Browse all documents

ANÁLISIS DE DERECHO INTERNACIONAL, LEGISLACIÓN NACIONAL, FALLOS, E INSTITUCIONES AL INTERRELACIONARSE CON TERRITORIOS Y ÁREAS DE CONSERVACIÓN DE LOS PUEBLOS INDÍGENAS Y COMUNIDADES LOCALES

Report an error

Summary

AI-generated

This summary is written by a language model reading the source document. It is not the publisher's words and is not a substitute for the original.

Learn more about AI enrichment

This 2012 report analyzes the lack of legal recognition for indigenous-led conservation areas (TICCAs) in Panama. It details how the state's National System of Protected Areas (SINAP) often overlaps with indigenous territories, leading to conflicts and the restriction of traditional livelihoods. The report highlights the Guna people's 'Galus' and 'Birias' as effective traditional conservation models and recommends legislative reforms to recognize indigenous land rights and traditional knowledge in biodiversity management.

Key insights

AI-generated

These insights are written by a language model reading the source document. They are not the publisher's words and are not a substitute for the original.

Learn more about AI enrichment
  • Panama lacks specific legislation that recognizes or supports the creation of TICCAs for either indigenous or non-indigenous communities. All protected areas are managed under the National System of Protected Areas (SINAP), which the report argues ignores the role of indigenous peoples and local communities in biodiversity conservation.
  • The establishment of state protected areas has frequently led to conflicts with indigenous peoples by restricting traditional production activities such as hunting, fishing, and agriculture. In some cases, such as the Emberá and Wounaan peoples, ancestral rights were curtailed in favor of 'pure conservation'.
  • The Guna people utilize a traditional conservation system based on 'Galus' (sacred sites on land) and 'Birias' (sacred sites in water). These areas are viewed as habitats for flora and fauna that must not be altered to avoid calamities, effectively serving as traditional resource management tools for protecting endangered species.
  • The Narganá Protected Wild Area in the Guna Yala Comarca is highlighted as the only protected area in Panama directly administered by an indigenous people, with decisions made by the Guna General Congress.
  • The report identifies a significant gap in the protection of indigenous knowledge regarding biodiversity. While Law 20 protects collective intellectual property related to folklore, music, and dress, it does not cover traditional knowledge of biodiversity.
  • The Naso people are cited as a primary example of territorial usurpation, where two protected areas (Palo Seco National Park and La Amistad National Park) were established on their land, and parts of these areas were subsequently granted to cattle companies and the Bonyic hydroelectric project.
  • The report proposes several strategies for the recognition of TICCAs, including the modification of forestry, environment, and protected area laws to align with indigenous customary law, and the creation of a draft law specifically for the recognition of TICCAs as a complementary system to state protected areas.

Cite the original document

APA
Masardule, O. (2012). ANÁLISIS DE DERECHO INTERNACIONAL, LEGISLACIÓN NACIONAL, FALLOS, E INSTITUCIONES AL INTERRELACIONARSE CON TERRITORIOS Y ÁREAS DE CONSERVACIÓN DE LOS PUEBLOS INDÍGENAS Y COMUNIDADES LOCALES. Natural Justice. https://naturaljustice.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/Americas-Regional-Panama.pdf
Chicago
Masardule, Onel. ANÁLISIS DE DERECHO INTERNACIONAL, LEGISLACIÓN NACIONAL, FALLOS, E INSTITUCIONES AL INTERRELACIONARSE CON TERRITORIOS Y ÁREAS DE CONSERVACIÓN DE LOS PUEBLOS INDÍGENAS Y COMUNIDADES LOCALES. Natural Justice, 2012. https://naturaljustice.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/Americas-Regional-Panama.pdf.
Wikipedia
{{cite report |last1=Masardule |first1=Onel |title=ANÁLISIS DE DERECHO INTERNACIONAL, LEGISLACIÓN NACIONAL, FALLOS, E INSTITUCIONES AL INTERRELACIONARSE CON TERRITORIOS Y ÁREAS DE CONSERVACIÓN DE LOS PUEBLOS INDÍGENAS Y COMUNIDADES LOCALES |publisher=Natural Justice |date=September 2012 |url=https://naturaljustice.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/Americas-Regional-Panama.pdf |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}
BibTeX
@techreport{masardule2012anlisis, author = {Masardule, Onel}, title = {{ANÁLISIS DE DERECHO INTERNACIONAL, LEGISLACIÓN NACIONAL, FALLOS, E INSTITUCIONES AL INTERRELACIONARSE CON TERRITORIOS Y ÁREAS DE CONSERVACIÓN DE LOS PUEBLOS INDÍGENAS Y COMUNIDADES LOCALES}}, institution = {Natural Justice}, year = {2012}, month = sep, url = {https://naturaljustice.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/Americas-Regional-Panama.pdf}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }

Full text

Collected · Record updated