Loading...
Imperial Imperatives: Ecodevelopment and the Resistance of Adivasis of Nagarhole National Park, India
This article explores the impact of the India Ecodevelopment Project jointly funded by the Global Environmental Facility (GEF), the World Bank and the Government of India, on adivasi communities in Rajiv Gandhi National Park, Karnataka in Southern India (more generally referred to as the Nagarhole N...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Printed Book |
| Published: |
Law, Social Justice & Global Development (An Electronic Law Journal) 5 October 2005
2005
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://10.26.1.76/ks/004131.doc |
| LEADER | 025100000a22001450004500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 100 | |a Susan Mathews | ||
| 245 | |a Imperial Imperatives: Ecodevelopment and the Resistance of Adivasis of Nagarhole National Park, India | ||
| 260 | |c 2005 | ||
| 260 | |b Law, Social Justice & Global Development (An Electronic Law Journal) 5 October 2005 | ||
| 520 | |a This article explores the impact of the India Ecodevelopment Project jointly funded by the Global Environmental Facility (GEF), the World Bank and the Government of India, on adivasi communities in Rajiv Gandhi National Park, Karnataka in Southern India (more generally referred to as the Nagarhole National Park). Colonial conservation practices have influenced wildlife laws in post-colonial India, with conservation used as a technology of colonial control. Postcolonial environmental policies have largely adopted a protected areas model, which has excluded indigenous communities from access and use and has defined indigenous peoples as responsible for the depletion of biodiversity. The protected areas model is part galvanised by missionary zeal and a metaphorical search for the lost Garden of Eden. The GEF, initially created in 1991, provides grants to developing countries, for projects that aim to benefit the global environment while promoting sustainable livelihoods in local communities, with the World Bank as one of its key implementing agencies. This has led to an economic and managerial approach to environmental protection, which has had adverse impacts on indigenous peoples and has thrown into doubt the environmental benefits projected. The colonisation of nature, law's subordinating logic as regards nature and the creation of protected areas as a simplistic and abstract territorial model of conservation, impacts adversely on indigenous peoples and exposes the real and imagined boundaries of the global financing of environmental protection. Ecodevelopment is an ideology that comes under a green banner, but still reflects decisions made at distant centres, treating the adivasis and the forest as largely peripheral. There is a need for a post-imperial perspective that sees the subordination of nature and of adivasis as emerging from the same imperial imperative. | ||
| 650 | |a INDIGENOUS PEOPLE COLONIALISM PROTECTED AREAS CONSERVATION GLOBAL FINANCING ENVIRONMENTAL FACILITY | ||
| 856 | |u http://10.26.1.76/ks/004131.doc | ||
| 942 | |c KS | ||
| 999 | |c 73519 |d 73519 | ||
| 952 | |0 0 |1 0 |4 0 |7 0 |9 65483 |a MGUL |b MGUL |d 2015-08-01 |l 0 |r 2015-08-01 |w 2015-08-01 |y KS | ||