IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/dia/wpaper/dt202406.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

La mise en place de la Nouvelle Aire Protégée du Makay à Madagascar:Terrain d’enjeux ou terrain de jeu ?

Author

Listed:
  • François Roubaud

    (UMR LEDa, DIAL, IRD, CNRS, Université Paris-Dauphine, PSL, Paris, France)

  • Mireille Razafindrakoto

    (UMR LEDa, DIAL, IRD, CNRS, Université Paris-Dauphine, PSL, Paris, France)

  • Emmanuel Pannier

    (UMR PALOC, IRD, MNHN, CNRS, Paris, France)

  • Christian Culas

    (UMR ART-Dev, CNRS, Université Paul-Valéry Montpellier, France)

  • Stéphanie M. Carrière

    (UMR SENS, IRD, CIRAD, Université Paul-Valéry Montpellier, France)

Abstract

Les Aires protégées (AP) constituent le principal outil de protection sur lequel s’appuie la communauté internationale pour endiguer la dégradation accélérée des écosystèmes et la perte de biodiversité à l’échelle planétaire. Madagascar, considéré comme un hotspot de biodiversité mais également un des pays les plus pauvres du monde, a de longue date fait des AP le principal instrument de sa politique environnementale. Couvrant 13% du territoire, les initiatives se multiplient. S’inscrivant dans cette dynamique de prolifération des AP, cet article interroge les processus et les enjeux qui président à leur mise en place, en s’appuyant sur le cas de l’AP en création du Makay, l’une des plus grandes du pays. Pour ce faire, nous mobilisons trois champs disciplinaires, que nous tentons de faire dialoguer : l’anthropologie du développement, l’économie politique et la critical political ecology. Après avoir posé les éléments de contexte et le cheminement qui a propulsé le massif du Makay du statut de zone rurale isolée et méconnue à celui de site globalisé, nous examinons les arguments mobilisés pour justifier la création de l’AP et comment ces justifications sont construites. Trois arguments-clés sont mis en avant par les promoteurs: la richesse et l’originalité de la biodiversité du Makay ; les menaces anthropiques dont il fait l’objet, en particulier les feux déclenchés par les populations ; et enfin la pauvreté qui aggrave la dégradation de l’environnement. Nous montrons que ces arguments ne sont pas fondés empiriquement. Néanmoins, ils s’imposent et le processus de mise en protection est lancé. Ce qui prime in fine ce sont les positions, les logiques, les motivations, les intérêts et les idéologies des acteurs dominants au détriment des connaissances scientifiques, des enjeux locaux et des populations, généralement négligées. Si le cas d’étude du Makay est spécifique, il a une portée plus large en reflétant une dynamique générale. Nos analyses nous conduisent à esquisser les principes d’un dispositif générique de connaissance, suivi et évaluation qui permettrait de poser un diagnostic empiriquement fondé sur la situation socio-économique et environnementale d’une zone donnée, et par là d’appuyer (ou non) la décision de créer une AP._________________________________Protected Areas (PAs) are the main protection tool used by the international community to stem the accelerated degradation of ecosystems and the loss of biodiversity worldwide. Madagascar, considered a biodiversity hotspot but also one of the poorest countries in the world, has long made PAs the main instrument of its environmental policy. Covering 13% of the country, initiatives are expanding. Against this backdrop of proliferating PAs, this article looks at the processes and issues involved in setting them up, based on the case of the Makay PA in creation, one of the largest in the country. We mobilise three disciplinary fields, which we attempt to bring into dialogue: development anthropology, political economy, and critical political ecology. After setting out the context and the path which propelled the Makay massif from the status of an isolated and little-known rural area to that of a globalised site, we examine the arguments used to justify the creation of the PA and how these justifications are constructed. Three key arguments are put forward by the promoters: the richness and originality of the Makay's biodiversity; the anthropogenic threats to which it is subject, in particular the fires set by local people; and finally, poverty which is seen as a factor exacerbating environmental degradation. We show that these arguments have no empirical basis. Nevertheless, they are not questioned and the PA implementation process has been launched. Ultimately, the dominant players' positions, logic, motivations, interests, and ideologies take precedence, to the detriment of scientific knowledge, local issues, and local populations, which are generally neglected. Although the Makay case study is specific, it has a broader scope in that it reflects a general dynamic. Our analyses have led us to outline the principles of a generic knowledge, monitoring and assessment system that would enable an empirically-based diagnosis of the socio-economic and environmental situation in a given area, and thereby support (or not) the decision to create a PA.

Suggested Citation

  • François Roubaud & Mireille Razafindrakoto & Emmanuel Pannier & Christian Culas & Stéphanie M. Carrière, 2024. "La mise en place de la Nouvelle Aire Protégée du Makay à Madagascar:Terrain d’enjeux ou terrain de jeu ?," Working Papers DT/2024/06, DIAL (Développement, Institutions et Mondialisation).
  • Handle: RePEc:dia:wpaper:dt202406
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://dial.ird.fr/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/2024-06-Article-Configuration-Developpementaliste_DT_26062024.pdf
    File Function: First version, 2024
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Protected Area; Developmentalist Configuration; Conservation and Développement; Monitoring and Evaluation System; Madagascar; Makay;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • O22 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Development Planning and Policy - - - Project Analysis
    • O55 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economywide Country Studies - - - Africa
    • P48 - Political Economy and Comparative Economic Systems - - Other Economic Systems - - - Legal Institutions; Property Rights; Natural Resources; Energy; Environment; Regional Studies
    • Q57 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Ecological Economics

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:dia:wpaper:dt202406. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Loic Le Pezennec (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/diallfr.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.