• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Conservation Biology >The global village: Linkages between international coffee markets and grazing by livestock in a south Indian wildlife reserve
【24h】

The global village: Linkages between international coffee markets and grazing by livestock in a south Indian wildlife reserve

机译：全球村：国际咖啡市场与印度南部野生动植物保护区的牲畜放牧之间的联系

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

India's heritage of natural habitats and wild species is under growing threat from its biomass-dependent rural peoples and its consumeristic urban economy. As the mainstay of its wildlife conservation effort, then, India's wildlife reserves continue to face a range of extractive uses. The Indian conservation/development discourse has, however, drawn a distinction between traditional subsistence use and modern commercial use of natural resources in wildlife reserves. It has also been suggested that subsistence use must be accommodated within Indian wildlife reserves because it caters exclusively to local consumption for livelihood, whereas commercial use warrants greater restriction because it furthers profit-based goals of distant interests. How valid is such a clear distinction between subsistence use and commercial use ? I address this question using the village of Hangala on the boundary of Bandipur National Park in south India as a case study. Hangala's livestock were reared primarily for their inputs of dung and draft power into local agriculture, and customarily grazed in the forests of Bandipur. This practice qualified as subsistence use because all goods and services obtained from livestock grazing in Bandipur catered exclusively to village-level consumption. In the last two decades, major upheavals in the global coffee markets dramatically boosted profit margins of coffee growers in the hill districts abutting Bandipur. The profits enabled coffee growers to afford expansions of their resource catchment for dung, an important farm manure in short supply in the coffee districts. When this demand reached Hangala, it resulted in large-scale export of dung, which transformed it from locally produced and locally consumed manure for village agriculture to a high-value organic fertilizer for commercial export to coffee plantations. Following the dung export, livestock numbers in the region increased, aggravating grazing pressures on the forests. This case study thus challenges politically correct notions that subsistence use is distinguishable from and preferable to commercial use in the context of protected-area management in India.
机译：印度的自然栖息地和野生物种遗产正日益受到依赖生物量的农村人民和消费型城市经济的威胁。因此，作为野生动植物保护工作的支柱，印度的野生动植物保护区继续面临一系列采掘用途。但是，印度的保护/发展话语在野生生物保护区的自然资源的传统生存使用和现代商业使用之间进行了区分。也有人建议，必须在印度野生动植物保护区中适应生计用途，因为它专门满足当地居民的生计需求，而商业用途则应受到更大的限制，因为这会促进基于利益的远距离目标。生计用途和商业用途之间的这种明显区分有多有效？我以印度南部班迪普尔国家公园边界上的汉加拉村为案例研究了这个问题。汉加拉的牲畜主要是为了将粪便和草稿投入当地农业而饲养的，习惯上在班迪铺的森林中放牧。这种做法符合生活用途，因为在班迪普尔放牧的牲畜所获得的所有商品和服务都专门用于乡村一级的消费。在过去的二十年中，全球咖啡市场的重大动荡极大地提高了毗邻Bandipur的山区咖啡种植者的利润率。利润使咖啡种植者能够负担得起扩大粪便资源的收集量，粪便是咖啡区供不应求的重要农家肥。当这种需求到达汉卡拉时，便导致了粪便的大规模出口，使粪便从当地生产和当地消费的用于乡村农业的粪便转变为用于商业出口到咖啡种植园的高价值有机肥料。粪便出口后，该地区的牲畜数量增加，加剧了森林的放牧压力。因此，本案例研究对政治上正确的观念提出了质疑，即在印度保护区管理的背景下，生计用途与商业用途是有区别的，并且比商业用途更好。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号