{

Contribution of Environmental Sociology to the Watershed Corridors Conservation in Sabah

Prof. Dr. Fadzilah Majid Cooke, Faculty of Humanities, Arts and Heritage FKSW and Universiti Malaysia Sabah UMS

AndAlameen Abdul Majeed, FKSW, UMS

(Paper presented at the Heart of Borneo Conference 2015, November 11-12, Kota Kinabalu.)

some examples Why are the same scientific data interpreted differently by different

groups end up blaming different causes and recommending different solutions? Case study: the haze. How does environmental sociology

contribute to a deeper SOCIAL understanding of the haze phenomenon?

Why are many poor fishers or farmers opposed to zoning in marine or terrestrial conservation areas? Aren’t the zones meant for a sustainable future for them?

Why in eco tourism, women operate homestays but register the business under their husband’s, fathers’ or brothers’ names?

Is it true that the cost of pollution is borne by different groups unequally?

Community based natural resource management is wishful thinking because successes are very few?

Environmental sociology asks interesting questions about development and environment

To examines beliefs and human behaviours towards the environment;

and

how structures of society influence these beliefs and behaviours

Beliefs, behaviours and structures of society contribute to the persistent abuse of the environment.

Structures refer to economic, social/cultural structures

Economic structure = system of production and exchange but also the norms values and social relations that keep the system going. E.g. whether our economic values are oriented towards waste or prudence (cermat); whether our social relations are geared towards more production (GNP) or towards increased happiness (Gross National Happiness).

ENVIRONMENTAL SOCIOLOGY – MAJOR CONCERNS

Basic framework: -------- The root of environmental problems (technical) is largely social E.g. Haze – the ‘technical ‘ cause excessive burnings -the

carrying capacity of the ecosystem to absorb CO2 and other gases has been exceeded;

Case study 1 HAZE AS A SOCIO-ECOLOGICAL SYSTEM

convincing links (through research) BETWEEN HAZE (an ecological disruption) AND the social system;

we have a production system that regards unexploited natural resources as ‘unproductive‘ --- >value to be gained only when they are converted.

ECOLOGY FIGHTS BACK – through losses – SOCIAL LOSS (INDIVIDUAL HEALTH) , PUBLIC COST – (hospital. Clinics., future health of children) ,

SOCIOLOGICAL ANALYSIS : Our system of production favours private gain at the expense of public loss. What are we going to do about it?

Other ROOT CAUSE: good governance or lack of it……… etc.

ENVIRONMENTAL SOCIOLOGY’S FRAMEWORK

.

Ecotourism viewed as a viable option for poor rural economies; Environmentally friendly,

popular among men because no huge upfront investment liked by women because of potential of earning from

home. But an interesting pattern is emerging. In our study of

homestays in two Lower Kinabatangan villages confirmed that:

1) Women are the main operators of the homestays; BUT 2) Male partners /relatives are their registered owners WHY IS THIS SO? On the surface answer given by women ---- men better at

dealing with bureaucracies, women prefer to work behind the scene

y

study 2: Why in eco tourism, women operate homestays but register the

business under their husband’s, fathers’ or brothers’ names?

The sociological questions: How typical is the Kinabatangan case? What is the gender dynamics at the household and community levels that contribute to this divide?

In depth interviews found that women are leaning back because they DO NOT WANT TO APPEAR TO BE TOO DOMINANT

The next sociological question: how would the institution of the family deal with ownership and distribution issues at key points e.g. death of the male relative – or divorce among partners.

To be investigated, since without sociological research, homestays, could in the long term lead to another source for “the feminisation of poverty”.

MORE studies needed on the gender aspects of homestays. And this will be good for helping overcome some of Malaysia’s

‘gender gap’ as suggested by the Sustainable Development Goals

Lower Kinabatangan Homestays – ownership by men ( in general)?

Based on our baseline study of the Lower Kinabatangan SegamaWetlands LKSW Ramsar site, (2014-2015)

Total of 8 villages

6 villages in the Lower Kinabatangan: Abai, Bongon, Mumiang, Pitas, Sri Ganda and Tundon Bohangin

2 villages in the Segama river area -- Dagat and Tidung.

A majority live below the poverty line. Livelihoods are highly dependent on natural resources especially rivers,

forests and mangroves.

Effects of pollution on livelihoods caused by upriver agricultural activities are visible and sharply felt. IN THE LOWER KINABATANGAN, LESS SO IN THE SEGAMA RIVER AREA

Case study 3.Lower Kinabatangan Segamawetlands , some villages bearing the brunt of non point water pollution

BEARING THE COSTS OF NONPOINT POLLUTION?

Interview with fisher, Mr. Sukati (not his real name) in October 2014. Mr. Sukati owns his own boat and , and goes out 2 to 3 miles out to sea

with two others as crew members.

The cost of petrol per trip of 2 to 3 days = RM 100 3 day wages x 2 crew members x RM 70 = 420. 2 day food = for 3 x 2 days = = 100.

COSTS OVERALL = 6 20

Earnings , approx. RM 1000 - Less cost 620

NET EARNINGS = RM 380

(BOAT maintenance not included).

Kg. Mumiang in the LKSW – Ramsar site

THE LARGER PICTURE At Mumiang, up until a few years ago, there were 12 boats with crew. Now

there are only 2. Contributing factors as described by fishers: declining fisheries and huge floods of 2010 – 2012.

At Kg. Abai, diminishing stock of prawn (udang galah) and fish saved in time by livelihood alternative in conservation work – forest regeneration in the Kinabatangan wildlife corridor and nursery for seedlings.

Mr. Sukiati cannot change his job; To be a tourist guide? too many formalities, rules and regulations, some of

which he could not meet.

E.g. boat license awarded for fishing cannot be used as a tourist boat. He had to apply according to specific procedures to convert a fishing boat to a tourist boat;

How representative is Mr. Sukiati ‘s case for the Kinabatangan?

Map of villages located in the core zone of Lower

Kinabatangan and Segama Wetlands, Ramsar Site.

Images of people of the LKSW

1) That the root cause of environmental problems are social. Addressing social problems means changing our economic practices and principles :e.g. should we continue thinking that

natural resources are wasted unless converted to something else, or are they assets to be protected?

2) exposure to environmental risks vary according to rich/poor, urban/ rural, gender difference;

3) Such insights can address questions INCLUDING:

1) what can conservation initiatives (such as RAMSAR) do to enhance social justice (by gender.by geography – upper and lower Kinabatangan, urban/rural)?.

2) How do we proceed from here?

CONCLUSION: senvironmental sociology’s contribution to policy due to the following insights: