Abstract: The merits of integrated conservation and development projects (ICDPs), which aim to provide development incentives to citizens in return for conservation behaviors, have long been debated in the literature. Some of the most common critiques suggest that conservation activities tend to be strongly overpowered by development activities. We studied this assertion through participant observation and archival analysis of five Conservation Area Management Committees (CAMCs) in the Annapurna Conservation Area (ACA), Nepal. Committee activities were categorized as conservation activities (policy development and conservation implementation), development activities (infrastructure, health care, education, economic development, and sanitation), or activities related to institutional strengthening (administrative development and capacity building activities). Greater longevity of each ICDP was associated with greater conservation activity in relation to development activities. Project life cycles progressed from a focus on development activities in their early stages, through a transitional period of institutional strengthening, and toward a longer-term focus that roughly balanced conservation and development activities. Results suggest that the ICDP concept, as practiced in ACA, has been successful at building capacity for and interest in conservation amongst local communities. However, success has come over a period of nearly a decade, suggesting that prior conclusions about ICDP failures may have been based on unrealistic expectations of the time needed to influence behavioral changes in target populations.

Abstract: The Greater and Trans-Himalayan tracts are cold deserts that have severe seasonal and resource scarce environments. Covering the bulk of Indian Himalayas, they are a rich repository of biodiversity values and ecosystem services. The region has a large protected area (PA) network which has not been completely effective in conserving these unique values. The human population densities are much lower (usually < 1 per sq km) than in most other parts of the country (over 300 to a sq km). However, even such small populations can come into conflict with strict PA laws that demand large inviolate areas, which can mainly be achieved through relocation of the scattered settlements. In this paper, I reason that in this landscape relocation is not a tenable strategy for conservation due to a variety of reasons. The primary ones are that wildlife, including highly endangered ones are pervasive in the larger landscape (unlike the habitat 'islands' of the forested ecosystems) and existing large PAs usually encompass only a small proportion of this range. Similarly, traditional use by people for marginal cultivation, biomass extraction and pastoralism is also as pervasive in this landscape. There does exist pockets of conflict and these are probably increasing owing to a variety of changes relating to modernisation. However, scarce resources, the lack of alternatives and the traditional practice of clear-cut division of all usable areas and pastures between communities make resettlement of people outside PAs extremely difficult. It is reasoned that given the widespread nature of the wildlife and pockets of relatively high density, it is important to prioritise these smaller areas for conservation in a scenario where they form a mosaic of small 'cores' that are more effectively maintained with local support and that enable wildlife to persist. These ideas have recently gained widespread acceptance in both government and conservation circles and may soon become part of national strategy for these areas.