摘要：People who live in rural places usually define the surrounding territory and
land as their home, as the places they recreate, collect and use natural
resources, and bury their friends and kin. The land is a part of the people,
and the meanings they give to places are reflections of themselves and their
self-identity. That building over there is not just a building; it is Uncle
Warren’s cabin, built on the site where my grandmother is buried. But what
happens to the meanings of the land and places on the land--indeed to the
very meanings local people have of themselves–when the land is
transformed from private ownership to public ownership and is managed by
a government agency for the benefit of conservation, preservation, and
recreation by the public? Examples of this include Protected Areas or
National Parks. How do local people make sense out of and adapt to the
new restrictions on traditional use and access imposed by the agency to
meet a political mandate for preservation? How do the employees of a public-land agency attempt to construct new meanings for the land and
places on the land? Do these various social constructions or meanings
compete or conflict with one another? What are consequences of
competition, conflict, and/or resistance over resources (management
problems, degradation of the environment, and vandalism for examples)?
What measures can be taken to lessen conflict and resistance over the
management of public land?
Loading...
