Erasure of Indigenous Peoples risks perpetuating conservation's colonial harms and undermining its future effectiveness

On September 15, 2020, major news outlets in Canada reported the extirpation of the Maligne caribou herd as well as the imminent elimination of two other subpopulations of woodland caribou (Rangifer tarandus caribou) living in Jasper National Park. This regrettable outcome, which happened despite the presence of multiple mainstream conservation measures, including the presumption of legal protection of critical habitat under the federal Species at Risk Act, stands in stark contrast to the publication and subsequent news coverage of Bolam et al.'s (2020) letter in this journal. They report success at preventing the extinction of as many as 48 bird and mammal species since 1993 and argue that their findings are critical to how governments around the world negotiate new goals for conservation. We agree with the latter point, and as such are troubled by the lack of any mention in their paper of Indigenous Peoples and their longstanding contributions to conservation around the world. Countless Indigenous Societies, past and present, share traditional territories with at least 19 of the species discussed in their paper (Table S1). Yet, the study makes no mention of Indigenous people's roles in conservation efforts or their importance to the success of new global agreements like the post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework, which is due for adoption at CBD-COP15 next year, in Kunming China. This oversight has real ramifications for Indigenous peoples; research has repeatedly shown that Indigenous people are effective stewards of biodiversity, and biodiversity on Indigenous lands regularly matches or exceeds that found in formally designated parks and protected areas (Schuster, Germain, Bennett, Reo, & Arcese, 2019). As such, it is likely that the historical legacy and continued presence of Indigenous peoples is at least partially responsible for the successes discussed in their study. It is also essential to point out that many of the conservation practices identified as successful by Bolam et al. (e.g., protected areas, hunting limits) have violent colonial histories. Time and again, Indigenous people have been removed from their lands and prevented from practicing traditional lifeways in the name of conservation (Brockington & Igoe 2006). This includes the aforementioned Jasper National Park, which was established in 1909 through the expulsion of Indigenous Peoples from their traditional lands (Youdelis, 2016). Any quantifiable benefit that these violent acts have had for conservation have easily been eclipsed by the negative social and ecological implications of removing Indigenous stewards from their traditional lands (Artelle et al., 2019). Indigenous territories managed under customary forms of conservation (e.g., Indigenous Protected and Conserved Areas) approximate or exceed the number and extent of state-protected areas (Kothari, Corrigan, Jonas, Neumann, & Shrumm, 2017). There is growing recognition of the role of Indigenous resource use and stewardship practices (e.g., managed fire) in sustaining high conservation value ecosystems, including most of the world's remaining intact areas. Given that research often influences narratives regarding who ought to be at the decision-making table, conservation researchers need to be more proactive in their acknowledgment of Indigenous peoples’ legacy, presence, knowledge, and agency. Philip A. Loring and Faisal Moola contributed to the writing of this letter. Please note: The publisher is not responsible for the content or functionality of any supporting information supplied by the authors. Any queries (other than missing content) should be directed to the corresponding author for the article.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.