Department of Conservation Social Sciences, College of Natural Resources, University of Idaho, Box 441139, Moscow, ID, USA.
Environ Manage. 2012 Mar;49(3):593-604. doi: 10.1007/s00267-012-9814-9. Epub 2012 Feb 24.
Collaborative planning theory and co-management paradigms promise conflict prevention and the incorporation of indigenous knowledge into plans. Critics argue that without devolved power to culturally legitimate institutions, indigenous perspectives are marginalized. Co-management practice in North America is largely limited to treaty-protected fish and wildlife because federal agencies cannot devolve land management authority. This paper explores why the Pueblo de Cochiti, a federally recognized American Indian Tribe, and the U.S. Bureau of Land Management sustained an rare joint management agreement for the Kasha-Katuwe Tent Rocks National Monument in New Mexico despite a history of conflict over federal control of customary tribal lands that discouraged the Pueblo from working with federal agencies. Based on the participant interviews and documents, the case suggests that clear agreements, management attitudes, and the direct representation of indigenous forms of government helped achieve presumed co-management benefits. However, parties enter these agreements strategically. We should study, not assume, participant goals in collaborative processes and co-management institutions and pay special attention to the opportunities and constraints of federal laws and institutional culture for collaborative resource management with tribal and local communities.
协作规划理论和共同管理范式承诺可以预防冲突，并将本土知识纳入规划之中。批评者认为，如果没有权力下放给在文化上合理的机构，那么本土观点就会被边缘化。北美的共同管理实践在很大程度上仅限于受条约保护的鱼类和野生动物，因为联邦机构无法下放土地管理权力。本文探讨了为什么联邦认可的美国印第安部落 Cochiti Pueblo 和美国土地管理局尽管在联邦控制习惯部落土地方面存在历史冲突，导致 Pueblo 不愿与联邦机构合作，但仍能维持新墨西哥州 Kasha-Katuwe Tent Rocks 国家纪念碑的罕见联合管理协议。基于参与者的访谈和文件，该案例表明，明确的协议、管理态度以及本土形式政府的直接代表有助于实现预期的共同管理效益。然而，各方是出于策略考虑才签订这些协议的。我们应该在协作过程和共同管理机构中研究参与者的目标，而不是假设，特别要关注联邦法律和机构文化为与部落和地方社区进行协作资源管理带来的机遇和限制。
