1 00:00:00,270 --> 00:00:09,600 Friends, colleagues, I hope that I am audible, not only within the room, but to a large diaspora on the internet. 2 00:00:09,600 --> 00:00:18,450 This is an exciting occasion. Actually, it's the third such exciting occasion for our natural governance programme here at the Martin School. 3 00:00:18,450 --> 00:00:27,630 Many of you, I'm sure, will remember that we've had a couple of earlier talks one by John visited and the other by Mohamed Kardinya, 4 00:00:27,630 --> 00:00:29,760 and it's a double pleasure. 5 00:00:29,760 --> 00:00:41,640 Not only that those were startlingly successful and well attended, but the John I know is on line and Mohamed is in the room to join this discussion. 6 00:00:41,640 --> 00:00:49,440 No less exciting is the third in the series is to be presented by Dr. Alexandra Zimmerman, 7 00:00:49,440 --> 00:00:56,160 who's had a startling career in the topic of human wildlife conflict and at the moment, most significantly, 8 00:00:56,160 --> 00:01:02,850 perhaps as well as being a senior research fellow at the wild crew, is also the leader, 9 00:01:02,850 --> 00:01:11,940 the chair of the IUCN Taskforce on that topic, which is gaining enormous international attention. 10 00:01:11,940 --> 00:01:23,610 So many things in life tend to end up in a bit of argy bargy and conservation, and everything associated with it is no exception. 11 00:01:23,610 --> 00:01:31,110 So hardly any conservation issue anywhere in the world is devoid of at least some 12 00:01:31,110 --> 00:01:36,840 conflict between the protagonists or between elements of wildlife and people. 13 00:01:36,840 --> 00:01:39,840 So this is as it were a funnel. 14 00:01:39,840 --> 00:01:49,860 This topic is a funnel into which almost every aspect of biodiversity conflict pause, and it's one that's gravely in need of solutions. 15 00:01:49,860 --> 00:01:54,240 It's solutions that Alex is came to tell us about. 16 00:01:54,240 --> 00:02:04,140 So I'm going to invite her to the stage in just a moment, but I'll anticipate the future by telling you that after she has spoken, 17 00:02:04,140 --> 00:02:12,180 we have the opportunity for a question and answer session that will involve those people in the room and people beyond the room. 18 00:02:12,180 --> 00:02:13,890 We will be terribly disciplined. 19 00:02:13,890 --> 00:02:21,870 I'll say it now and I'll say it again later about using the microphone because without the microphone, the wider family can't hear us at all. 20 00:02:21,870 --> 00:02:26,100 So when people have anything to say, they must say in the microphone. 21 00:02:26,100 --> 00:02:32,520 And I just conclude by pointing out that not only do we think this topic is important, 22 00:02:32,520 --> 00:02:43,440 but I think you will do as well because this event was completely sold out more than a week ago, which surely is a marvellous sign for its importance. 23 00:02:43,440 --> 00:02:57,120 And on that note, I'd like you to welcome Alex Zimmerman up to the stage to give her presentation. 24 00:02:57,120 --> 00:03:04,260 Thank you very much, David, for the kind introduction thank you to the Oxford Martin School for organising this. 25 00:03:04,260 --> 00:03:10,740 It's my pleasure to be here and talk to you about conflicts in conservation. 26 00:03:10,740 --> 00:03:16,170 Now many of us know each other already, and I think many of our audience online, 27 00:03:16,170 --> 00:03:20,640 we have worked together, you know me as working on human wildlife conflict. 28 00:03:20,640 --> 00:03:26,970 One of the flagship conflicts that takes place in biodiversity conservation. 29 00:03:26,970 --> 00:03:29,520 And I'm certainly going to talk a little bit about that. 30 00:03:29,520 --> 00:03:40,230 But today I want to really explore the wider conservation conflicts that we need to grapple with in that in this field and human wildlife conflicts. 31 00:03:40,230 --> 00:03:51,960 That is, direct conflicts over wildlife are very much a flagship within that, and they teach us a lot about the wider conflicts as well. 32 00:03:51,960 --> 00:03:59,670 And so I came to this through a sort of a past starting in zoology. 33 00:03:59,670 --> 00:04:02,460 I studied zoology many, many years ago. 34 00:04:02,460 --> 00:04:11,640 And just as the field of conservation biology has involved a great deal more into what we now call conservation science, 35 00:04:11,640 --> 00:04:24,360 I have to respond very quickly from zoology into social sciences on the realisation that so much at the core of these issues is entirely about people. 36 00:04:24,360 --> 00:04:33,330 And so following that kind of evolution of the field of conservation science, it has become more and more interdisciplinary. 37 00:04:33,330 --> 00:04:39,750 And we've seen that in that in the degrees that are out there, the work of institutes like the wild and many others, 38 00:04:39,750 --> 00:04:46,680 the work of conservation organisations has become entirely interdisciplinary and it needs to be. 39 00:04:46,680 --> 00:04:52,710 And the social sciences when I started out were kind of a bit of a niche side, nice to have, 40 00:04:52,710 --> 00:04:59,730 and they've now become entirely core and essential and seen as that in conservation science. 41 00:04:59,730 --> 00:05:06,570 And so what I'm going to propose today is that this evolution needs to continue and the way it is going, 42 00:05:06,570 --> 00:05:16,530 and I'd like to propose it should go is to start to include the field of peace and conflict studies and everything that that entails. 43 00:05:16,530 --> 00:05:22,500 Because at the core of so many of the issues we're grappling with in conservation are conflicts. 44 00:05:22,500 --> 00:05:28,320 They're everywhere in all different dimensions, different levels, different scales, different severities. 45 00:05:28,320 --> 00:05:36,420 And it is becoming quite urgent that we really incorporate this not as a little Nisid topic, 46 00:05:36,420 --> 00:05:41,490 but it becomes woven into the field of conservation science substantially. 47 00:05:41,490 --> 00:05:45,940 And I would predict that that is where this field is actually going. 48 00:05:45,940 --> 00:05:56,020 And so the core purpose of my talk today is to propose to you that conflict resolution is absolutely critically important, 49 00:05:56,020 --> 00:06:00,340 it is urgent and it is needed at scale, not a little bit here and a little bit there. 50 00:06:00,340 --> 00:06:11,350 We have to actually weave this into conservation biodiversity conservation substantially everywhere globally and that this is essential. 51 00:06:11,350 --> 00:06:16,600 So let's explore that a little bit. And I think this is extremely timely because right now, 52 00:06:16,600 --> 00:06:23,000 as we have all learnt in the last two years, we have several global shocks or crises happening. 53 00:06:23,000 --> 00:06:27,970 We have climate change with the COP 26 having just finished. 54 00:06:27,970 --> 00:06:32,770 That itself is full of conflicts in every way possible. 55 00:06:32,770 --> 00:06:43,010 We've had the COVID pandemic. Bringing about conflicts everywhere from the from losses of income to global. 56 00:06:43,010 --> 00:06:49,010 Clashes between states and organisations and somewhere in there, we have the crisis of biodiversity loss, 57 00:06:49,010 --> 00:06:58,670 and we're trying to grapple with this as well, and all of these things bring about, you know, day to day fundamental problems from loss of income. 58 00:06:58,670 --> 00:07:01,970 We see this particularly post-pandemic now, 59 00:07:01,970 --> 00:07:10,880 where a lot of biodiversity conservation strategies heavily relied so much on tangible economic benefits from biodiversity. 60 00:07:10,880 --> 00:07:18,700 For example, tourism, such things have just disappeared during these times of lockdown and so on. 61 00:07:18,700 --> 00:07:28,660 And so we have seen really direct threats to people and their ability to conserve wildlife biodiversity, 62 00:07:28,660 --> 00:07:33,190 and these sorts of conflicts now are not going to go away. 63 00:07:33,190 --> 00:07:38,490 These are not just going to de-escalate and die off. These problems are. 64 00:07:38,490 --> 00:07:46,920 Global, and they're huge. And I would say we have to figure out very quickly how to address these at scale, 65 00:07:46,920 --> 00:07:55,770 and so much so that even in the next big U.N. convention cop, that is about to happen in April next year, 66 00:07:55,770 --> 00:08:00,900 the COP15 deal of the Convention on Biological Diversity, 67 00:08:00,900 --> 00:08:07,740 where the aim is to now look at the next 10 years through this so-called post-2020 global biodiversity framework. 68 00:08:07,740 --> 00:08:18,690 If you look at that entire aim, the entire vision of that convention is to create to find ways to live in harmony with nature. 69 00:08:18,690 --> 00:08:24,940 So again, this is the opposite of all these conflicts that we are that we are facing. 70 00:08:24,940 --> 00:08:29,760 So how are we going to do this? It is very important, very good to have this vision. 71 00:08:29,760 --> 00:08:35,810 How to do this in practise is going to be very much more difficult. And so what are we talking about? 72 00:08:35,810 --> 00:08:40,700 Well, it gets very, very messy. These conflicts are about so many things, 73 00:08:40,700 --> 00:08:48,980 and so many of these things are social and they're political and they're cultural and they're about people and groups and organisations. 74 00:08:48,980 --> 00:08:58,640 And how do we deconstruct this mess of factors and how do we make sense of what we need to do? 75 00:08:58,640 --> 00:09:04,240 And what sort of conflicts are we talking about, actually? So let me give you examples. 76 00:09:04,240 --> 00:09:14,530 One clear and obvious one straight away is protected areas now protected areas as the foundation of biodiversity conservation essentially important. 77 00:09:14,530 --> 00:09:19,840 And there's very much a drive to increase the area of marine interest or protected areas. 78 00:09:19,840 --> 00:09:25,000 Nowadays, this naturally creates potential for conflict. 79 00:09:25,000 --> 00:09:32,620 These are areas that might bring about questions of who is allowed to access resources. 80 00:09:32,620 --> 00:09:38,170 Big, they create disputes over tenure access. 81 00:09:38,170 --> 00:09:45,740 Who gets the benefits? Is it the tourist resource or is it the local people and which local people and conflicts between those? 82 00:09:45,740 --> 00:09:50,790 There's layers and layers. Of potential conflict here. 83 00:09:50,790 --> 00:09:58,110 And so this is very much about benefits from conservation, it's about equity, it's about access. 84 00:09:58,110 --> 00:10:05,220 Then you have your other very high kind of profile, high profile kind of conservation conflicts, as we saw, for example, 85 00:10:05,220 --> 00:10:15,450 with Cecil the Lion a few years ago, where of course you have a very contentious issue like hunting or trophy hunting of wildlife, 86 00:10:15,450 --> 00:10:20,400 and there will be people who are in favour of this and there is people who are adamantly against this, 87 00:10:20,400 --> 00:10:26,070 and there's people who are trying to figure out what to do with this issue. 88 00:10:26,070 --> 00:10:33,990 And interestingly, this isn't this is classic in conservation conflicts because it isn't it isn't binary. 89 00:10:33,990 --> 00:10:43,140 There are many different sub conflicts going on here, so you might think that it is primarily between conservation and hunting. 90 00:10:43,140 --> 00:10:52,830 But actually, there's an enormous conflict between conservation and animal rights, which we see over and over and conservation again as well, 91 00:10:52,830 --> 00:11:02,220 because this becomes an issue of both beliefs and values that are opposite to each other, and it brings out quite intense emotions. 92 00:11:02,220 --> 00:11:10,860 And so you have those who campaigned very strongly for absolutely no hunting on the basis of welfare and rights of the animal. 93 00:11:10,860 --> 00:11:16,740 And then you have others who advocate that there has to be a balance. 94 00:11:16,740 --> 00:11:22,880 There has to be there are actually benefits from this activity to. 95 00:11:22,880 --> 00:11:28,870 And this can become extremely heated and complicated and multi-layered. 96 00:11:28,870 --> 00:11:34,810 Let me give you another example, which really gets into the sorts of dilemmas we face sometimes. 97 00:11:34,810 --> 00:11:47,320 This is a map of the Kutupalong refugee camp in Bangladesh near the border of Myanmar before the refugee crisis. 98 00:11:47,320 --> 00:11:58,930 It looks like this. The refugee camp, which emerged in twenty seventeen twenty eighteen 800000 people, moved into this area. 99 00:11:58,930 --> 00:12:05,080 This is an absolute humanitarian disaster in crisis. And yet look what happened very, very rapidly. 100 00:12:05,080 --> 00:12:12,060 Now this creates a huge dilemma. There are in so many ways in so many layers. 101 00:12:12,060 --> 00:12:18,150 And one of the quite noticeable conflicts that happened here is that elephants used 102 00:12:18,150 --> 00:12:23,460 to pass through this area and they continue to try to pass through this area. 103 00:12:23,460 --> 00:12:30,360 And they encountered in the new settlement of 800000 people and around a dozen people, 104 00:12:30,360 --> 00:12:33,960 refugees were killed by elephants and it created absolute chaos. 105 00:12:33,960 --> 00:12:38,970 And of course, this made it into the papers. Of course, this created a lot of attention. 106 00:12:38,970 --> 00:12:41,760 And here you have a real dilemma. 107 00:12:41,760 --> 00:12:51,690 You have a very dire humanitarian, serious humanitarian crisis and you have a conservation problem piled on top of each other, 108 00:12:51,690 --> 00:12:55,410 and there are layers and layers of of issues here. 109 00:12:55,410 --> 00:13:01,950 Not only is this a problem of what do you do about the elephants trying to pass through, but then there were also, of course, 110 00:13:01,950 --> 00:13:12,100 local communities who were there before, and there's resentments that pile up and there's clashes between all sorts of different groups. 111 00:13:12,100 --> 00:13:16,870 And so as conservation scientists are, we meant to figure out how to solve this? 112 00:13:16,870 --> 00:13:27,010 This is really going a little bit beyond the scope. So this is about needs, it's about human rights, it's about security. 113 00:13:27,010 --> 00:13:35,740 And then lastly, the classic human wildlife conflict example people against other people about a species. 114 00:13:35,740 --> 00:13:45,910 And one of the most intractable and complicated one is that of wolves, particularly in parts of the US and parts of Norway and other parts of Europe. 115 00:13:45,910 --> 00:13:51,220 And this this this is really not about the wolf very much at all. 116 00:13:51,220 --> 00:13:58,900 This is about different groups of people who have very different deep rooted values, beliefs and identities, 117 00:13:58,900 --> 00:14:04,360 mistrust each other who blame each other, who you cannot talk to each other anymore. 118 00:14:04,360 --> 00:14:08,440 And these are conflicts that are about politics. They're about identities. 119 00:14:08,440 --> 00:14:12,210 They're about polarisation and divisions. 120 00:14:12,210 --> 00:14:20,130 And so you look at these just these examples of you kind of typical examples of the sorts of conservation conflicts that 121 00:14:20,130 --> 00:14:26,940 exist and you look at what they're about and they're about access and benefits and values and beliefs and emotions. 122 00:14:26,940 --> 00:14:33,050 They're about security and divisions, identity politics. 123 00:14:33,050 --> 00:14:37,310 These are about the social interactions of humans. 124 00:14:37,310 --> 00:14:44,480 And so these really cannot be solved with technology and they can't be solved with data very much either. 125 00:14:44,480 --> 00:14:50,870 And so this is why I'm saying the field of conservation biology, which has turned into science. 126 00:14:50,870 --> 00:15:03,310 It needs to move further. It needs to start to figure out how do we deal with all this mess, this intangible, these difficult dilemmas? 127 00:15:03,310 --> 00:15:07,900 And so what we tend to do and have done in the past to try and resolve 128 00:15:07,900 --> 00:15:13,210 environmental and conservation conflicts is to look at the obvious what you see, 129 00:15:13,210 --> 00:15:21,640 what you see above the surface is some sort of clash, some sort of dispute. Something has happened and you try your best to do something about it. 130 00:15:21,640 --> 00:15:28,600 And so most efforts currently in resolving conflicts and biodiversity try to focus on this. 131 00:15:28,600 --> 00:15:36,640 Understandably so. This is both a bit of a criticism, but it's also an acknowledgement of this is the best we've got right now. 132 00:15:36,640 --> 00:15:44,860 However, underneath all of these are layers and layers of less visible drivers triggers causes 133 00:15:44,860 --> 00:15:53,110 things that are that are causing these conflicts to to occur in the first place. 134 00:15:53,110 --> 00:16:03,640 And really focussing only on the quick fixes that the technical or the practical interventions that just look at the dispute is very, very limiting. 135 00:16:03,640 --> 00:16:08,350 This looking only here isn't going to create change if you want long term change, 136 00:16:08,350 --> 00:16:15,070 if you want to work towards that CBD mission of vision, of living in harmony with nature. 137 00:16:15,070 --> 00:16:21,520 Change happens here and this is, of course, very, very much harder. 138 00:16:21,520 --> 00:16:31,510 And so. In conservation conflicts and in human wildlife conflicts, very classically, the fundamental recognition, 139 00:16:31,510 --> 00:16:38,740 the fundamental thing for us to realise is that although it looks like there is a conflict between a resource and animal, 140 00:16:38,740 --> 00:16:50,760 a park something and people who live there, the conflicts are actually, of course, between all the different groups of people that are involved. 141 00:16:50,760 --> 00:17:01,630 And that can be individuals, it can be different communities, it can be organisations, it can be parts of governments, it could even be entire states. 142 00:17:01,630 --> 00:17:07,600 And so there is a need to shift a little bit our thinking from looking at the 143 00:17:07,600 --> 00:17:13,660 visible species or wildlife or protected area issue to what is actually going on. 144 00:17:13,660 --> 00:17:22,510 And it is very, very rarely binary. There's usually no number of parties involved. 145 00:17:22,510 --> 00:17:32,500 And so what I want to try to to do today in this brief talk is to have a little look at how can we make sense of this massive conflict? 146 00:17:32,500 --> 00:17:41,020 It is. It can be so overwhelming, intimidating. What sort of approaches are out there that we can import, adapt, 147 00:17:41,020 --> 00:17:49,660 modify to use directly in biodiversity conflicts and what might be the way forward ultimately in this? 148 00:17:49,660 --> 00:18:00,160 And for this, I would take us to one of the the main models that is used in conservation and in human wildlife conflict in particular, 149 00:18:00,160 --> 00:18:07,480 which I have worked with a lot. And you may have heard me speak about before it was originally developed by my 150 00:18:07,480 --> 00:18:11,770 colleague Brian MacLean in the Canadian Institute for Conflict Resolution. 151 00:18:11,770 --> 00:18:20,560 It was adapted further by Madam and the Queen to look at conflicts over wildlife, and I have worked with this extensively around the world, too. 152 00:18:20,560 --> 00:18:25,690 And this is basically it's a conceptual model. It's trying to take the messy conflicts. 153 00:18:25,690 --> 00:18:31,630 I'm trying to make sense of what is going on because one thing you may observe and you may know from 154 00:18:31,630 --> 00:18:38,950 your own work is that some conflicts seem relatively solvable and some seem absolutely impossible. 155 00:18:38,950 --> 00:18:44,650 And how do you even know what's going on? How do you, first of all, make sense of it all? 156 00:18:44,650 --> 00:18:50,560 And so this is kind of alluding to the iceberg. 157 00:18:50,560 --> 00:18:54,880 So the visible top, you have a dispute. Something has happened. 158 00:18:54,880 --> 00:18:58,630 There has been some kind of some loss or damage. 159 00:18:58,630 --> 00:19:07,800 Some property has been damaged or there is an issue of safety or an issue of access or livelihood loss. 160 00:19:07,800 --> 00:19:15,930 This is what what you see. But very, very often, in fact, most often, there is something else going on underneath. 161 00:19:15,930 --> 00:19:19,680 There are these things are rarely just one-off events. 162 00:19:19,680 --> 00:19:31,380 There's usually a history and that history is what drags this conflict into it and to levels of off of deeper complications that below the surface, 163 00:19:31,380 --> 00:19:38,850 this is what we have to figure out and uncover the history of recurrence of an issue and in particular, 164 00:19:38,850 --> 00:19:49,810 a history of unsatisfactory attempts to resolve it is what tends to make these conflicts more weighty and more complicated. 165 00:19:49,810 --> 00:19:55,450 And in the worst case scenario, this carries on and on, 166 00:19:55,450 --> 00:20:03,460 and it time is a factor in this and these this history accumulate so much that groups of people feel threatened. 167 00:20:03,460 --> 00:20:12,880 They feel threatened and who they are. Their identity is mistrust starts to build values, feel threatened and everything starts to break down. 168 00:20:12,880 --> 00:20:21,580 And so what we really are looking at in conservation is that these sorts of conflicts, 169 00:20:21,580 --> 00:20:25,420 we come with the right techniques, with the right knowledge awareness. 170 00:20:25,420 --> 00:20:35,110 We can do something about. This kind of deep-rooted, identity based, intractable conflict is extremely difficult to deal with. 171 00:20:35,110 --> 00:20:41,390 And what we need to do urgently in conservation is try and make sure that we keep as 172 00:20:41,390 --> 00:20:48,710 we stay out of this level that we don't allow conflicts to get that bad over time. 173 00:20:48,710 --> 00:20:58,520 So. How do you figure out what's going on as I try to show you with this analogy? 174 00:20:58,520 --> 00:21:02,780 You see, first of all, that there is something there is some dispute, 175 00:21:02,780 --> 00:21:09,980 but you have to ask what is actually happening in order to figure out what is underneath that surface, 176 00:21:09,980 --> 00:21:14,540 what is actually going on, what is the tension that is there really about? 177 00:21:14,540 --> 00:21:21,700 And therefore, are you trying to solve the problem? An example of this. 178 00:21:21,700 --> 00:21:29,620 I've spent a lot of time working in the past working on conflicts about Jaguares in Latin America, particularly Brazil. 179 00:21:29,620 --> 00:21:39,580 And so you go in, there are many, many of these all over the 17 countries that attack is occurring and each of them is very, very different. 180 00:21:39,580 --> 00:21:49,360 But very often it appears at first glance that it is a problem of of cattle rancher killing Jaguar in retaliation for losing livestock. 181 00:21:49,360 --> 00:21:55,370 And so if you look at it only there and you look at only that top level, you will think, Well, 182 00:21:55,370 --> 00:22:01,810 we need to reduce it, we need to protect the livestock, then they will no longer kill the Jaguar. 183 00:22:01,810 --> 00:22:04,390 That's not at all what's going on in most of these. 184 00:22:04,390 --> 00:22:13,570 This is entirely about these, this community's identity, who they are, their history, their culture. 185 00:22:13,570 --> 00:22:19,030 In this particular example, it is part of the culture to hunt jaguars to a certain extent. 186 00:22:19,030 --> 00:22:26,330 And so just coming in with a bigger fence or some kind of quick fix isn't going to do it. 187 00:22:26,330 --> 00:22:33,100 And my worry is it is going to make the conflict worse. So how do you know what is actually going on? 188 00:22:33,100 --> 00:22:44,300 So with this, with the levels of conflict, we took this further and we started to look at what are the telltale symptoms that can help you? 189 00:22:44,300 --> 00:22:54,530 Get a sense of what's going on, even before you perhaps do some more in-depth qualitative research on understanding the issues you can get us, 190 00:22:54,530 --> 00:23:01,330 you can very much get a sense, for example, if you are dealing with that top level dispute. 191 00:23:01,330 --> 00:23:07,570 You will know you will hear from the parties involved, a certain sympathy for the situation. 192 00:23:07,570 --> 00:23:17,720 There will be concern with a practical resolution. There will be a willingness to adapt and an openness to actually working with people. 193 00:23:17,720 --> 00:23:29,870 If, however, you are, what's going on is deeper than that and there is a history and this, the conflict has evolved into something more deep-rooted. 194 00:23:29,870 --> 00:23:39,110 There is going to be you will hear in conversations really some frustration about the issue, exaggeration of the incidences. 195 00:23:39,110 --> 00:23:44,540 There will be a history of of unresolved attempts. 196 00:23:44,540 --> 00:23:48,410 And there's definitely an expectation that somebody else has to fix this. 197 00:23:48,410 --> 00:23:57,320 And there's a huge amount of scepticism. And then worst case scenario, if you observe a conflict about wildlife biodiversity, 198 00:23:57,320 --> 00:24:02,210 where the language is extremely negative, it's polarised, it's hostile. 199 00:24:02,210 --> 00:24:09,260 There's actual aggression, perhaps even violence. There is a refusal to cooperate in the hostility towards other parties. 200 00:24:09,260 --> 00:24:14,860 And you're dealing with something that is approaching an intractable conflict. 201 00:24:14,860 --> 00:24:25,840 And so the problem we currently have in conservation is that the vast majority of our efforts right now are looking at these conflicts 202 00:24:25,840 --> 00:24:33,940 as if they are simply at that level and they're trying their best to find quick fixes pressured by the urgency of the situation. 203 00:24:33,940 --> 00:24:41,770 And that is understandable. However, the vast majority of biodiversity conflicts, I would suggest, 204 00:24:41,770 --> 00:24:49,570 are actually more in that middle level, and this is where a lot of progress is basically hindered. 205 00:24:49,570 --> 00:24:57,190 Because if you try and apply a quick fix, as I said before, this is something that is actually a deeper conflict amongst parties. 206 00:24:57,190 --> 00:25:05,930 You're not going to get very far. So how do we how do we approach these problems? 207 00:25:05,930 --> 00:25:12,650 What can. In what can we do in the short term, what are some of the techniques just to get a feel for? 208 00:25:12,650 --> 00:25:16,730 How does one actually start to work with these different layers? 209 00:25:16,730 --> 00:25:25,250 And of course, this is a huge field of its own, as I'm proposing that we need to add peace and conflict studies to conservation science. 210 00:25:25,250 --> 00:25:32,210 The whole family of studies around that, including negotiation, peacekeeping, conflict resolution, 211 00:25:32,210 --> 00:25:36,920 conflict transformation, mediation, these are fields of expertise that need to be added. 212 00:25:36,920 --> 00:25:42,450 So all I'm giving you today is a little bit of a flavour of the sorts of approaches. 213 00:25:42,450 --> 00:25:51,810 That are there. The fundamental one fundamental tool for thinking about this comes from negotiation, 214 00:25:51,810 --> 00:25:58,530 and that is that you have to look at everything as having these three overlapping elephant elements. 215 00:25:58,530 --> 00:26:02,270 There is an issue. Something has happened. 216 00:26:02,270 --> 00:26:10,340 But there are also relationships, and there is a process that will help repair relationships and deal with the issue. 217 00:26:10,340 --> 00:26:15,490 And these three things have to be looked at together. 218 00:26:15,490 --> 00:26:23,140 So if you if you do have what I would call a level one conflict and you are dealing with primarily 219 00:26:23,140 --> 00:26:30,010 something that is there has been some damage and there isn't yet much hostility or resentment. 220 00:26:30,010 --> 00:26:38,440 This is the aim of the of this is really to find them to find tangible solutions that are acceptable to all the parties. 221 00:26:38,440 --> 00:26:45,640 This is about safeguarding income, it is about reducing risk and it's about diversifying income sources, 222 00:26:45,640 --> 00:26:53,410 if necessary or these sorts of short term solutions that the parties can work with. 223 00:26:53,410 --> 00:27:00,340 And the primary approach in the primary tools to this is interest based negotiation negotiation. 224 00:27:00,340 --> 00:27:07,690 So let me explore this a little bit because this is extremely fundamental, 225 00:27:07,690 --> 00:27:17,640 very simple and yet absolutely fundamental to all conflict resolution, whether you're dealing with this kind of level one or more complicated. 226 00:27:17,640 --> 00:27:27,320 And the first most fundamental. Saying that has to be done here is you have to get the parties to talk, to get to each other. 227 00:27:27,320 --> 00:27:35,510 And the first stumbling block very often is that people involved in this dispute take on the position. 228 00:27:35,510 --> 00:27:42,500 And a position is six idea, it is a statement of where we or I stand and it is not in. 229 00:27:42,500 --> 00:27:48,240 This is my take on this. And it's not to be budged. 230 00:27:48,240 --> 00:27:49,950 And what has to happen, 231 00:27:49,950 --> 00:27:57,750 and this is the foundation for starting any kind of conflict resolution is that those positions have to be shifted and we have to 232 00:27:57,750 --> 00:28:06,390 talk about interests for what is actually what are actually the underlying needs and motivations and wants of the parties involved. 233 00:28:06,390 --> 00:28:15,300 So to give you an example, one of the human wildlife conflicts I've worked with is around bats and marshes, 234 00:28:15,300 --> 00:28:24,190 where bats are perceived by many people, including the government of Mauritius, as co-operators and menace. 235 00:28:24,190 --> 00:28:33,100 And the whereas the conservation organisations of Mauritius want to protect the species which is endangered, listed as endangered. 236 00:28:33,100 --> 00:28:43,600 And so the positions that the parties are taking here is you have those who say this is a this is a co-operator, we need to eliminate the species. 237 00:28:43,600 --> 00:28:48,700 And you have a conservation stakeholders in this who are saying absolutely not. 238 00:28:48,700 --> 00:28:54,190 This is a protected species. Killing even a single one of these is out of the question. 239 00:28:54,190 --> 00:28:59,050 So then you have a deadlock right there. So how do you shift this from talking? 240 00:28:59,050 --> 00:29:09,520 Not so much about this is my position. I'm not moving from it to talking about what is actually what might be explorable options in this. 241 00:29:09,520 --> 00:29:15,220 This is the first thing, it is the foundation of beginning any kind of dialogues to resolve conflicts. 242 00:29:15,220 --> 00:29:24,550 It applies in your day to day life as much as it does to negotiating some major treaty. 243 00:29:24,550 --> 00:29:30,970 The what this does and why this is so simple yet important is that what you. 244 00:29:30,970 --> 00:29:39,190 It helps to de-escalate a tension, and it focuses the party on some kind of some kind of common outcome, 245 00:29:39,190 --> 00:29:44,890 and it can unlock the ability of those involved to find other solutions. 246 00:29:44,890 --> 00:29:51,920 And this is this then takes you to finding solutions that can be more win win. 247 00:29:51,920 --> 00:29:59,600 One nice example or illustration of this that comes up quite often in negotiation courses is, 248 00:29:59,600 --> 00:30:08,850 is this, for example, if I were to ask you right now to arm wrestle with the person next to. 249 00:30:08,850 --> 00:30:14,310 And I were to say, OK, everybody in this room, you will get one point. 250 00:30:14,310 --> 00:30:20,760 Every time you manage to arm wrestle the other person's arm down once and you need to get three points. 251 00:30:20,760 --> 00:30:26,020 Everybody in this room needs to get three points. That is your aim. Off you go. 252 00:30:26,020 --> 00:30:36,520 The vast majority of us start to try and use force and arm wrestle the other person's arm down to get our points on our second point to third point. 253 00:30:36,520 --> 00:30:40,750 Why do we do this? Because we already have. There's context here. 254 00:30:40,750 --> 00:30:46,540 We already know what arm wrestling is. This is we know it's a game of winning and losing. 255 00:30:46,540 --> 00:30:55,620 And so we bring that into it straightaway. But the thing is, and the few people in will always pick this up straight away. 256 00:30:55,620 --> 00:31:01,100 I didn't say you need to win. I said, you need to get three points. 257 00:31:01,100 --> 00:31:06,050 But we naturally tend to look at things a little bit as win lose. 258 00:31:06,050 --> 00:31:15,190 And so the whole aim, the whole practise of conflict resolution is to think differently, to not bring. 259 00:31:15,190 --> 00:31:20,480 And this is what the third party has to do is not bring in those those that that 260 00:31:20,480 --> 00:31:27,640 framing that we already have and start to look at the situation differently. 261 00:31:27,640 --> 00:31:35,380 And so what you're doing, then, is you're moving from this win lose to a possible win win of some sort. 262 00:31:35,380 --> 00:31:38,260 And to get that and again, this is so, so basic. 263 00:31:38,260 --> 00:31:49,650 But these are the foundations I'm suggesting here that then from which you then can build a much more sophisticated conflict resolution approaches. 264 00:31:49,650 --> 00:32:02,440 So this absolutely requires a different way of looking at the problem, a challenging one's own, what one brings into it and looking at it in new ways. 265 00:32:02,440 --> 00:32:08,410 And so what this is essentially and what is another extremely foundational method in 266 00:32:08,410 --> 00:32:13,990 all interest based negotiation and in conflict resolution is what we call reframing. 267 00:32:13,990 --> 00:32:18,490 You take the problem as I've given it to you and you keep turning it this way, 268 00:32:18,490 --> 00:32:24,580 that way the other way until you find some kind of entry point and you see something 269 00:32:24,580 --> 00:32:31,720 that can nudge you towards a solution that can nudge the parties towards a solution. 270 00:32:31,720 --> 00:32:41,830 And it can be as simple as looking at a problem negatively and then looking at exactly the same problem slipped into something more positively. 271 00:32:41,830 --> 00:32:47,920 How do we solve the problem of appropriating elephants, or how do we turn elephants into an opportunity? 272 00:32:47,920 --> 00:32:52,510 Do we look at human wildlife conflict, or do we look at human wildlife coexistence? 273 00:32:52,510 --> 00:33:01,080 These are subtle changes that help they are tools to help reframe and re understand a problem. 274 00:33:01,080 --> 00:33:05,580 And it sounds extremely simple, but these are the building blocks of all conflict resolutions. 275 00:33:05,580 --> 00:33:15,090 These are the foundational tools. And this can then open up this kind of creative problem solving that ideally you want to do as a group. 276 00:33:15,090 --> 00:33:21,600 Now important to say here is that often if we are a party in a conflict, we can't really do it. 277 00:33:21,600 --> 00:33:29,280 We struggle to do this. This is where a third party comes in and brings fresh, fresh insights. 278 00:33:29,280 --> 00:33:34,470 So what do you do then, is if things are more more, 279 00:33:34,470 --> 00:33:42,840 they have more of a history that accumulated more layers this this now becomes not so much about practical problem solving, 280 00:33:42,840 --> 00:33:50,480 but it becomes about relationships. It's become becomes about rebuilding trust. 281 00:33:50,480 --> 00:34:01,460 And very, very key in this is that it is natural need for all groups and all people to be heard and very often in the process. 282 00:34:01,460 --> 00:34:11,940 One of the very first things that has to be done is that the parties involved in a conflict about whatever it may be a protected area of wildlife. 283 00:34:11,940 --> 00:34:17,070 Needs to simply have a chance to have their side heard. 284 00:34:17,070 --> 00:34:25,710 And this is, of course, why we do things such as have all sorts of community meetings in conservation. 285 00:34:25,710 --> 00:34:33,450 This is something that conservation has already become much, much better at the whole processes of engagement. 286 00:34:33,450 --> 00:34:37,230 And this is but it is important to really understand what this is about. 287 00:34:37,230 --> 00:34:47,370 This is about building relationships from which you then can start to engage in conflict practical conflict resolution. 288 00:34:47,370 --> 00:34:51,930 And so very often for this, you bring in an external party of some sort. 289 00:34:51,930 --> 00:34:54,090 It could be using more mediation, 290 00:34:54,090 --> 00:35:03,270 which is used throughout society for everything from interpersonal conflicts to to conflicts across states and in mediation. 291 00:35:03,270 --> 00:35:12,210 Really what this is, you're bringing in an impartial external third party to help those who are in conflict together find a solution. 292 00:35:12,210 --> 00:35:15,840 This is not where the third party orders the solution. 293 00:35:15,840 --> 00:35:20,220 This is where they help the parties find the solution themselves and really, 294 00:35:20,220 --> 00:35:26,310 really important to realise in conservation is that the conservation sciences we are, 295 00:35:26,310 --> 00:35:36,960 we are not these mediators, and there is sometimes an attempt to try and be sometimes perhaps the lack of awareness or lack of resources. 296 00:35:36,960 --> 00:35:40,770 But in conservation conflicts, conservation scientists are a party. 297 00:35:40,770 --> 00:35:50,060 They are not the third impartial party. They should not be the ones trying to mediate here. 298 00:35:50,060 --> 00:35:57,470 And so what I think we really, really need to do is make use much more use of this in conservation. 299 00:35:57,470 --> 00:36:05,030 The problem we have right now is that we don't have access very much. We have they don't have the funding or the resources to bring in mediators from 300 00:36:05,030 --> 00:36:11,420 other seals or we don't have conservation mediators in in our field and we don't. 301 00:36:11,420 --> 00:36:21,020 There are very, very few people or we don't think about doing this. This is something we need to think about a lot, lot more when that has. 302 00:36:21,020 --> 00:36:24,110 When that has happened and you start to rebuild relationships, 303 00:36:24,110 --> 00:36:33,890 you can start to then go back up to that more practical level and you can start to discuss interest and you can start to reframe issues and 304 00:36:33,890 --> 00:36:46,760 you can start to engage in some creative problem-solving once these parties can talk to each other again through the help of a third party. 305 00:36:46,760 --> 00:36:54,650 And I wanted to tell you a little example of a creative problem solving story, which is a classic in conflict resolution. 306 00:36:54,650 --> 00:36:59,690 Maybe someone's heard this before. This is I was trying to find the original source. 307 00:36:59,690 --> 00:37:04,850 It's a story of 17 camels. It's an old parable from the Middle East. 308 00:37:04,850 --> 00:37:12,050 It's been retold many, many times. It's used often in in conflict resolution teaching. 309 00:37:12,050 --> 00:37:17,270 So the story goes that there was a man who had 17 camels. 310 00:37:17,270 --> 00:37:28,470 He he passed away and he had three sons. And in his will, it said that these sons would get the first son would get half of his camels. 311 00:37:28,470 --> 00:37:37,390 The second son would get one third of his camels and the third son would get one ninth of his some of his camels. 312 00:37:37,390 --> 00:37:42,520 And if they could figure this out, they would have the camels and they would also have hotels here left to them. 313 00:37:42,520 --> 00:37:48,220 And so this this goes on and on because these the three sons try and solve this problem and they 314 00:37:48,220 --> 00:37:55,960 realise that 17 can't be divided if you want whole camels by a half or a third or a knights, 315 00:37:55,960 --> 00:38:01,780 and it seemed absolutely impossible. There is no solution to this, and they became more and more entrenched and they took their positions. 316 00:38:01,780 --> 00:38:05,860 I demand my house because I'm the older one and so on, and they start. 317 00:38:05,860 --> 00:38:13,210 This starts to gather layers of argument and they are unable to resolve this. 318 00:38:13,210 --> 00:38:24,220 And one day a wise old moment comes along and says, I don't know how to help you, but I'm going to give you my camel. 319 00:38:24,220 --> 00:38:32,640 And then they look at the problem again, and they have 18 camels. The first son takes half of 18, that's nine. 320 00:38:32,640 --> 00:38:37,550 The second son takes a third of 18, that's six camels. 321 00:38:37,550 --> 00:38:45,960 The third son takes one ninth of his of 18 camels, that's two camels, and it adds up to 17. 322 00:38:45,960 --> 00:38:49,770 And they give the spare camel back to the old lady. 323 00:38:49,770 --> 00:38:59,370 And this is such a lovely story because what it teaches us is that the solution was there all along, but we couldn't see it. 324 00:38:59,370 --> 00:39:05,850 The six camels are there and the nine and the six, and they're there, but we couldn't see this. 325 00:39:05,850 --> 00:39:14,160 It had to have that fresh look from somebody outside to turn it around this way in that way until you find a solution. 326 00:39:14,160 --> 00:39:22,770 And this is a very creative one, and it's a lovely story. And so I think that very much about what we really need to do in conservation science 327 00:39:22,770 --> 00:39:31,290 is try to figure out what is our what is our 18th camel solution to these conflicts? 328 00:39:31,290 --> 00:39:39,340 So very briefly, looking at that third level, and this is where it really gets difficult and messy. 329 00:39:39,340 --> 00:39:45,370 What's going on in these in these deep rooted conflicts is that you have you have clashing identities, 330 00:39:45,370 --> 00:39:51,640 people who are deeply divided, they don't trust each other, they do not even want to talk to each other. 331 00:39:51,640 --> 00:39:58,600 It is just and you can think of examples in the world currently within countries between groups and so on. 332 00:39:58,600 --> 00:40:05,620 This happens. It is part of societies. These kinds of conflicts are extremely difficult to resolve. 333 00:40:05,620 --> 00:40:09,880 It takes a very, very long time. This takes it, takes teams of people. 334 00:40:09,880 --> 00:40:11,530 It takes years and years. 335 00:40:11,530 --> 00:40:20,350 And what we must at all costs try and prevent is that our conservation conflicts slip too much into these sorts of situations. 336 00:40:20,350 --> 00:40:26,230 And I won't go very much into these, but just to explain a little bit. 337 00:40:26,230 --> 00:40:32,980 These kinds of what are called in and conflict studies, intractable conflicts, these are situations that are persistent. 338 00:40:32,980 --> 00:40:39,430 They're destructive, they're very resistant to any kind of they're systemically resistant to solutions. 339 00:40:39,430 --> 00:40:44,560 This is where you have extreme divisions, extreme mistrust. 340 00:40:44,560 --> 00:40:50,680 And this is not just a matter of differences of opinion. People actually have different realities. 341 00:40:50,680 --> 00:40:55,510 They will see what you see differently and adamantly see it differently. 342 00:40:55,510 --> 00:40:58,990 It is. You can see the same thing in different ways. 343 00:40:58,990 --> 00:41:03,760 I don't know if you see here a seagull or a rabbit. 344 00:41:03,760 --> 00:41:08,400 There are and this is where you can't say your reality is wrong. 345 00:41:08,400 --> 00:41:15,850 And that just makes it all worse. So these are these are conflicts that need reconciliation efforts. 346 00:41:15,850 --> 00:41:24,860 They need a very widespread approach to this is something of conflict transformation, which is starting to come into conservation. 347 00:41:24,860 --> 00:41:34,900 Also, you may have come across this conflict transformation basically essentially tries to look at all three levels at once. 348 00:41:34,900 --> 00:41:38,050 It looks at the dispute. Maybe it's the elephant. 349 00:41:38,050 --> 00:41:45,490 But it also looks at the elephant in the room, which is the hidden things that we can't talk about that you distrust each other about, 350 00:41:45,490 --> 00:41:49,480 and it tries to work structurally and tries to work on relationships. 351 00:41:49,480 --> 00:42:01,020 It tries to work on tangible issues all at once. And this is a very long, difficult process with a lot of setbacks. 352 00:42:01,020 --> 00:42:06,600 And so really, what we absolutely need to do in conservation right now urgently, I'm saying, is urgent. 353 00:42:06,600 --> 00:42:12,330 We need to get much, much better at resolving conflicts before they get to this stage. 354 00:42:12,330 --> 00:42:20,930 It may feel like a lot of conservation conflicts are, and some would argue that a lot of them are already in this sort of realm. 355 00:42:20,930 --> 00:42:26,240 I'm a little more optimistic, I think some look, some conflict look to us more intractable than they are. 356 00:42:26,240 --> 00:42:31,610 I think there are actually quite a number of kind of 18th camels which are solutions out there, 357 00:42:31,610 --> 00:42:38,720 but we as collectively as a field do not yet have the capacity and the numbers of people who know how to resolve these things. 358 00:42:38,720 --> 00:42:44,660 That's what I'm suggesting has to change. Where do we go from here? 359 00:42:44,660 --> 00:42:52,580 Even if we have a surface level understanding of how these conflicts evolve and what needs to be done, 360 00:42:52,580 --> 00:43:01,430 what the approaches are, what what needs to happen. There's a huge field out there of conflict and peace studies. 361 00:43:01,430 --> 00:43:08,450 There you will find all sorts of models of the cycles of conflict and the very common kind of example. 362 00:43:08,450 --> 00:43:17,000 And so this makes me think about the fact that in conservation or in any in any conflict, really what typically happens, 363 00:43:17,000 --> 00:43:24,020 which is always depicted in the series, is that something triggers a conflict escalates. 364 00:43:24,020 --> 00:43:34,370 There is a crisis and then through some form of intervention, it manages to de-escalate. 365 00:43:34,370 --> 00:43:40,520 So this is kind of the simple conceptual curve of how conflicts progress. 366 00:43:40,520 --> 00:43:46,010 My concern, my real worry, is that in conservation, 367 00:43:46,010 --> 00:43:58,760 we do not at scale have the ability to to to bring these conflicts back down and that they can carry on and they can go and they can just. 368 00:43:58,760 --> 00:44:07,220 Stay at crisis level for far too long and stay at intense levels much, much too long, and the worry here is, you know, 369 00:44:07,220 --> 00:44:16,760 take for example, here recently, in the last weeks there was a row over fisheries between England and France. 370 00:44:16,760 --> 00:44:21,140 This is a very common situation. Fisheries conflicts pop up all the time. 371 00:44:21,140 --> 00:44:28,580 This is so high stakes that immediately it's dealt with very with people who know 372 00:44:28,580 --> 00:44:33,470 how to deal with these things and these things are dealt with and conservation. 373 00:44:33,470 --> 00:44:40,010 We don't have those. We don't have the knowledge, we don't have the resources, we don't have access to that kind of structural support. 374 00:44:40,010 --> 00:44:46,880 And so we're at risk of going ending up with a lot of conflicts that are just going on and on. 375 00:44:46,880 --> 00:44:53,450 And of course, we have to think also about costs. Human conservation is a very poor field. 376 00:44:53,450 --> 00:45:03,190 Intervening might cost a little bit. Resolving once it's getting worse and worse is going to cost more. 377 00:45:03,190 --> 00:45:08,770 When you've got a crisis and you've got many of them, we don't know what these costs are. 378 00:45:08,770 --> 00:45:14,170 This would be an interesting thing to study, but they're going to be high and they're going to just continue. 379 00:45:14,170 --> 00:45:20,830 We can't we literally can't afford this in conservation. We don't have this funding to deal with this. 380 00:45:20,830 --> 00:45:32,320 So we have to. We have to become very much better at knowing how to how to stop those escalations as an entire field. 381 00:45:32,320 --> 00:45:39,280 I would propose that we the first thing is to understand the importance of this across conservation, to build capacity, 382 00:45:39,280 --> 00:45:50,580 to make conservation, to make conflict resolution part of every project of every intervention and to reach out to to fields that can help. 383 00:45:50,580 --> 00:45:57,150 And to incorporate this into policy and strategy as it is now emerging and things like this. 384 00:45:57,150 --> 00:46:03,780 So I said at the beginning, conflict resolution is critically important for conservation worldwide and I would say, 385 00:46:03,780 --> 00:46:10,470 well, the solution to that is we have to invest in concert conflict resolution, 386 00:46:10,470 --> 00:46:20,490 peacebuilding at scale and by investing in in resources and in capacity building and knowledge and in everybody works in conservation, 387 00:46:20,490 --> 00:46:23,580 becoming aware and knowing how to approach these things. 388 00:46:23,580 --> 00:46:30,330 I would like to see conflict resolution taught in every conservation degree and every conservation course. 389 00:46:30,330 --> 00:46:37,290 I would like to see that hundreds of mediators who can who are there to help in conservation projects. 390 00:46:37,290 --> 00:46:47,040 I would like to see projects actually building this into into their initiatives as as a norm, not an exception. 391 00:46:47,040 --> 00:46:51,170 And with that, I think we can finally get there. 392 00:46:51,170 --> 00:47:03,960 Thank you very much. Basically. 393 00:47:03,960 --> 00:47:13,650 But thank you. We have now the opportunity for questions from the floor and through the marvellous intervention of Terry, 394 00:47:13,650 --> 00:47:23,610 who's came to multitask by running the microphones around and keeping an eye on the extended family hours and the internet. 395 00:47:23,610 --> 00:47:33,110 We all have questions from both. So if you'd like to indicate, please, if you've got to go to question. 396 00:47:33,110 --> 00:47:40,520 Yeah, at the very BACTÉRIAS post you already. I am. 397 00:47:40,520 --> 00:47:46,430 Very briefly, you've talked quite a lot about conflicts between people arising through in 398 00:47:46,430 --> 00:47:51,890 relation to conservation and not that much about the natural world and its voice. 399 00:47:51,890 --> 00:48:02,630 So how do you take into account the voice of nature as represented, perhaps through representatives in this process, by the way you say who you are? 400 00:48:02,630 --> 00:48:10,960 David Calvert I'm an independent, retired researcher. Thank you, Harris. 401 00:48:10,960 --> 00:48:20,140 So nature, wildlife itself, its voice is portrayed through people, 402 00:48:20,140 --> 00:48:28,540 people speak on behalf of the interests or what we consider to be the interests of wildlife, people or biodiversity. 403 00:48:28,540 --> 00:48:38,770 And so that then is a group of people and those they represent what they value, and that may be different to what others value or need. 404 00:48:38,770 --> 00:48:45,230 And so ultimately, it is again about people versus people. 405 00:48:45,230 --> 00:48:50,270 OK, you got a question from the outer world. 406 00:48:50,270 --> 00:48:55,820 So this is from Rachel online, she said. How can education programmes be used to resolve conflicts? 407 00:48:55,820 --> 00:49:04,350 And can you share any key examples where an educational programme has played a significant part in the resolution? 408 00:49:04,350 --> 00:49:14,550 So education in the sense of provision of information or awareness itself tends not to resolve disputes, 409 00:49:14,550 --> 00:49:19,190 simply throwing, and we see this a lot in the more and the deeper conflict. 410 00:49:19,190 --> 00:49:25,920 Simply throwing information at people does not get them to change their minds. 411 00:49:25,920 --> 00:49:35,760 If you're talking about how do we educate better conflict resolution skills, then that that, I would say, is extremely important. 412 00:49:35,760 --> 00:49:41,850 And I'm one, I'm asking, why are we not at scale learning these skills in schools? 413 00:49:41,850 --> 00:49:46,920 Also, why are we not teaching negotiation and conflict resolutions in schools? 414 00:49:46,920 --> 00:49:53,790 It is part of everybody's everyday life and the fabric of society, but in particular in conflict. 415 00:49:53,790 --> 00:50:07,920 In conservation, these skills need to be built up hugely. 416 00:50:07,920 --> 00:50:15,450 Thank you. I'm I'm a student of biodiversity conservation in the School of Geography. 417 00:50:15,450 --> 00:50:25,080 And when you mention or when you say conservation is a little funding or capacity to deal with these conflicts, 418 00:50:25,080 --> 00:50:35,640 you also mean that governments and NGOs and other stakeholders have little interest in contributing the solution of these conflicts. 419 00:50:35,640 --> 00:50:41,720 Sorry, I didn't catch that the second. So the last part again. 420 00:50:41,720 --> 00:50:51,470 I want him to know if there's interest from the governments and NGOs and the corporations contribute in the resolution of this conflict, 421 00:50:51,470 --> 00:50:58,610 because you mentioned that there's little funding and capacity elsewhere to contribute. 422 00:50:58,610 --> 00:51:08,570 I think there's definitely increasingly an awareness, a need for for the need for this, the willingness to actually put resources to it, 423 00:51:08,570 --> 00:51:18,370 for example, into training or capacity building or even hiring mediators, for example, that ice I'm not seeing. 424 00:51:18,370 --> 00:51:26,350 Or very, very little. It's the exception, and I think that has a little bit to do with it doesn't it's not very tangible for a funder. 425 00:51:26,350 --> 00:51:35,170 It's quality. It's soft. How do you how do you demonstrate what has been done for if you put yourself into the shoes of a thunder, 426 00:51:35,170 --> 00:51:39,490 they have to show impact and they have to show it quickly. 427 00:51:39,490 --> 00:51:43,660 And a lot of the funding is in short cycles and we need quick results. 428 00:51:43,660 --> 00:51:48,190 That no, some of these companies are not going to be fixed in two or three years. 429 00:51:48,190 --> 00:51:54,700 How are you going to show this is another question that is tied into the bigger policy questions? 430 00:51:54,700 --> 00:52:02,430 Actually, how do we demonstrate that we are making progress in resolving conflicts like that? 431 00:52:02,430 --> 00:52:05,430 Are you angry? Close to zero? 432 00:52:05,430 --> 00:52:14,280 You made a compelling case about conservation practitioners not getting involved in mediation and the need for professional mediation. 433 00:52:14,280 --> 00:52:15,420 Quite often, 434 00:52:15,420 --> 00:52:23,860 conservation practitioners belong to a different culture and a society different to those people having conflict and quite often mediators. 435 00:52:23,860 --> 00:52:34,150 That protein also come from different backgrounds. So what would be the main criteria to find successful mediators in a genetic way? 436 00:52:34,150 --> 00:52:34,420 Well, 437 00:52:34,420 --> 00:52:42,490 I would say that there's no reason that conservation scientists can't learn how to become a mediator because when you're dealing in some situations, 438 00:52:42,490 --> 00:52:52,360 you can put yourself outside of the problem enough to take on a sufficiently impartial role to help help along. 439 00:52:52,360 --> 00:52:55,960 Even just to maybe firefight the situation in the first instance. 440 00:52:55,960 --> 00:53:01,040 And those are skills that we can and should all learn, actually. 441 00:53:01,040 --> 00:53:10,940 But when it becomes when things are much more tense or where the conservation as seen as a party by any of the other parties, 442 00:53:10,940 --> 00:53:19,850 when there's a clash between you conservation people, then obviously you will be seen as that you cannot act as an impartial mediator. 443 00:53:19,850 --> 00:53:26,910 So I think that the fields of sustainable development have are actually ahead of us in this. 444 00:53:26,910 --> 00:53:35,010 They they already use this much more than we do in conservation. There's something to learn and maybe to borrow and bring in. 445 00:53:35,010 --> 00:53:39,930 There are quotes from these, as this is Laura Perry from Wild Crew. 446 00:53:39,930 --> 00:53:42,690 She is following on, I think, from what you've just been saying, 447 00:53:42,690 --> 00:53:49,320 she wants to know what the extent your point about conflict resolution are quite evident to situ researchers. 448 00:53:49,320 --> 00:53:55,380 But what then do you think the barriers are to courses institutions building conflict resolution into programmes? 449 00:53:55,380 --> 00:54:04,420 Why aren't they doing this already? And what can we, as individuals do to push this conflict resolution education agenda? 450 00:54:04,420 --> 00:54:14,140 Great question. So I think at this point in time, it's a it's it's an issue of awareness, actually, because if you think back to, you know, 451 00:54:14,140 --> 00:54:21,340 20 years ago, conservation efforts were so focussed on natural science and we started to bring in social science. 452 00:54:21,340 --> 00:54:28,000 And now it's very, very normal to do that. And in conservation projects, you will tend to have social scientists on the team. 453 00:54:28,000 --> 00:54:37,450 So I think that that will naturally happen. We will start to through talking about the need for this start to see project 454 00:54:37,450 --> 00:54:42,730 designs actually incorporate conflict resolution and professionals in that. 455 00:54:42,730 --> 00:54:51,800 At least that is my hope and that's what I'm arguing we need to see. Whatever. 456 00:54:51,800 --> 00:54:57,260 Q, thanks for the nice talk, Irish Courtesy. I have a question there. 457 00:54:57,260 --> 00:55:05,870 How much you see conservation is being reflexive on their own actions in terms of creating new conflicts. 458 00:55:05,870 --> 00:55:13,760 I mean, we are talking, for example, about 30 by 30 and all the conflicts that probably would escalate with such decisions, 459 00:55:13,760 --> 00:55:16,370 potentially, and there are strong calls against it. 460 00:55:16,370 --> 00:55:28,000 How much, for example, IUCN, as a high level conservation organisation, really takes into account in their decision making to account for a company. 461 00:55:28,000 --> 00:55:38,500 Exactly, so creating new protected areas, which is a 30 by 30 is about IS creates high potential for conflict, 462 00:55:38,500 --> 00:55:43,990 and that is why that was also quite controversial or one of the reasons it was controversial. 463 00:55:43,990 --> 00:55:52,120 And so what has to change structurally and systemically is that conflict prevention 464 00:55:52,120 --> 00:55:57,670 and awareness of the possibility of conflicts of merging has to be a given. 465 00:55:57,670 --> 00:56:08,110 It has. We have to be aware of that at every level. So as the conservationists on the ground, but also at general CVB levels conflict prevention, 466 00:56:08,110 --> 00:56:13,330 if you if it would be nice to actually calculate some of those costs and we might try and do that, 467 00:56:13,330 --> 00:56:19,140 but certainly not letting it get to the point where you then with conservation, 468 00:56:19,140 --> 00:56:27,820 start with the intention of making a win win solution, but can get sucked into being a party that is then facing a lot of hostility. 469 00:56:27,820 --> 00:56:35,000 You don't go there. Please allow from Natural England. 470 00:56:35,000 --> 00:56:39,690 You're my U.S. and is currently developing guidelines for human life conflict. 471 00:56:39,690 --> 00:56:45,330 Can you just give us a little bit of an update of when they're likely to be available for us to use 472 00:56:45,330 --> 00:56:51,620 coming in the IUCN reintroduction guidelines sort of being sort of a benchmark for reintroduction, 473 00:56:51,620 --> 00:56:56,180 hoping that the will have conflict ones will prove to be the same. 474 00:56:56,180 --> 00:57:04,820 Yeah. So that is actually the reintroduction translocation guidelines of ICE in our kind of our our model in a way because what we'd like to 475 00:57:04,820 --> 00:57:14,360 achieve with these guidelines is that these are kind of a standard that you need to be aware of and that gives you practical guidance. 476 00:57:14,360 --> 00:57:24,650 This is very, very much. Short bits of practical guidance. It has been a difficult thing to even figure out how to structure and how to 477 00:57:24,650 --> 00:57:29,870 make how to make most useful for all the human wildlife conflicts in the world. 478 00:57:29,870 --> 00:57:41,750 So how do you the right guidelines that apply to humpback whales and fisheries in Scotland, but also apply to shark issues in? 479 00:57:41,750 --> 00:57:49,730 Reunion. So where we are at, we're in the very final stages, couple of chapters in the last stages of draughting, 480 00:57:49,730 --> 00:57:55,850 what we are going to do is once there is a reasonably good complete version, 481 00:57:55,850 --> 00:58:02,030 which is probably in the next few months, we are going to start piloting it and sort of testing it. 482 00:58:02,030 --> 00:58:07,820 We're going to field test these guidelines rather than format and say, Here you go, everybody follows this. 483 00:58:07,820 --> 00:58:16,700 We're going to have projects and ministries and organisations actually try them out as a sort of pilot version. 484 00:58:16,700 --> 00:58:25,850 Then improve them, so use the collective intelligence of practitioners, enough decision makers to make them better and then create a final, 485 00:58:25,850 --> 00:58:31,170 that very final version is a little way off, but a pilot version is pretty imminent. 486 00:58:31,170 --> 00:58:36,500 We're on to our last rather brief question. Thank you for your talk. 487 00:58:36,500 --> 00:58:42,410 You spoke about taking, though many suggestions that you provided to scale, 488 00:58:42,410 --> 00:58:50,360 and that's a very common phrase being used in environmental related issues right from climate to biodiversity. 489 00:58:50,360 --> 00:58:56,720 So I was wondering if you had any thoughts on how do you reconcile this, the time and more? 490 00:58:56,720 --> 00:59:01,340 Because many of the things that you suggested like, especially for conflict two and three, 491 00:59:01,340 --> 00:59:07,460 which are most citizens, think about histories, and all of that takes a lot of time building trust and everything. 492 00:59:07,460 --> 00:59:10,820 So what are your thoughts on how do we keep that in mind? 493 00:59:10,820 --> 00:59:17,270 Because it would take a long time to do some of the things that you have suggested in the ways forward? 494 00:59:17,270 --> 00:59:27,080 Absolutely. All the more reason to really hurry. I would say and start to have the first thing we can do is have everybody studying 495 00:59:27,080 --> 00:59:32,180 conservation science start to understand these things and all of us to actually, 496 00:59:32,180 --> 00:59:37,910 I mean, you don't have to. There are zillions of negotiation courses in conflict resolution courses. 497 00:59:37,910 --> 00:59:42,560 If you're interested in this, there's a lot of material out there there. 498 00:59:42,560 --> 00:59:51,380 But then what I would like to see is that it becomes part of the how we do things as a norm in every project and every organisation. 499 00:59:51,380 --> 00:59:58,080 It becomes completely normal to involve conflict resolution specialists. 500 00:59:58,080 --> 01:00:02,070 In the short term, that might mean bringing an end for that any resources. 501 01:00:02,070 --> 01:00:11,520 But eventually we need to be able to do this internally. OK, well, some brief, but nonetheless, sincere thanks. 502 01:00:11,520 --> 01:00:18,240 Of course, these things all focus on Alex and her tremendous presentation, but there's a wider circle here. 503 01:00:18,240 --> 01:00:26,340 I go back to our very first question asking about who represents wildlife or nature or animals. 504 01:00:26,340 --> 01:00:36,840 One of the things that's been developed actually from our natural governance programme here is a way of thinking about social justice in conservation. 505 01:00:36,840 --> 01:00:42,740 Several of us led by Visit Choose a scholar as part of our programme with Alex and myself and others. 506 01:00:42,740 --> 01:00:48,120 The co-authors was to draw a distinction between different worldviews. 507 01:00:48,120 --> 01:00:55,620 You might characterise them glibly as anthropol. centrists who think that nature and wild 508 01:00:55,620 --> 01:01:02,220 animals are merely chips in the game to be played or no known threat for centrists. 509 01:01:02,220 --> 01:01:08,640 I'm one of those who thinks that nature and wildlife have a stake in the US, 510 01:01:08,640 --> 01:01:14,190 having interests in the conclusion and have to be taken into account accordingly. 511 01:01:14,190 --> 01:01:23,700 My mention of natural governance programme was because this is actually the last event in that Martin School programme. 512 01:01:23,700 --> 01:01:30,030 So as well as thanking Alex and thanking all of you and all who participated over the years. 513 01:01:30,030 --> 01:01:38,790 Now that we've been doing this, I want on behalf of myself and my two colleagues who convened the whole programme, 514 01:01:38,790 --> 01:01:46,930 professors of the White House and Dominic Johnson, to acknowledge what a delight this programme has been for us. 515 01:01:46,930 --> 01:01:55,200 I think it's been fruitful and our thanks go to the and school and all who saved her from making that possible. 516 01:01:55,200 --> 01:02:04,140 Our experience and I hope it's been yours, is the mountain school is the most extraordinary institution for bringing the best out of scholarship. 517 01:02:04,140 --> 01:02:11,100 So thanks to everybody involved, thank you to my colleagues in the natural governance programme. 518 01:02:11,100 --> 01:02:15,660 Thank you to the mountain school. Thank you to all previous speakers and colleagues. 519 01:02:15,660 --> 01:02:19,830 And today, most particularly, thank you to Alex for her talk. 520 01:02:19,830 --> 01:02:28,493 Thank you.