from them. Some of these people have lived on these lands for centuries, and when you take that away from them, they lose more than their home; they lose their traditions, culture and history. The government justifies this by saying that their presence jeopardizes the economic progress of the country. This however doesn`t allow anyone to remove people from their lands.
In the Dominican Republic, 31.5 percent of its land is considered protected, which forces people to crowd to other portions of the island. The refugee history of the Dominican Republic has had many dramatic episodes. The destruction caused by World War II have already left people in the region homeless and struggling. It seems that the conservation movement is just another hardship the people of the Dominican Republic are going through.
Conservation is also about creating commodities for foreign exchange, infrastructure, and investments that seem to fall under the umbrella of growing development. The displacement of people is often a common byproduct of development. While some conservationists may believe that what they are doing is the right thing, there are those who don't really care if what they are doing is particularly noble. The corporations that fund these ENGOs seem to view conservation as a new way for them to exploit more resources from the land. These ENGOs will never see their preserved natural world as long as they keep relying on the large corporations with their own agendas and separating humans from nature for fear that we might poison it. Conservation isn't bad but it shouldn't be used as an excuse to remove people from their lands for some kind of economic benefit.
[photo, by Katy Warner licensed by CC BY-NC-ND 2.0]