Abstract :
How does environmental protection intersect with processes of democratization in Latin America? This paper examines this question with a case study in Guatemala centered on the Maya Biosphere Reserve. In particular, I explore how individuals and collectives—who are differently situated socially, politically, and geographically—conceptualize and negotiate the linkages between conservation and democratization in Guatemala. Drawing upon interviews with key players as well as my ethnographic research on the daily practices of conservation in the reserve, I suggest that democratization and environmental protection in Guatemala intersect in uneasy and paradoxical ways. At the heart of these contradictions lay historical patterns of exclusion that restrict who counts as a political actor, (environmental) decision-maker, and therefore citizen. The recent emergence of environmental movements and new conservation policies in Latin American countries is frequently tied to the restoration of democratic regimes in the 1980s. As Stephen Mumme and Edward Korzetz (1997: 46) contend, “liberalization and democratization create a host of new opportunities for environmental mobilization and policy development in the region”. Latin American leaders support the presumed congruence between environmental protection and democracies, as outlined in Our Own Agenda, the Latin American response to the Brundtland Report (UNDP, 1990; Gabaldón, 1992). ‘Green’ activists working in North American or European contexts also promote the notion that environmentalism is essentially a democratic ideology (Eckersley, 1992; see also Payne, 1995). Such claims are hotly contested at theoretical or philosophical levels (Dobson, 1996; Goodin, 1992; Saward, 1993), while empirical researchers find little evidence of natural congruence (Carruthers, 2001; Lafferty & Meadowcroft, 1996; Midlarsky, 1998; Walker, 1999). Instead, ample data demonstrate that conservationist objectives can be and are met without consideration for democratic procedures (Campbell, 2000; Neumann, 1998; Peluso, 1992). In short, although we may wish that environmental protection be accomplished through democratic means, there are no essential linkages between these two social imperatives. Consequently, understanding if and how environmental protection projects support or foster democracy requires geographically situated empirical analysis that is attentive to social relations and every day practices. This paper contributes to the on-going debate about the linkages between environmental protection and democracy with a case study in Guatemala centered on the Maya Biosphere Reserve, created in 1990 to protect 1.6 million hectares of tropical lowland flora and fauna. Specifically, I explore how individuals and collectives—who are differently situated socially, politically, and geographically—conceptualize and negotiate the linkages between conservation and democratization in Guatemala. My interviews with key players as well as my ethnographic research on the daily practices of conservation in the reserve lead me to suggest that democratization and environmental protection in Guatemala intersect in uneasy and paradoxical ways. At the heart of these contradictions lay historical patterns of exclusion that restrict who counts as a political actor, (environmental) decision-maker, and therefore citizen. Citizenship, then, is central to my analysis and I begin this paper outlining how and why this concept is particularly relevant in the Latin American context. I then turn to a more fine-grained analysis of citizenship formation in Guatemala, with a focus on the transition to democracy and emerging environmental movements. Drawing upon interviews with key players in the environmental movement, I consider how the social and political exclusions organizing Guatemalan society shaped the implementation of protected area legislation and the Maya Biosphere Reserve in particular. I next examine how the reserve’s inhabitants experienced the imposition of new environmental governance strategies. In two ethnographic vignettes, I analyze how two social groups, whose class position, gender, and race have historically limited their access to citizenship, negotiated the daily practices of conservation projects. In each case, the outcomes are at once uneven, contradictory, and promising. My analysis draws upon qualitative research between 1996 and 1997 on the politics of conservation in Guatemala and the Maya Biosphere Reserve. I conducted additional fieldwork in August 2000, focusing specifically on the relationship between environmental protection and processes of democratization.11I am grateful to the University of British Columbia for funding my research in August 2000 with an HSS grant. Support from IIE Fulbright funded my research in 1996–1997. Unless otherwise noted, all quotations are taken from my taped interviews and field-notes, which I have translated from Spanish. With the exception of some public officials, all names have been omitted/changed to protect the identity of the men and women working both to protect Guatemala’s bio-physical landscapes and to create a more just society. I also wish to note that the analysis presented here is necessarily selective and partial (after Haraway, 1991). I did not speak to everyone, nor am I speaking for anyone. Rather, I have constructed this narrative to make a particular argument about conservation, democratization, and social inequality in the hopes that future generations will consider the broader political implications of environmental protection in specific geographical contexts.
