Advertisement

From “Natural Wealth” to “Resources”: Simplification of Nature in Asia

  • Jin Sato
Conference paper

Summary

“Resource” is a central concept that connects nature and the human use of nature. Identification of resource has the power to delimit what is useful from what is not in our surrounding nature. It is also an extremely relevant concept in thinking about the balance between environmental conservation and economic development. The definition of what constitutes a resource and the distribution of control over it has significant implication for sustainable development. “Development,” after all, can be interpreted as the process of identifying and allocating resource control, as well as processing material and nonmaterial resources into useful products and human services. The management of nature has been the key to rapid economic growth in Asia, and this was successfully achieved by the top-down simplification of nature: extracting useful material and transforming nature into resources from the point of view of the state. Interests in resource control have gone beyond nature per se and extended its reach over the control of people living with the resources, such as the minority hill people in the forests. Simplification of a resource, therefore, often entails extraction of resource from the weak to the more powerful. This chapter argues that state simplification creates disparity between those who control the resources and those who live with them in a specific locale. Understanding this divergence is crucial for responding to certain environmental questions, such as why it often takes so much time for the state to take an initiative in remedying problems that had long been identified by scholars and local people. Reversing the direction of simplification is a formidable task, despite various attempts by the governments to decentralize their resource management system. Rather than holding on to the conventional framework of “centralized versus decentralized,” the chapter draws attention to the political implication of “slowing down” the policy speed as an alternative entry point for reforming resource governance.

Keywords

Forest Management Forest Cover Local People State Simplification Environmental Conservation 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Blaikie P (1985) The political economy of soil erosion in developing countries. Longman, Harlow, Essex.Google Scholar
  2. Bruun O, Kalland A (eds) (1995) Asian perceptions of nature: a critical approach. Curzon Press,Richmond.Google Scholar
  3. Dove M (1993) The revisionist view of tropical deforestation and development. Environ Conserv 20(1): 17–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Duraiappah A (1998) Poverty and environmental degradation: a review and analysis of the nexus. World Dev 26(12):2169–2179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Fairhead J, Leach M (1996) Misreading the African landscape. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Ganjanapan A (2000) Local control of land and forest: cultural dimensions of resource management in Northern Thailand. RCSD Monograph Series No 1. Faculty of Social Sciences, Chiang Mai University.Google Scholar
  7. Johnson G, Forsyth T (2002) In the eyes of the state: negotiating a “rights-based approach” to forest conservation in Thailand. World Dev 30(9): 1589–1603.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Li TM (2002) Engaging simplifications: community-based resource management market processes and state agendas in upland Southeast Asia. World Dev 30(2):265–283.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Sasagawa K (1917) Fugen Hozon Ron [Theory of resource conservation] (in Japa-nese).Meiseikan Shoten, Tokyo.Google Scholar
  10. Sato J (2000) People in between: conversion and conservation of forest lands in Thailand. Dev Change 31(1): 155–177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Sato J (2003) Public land for the people: institutional basis of community forestry in Thailand. J Southeast Asian Stud 34(2): 329–346.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Scott J (1998) Seeing like a state: how certain schemes to improve people’s lives often fail. Yale University Press, New Haven.Google Scholar
  13. Van Hise C (1910) The conservation of natural resources (translation). Macmillan, New York.Google Scholar
  14. Watsuji T (1961) A climate: a philosophical study translated by Geoffrey Bownas. Ministry of Education, Tokyo (originally published as FÜDO in Japanese).Google Scholar
  15. World Bank (1992) World development report. Oxford University Press, Oxford.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Japan 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jin Sato
    • 1
  1. 1.Graduate School of Frontier SciencesThe University of TokyoTokyoJapan

Personalised recommendations