Challenges of Participatory Community Monitoring of Biodiversity in Protected Areas in Brazilian Amazon

Abstract

Participatory community monitoring programs (PCM) have become an important methodological innovation for the management of biodiversity conservation in protected areas. Based on the participation of the local communities, they are presented as less costly programs than conventional ones. However, in practical terms, such programs pose serious implementation challenges. In this article, we identify the achievements, obstacles, and perspectives of four PCM implemented in the state of Amazonas, Brazil. Based on bibliographical and documentary research, direct observations and in-person interviews with program managers and specialists, we qualitatively evaluated these programs with respect to participation, data production and retrieval, and financing. We found that the performances of these programs were not yet adequate to their protected areas management priorities and that they had not yet generated perceptible benefits enough to enhance community trust and full appropriation of the programs' outcomes by resource users and by conservation unit management teams.

Connecting Top-Down and Bottom-Up Approaches in Environmental Observing

“…Despite recent progress (Armitage et al 2011 , Kendall et al 2017 , Tengö et al 2017 ), government agencies and academia continue to struggle to understand the nature and relevance of CBM and the Indigenous and local knowledge that informs many CBM efforts (table 1 ). Misconceptions include a perceived lack of CBM reliability and failure to appreciate equivalency of information generated through CBM and by professional scientists (Johnson et al 2015 , Costa et al 2018 ). In part, historical and power relationships may create an adversarial dynamic—for example, between multilevel actors that are part of comanagement or between researchers and community members (Armitage et al 2011 , Long et al 2016 ).…”

“…Some research and CBM programs have unclear agreements on data ownership and use (Costa et al 2018 ). It is important that communities maintain control over data and that community members have access to the data with long-term data storage solutions as part of CBM design (Johnson et al 2021 [this issue]).…”

“…Programs may be established without any insight into existing organizational or institutional landscapes in the area. Instead of properly incorporating CBM activities into local organizations with a track record of success, parallel island structures are set up that wither and detract from existing successes (Costa et al 2018 ). Typically, natural resource management programs require 5–10 years of external support before self-sufficiency, with some CBM programs not sustained over this minimum period of time and therefore unable to achieve their main objectives.…”

Mitigating the Pressures: The Role of Participatory Planning in Protected Area Management

“…However, PP also entails pitfalls which need to be taken into account. These refer to (i) the time and costs required (Luyet et al 2012), (ii) potential stakeholder frustration and fatigue (Rasheed and Abdulla 2020;Reed 2008), (iii) the issue of power dynamics and group thinking (Luyet et al 2012), (iv) communication problems such as technical language and general language barriers (Glicken 2000;Rasheed and Abdulla 2020), (v) potential new conflicts (Kangas and Store 2003), (vi) involvement of non-representative stakeholders (Reed 2008) or additional empowerment of those already important (Luyet et al 2012;Rashid et al 2013) and (vii) data generation and retrieval (Costa et al 2018). In terms of the data issue, a key challenge for effective PA management and, in particular, visitor management, is the availability of spatial data (Hennig 2017).…”

Ruído no meio urbano: perspectivas e diagnóstico

“…[3]; Paz [4]; Guedes [5]; Mardones [6]; Botteldoorenet et al [7]; Can et al [8]; Dekoninck et al [9]; Costa et al [10]; Gozalo et al [11]. No cotidiano, sabe-se que além do tráfego de automóveis, contribuem para a emissão de ruído: bares, templos religiosos, fogos de artifício, casas noturnas, construção civil, carros de som, aglomerados de pessoas, máquinas industriais, canteiros de obras, vendedores ambulantes etc.…”