ABSTRACT
In an increasingly globalised world, discourses articulated in and through international arenas 1 shape and influence national and local protected area discourses, and the outcomes of international negotiations have substantial effects on the space for agency of individuals and groups on national and local levels. The number and scope of international institutions, organisations and knowledge systems aimed at solving environmental problems are growing, as is the influence of international conservation authorities. International law governs much national protected area legislation, and discourses of protected areas are intertwined within and across political and administrative levels. 2 International arenas for nature conservation and protected areas have also proved important for Indigenous advocacy, as part of Indigenous peoples’ strategies to legitimise and support their claims to land rights, participation and political influence. 3
Discourses of area protection have traditionally been concentrated on preserving and maintaining (the idea of ) ‘untouched’ or ‘wilderness’ areas, and have largely ignored or suppressed Indigenous land and resource use. 4 In recent decades, the arguments and ideologies underpinning area protection have changed, introducing concepts such as biological diversity protection and sustainable development along with rights-based approaches, increased recognition of local and traditional knowledge and a growing focus on local participation. 5 International arenas for nature conservation and area protection increasingly focus on Indigenous peoples’ role in and contribution to conservation policies and have become important instruments through which they can gain protection for their natural resources, knowledge, traditions and lifestyles. 6 Indigenous peoples are visible
advocacy and attempts to influence policy. International law can be an important tool for advancement of the political goals of Indigenous peoples, and international activism can be a way for them to bypass national levels where they are not sufficiently or accurately represented. 8
However, both scholars and Indigenous representatives have also problematised the major international conventions for nature conservation and area protection. Critics argue that these texts are largely constructed and upheld by non-Indigenous people, that their organisations and decision-making bodies include representatives of nation-states where Indigenous peoples are still struggling for recognition of their rights and that they do not always provide adequate mechanisms for Indigenous influence and participation. They have also been criticised for upholding and reproducing colonial discourses and structures, and for failing to safeguard, or even violating, Indigenous rights.
