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...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Pellegrino A Luciano
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