ABSTRACT
To what extent do international political processes represent a political and institutional framework for the treatment of biological diversity in specific national and local contexts? Using a case study conducted in Mexico, and within it at the local level in the state of Chiapas, this chapter explores this question, and three implied subquestions. First, are international policies translated relatively directly into national regulations or do they encounter specific interests, relationships of forces, political and institutional conditions and socio-economic dynamics at the national level and if so, are they modified by these? The question of implementation is, as we have already seen, of central importance, especially for a framework agreement such as the CBD (Convention on Biological Diversity). The forms of intervention of different levels are manifold. We shall differentiate here between four such forms: (a) legal regulations, which in a certain sense create ‘‘corridors’’ in which certain confrontations take place, (b) the forms of the constitution of problems and proposals for dealing with them, (c) the ability of certain actors to assert their authority and (d) structural conditions. Second, it must be examined empirically to what extent in Mexico a
‘‘coherent’’ national biodiversity policy is being formulated, as has been demanded repeatedly by national and international actors. If this is not the case, what are the main reasons for this? Third, what role is played by the specific place, which is bound into
spaces in a multitude of ways? There exist competing ideas and strategies on how to deal with the places, that is the natural living conditions and societal relationships to be found there. Here, too, there are specific relationships of forces which cannot simply be ‘‘derived’’ from the national ones. The choice ofMexico, andChiapas, for the case study,was arrived at for several
reasons. Mexico is, for one thing, a so-called megadiverse country, and it is also geographically and political-institutionally closely tied to the major ‘‘demand country’’, the USA, namely within the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). Moreover, questions concerning the appropriation of biological diversity have enjoyed a high level of importance in both expert and public discussion since the end of the 1990s. For the purposes of research this latter fact means that the perspectives and interests of individual actors
and also the lines of conflict have been clearly articulated. Mexico is also interesting with regard to the question of the ‘‘democratic formation of biodiversity policy’’. The ‘‘question of democracy’’ has been emphatically discussed since the 1994 uprising of the Zapatista liberation army (Eje´rcito Zapatista de Liberacio´n Nacional; EZLN) and its social basis. Particularly in the state of Chiapas in the south-east of Mexico, which is a hot spot as far as biodiversity is concerned and at the same time one of the country’s poorest regions, the relationship of forces has shifted as a result of the uprising. How does this change the conditions of democratic politics and thus also of the appropriation of nature? Finally, Mexico was also chosen because the project group already had good contacts there, which meant better access to the subject of the research.1
