Need for conservation planning in postconflict ... - Wiley Online Library

Need for conservation planning in postconflict Colombia Pablo Jose Negret1*, James Allan1, Alexander Braczkowski1, Martine Maron¹, James E.M. Watson1,2

1

The School of Geography, Planning and Environmental Management, The University of Queensland,

St. Lucia, Brisbane, Queensland, 4072 Australia 2

Wildlife Conservation Society, Global Conservation Program, 2300 Southern Boulevard, Bronx, NY

10460-1068, USA *Correspondence to: [email protected]

More than 80% of recent major armed conflicts have taken place in biodiversity hotspots, including the Tropical Andes which is home to the world’s highest concentrations of bird, mammal, and amphibian species, and more than ten percent of all vascular plant species (Mittermeier et al. 2004; Hanson et al. 2009). Armed conflicts not only seriously impact social and political systems, but also have important ramifications for biodiversity, from the time preparations for conflict start through to the post-conflict period (Machlis & Hanson 2008). Tropical forests have been identified as

This article has been accepted for publication and undergone full peer review but has not been through the copyediting, typesetting, pagination and proofreading process, which may lead to differences between this version and the Version of Record. Please cite this article as doi: 10.1111/cobi.12902.

This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved. 1

particularly vulnerable during the post-conflict period, when areas made inaccessible during hostilities become open to development (McNeely 2003).

Colombia, one of the most biologically-rich countries on earth (Franco & Ruiz 2014), is emerging from 50 years of internal armed conflict (Brodzinsky 2016). A final version of a peace agreement between the oldest and strongest Colombian illegal armed group, FARC-EP, and the Colombian government was signed on November 12th, 2016 (Colombian Government and FARC-EP 2016).

The Colombian 50-year civil war was tragic, with over 270 000 people killed and more than 7 million displaced (Colombian Information Network 2016). This displacement was primarily a rural to urban movement, causing significant socio-economic problems including local decreases in agricultural production and an increase in poverty and crime in many cities (Zafra 1997). This rural-urban displacement also resulted in forest regeneration in some areas, mainly in the Andes (SánchezCuervo et al. 2012). In response, an important aspect of the peace agreement is rural land reform that aims to encourage displaced people to return to their homes and boost local economies in the less developed, rural regions (Colombian Government and FARC-EP 2016). This land reform is likely to drive a rapid change in the development of agriculture and extractive industries in regions that were previously inaccessible because of the armed conflict, a phenomenon observed in many countries that have recently emerged from conflict (e.g. Cambodia and Liberia) (Brottem & Unruh 2009; Loucks et al. 2009).


In the case of Colombia, without proactive planning, this rural return and its associated development could have catastrophic consequences for its natural heritage. Many conflict regions that were beyond the reach of development during hostilities harbor high levels of biodiversity (Álvarez 2003). For example, the Serranía de la Macarena, a mountainous region with a similar number of bird species to all of North America contained in an area one-millionth of its size (Cadena et al. 2000), has been off-limits to development because of the conflict, despite being oil- and timber-rich (CastroNunez et al. 2016). Across Colombia, there is a positive relationship between forest cover and the intensity of armed conflict (Álvarez 2003) and thousands of square kilometers of highly-biodiverse forested land once under FARC control are now becoming accessible for extractive industries and agricultural expansion. For example, there are already significant agricultural and industrial projects being proposed in Serranía de la Macarena, the Orinoco, Caribe and Choco regions (Cagan 2014; Castro-Nunez et al. 2016; Wade 2016).

The end of such a long and tragic conflict is a cause for celebration not just for Colombians but for the global community. However, given the nation’s globally-significant natural heritage, planning for economic development in ways that are not just sensitive to its biodiversity but proactively utilize it by generating sustainable green economies is urgently needed (Wunder 2000; León-Rodríguez 2016). The development of an environmental zoning plan that delimits the agricultural frontier and controls the use of areas that require special environmental management has been proposed within the next two years as part of the peace agreement (Colombian Government and FARC-EP 2016). This zoning plan has the potential to limit environmental damage and increase formal protection of the most irreplaceable natural areas. However, poorly-informed zoning plans can result in greatly increased deforestation, the creation of inefficient or residual protected areas and the loss of highly


biodiverse areas (Meir et al. 2004; Brottem & Unruh 2009). It is too soon to say which way the planning process will go—but much is at stake. The Colombian conservation science community must now actively engage in the development of this environmental zoning plan and other postconflict planning initiatives to ensure positive and durable outcomes for the nation’s globally significant biodiversity. Colombia has an incredible opportunity to implement a social, economic and environmentally friendly post-conflict development plan that could set the benchmark for other nations overcoming internal armed conflicts.

References: Álvarez MD. 2003. Forests in the Time of Violence: Conservation Implications of the Colombian War. Journal of Sustainable Forestry 16:137–166. Brodzinsky S. 2016. Farc peace talks: Colombia nears historic deal after agreement on justice and reparations. The Guardian. Bogota, Colombia. Available from https://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/sep/24/farc-peace-talks-colombia-nears-historicdeal-after-agreement-on-justice-and-reparations. Brottem L, Unruh J. 2009. Territorial Tensions: Rainforest Conservation, Postconflict Recovery, and Land Tenure in Liberia. Annals of the Association of American Geographers 99:995–1002. Cadena CD et al. 2000. The birds of CIEM, Tinigua National Park, Colombia: an ovewiew of 13 years of ornithlogical research. Cotinga 13:46–54. Cagan S. 2014. Mining Challenges in Colombia’s El Choco. ReVista: Harvard Review of Latin America. Available from http://revista.drclas.harvard.edu/book/mining-challenges-


colombia%25E2%2580%2599s-el-choco. Castro-Nunez A, Mertz O, Quintero M. 2016. Propensity of farmers to conserve forest within REDD+ projects in areas affected by armed-conflict. Forest Policy and Economics 66:22–30. Colombian National Government and FARC-EP. 2016. Final agreement for the ending of the conflict and the construction of a stable and lasting peace. Available from https://www.mesadeconversaciones.com.co/sites/default/files/24-1480106030.111480106030.2016nuevoacuerdofinal-1480106030.pdf. Colombian National Information Network. 2016. Unique Victime Record (RUV). Available from http://rni.unidadvictimas.gov.co/RUV. Franco L, Ruiz JP. 2014. V National Report on Colombian Biodiversity. Bogotá D. C., Colombia. Available from http://www.co.undp.org/content/dam/colombia/docs/MedioAmbiente/undpco-informebiodiversidad-2014.pdf. Hanson T, Brooks TM, Da Fonseca GAB, Hoffmann M, Lamoreux JF, MacHlis G, Mittermeier CG, Mittermeier RA, Pilgrim JD. 2009. Warfare in biodiversity hotspots. Conservation Biology 23:578–587. León-Rodríguez N. 2016. Territory and Environment: Priority in the peace agreements. Bitácora Urbano Territorio 26:91–94. Loucks C, Mascia MB, Maxwell A, Huy K, Duong K, Chea N, Long B, Cox N, Seng T. 2009. Wildlife decline in Cambodia, 1953-2005: exploring the legacy of armed conflict. Conservation Letters 2:82–92. Machlis GE, Hanson T. 2008. Warfare ecology. BioScience 58:729–736.


McNeely JA. 2003. Conserving forest biodiversity in times of violent conflict. Oryx 37:142–152. Meir E, Andelman S, Possingham HP. 2004. Does conservation planning matter in a dynamic and uncertain world? Ecology Letters 7:615–622. Mittermeier RA, Robles-Gil P, Hoffmann M, Pilgrim J, Brooks T, Mittermeier CG, Lamoreux J, da Fonseca GA. 2004. Hotspots revisited. CEMEX, Mexico. Sánchez-Cuervo AM, Aide TM, Clark ML, Etter A. 2012. Land Cover Change in Colombia: Surprising Forest Recovery Trends between 2001 and 2010. PLoS ONE 7. Wade L. 2016. An unhappy peace dividend. Science 352:129–130. Available from http://science.sciencemag.org/content/352/6282/129. Wunder S. 2000. Ecotourism and economic incentives — an empirical approach. Ecological Economics 32:465–479. Zafra G. 1997. The internally displaced by violence: a fundamental problem in Colombia. Bogotá D. C., Colombia. Available from http://www.oas.org/juridico/spanish/zafra.html#4.
