14 For Kin, God and Other Beings: Mixtures of Conservation …
269
Pacific Island Communities’ Environmental Practices
at the Juncture of Custom and Science
The designers, funders and implementers of environmental projects tend to make
assumptions about which type of knowledge matters to beneficiary communities. In
Asia and elsewhere, donors and governments tend to privilege quantifiable metrics
over qualitative responses or knowledge practices of resource-dependent populations (Agrawal 2005). Similarly, nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), scientists and development agencies often promote technocratic solutions to improve
the social development of indigenous groups (Li 2007; Dove 2011). Misunderstandings about human–environment relations have frustrated the development of
holistic community-engaged responses to threats (Klöck and Nunn 2019; Nunn and
McNamara 2019; Luetz and Havea 2018).
Anthropological research has documented how indigenous stewardship of ecological zones has supported biodiversity and the resilience of people who make a living
from the sea or forest. Such practices typically entail the establishment of communitybased spatial and temporal boundaries, the prescription of acceptable gear and catch
restrictions to maintain valued biota in specific ecological habitats (Hviding 1996;
Cinner and Aswani 2007), and the creation of forms of cooperative governance
that prevent exploitation of common-pool resources (Berkes et al. 2000). People,
clans, or factions tend to compete for control of forests, reefs and fishing grounds
(Adhuri 2013; Thorburn 2000). Misunderstandings have occasionally led to conflicts
over ownership and access rights to coastal fishing locations and marine harvest
sites (Pollnac and Pomeroy 2005). Traditional environmental practices may also be
focused on optimizing harvests for yearly celebrations rather than being driven by
an intrinsic environmentalist interest for protecting turtles, sharks or rays (Foale and
Manele 2004). Research also highlights that indigenous communities often compete
over resources, with different interests (Brosius 1999; Sillitoe 1998; Nazarea 2006;
Buggy and McNamara 2016).
Locals and outsiders with stakes in natural resources occasionally form alliances
with NGOs or outside agencies to protect species or clash over the management plans
for a specific site (Brosius 1999; Li 2007). Relatedly, a society’s interactions with the
surrounding environment—including beliefs about nonhuman spirits—can change in
relation to outside pressures, incentives or forces (Jacka 2010). People rely on cultural
values and beliefs to develop new mechanisms for coping with change (Sasaoka and
Laumonier 2012). Adger et al. (2013: 114) note that “developing new narratives,
alternative meanings or strategies to lead meaningful lives” can help societies adapt
to change.
269
Pacific Island Communities’ Environmental Practices
at the Juncture of Custom and Science
The designers, funders and implementers of environmental projects tend to make
assumptions about which type of knowledge matters to beneficiary communities. In
Asia and elsewhere, donors and governments tend to privilege quantifiable metrics
over qualitative responses or knowledge practices of resource-dependent populations (Agrawal 2005). Similarly, nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), scientists and development agencies often promote technocratic solutions to improve
the social development of indigenous groups (Li 2007; Dove 2011). Misunderstandings about human–environment relations have frustrated the development of
holistic community-engaged responses to threats (Klöck and Nunn 2019; Nunn and
McNamara 2019; Luetz and Havea 2018).
Anthropological research has documented how indigenous stewardship of ecological zones has supported biodiversity and the resilience of people who make a living
from the sea or forest. Such practices typically entail the establishment of communitybased spatial and temporal boundaries, the prescription of acceptable gear and catch
restrictions to maintain valued biota in specific ecological habitats (Hviding 1996;
Cinner and Aswani 2007), and the creation of forms of cooperative governance
that prevent exploitation of common-pool resources (Berkes et al. 2000). People,
clans, or factions tend to compete for control of forests, reefs and fishing grounds
(Adhuri 2013; Thorburn 2000). Misunderstandings have occasionally led to conflicts
over ownership and access rights to coastal fishing locations and marine harvest
sites (Pollnac and Pomeroy 2005). Traditional environmental practices may also be
focused on optimizing harvests for yearly celebrations rather than being driven by
an intrinsic environmentalist interest for protecting turtles, sharks or rays (Foale and
Manele 2004). Research also highlights that indigenous communities often compete
over resources, with different interests (Brosius 1999; Sillitoe 1998; Nazarea 2006;
Buggy and McNamara 2016).
Locals and outsiders with stakes in natural resources occasionally form alliances
with NGOs or outside agencies to protect species or clash over the management plans
for a specific site (Brosius 1999; Li 2007). Relatedly, a society’s interactions with the
surrounding environment—including beliefs about nonhuman spirits—can change in
relation to outside pressures, incentives or forces (Jacka 2010). People rely on cultural
values and beliefs to develop new mechanisms for coping with change (Sasaoka and
Laumonier 2012). Adger et al. (2013: 114) note that “developing new narratives,
alternative meanings or strategies to lead meaningful lives” can help societies adapt
to change.