8/2/2019 MapuchesPA

1/16

Mapuche Struggles for Land and the Role ofPrivate Protected Areas in ChileLaura E. Meza

Consultant for tbe Eoacl c^' Agiiciilttinil Orgeini^ation of the 'nite Nations (HAO) Multidisciplinary Team for Sotith AmeiicuSantiago, Chile

AbstractThe Chilean system of public protected areiis (Pl'As) has several pniblcms thai restrici itscapacity in the process of biodiversity conservation. Since A large portion of the territoryis privately owned, private protected areas are increasingly considered an important ele-ment to address national conservation goals. International and local non-governmentalorganizations (NGOs), companies, communities, and private landowners have createdmore than 5(H) private conservation projects in Chiie in the last decade. This researchdescribes the conflicts to extend private conservati

8/2/2019 MapuchesPA

2/16

ISO journal of Latin American GeographyPa labras c la \ -e : reas pblicas protegida.^, tierras indigenas, co nsen'acin, cmflictos, parques, Chile

IntroductionDespile important environmental protection measures taken by the Chilean gov-ernment in the past decade, natural resources and biodiversity remain threatened. A2005 report by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD)shows the inadequacy of nature conservation in the country fCONANlA 2005). TheChilean challenge is to conserve unique ecosystems while growing an economy basedon natural resources. Due to the difficulties with establishing new public parks, privateprotected areas (PPAs) constitute both a complement to, and an alternative for, conser-vation strate,tiies in many countries. Worldwide, private conservation initiatives continueexpanding, although they remain largely unrecognized by the academic community (L'p-hoff and Langholz, I")'>8; Kramer et al, 2000; Ung ho lz , 2(H)3).In the last decaiie, numerous private conser\'ation initiatives have been under-taken, followed by a debate about the appropriate mechanisms to promote conservationand the role of the private sector in conservation. The re are 500 PPAs in (^hile, coveringroughly 1.5 million hectares (2"/. of the totai land area) (CONAiNU 200.S). The ten larg-est PPAs cover I million hectares, and were created by philanthropists and internationalconservation NGOs such as the World Wild Fund (W^'F), Conservation Land Trust

(C:LT), Patagonia I md Trust (PLl^, The Nature Conservancv iTNC), and Wildlife Con-servation Society (WCS). SmaUer-sized PPAs have been established by a variety of stake-holders, including corporations, research institutions, tourism entrepreneurs, N ti O s , andindigenous communities.Despite the promotion of PPAs in (^hile, only a few private reserves have beenestablished in the Mapuche territory (mainly regions VIII, IX, XIV and X) (I'ij^re 1).The Mapuche territory brings together several stakeholders and their Cijntlicting inter-ests, including indigenous interests, large forestry companies, and conservation NGOs.While private businesses legally "own" a large proportion of ancient Mapuche land, theindigenous communities claim those lands as their own. There is an ongoing violentconllict between forestry companies and Mapuches that had caused n

8/2/2019 MapuchesPA

3/16

Private ProtectetI Areas in Chile l.Sl

8,000,000

700,000"

600,000

500,000

400,000

300,000

200,000

100,0000

D

I g, XV II IV RM VI VII VII! IX X&XIV XI XIIn Public Protected Areas Private Protected Areas

Figure I. Distribution ot protected areas per region in hectares.Two lines of investigation arc presented: first, a description of the historical pro-cesses that explain conflicts in indigenous lands; second, the emergence of PPAs as apotential solution to those conflicts. "O pen-end ed" interviews were applied with expertsfrom tffereni kinds ot organizations related tu PPAs, trom academia, forestry compa-

nies, internati(3nal and national NGOs, and an indigenous organization.There is not an inherent conflict between indigenous demands and consei^'iitionprerogatives. ConHict appears only when a priority- is assigned to one of these dem ands.Nature conservation is not a "tension-free" terrain and it is clear that certain policies can

8/2/2019 MapuchesPA

4/16

I.S2 Journal of Latin .'\merican CieographyT h e P e o p l e of the L a n dIn the native language. Mapuche means "people thai belong to earth." The Mapu-che people are the largest and most organized Indigenous group in Chile, which also in-cludes the Pehuenche and Huilliche people. The Mapuche are on ihe lowesi social castestrata in a highly unequal Chilean society, considered poorer than the poorest rural indi-viduals. For generations the Mapuche have been subjected to racial discrimination. Theyare concentrated in areas of poor soil qualitv' and low ctiltivation productivity, whichmakes it difficult for them to sustain themselves (Kay, 20()2). Statistics indicate that theincidence ot poverty is 2') percent among the indigenous, compared to 20 percent amongthe non-indigenous population of Chile (MIDEPL,\N 2003). Thus, the chance of beingpoor is 56 percent greater if one is indigenous. On average, indigenous families receivealmost halt the income of non-Indigenous families, and 65 percent of the indigenousfamilies are within the lowest two quartiles of income distribution. In (erms oi educa-tion, the average amount of time spent in school among indigenous peoples is about 2.2years belmv the average of non-indigenous individuals, which make them more likely toobtain unskilled jobs.

Mapuche were the native inhabitants of central and southern Chile before theSpanish conquest, "l'heir original territory is believed to extend over two mtllion hect-ares. Since Mapuche territory was incorporated into the Chilean state at the end of thenineteenth century, the Mapuche have systematically been deprived of their ancestralterritory (Aylwin, 2002). In the early twentieth century , a policy which offered incentivesto ['European settlers resulted in thousands of new settlers occupying their land. Duringthe 1980s, a policy promoting forestry expansion (Decree Law 70!) again dispossessedihe Mapuche in favor of Iarge forestry companies.The historical transformation of the land tenure system and the implementationof liberal policies in Chile have resulted in the formation of a rural landscape that ismostly privately owned {W'^u) and predominantly in the hands of medium to large-si/edentrepreneurial landowners. Sm;il properties and local communities have a marginalrepresentation (Silva, 2tH)4). The expansion ot forestry farms still occurs in areas wheresettlements ot indigenous people exist. It has generated the marginal7;aiion of the Ma-puche , who have been obliged to sell their land, which has often resulted in violentdisputes between indigenous communities, the forestry companies, and the government(Armesto et al., 2001; Silva, 2(.X)4). A rm esto ct ai. {2001), however, stress that mo re than ahalf a million people of indigenous ancestry still live in "elose association with forests"in centnil and southern Chile.With the passage of the lntligenous l^iw, the Chilean government establisheil aprogram to return land to indigenous eommunities. However, the program has beencriticized because of the low fertility- and productivity of the land, which is usually de-graded, and because of the inadequacy of technical assistance offered to support tliecommunities. Because of these problem s, the Mapuche have noi been able lo take advan-tage of the law to rebuild their communities and to protect their natural environment .

8/2/2019 MapuchesPA

5/16

Private Protected Areas in Chile 153.Mapuche land disputes are concentrated primarily in tbe Araucania Region, which

includes theH''', 9''' 10'''and 14''' national regions (I igure 2). Such disputes involve violentprotests, land invasion, damages to private properly, and criminal prosecutions, Sw{)rd(2001) observes that there is not one unified "Mapuche Movement"; she points oui thaithere are many movements and many changing demands. Contesse (2004) classifies iheMapuche protest as a "new social movement", based on ethnic identity.

W'hl cire the Mapuche denmndsNot only is it imperative t

8/2/2019 MapuchesPA

6/16

154 [oiimal (if Kaiin American Geography

l'igure 2. Araucania repi'in (afier Torreji>n y ("isternas, 20(12).criticized the governmental intervention related to Mapuche conllicts,ihai ihe state should do more. The interviewee of Mininco forestry companydeclared:

arguing(CMPC)

Did we commit a sin? No. Should we have cared about everything relatedto this? No, probably nci. And when the indigenous communities claim theirancestral rights and things like that, the State declares that it is a problembetween private entities. It is an asserticjn against the State, f lowever, we areclose to them [indigenous[ and we are the first to suffer the attacks.

8/2/2019 MapuchesPA

7/16

Private Protected Areas in Chile 155plications of this Law."

The performance of these companies is cltisely observed by international agen-cies, and regulated by international standards with regard to social and environmentalconcerns. In a successful international campaign promoted by NGOs toward native for-est conser\'ation,' CMPC and ARALICO and a number of Chilean and US environmen-tal NGOs signed an agreement whereby lhe companies agreed to conserve the areas ofnative forest existing on their properties - representing 2.8yn of the total surface of thenative torests in the country - and not replace them with plantations of exotic species.

Due to forest certification standards Forestal Mininco (part of CNfPC holding)has implemented a so-called "Good Neighbor Program" to improve its relation with theindigenous communities.Conservation and the Mapuche Movement

After being censured ftr their lack ot promotion oF local peoples' participation,particularly indigenous communities, in conservation projects, international conservationbodies are now paying more attention to the social impacts of their projects. In 199*), theWorld Commission on Protected Artas (IUCN) implemented guidelines emphasizingco-management of protected areas, agreements between indigenous peoples and con-servation bodies, indigenous participation, and recognition of indigenous peoples' rightsto use their lands and territories (Jeanrenaud, 2(tU2). Moreover, the commitment of theinternational eommunity to the Millennium Development Goals has set a new challengeto find ways for protecting nature along with reducing poverty.

In (lle, international and national conservation NG(.)s have aided the Mapuchemovement by denouncing the situation facing Mapuche communities because of forestplantation expansion. By the same token. Mapuches declare that "they are not again.siconservation projects, but against forestry companies' interests" (Coordinadora Mapu-che, 2003). In some cases conservation interests have c

8/2/2019 MapuchesPA

8/16

136 journal of Latin American Geographyconservation NGOs have created the largest PPAs in Chiie, but only one case is lo-cated where indigenous land claims exist: the Chauhin-Venecia project in Region XIV.

Private parks on Mapuche landThree cases of PPAs, set in indigenous territories, are here selected (lgure 3) toillustrate the outcomes of divergent interests over indigenous lands. The tirst case is asmall project conducted by various indigenous communities. The second example is amedium sized project organized by an international NGO. The third example is a largeprivate park created by an entrepreneur that had generated conflict with neighboringindigenous communities.

Mapii l^hual netii'ork of hidigemmsparksThe indigenous association "Mapu Lahual" of Butahuillimapu has a communi-ty-based conservation project in Huilliches' lands in Region IX. The community' has

implemented a network of six pn)tected areas covering mort' than 1,000 hectares ofcoastal temprale rainforest. The idea is to increase family income and to diversify (heireconomic activities in areas where many communities live below the poverty line. Theproject has been supported by the W'Wr who on its Web page (2CH16) declares: "Mapu-lahual demonstrates thai it is possible to recognize the rights of indigenous peoples andachieve conservation go;ils in the snme areas."

Inicrvicv.' data provided an excellent evaluation of Mapu Lahual as a conservationproject conducted by an indigenous commutiitj'. The VCNOT interviewee highlighted thefact thai this initiative was spontaneously initiated from within the community. Oviedoet al. (2002) mention that the initiative was greatly encouraged by a change in the way theChilean government engages with communities.

Now there are many activities initiated by communities or third parties thatwork with communities. One of the most motivating or surprising things tome is that many grassroots organizations are initiating and innovating in con-ser\'ation. Many of them have ideas related lo conservadon and afterwardsthey request technical support. [Fhrough this process| sophisticated and inter-esting initiatives have been created. The Mapu Lahual Network of protectedareas is an example in that direction. The idea was born there and it is growingbecause of a group of leaders who are highly prepared (W>X'F representative)

On the other hand, the spokesperson for 'Parques para Chile' revealed that in theMapu Lahuai area there are communities that "do not believe in conservation." Accortl-ing to this interviewee, "this aspiration |for conser\ing nature] should be shared by thecommunities beyond their leaders."

The CODFiFl' representative highlights [he impossibility of giving legal protec-tion to PPAs in indigenous lands, due to the legal status of intligenous lands. Accord-ing lo the interviewee, the long-lerm commitment for conservation is a du!)ious point:

8/2/2019 MapuchesPA

9/16

Private Protected Areas in Chile 157

'CHILE

MapArea

Mapu LahualChahuin-Venecia

Indigenous communities want to create and implement their own protected areas; therelation bet-ween nature conservation and ecotourism being viewed as an opportunity.The I luilliche spokesperson believed that conservation is good for future generations

8/2/2019 MapuchesPA

10/16

158 Journal ot Latin American Geographybeen here alwavs, because we had enough intelligence to keep it. And second,because it is important Ut conserve to maintain a socially responsible tourism,whicli has no race or frontier, iis only condition is to respect human digtiiiy.

I hnvever, there are only a small number of concrete initiatives conducted by in-digenous communities with Mapu Lahual being the most commented upon. One ofthe reasons that only a few indigenous commutiities are involved in PPAs, according tothe Huilliche spokesperson, is a lack of support from the government Nonetheless, hedeclared that "we also plan to have future parks in al! ot our communities, Iiut the mostemblematic will be south of the Chilo National Park."

C/jhti/n-1In 2003 TNC acquired 60,000 hectares at public aucuon following the bank-

ruptcy ot a forestry company. Since then, the Nature i-onservancy and WWF' havebeen managing the Valdivian Coastal Reserve site (named C^bahuin-Venecia). Ac-cording to the TN(~ web page (accessed 2009): "we are working closely with neigh-boring fishing villages and indigenous communities to maintain traditional landuses and encourage compatible local economic development as part of the reserve'soverall conservation strategy." In 2006 the VCWF web page declaretl that the designa-tion ot the property as a reserve is part of a larger partnership among the Conser-vancy, World Vi'ildlife Fund, local organizations, and the (Chilean environmental agency(CONAMA). Tlic interviewee from CONAMA observes that this PPA was createdbecause there was a development project that constituted a menace to biodiversity.

The reason why most of the projects are in the 10"' region is because of a lowanthropological intervention that allows finding pristine areas particularly inthe coastal mountain range. And that is the reason why the highway projectaroused contlict. Interestingly, W ^ T and TNC buy Chahuin-N'enecia propertywhere the highway is planning to go through.

There are indigenous land claims in the vicinity of the Chahuin-Venecia ProtectedArea. Cooper (2003), referring to this case, argues that even if Chile does not comply withinternational norms regarding indigenous rights, and therefore does not force others to doso . international conservation NGi^s should comply with these norms and should Irans-ter these rights to the indigenous communities. WWT- declares that they are evaluatingways to integrate the participation ot communities living off the management of the area.

Taiitcituo PctrkSebastian Pinera, a businessman and presidential catididate in the election of lanu-

ary 2006, developed a I30,(K)0-hectares nature reserve on Chilo Island. The project isone of the largest private reserves located on indigenous land, it had generated con-flicts because the Huilliches people, a subgroup of Mapuches, claim indigenous land

8/2/2019 MapuchesPA

11/16

Private Protected Areas in Chile 1.S9W ith rega rd tt> Pin era our feebng is thai there is a big injustice because theselands are essentially fluilliche. And f rom morn ing to night to see them inthe h:inds i>t one pers on, wh o certainly mighi have go od in tention s, I'm notjudging his inteniions, but because he has money some would say he can afff>rdthis big luxury.

F o r the academic interviewee Piera 's interest in conservat ion is seen as a positive sij;-nal from the traditional entrepreneurial class in Chile, a shift in envi ronmenta l concernby an i m p o r t a n t m e m be r of this social group. The interviewee from the g o v e r n m e n t(CO NA M A) th inks tha t the motivat ion of Pinera to conse rve is because of e c o n o m i cprofit. The representative oPParques para Chile ' declared that Pinera is an enigma. Theinterviewee from the Fores t Company ques t ioned ihe legitimacy of philanthropic moti-vat ions ot Pinera declaring that "he can play being a philanthropis t ."

Huilliches had ques t ioned the par t ic ipat ion of Adriana Hoffmann, a verywell-known environmental is t , in supporting Pinera 's project by declar ing that:

. . . |a few| years ago, she suppor ted us against the Colden Springs project.Today the scenario has changed and she is now working for the park, whichmeans that she is now denving OUT indigenous r ights {El nsular, 7 June 2(1(15).

Asked about this cont l ic t , she commented: "I told Pinera to inc lude indigenous peoples ;otherwise il will be very difficult to work there ."

The interest ot the entrepreneurial class to create l*PAs is seen as positive signaiand something that need tf> be promoted . However , as Langholz (2003) argues, PPAscould allow large landowners to keep their landholding while maintain the s ta tus quowith indigenous communit ies .

The three cases il lustrate what happens at the intersection of conservat ion prerog-at ives and indigen ous dem ands . In digeno us gro up s are us ing a discourse abo u! the indig-enous inher i ted apt i tude toward nature conservat ion lo reinftirce their identity as "peopleof the land" and to assert land claims and governance over the land. The case of the Cha-huin-Venecia protected area is an example of an alliance between indigenous groups andcon serv atio n NCit )s as awa y ot gaining legitimacy in tcrr itor iesin which they are con front-ing a threat to their livelihood or existence. In ih is r e lat ionsh ip , bo th groups -M ap uc heand conservation organi^iations reciprocally influence their narratives. Yet the solutiiinfor the indigenous demands for land is not res(j!ved. Tan ta uc o illustrates a clash betweenMapuche tntercsts and conservation's interests , provoking the question: should conserva-tion have priority over indigenou s dem an ds or \ i ce versa? Finally, Mapu lahual is an opt iontrying to address economic deve lopment , ind igenous demands , and conservat ion needs .

Indigenous parksIn Mapuche territory, the establishment of public and private protected areas islimited, due to the reluctance to establish new parks. However, there are some exampies

8/2/2019 MapuchesPA

12/16

)(jurnal of Latin American Geography

We indigent)us people have a playful and ancient relationship with the forest.(...) Our principle is to be respectful towards the environment and to havesocial commitment.Some interviewees refer to the need for including smaO proprietors, and to transformeonservadon as an alternative to development for the rural world, as a mean of reducingpoverty."' The responses linked conservation and poverty reduction by rwo mechanisms:eco-tourism and sustainable forest managem ent. Some interviewees mention the pointof subsidies by stating that small landowners, rural communities, and indigenous com-munities need them m ost. Nonetheless, some responses show reservations about the fea-sibility of implementing conservation projects by small farmers, because of their urgenteconomic needs, and particularly in indigenous territories already involved in conflicts.

I or indigenous peoples, private reserves are a source of income and their (wner-ship is a way to validate their legitimacy over the land. However, indigenous land doesnot mean communal land necessarily. Most indigenous territories are private prop ertiesowned by an indigenous person. In fact, the land-back program implemented hy thegovernment transfers land to both individuals and communities.Forestry companies are the major landowners and potential private park creators.An N G O representative referring to their work in the Araucania region declared to preferthe biggest landowners because "the biggest areas imply the largest protected areas." Byusing this criterion indit;enous landowners are at a clear disadvantage. It is very utilikely

that indigenous communities will create relevant PPA because they i3wn relatively smallpieces of land with low ecological value. Therefore , it is improbab le that the indigenouscommunities will take a leading role in conservation projects if they are not granted landand the necessary resources to develop. The interviewee from 'Parques para Chile' addsan ideological consideration, stating that: "A lot of private landowners think of conserva-tion in an exclusionary way; it means that only rich people do conservation."In I')>(), the WW F' adopted specific policy regarding indigenous groups. The dec-laration acknowledges the rights of indigenous peopie to ow n, develop, contrf>!, and usethe land and territories. Other international organizations had also adopted spt-eifie poli-

cies for their engagement with indigenous communities. More and mtire, (ConservationNGOs play an important role in rural development, (hooper (2005) suggests that theseorganizations should be the ones who take on the task of transferring rights of use toindigenous com munities.Mapuche comm unities want to create conservation projects. Mapuche groupsseek to strengthen their legitimacy to access the forest and to occupy land through dis-course about authenticity, and by stressing their ancient relationship with nature. Mapu-ches, particulariy the Huiliiehes, have included ecological concepts in their arguments, togain legitiniacv on nature governance. They declare themselves to be the ancient forestinhabitants, and insist upon their autonomy from the (Chilean state, by extension de-manditig control over land and resources in their territory.

8/2/2019 MapuchesPA

13/16

Privaie Protected Areas in Chile 161groups to agree lo use restrictions in favor of nature conservation, in order lo assertrights lo iheir traditional land.ConclusionsThe ongoing confiici over indigenous territories creates ihree problems. I'irst, itpromotes a lack of public and private interest in protecting such areas. Second, competi-tion for land between conservation projects and indigenous claims is exacerbated. Third,conservation is being used politically, limiting discussion about alternatives.Nature conservation is used in t^hile as a political tool to gain territorial control,both by big landowners and indigenous groups. Despite the debate, conservation in theAraucam'a region m;untains its status quo. International conservation NGOs and philan-thropists are new actors expanding their actions in indigenous lands.It is necessary not only to recognize the legitimacy of indigenous com munities tocreate their conservation projects, but aiso to promote their involvement in extendingnature conservation and diminishing conflicts. Forestry companies, NGC )s. ami the ('hil-ean state should acknowledge the legitimacy of these communities to be part of naturegovernance, looking for ways of sustainable use of the resources.There is a need to respects indigenous rights, while at the same time in-creasing conservation in the Araucam'a region. Therefore, it is necessary to cre-ate a category of private protected areas specific to indigenous lands. A designa-tion ot "Indigenous Park" shouid include the study of the legal aspects of suchdesignation due to the legal nature of indigenous lands. However, the designa-tion is not useful by itself it it is not closely related to mechanisms that guaranteethe long-term sustainabiiit\' of such projects. International conservation NCOshave an important role to play regarding the indigenous issue, in Chile and beyond.Notes' The recommendations ot the "Commission for Truth and New Treatment'" (200.'^) torecognize indigenous people in the (constitution and mandate indigenous representa-tion in the Congress and local governing bt)dies, however, was not approved by theCongress.~ In August 20(6, the government compromised to reduce bureaucracy and to giveflexibility to small landowners to obtain benetits from the Native Forest Law, one ofthe demands presented by the coalition of NGOs called "Native Ftrest Network" (F.lM.!trador, August 2005).' In 2003, the campaign was executed in the USA targeting the consumers. The famouswriter Isabel Allende participated appearing in The New York Times ana saying: "Don't buywood coming from Chile. It is destroying the native forests."* The Chilean Biodiversity Strategy (CONAMA 2003) acknowledges the importance of

8/2/2019 MapuchesPA

14/16

162 journal of Latin Am erican Ge ogr aph yAr m esto , ]., Sm itlvKa mire z, C. and Ro?.zi, R. 2l)0I. Co nser vatio n strategies for biodiver-sity and indigenous people in Chilean torest ecosystems, ournal of the Rir^alSociety of NewZealand, M (4): 865-S71.

Aylwin, )os. 2000. Los Conflictos en el Territorio Mapuche: Antecedentes y Perspec-tivas, Revuta ihrspectivas (Universidad de Chile), Vol. 3(2): 277-300.Bailey, |odi. 20tt4. Th e Limits of Largesse: International Env ironm ental N t O s, Phi-lanthropy, and Conservation. Guest speaker presentation ai "NGOs in Latin AmericaSpeaker Series". Syracuse I'niversity Fidl 2004.C O N A M A , 2003. National Biodivenity Strate^ of the Republic of Chile. Official document,D e c e m be r 2(Ht3. National Commiss ion of Environment (CONAMA) and Uni ted Na-t ion Development Program (UNDP).Co op er, A. 2(K15. Indig eno tis Land Issues and P rivate Protected Areas in Chile: an O p -portunity' tor International Conservation Organizations. Presented at Seminar: Adjudi-cating Culture, Politicizing Law: Legal Strategies for Black and Indigenous Land RightsS t ruggles in the Amer icas , h t tp : / /www.utexas . edu/ l aw/academics /cen te rs /human-rights/ad judicating/session.htmlApri l 28-2 9, 2005.Contesse, Jorge. 2004. The Rebel Democracy: A Look inio the Relationship between theMapuche People and The Chilean State. Available at ht tp:/ / is landia. iaw.yale.edu/sela/SI ' : i .A'Vl,220l)4/ContessePaperEnglishSELA2004.pdfGacita-Mari, Estanislao. 20(M). indigenous Peoples m Chile: Current Situation an d Policy IssuesBackground Paper No. 7, Wbdd Bank.leanrenaud, S. 20(12. i'eopk-Oriented Approaches in Global Coiuermtion: is tht i^-opard Changing//,r , \/)o/,rf'London: Internatio nal Institute to r En vir on m en t and Dev elo pm ent (II ED ) andBrighton: Insti tute tor l evelopment Studies.Kay, Cristobal. 2002. Chile's Neoliberal Agrarian Transformation and the Peasantry, \our-nal of .Agrarian Change, 2(4): 464-501.Kramer R., | . Langholz and N. Salafsa. 200(1, T he Role of the Private Sector in protecte darea establishment and management: A conceptual tramework for analyzing effective-ness. In Making Park works: Strategies for preserving tropical forest, J Terborgh, C. van Schaik,L. Davenport, antl M. Rao (eds.), pp. 335-351. Washington, DC: Island Press.Langholz, leffrey. 2003. Privatizing Conservation. In: Contested Nature, lirechin S, P.Wilshusen, C. Fortwangle and P. West (eds.), pp.117-136. Albany: State Llniversity of

8/2/2019 MapuchesPA

15/16

Private Protected Areas in Chile 163for grassroots development-friendly initiatives. Paper presented at the Latin AmericanStudies Association, 20th International Congress, Gtiadalajara, Mexico, 17-19 .'\pril.Sword, Alicia. 2001. Ten More Rise Up! How Mapuehe autonomists confront timbercompanies and the Chilean government in the Mapuche-timber contlict (1997 to 2001).M.Sc, thesis, Cornell Ihiiversity.Torrejon, F. y Cisternas, M. 2002. Alteraciones del paisaje ecolgico araucano por laasimilacin mapuche de la agro-ganadera hispano-meditcrrnea (siglos XVI v XVII).Revista Chilena de I listona Natural 75: 729-736.L'phott, N. and Langhjl/, ). 199H. Incentives for avoiding die Tragedy of the Comm ons.Enrironmental(.conservation 75) (.3): 251261.

Uv in, Peter. 2000. Th e Role of NG (.)s in In ternation al Relations. In; Global Institutions and\ Mcal E.mpowermunt, pp. 9-29, Kendal, Stiles (ed.). New \'ork: St. Martin's Press.Vergara, J., R. Foerster and Ii. ( iin de rm an n. 2004 . Ms ac de la legalidad, 1.a Co nad i,li ley indgena y el pue blo ma puc be (1989-2004), Polis. Revista de la Universidad Holivariana,(Santiago, Chile) No. y.

8/2/2019 MapuchesPA

16/16