106 Ingrid Hall
philosophical nature of this discussion should not make us forget that the work of
diplomacy takes place within relations of power. As such, the biocultural tools and
rights shaped by the CBD are developed on the basis of discourses negotiated and
formulated according to a logic that is largely foreign or extraneous to local and
indigenous communities. This process reflects the weight of the naturalist and capitalist ontology. Such framing of the local views proves to be politically powerful,
but entails some accommodations. On one hand, emphasis on this discourse within
these communities has consequences that are worth evaluating. On the other hand,
one might well ask to what extent the international tools forged according to cases
like the Park may need to be more finally tuned in order to defend the interests of
specific Indigenous peoples or Local communities.
Notes
1 This chapter was originally published in French in the journal Anthropologie et
Sociétés: Hall Ingrid (2019). “Le ‘bien-vivre’ (sumaq kawsay) et les pommes de terre
paysannes. Du délicat exercice de la diplomatie ontologique”. Anthropologie et Sociétés,
43(3), 217–244, https://doi.org/10.7202/1070155ar. This version has been updated and
slightly modified. This research has been possible, thanks to the Fonds de recherche
du Québec – société et culture (FRQSC) and the Social Sciences and Humanities
Research Council (CRSH) of Canada. *All URLs retrieved on 1 September 2021.
2 Asociación para la naturaleza y el desarrollo sostenible [Association for nature and sustainable development].
3 Latour understands political ecology as a refounding of the “modern constitution”
that sets human collectives apart from non-human collectives (Latour, 2004a).
According to Latour and Stengers (2004), this process has to take place via a new
“composition of worlds” based upon hybrid collectives, composed of both humans
and non-humans.
4 Other authors discuss the omnipresence of NGOs in the realm of biodiversity conservation (Aubertin, 2005b).
5 On the emergence of international governance concerning biodiversity, see A uberti
(2005a), Halewood et al. (2013), Nazarea and Rhoades (2013), and Thomas an
Boisvert (2015).
n
d
6 Following the title of an article by Argumedo (2008): “The Potato Park, Peru:
Conserving Agrobiodiversity in an Andean Indigenous Biocultural Heritage Area”.
7 The peasant community is the established form of organization of rural communitie
in the Peruvian Andes; nowadays, there are more than 6,000 of them in Peru (Tipul
& Alvarado, 2016).
8 See https://cipotato.org/genebankcip/process/potato/potato-cultivated, and https://
cipotato.org/crops/potato/.
9 https://cipotato.org/programs/.
s
a
10 Namely in the large germplasm banks such as the International Potato Center, which
depends on the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (Halewood
et al., 2013).
11 See https://www.iccaconsortium.org/index.php/discover/.
12 An article signed by Alejandro Argumedo (2008) appeared in the first volume of the
series “Values of Protected Landscapes and Seascapes” edited by the IUCN.
13 Asociación de Comunidades del Parque de la Papa.
14 Since membership of the Park depends upon voluntary membership of the A ssociation
of Potato Park communities, this membership can be cancelled. As a matter of fact,
one community did quit the Park.
philosophical nature of this discussion should not make us forget that the work of
diplomacy takes place within relations of power. As such, the biocultural tools and
rights shaped by the CBD are developed on the basis of discourses negotiated and
formulated according to a logic that is largely foreign or extraneous to local and
indigenous communities. This process reflects the weight of the naturalist and capitalist ontology. Such framing of the local views proves to be politically powerful,
but entails some accommodations. On one hand, emphasis on this discourse within
these communities has consequences that are worth evaluating. On the other hand,
one might well ask to what extent the international tools forged according to cases
like the Park may need to be more finally tuned in order to defend the interests of
specific Indigenous peoples or Local communities.
Notes
1 This chapter was originally published in French in the journal Anthropologie et
Sociétés: Hall Ingrid (2019). “Le ‘bien-vivre’ (sumaq kawsay) et les pommes de terre
paysannes. Du délicat exercice de la diplomatie ontologique”. Anthropologie et Sociétés,
43(3), 217–244, https://doi.org/10.7202/1070155ar. This version has been updated and
slightly modified. This research has been possible, thanks to the Fonds de recherche
du Québec – société et culture (FRQSC) and the Social Sciences and Humanities
Research Council (CRSH) of Canada. *All URLs retrieved on 1 September 2021.
2 Asociación para la naturaleza y el desarrollo sostenible [Association for nature and sustainable development].
3 Latour understands political ecology as a refounding of the “modern constitution”
that sets human collectives apart from non-human collectives (Latour, 2004a).
According to Latour and Stengers (2004), this process has to take place via a new
“composition of worlds” based upon hybrid collectives, composed of both humans
and non-humans.
4 Other authors discuss the omnipresence of NGOs in the realm of biodiversity conservation (Aubertin, 2005b).
5 On the emergence of international governance concerning biodiversity, see A uberti
(2005a), Halewood et al. (2013), Nazarea and Rhoades (2013), and Thomas an
Boisvert (2015).
n
d
6 Following the title of an article by Argumedo (2008): “The Potato Park, Peru:
Conserving Agrobiodiversity in an Andean Indigenous Biocultural Heritage Area”.
7 The peasant community is the established form of organization of rural communitie
in the Peruvian Andes; nowadays, there are more than 6,000 of them in Peru (Tipul
& Alvarado, 2016).
8 See https://cipotato.org/genebankcip/process/potato/potato-cultivated, and https://
cipotato.org/crops/potato/.
9 https://cipotato.org/programs/.
s
a
10 Namely in the large germplasm banks such as the International Potato Center, which
depends on the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (Halewood
et al., 2013).
11 See https://www.iccaconsortium.org/index.php/discover/.
12 An article signed by Alejandro Argumedo (2008) appeared in the first volume of the
series “Values of Protected Landscapes and Seascapes” edited by the IUCN.
13 Asociación de Comunidades del Parque de la Papa.
14 Since membership of the Park depends upon voluntary membership of the A ssociation
of Potato Park communities, this membership can be cancelled. As a matter of fact,
one community did quit the Park.