Where are the edges of a protected area? Political dispossession in Machu Picchu, Peru
This report draws on fieldwork done in Machu Picchu, Peru in order to critique the Wittemyer et al. (2008) study on population growth around protected areas. I disagree with the study′s emphasis on reducing people′s motives to economic drives alone. The study separates the political from the economi...
Main Author: | |
---|---|
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications
2011-01-01
|
Series: | Conservation & Society |
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | http://www.conservationandsociety.org/article.asp?issn=0972-4923;year=2011;volume=9;issue=1;spage=35;epage=41;aulast=Luciano |
id |
doaj-c027d0159aff424f8bf6f21e4d680000 |
---|---|
record_format |
Article |
spelling |
doaj-c027d0159aff424f8bf6f21e4d6800002020-11-24T23:25:21ZengWolters Kluwer Medknow PublicationsConservation & Society0972-49232011-01-0191354110.4103/0972-4923.79186Where are the edges of a protected area? Political dispossession in Machu Picchu, PeruPellegrino A LucianoThis report draws on fieldwork done in Machu Picchu, Peru in order to critique the Wittemyer et al. (2008) study on population growth around protected areas. I disagree with the study′s emphasis on reducing people′s motives to economic drives alone. The study separates the political from the economic by attempting to fix motives as economic calculations. I argue that a homogenous social process does not drive the population of the protected area. The approach used by Wittemyer et al. (2008) risks constructing a dichotomy that frames inhabitants of protected areas as either ′needy′ or ′greedy′, and fails to recognise that protected areas can form different kinds of political spaces for locals. In Machu Picchu the failure to recognise political space leads to many misunderstandings between locals and conservationists. The paper is a reminder that even for locals, protected areas involve discursive and political relations and the construction of a public sphere that has its own drive and momentum.http://www.conservationandsociety.org/article.asp?issn=0972-4923;year=2011;volume=9;issue=1;spage=35;epage=41;aulast=Lucianopolispublic spherepolitical dispossessionMachu Picchu |
collection |
DOAJ |
language |
English |
format |
Article |
sources |
DOAJ |
author |
Pellegrino A Luciano |
spellingShingle |
Pellegrino A Luciano Where are the edges of a protected area? Political dispossession in Machu Picchu, Peru Conservation & Society polis public sphere political dispossession Machu Picchu |
author_facet |
Pellegrino A Luciano |
author_sort |
Pellegrino A Luciano |
title |
Where are the edges of a protected area? Political dispossession in Machu Picchu, Peru |
title_short |
Where are the edges of a protected area? Political dispossession in Machu Picchu, Peru |
title_full |
Where are the edges of a protected area? Political dispossession in Machu Picchu, Peru |
title_fullStr |
Where are the edges of a protected area? Political dispossession in Machu Picchu, Peru |
title_full_unstemmed |
Where are the edges of a protected area? Political dispossession in Machu Picchu, Peru |
title_sort |
where are the edges of a protected area? political dispossession in machu picchu, peru |
publisher |
Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications |
series |
Conservation & Society |
issn |
0972-4923 |
publishDate |
2011-01-01 |
description |
This report draws on fieldwork done in Machu Picchu, Peru in order to critique the Wittemyer et al. (2008) study on population growth around protected areas. I disagree with the study′s emphasis on reducing people′s motives to economic drives alone. The study separates the political from the economic by attempting to fix motives as economic calculations. I argue that a homogenous social process does not drive the population of the protected area. The approach used by Wittemyer et al. (2008) risks constructing a dichotomy that frames inhabitants of protected areas as either ′needy′ or ′greedy′, and fails to recognise that protected areas can form different kinds of political spaces for locals. In Machu Picchu the failure to recognise political space leads to many misunderstandings between locals and conservationists. The paper is a reminder that even for locals, protected areas involve discursive and political relations and the construction of a public sphere that has its own drive and momentum. |
topic |
polis public sphere political dispossession Machu Picchu |
url |
http://www.conservationandsociety.org/article.asp?issn=0972-4923;year=2011;volume=9;issue=1;spage=35;epage=41;aulast=Luciano |
work_keys_str_mv |
AT pellegrinoaluciano wherearetheedgesofaprotectedareapoliticaldispossessioninmachupicchuperu |
_version_ |
1725558014068391936 |