Indigenous territories are facing increasing pressures from numerous legal and illegal activities that are pushing commodity frontiers within their limits, frequently causing severe environmental degradation and threatening indigenous territorial rights and livelihoods. In Central and South America, after nearly three decades of participatory mapping projects, interest is mounting among indigenous peoples in the use of new technologies for community mapping and monitoring as a means of defense against such threats. Since 2014, several innovative projects have been developed and implemented in the region to demonstrate and train indigenous communities in the use of small drones for territorial mapping and monitoring. In this paper, we report on five projects carried out in Peru, Guyana, and Panama. For each one we describe the context, main objectives, positive outcomes, challenges faced, and opportunities ahead. Preliminary results are promising and have gained the interest of many indigenous societies who envision this technology as a powerful tool to protect their territories and strengthen their claims regarding specific environmental liabilities and justice issues. Based on the results presented here and a review of previous similar studies, we offer a critical discussion of some of the main opportunities and challenges that we foresee regarding the use of small drones for indigenous territorial mapping and monitoring. In addition, we elaborate on why a careful, well thought-out, and progressive adoption of drones by indigenous peoples may trigger grassroots innovations in ways conducive to greater environmental justice and sustainability.
The use of drones with or by communities—what we call community drones—has emerged globally over the last decade to serve diverse purposes. Despite a growing academic interest in community drones, most experiences have been documented as gray literature and there are still no publications that review and systematize their use worldwide. Here, we present an overview of the first experiences using community drones—what we refer to as their global emergence (2012–2017). We reviewed gray and academic literature in English and Spanish for the period 2012–2017. We then analyzed the experiences according to their location, date, purpose, type of drone(s) used, agent(s) that carried them out, and methodology used for community participation; “good” and “bad” practices were also included when information was available. We reviewed 39 experiences and found that (1) they mostly occurred in Latin America from 2014; (2) commercial and multirotor drones were the most frequently employed; (3) the main purposes were community training to acquire territorial information for improved defense and/or informed decision-making; (4) most initiatives were driven by external agents and communities’ allies; (5) the most usual forms of community participation were participatory mapping and training workshops, yet local knowledge was either neglected or little valued to complement drone information; and (6) there were no appropriate practices established for community drone usage. Our study improves the little knowledge we have regarding the global emergence of community drones, its geographic trends, and the existing opportunities and challenges to meet the needs and expectations from community drones. In addition, we provide guidelines for appropriate practices that will be useful for communities and social agents interested in the acquisition, training, and use of drones. We conclude by suggesting new avenues to develop theoretical and methodological approaches in relation to the new field of community drones.
En Latinoamérica, los territorios indígenas y campesinos enfrentan graves problemas que generan numerosos conflictos ambientales. En estos territorios, con frecuencia las comunidades padecen situaciones graves de pobreza y exclusión social, carecen de los medios necesarios para hacer frente al deterioro ambiental causado por empresas y otros actores, y no cuentan con el estado para solucionar sus problemas. Por ello, diseñar e implementar participativamente programas de mapeo y monitoreo territorial en estas comunidades, puede resultar muy útil para generar evidencias de los impactos causados y, así, enfrentar un conflicto ambiental con mayores garantías de éxito. En estos casos, pensamos que la utilización comunitaria de vehículos aéreos no tripulados (drones), puede resultar en una innovación social con potencial para desequilibrar la balanza de fuerzas a favor de una comunidad. No obstante, creemos que este desequilibrio también puede darse en sentido inverso, es decir, en contra de la comunidad, dependiendo de diversos factores internos y externos. Con el objetivo de dilucidar el potencial de la herramienta en una situación de conflicto ambiental, en este estudio describimos dos experiencias en México en las que capacitamos a una comunidad indígena en situación de conflicto ambiental en el uso de un dron. Extraemos de ellas varios aspectos para la reflexión e identificamos algunos retos y oportunidades que consideramos de particular relevancia con respecto al objetivo planteado.
The scarlet macaw (Ara macao cyanoptera) is an endangered species in Mesoamerica due to illegal traffic, habitat loss, and hunting. In Mexico, its range has been reduced by 98%. Between April 2013 and June 2014, a population of 96 individuals of A. m. cyanoptera was reintroduced (six releasing events), in the tropical rainforests of Palenque, southeast Mexico, where this macaw had been extinct for the last 70 years. This study documents the use of wild foods and range use by the reintroduced macaws for the rainy season period June to November, 2014. The macaws used 140 trees of 31 species (19 families; 84% native species) as a source of food. Seeds and fruit accounted for 70% of their diet. The remaining 30% consisted of bark, stems, leaves, insect galls, flowers and shoots. A subset of five tree species was highly dominant in their diet (regarding number of trees used, months used and feeding records). Spatial data showed that food trees used by the macaws were dispersed over 36 ha and had a highly clumped distribution. The macaws used an additional 23ha for non-feeding activities. The dietary diversity and breadth (as indicated by Levin´s Index) of the reintroduced macaws closely approaches that of wild macaws. The capacity of the reintroduced macaws to use wild foods, a very low mortality in the released population (9%), and the occurrence of nine successful nesting events, attests to a short-term success of the reintroduction. We discussed the observed patterns of use of wild foods and habitat by the reintroduced scarlet macaws in the context of the softrelease protocol used and of behavioral flexibility, accumulated social learning and a high cognitive capacity typical of psittacines, aspects essential for a successful adaptation to the wild.Keywords: frugivory, reintroduction, foraging ecology, Neotropics, Psitacids Resumen En Mesoamérica, la guacamaya roja (Ara macao cyanoptera) está amenazada debido al tráfico ilegal, la pérdida de hábitat, y la cacería. En México, su distribución original se ha reducido en 98%. Entre abril de 2013 y junio de 2014, se reintrodujeron 96 individuos de A .m. cyanoptera (seis eventos de liberación), en las selvas de Palenque, México, en donde este psitácido se extinguió hace 70 años. Este estudio documenta, para el periodo de la época de lluvias junio-noviembre 2014, el uso de alimento silvestre y rango de acción de las guacamayas reintroducidas. Las guacamayas usaron 140 árboles de 31 especies (19 familias, 84% especies nativas) como fuente de alimento. Las semillas y frutas constituyeron el 70% de su dieta, el 30% restante consistió de corteza, tallos, hojas, agallas de insectos, flores y rebrotes. Cinco especies dominaron su dieta (en cuanto a número de árboles usados, número de meses en que se usaron y número de registros). El análisis espacial mostró que los árboles usados por las guacamayas como fuente de alimento se encontraron dispersos en 36ha y mostraron un patrón agregado. Otras 23ha fueron usadas para otras actividades. La diversidad y amplitud en la diet...
Since the early 2010s, small drones have become key tools for environmental research around the globe. While critical voices have highlighted the threat of ‘green securitisation’ and surveillance in contexts where drones are deployed for nature conservation, Indigenous peoples and local communities (IPLCs) worldwide have also begun using drones – most often in alliance with non-governmental organisations or researchers – exploring this technology’s potential to advance their own territorial, political and socio-ecological goals. Against this backdrop, this paper examines six different experiences in five countries where communities are using small drones in areas of high ecological and cultural diversity with international significance for nature conservation. We highlight the ways that communities deploy drones – both in terms of their motivations and actual use strategies. We also reflect upon the opportunities and barriers that IPLCs and their collaborators encounter in designing and implementing meaningful drone strategies, explicitly considering social, economic and political challenges. Finally, we consider the socio-ecological outcomes that community drone use enables across these sites along with the ways that drones engender more biocultural and territorial approaches to conservation through IPLC-led monitoring and mapping efforts. In conclusion, we suggest that effective, meaningful and appropriate deployment of drones, especially with IPLCs as protagonists in their use, can support nature conservation together with the recognition and protection of biocultural and territorial rights. Given the mounting demands for conservation to counter intertwined global socio-environmental crises, community drones may play a role in amplifying the voices and territorial visions of IPLCs.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.