Agricultural Science Digest

  • Chief EditorArvind kumar

  • Print ISSN 0253-150X

  • Online ISSN 0976-0547

  • NAAS Rating 5.52

  • SJR 0.156

Frequency :
Bi-monthly (February, April, June, August, October and December)
Indexing Services :
BIOSIS Preview, Biological Abstracts, Elsevier (Scopus and Embase), AGRICOLA, Google Scholar, CrossRef, CAB Abstracting Journals, Chemical Abstracts, Indian Science Abstracts, EBSCO Indexing Services, Index Copernicus
Agricultural Science Digest, volume 40 issue 3 (september 2020) : 223-225

Natural Resources Globalization and Its Effect on the Indigenous People; Evidence from the Theoretical and Empirical literature: Review

Birhane Anagaw Abebe
1Department of Rural Development and Agricultural Extension, College of Agricultural and Environmental Science, Bahir Dar University, Bahir Dar, Ethiopia.
Cite article:- Abebe Anagaw Birhane (2020). Natural Resources Globalization and Its Effect on the Indigenous People; Evidence from the Theoretical and Empirical literature: Review. Agricultural Science Digest. 40(3): 223-225. doi: 10.18805/ag.D-236.
The globalized view of natural resource is strictly connected with quantitative measures and strongly depends on expert assessments and assumptions with poorly understanding local knowledge and local facts, finally leads to unreliable conclusion. Hence, this review intends to investigate the globalization of natural resources and its effect on the lives of indigenous people. The study found that the conventional global approach tends to focus on quantitative measures by contrast the local and traditional approach tend to focus on qualitative information. Thus, local tailored forest conservation and management programs create a social environment that allows unique local environmental values to emerge increasing motivational force of environmental values in the conventional science. This reflects that giving recognition to and work with and through local real situations where problems are identified and solutions are determined makes environmental conservation more cost effective and sustainable. Local people believed that resources not only provide material benefits but also other cultural and social values. Indigenous peoples with a historical continuity of resource-use practices often possess a broad knowledge base of the behavior of complex ecological systems in their own localities. This knowledge has accumulated through a long series of observations transmitted from generation to generation. Where indigenous peoples have depended, for long periods of time, on local forests for the provision of a variety of resources, they have developed a stake in conserving, and in some cases, enhancing biodiversity.
  1. Agrawal, A. (1999). Enchantment and Disenchantment: The Role of Community in Natural Resource Conservation. 27(4):629–649
  2. Amnesty International Report (2013): The State of the World’s Human Rights. Retrieved from 
  3. Arsel M. and B¨uscher. B (2012). NatureTM Inc.: Changes and Continuities in Neoliberal Conservation and Market-based Environmental Policy. Development and Change 43(1): 53–78. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-7660.2012.01752.x. 
  4. Bebbington, A. (1999). Capitals and capabilities: a framework for analyzing peasant viability, rural livelihoods and poverty. World development. 27(12): 2021-2044.
  5. Besty A. and Thomas J. (2011). The REDD menace: Resurgent protectionism in Tanzania’s mangrove forests. Global Environmental Change 22(2): 332-341
  6. De la Cadena M. (2010). Indigenous Cosmopolitics in the Andes: Conceptual reflections beyond “Politics”. In Cultural Anthropology 25 (2): 334-370.
  7. Dressler W.H. (2011). First to third nature: the rise of capitalist conservation on Palawan Island, The Philippines, The Journal of Peasant Studies. 38 (3): 533-557.
  8. Fairbairn M. (2013). Indirect Dispossession: Domestic Power Imbalances and Foreign Access to Land in Mozambique. Development and Change. 44(2): 335–356.
  9. Goldman M. (2005) Imperial nature: The World Bank and struggles for social justice in the age of globalization. New Haven and London: Yale University Press, chapters 1 & 2.
  10. Nygren A. (2002). Development discourses and peasant-forest relation: Natural resource utilization as social process. Development and change. 31(1): 11-34. 
  11. Ojeda D. (2012). Green pretexts: Ecotourism, neoliberal conservation, and land grabbing in Tayrona National Natural Park, Colombia, Journal of Peasant Studies. 39(2):357-375. 
  12. Sharp, B. (1998). ‘First the Forest’: Conservation, ‘Community’ and ‘Participation’ in South-West Cameroon. Journal of the International African Institute. 68(1) 25-45
  13. Swyngedouw, E. (2010) Apocalypse Forever?: Post-political Populism and the Spectre of Climate Change. Theory, Culture and Society. 27(2-3): 213-232
  14. Swyngedouw, E. (2006) Impossible “Sustainability” and the Post-    Political Condition. In David Gribbs and Rob Krueger (eds) Sustainable Development. New York: Guilford Press
  15. Swyngedouw, E. (2005) Governance Innovation and the Citizen: The Janus Face of Governance-beyond-the-State. Urban Studies. 42(11): 1991–2006

Editorial Board

View all (0)