Files
Abstract
The present paper analyzes the role of discourse in conflicts concerning nature conservation in
tropical countries. We focus on the contested question as to whether and to which extent local
communities should be allowed to live and use resources inside protected areas. Applying the
concepts of belief-systems, story-lines and discourse coalitions, we analyze two empirical case
studies dealing with this conflict: The first case study is concerned with a policy process at the
national level that aimed at passing a community forestry law in Thailand to make the
establishment of community forests in protected areas possible. The second case study deals with
the proposed resettlement of a village from the Lore Lindu National Park in Sulawesi, Indonesia.
In both cases, three discourses could be observed: a conservationist discourse, an eco-populist
discourse, and a developmentalist discourse. The case studies show that the conservationists and
the developmentalists were able to form a discourse coalition, which was challenged by the
proponents of the eco-populist discourse. The analysis also demonstrates that establishing storylines
in the discourse can lead to the neglect of facts and problems that do not fit in either
discourse. The paper draws attention to the role of science in the different discourses and
concludes that scientists should become more aware of the role they play in the different
discourses.