Skip to main content

A Casualty of Peace? Lessons on De-militarizing Conservation in the Cordillera del Condor Corridor

Part of the Landscape Series book series (LAEC,volume 25)

Abstract

The resolution in 1998 of the armed conflict between Peru and Ecuador through environmental peace-building negotiations, creating a transboundary conservation area, have been heralded as an exemplar of how ecological factors can foster collaboration between adversaries (Ali SH, Peace parks: conservation and conflict resolution. The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 2007; Simmons B, Territorial disputes and their resolution: the case of Ecuador and Peru. United States Institute of Peace, Washington, DC, 1999; Herz M, Nogueira JP, Ecuador vs. Peru: Peacemaking amid rivalry, International Peace Academy, occasional paper series. Rienner Publishers, Boulder: L, 2002). This was also a rare case of US mediation resolving a territorial conflict alongside Brazilian diplomacy. However, 20 years later the peace between the two countries has not reaped the conservation dividends expected as other extractive industry interests and drug gangs have found their way into this region. Some of the lessons from earlier peace settlements that went awry need to be considered (Hampson FO, Nurturing peace: why peace settlements succeed or fail. United States Institute of Peace Press, Washington, DC, 1996). This chapter explores the lessons of public-private partnerships for conservation in a post-conflict demilitarized hinterland. It argues that “collateral values” of natural conservation that may be generated through conflict are vulnerable when peace is achieved without proper monitoring and enforcement mechanisms in place. The importance of finding better ways of not just attaining peace but sustaining conservation after peace is addressed through interviews with key stakeholders in a detailed retrospective of this extraordinary case.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-18991-4_8
  • Chapter length: 12 pages
  • Instant PDF download
  • Readable on all devices
  • Own it forever
  • Exclusive offer for individuals only
  • Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout
eBook
USD   169.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • ISBN: 978-3-030-18991-4
  • Instant PDF download
  • Readable on all devices
  • Own it forever
  • Exclusive offer for individuals only
  • Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout
Softcover Book
USD   219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
Hardcover Book
USD   219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
Fig. 8.1

Notes

  1. 1.

    The “Rio Protocol” refers The Protocol of Peace, Friendship, and Boundaries between Peru and Ecuador, an international agreement signed in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, on January 29, 1942, by the foreign ministers of Peru and Ecuador, with the participation of the United States, Brazil, Chile and Argentina as guarantors. The Protocol was intended resolve the long-running territorial dispute between the two countries, and brought about the official end of the Ecuadorian-Peruvian War of 1941–1942.

  2. 2.

    Refer to the ITTO web site for further details www.itto.int

  3. 3.

    USAID has funded numerous efforts for collaborative development along the Peru-Ecuador border. See for example, Assessment of the USAID Peru– Ecuador Border Region Development Program.

  4. 4.

    The Canadian program is managed by the Artisanal Gold Council: http://www.artisanalgold.org/our-projects/peru/

  5. 5.

    Respondent: Santiago Kingman, Coordinador del Proyecto ITTO PD 238/03 Respondiendo al cuestionario desde el punto de vista de las comunidades Macas, Ecuador. August 3, 2010.

  6. 6.

    Respondent Ángel Nantip: Coordinador de Gestión Externa Comunicador del Pueblo Resident of Pueblo Shuar Arutan Fecha: 15 de julio de 2010.

  7. 7.

    Kefren Graña, Presidente de FECOHRSA, Ruyer Chimpokat, Vice Presidente de FECOHRSA; Eliseo Chimshami, Tesorero de FECOHRSA, Comunidad de Kukuasa, Distrito del RSA FECOHRSA – Federación de las Comunidades Wampisas del Río Santiago.

  8. 8.

    Respondent: Bráulio Andrade Conservación Internacional Perú.

  9. 9.

    Santiago Kingman, Coordinador del Proyecto ITTO PD 238/03 Macas, Ecuador, August 3, 2010.

  10. 10.

    For example, a study of the peace agreement conducted by the U.S. Institute of peace bare mentions the central role of establishing the national parks as means of conflict resolution. Instead the focus is on the process of mediation. See Simmons 1999.

  11. 11.

    Respondent: Luis Espinel, Director Ejecutivo, Conservación Internacional Perú.

  12. 12.

    Respondent: Ruth Elena Ruiz, Fundacio Natura.

  13. 13.

    Two of the key groups that have been in contact with the Shuar are Accion Ecologica and The Indigenous Peoples and Community Conserved Territories and Areas Consortium www.iccaconsortium.org

References

  • Aguilar, D., & Castagnino, R. (2017, March 17). Shuar people ask for president’s freedom amid mining dispute. Mongabay. https://news.mongabay.com/2017/03/shuar-people-ask-for-their-presidents-freedom-amid-mining-dispute/. Accessed 31 Mar 2017.

  • Ali, S. H. (Ed.). (2007). Peace parks: Conservation and conflict resolution. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bennett, B. C., Baker, M. A., & Andrade, P. G. (2002). Ethnobotany of the Shuar of eastern Ecuador. Bronx: New York Botanical Garden.

    Google Scholar 

  • Busch, J. (2008). Gains from configuration: The transboundary protected area as a conservation tool. Ecological Economics, 67, 394–404.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Chapin, M. (2004, November/December). A challenge to conservationists. WorldWatch. http://watha.org/in-depth/EP176A.pdf

  • Chester, C. C. (2006). Conservation across borders: Biodiversity in an interdependent world. Washington, DC: Island Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conca, K., & Dabelko, G. D. (Eds.). (2002). Environmental peacemaking. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • DeLeon, C. P. (2011). Citizenship rights and articulations of indigenous resistance in the Ecuadorian extractive frontier. Masters thesis, York University, Toronto, Canada.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dowie, M. (2011). Conservation refugees: The hundred-year conflict between global conservation and native peoples. Cambridge, MA/London: The MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duncan, P. (2003). Changing landscapes: The development of the International Timber Organization and its influence on tropical forest management. London: Earthscan Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fall, J. J. (2005). Drawing the line: Nature, hybridity and politics in transboundary spaces. Burlington: Ashgate Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hampson, F. O. (1996). Nurturing peace: Why peace settlements succeed or fail. Washington, DC: United States Institute of Peace Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Herz, M., & Nogueira, J. P. (2002). Ecuador vs. Peru: Peacemaking amid rivalry (International Peace Academy, Occasional Paper Series). Boulder: L. Rienner Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lopez-Hoffman, L., Varady, R. G., Flessa, K. W., & Balvanera, P. (2010). Ecosystem services across borders: A framework for transboundary conservation policy. Frontiers in Ecology and Environment, 8, 84–91.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Mittermeier, R. A., Kormos, C. F., Mittermeier, C. G., Gil, P. R., Sandwith, T., & Besancon, C. (2005). Transboundary conservation: A new vision for protected areas. Washington, DC: CEMEX/Conservation International.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Research Council. (1996). Biodiversity conservation in transboundary protected areas. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Perkins, J., & Chumpi, S. M. S. I. (2001). Spirit of the Shuar: Wisdom from the last unconquered people of the Amazon. Rochester: Destiny Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simmons, B. (1999). Territorial disputes and their resolution: The case of Ecuador and Peru. Washington, DC: United States Institute of Peace.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wald, B. (2016). Inside the struggle for Ecuador’s Cordillera del Condor. https://www.greengrants.org/2016/03/10/inside-the-struggle-for-ecuadors-cordillera-del-condor/. Accessed 31 Mar 2017.

  • Watts, J. (2017, March 19). Amazon land battle pits indigenous villagers against might of Ecuador state. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/mar/19/ecuador-indigenous-shuar-el-tink-mining-land-dispute. Accessed 31 Mar 2017.

Download references

Acknowledgements

The author wishes to thank Taylor Holden and the Spatial Analysis Lab at the University of Richmond for preparing the map in Fig. 8.1.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Saleem H. Ali .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Ali, S.H. (2019). A Casualty of Peace? Lessons on De-militarizing Conservation in the Cordillera del Condor Corridor. In: Lookingbill, T., Smallwood, P. (eds) Collateral Values. Landscape Series, vol 25. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-18991-4_8

Download citation