Análise de conflitos ambientais e alternativas comunitárias no Páramo de Pisba, Cordilheira dos Andes (Boyacá, Colômbia)
The páramos are unique areas in the high mountains of the neotropics. They overlap with the Andean hotspot and form ecoregions of high regional biodiversity and endemic fauna and flora. They are important for water regulation, and their degree of threat classifies them as local hotspots. The use and...
| Autores: | , |
|---|---|
| Tipo de recurso: | artículo |
| Estado: | Versión publicada |
| Fecha de publicación: | 2025 |
| País: | Brasil |
| Institución: | Universidade Federal do Paraná (UFPR) |
| Repositorio: | Revista Desenvolvimento e Meio Ambiente (Online) |
| Idioma: | inglés español |
| OAI Identifier: | oai:ojs.pkp.sfu.ca:article/91451 |
| Acceso en línea: | https://revistas.ufpr.br/made/article/view/91451 |
| Access Level: | acceso abierto |
| Palabra clave: | conservation protected areas high mountain ecosystems socio-environmental conflict farmers conservación áreas protegidas ecosistemas de alta montaña conflicto socioambiental campesinos ecossistemas de alta montanha agricultores conservação conflito socioambiental |
| Sumario: | The páramos are unique areas in the high mountains of the neotropics. They overlap with the Andean hotspot and form ecoregions of high regional biodiversity and endemic fauna and flora. They are important for water regulation, and their degree of threat classifies them as local hotspots. The use and control of their resources had set the interests of several actors for their conservation, which in Colombia implies specific management of the territory under different categories of protected areas. This research aimed to analyze the environmental conflict of the Pisba páramo, according to the perspective of the community of the municipality of Socotá (Boyacá, Colombia). For this purpose, we applied social mapping and participatory rural appraisal tools, analyzing the ecosystemic and cultural characteristics of the area, the conflict scenarios, and the perspectives of the community about alternatives previously proposed by other authors. As a main result, we identified an environmental conflict framed in the following components: 1. Presence of environmental authorities and protected areas, 2. Impact of agricultural activities in the páramo, 3. Impact of coal mining in the area, 4. The presence of the Andean bear, and 5. Difficulty of access to the Ruta Libertadora horse path. Alternatives, such as 1. Community management plans, 2. Application of agroecology and biocultural memory recovery, and 3. Changes in the agrarian structure. These are reported to be a favorable response to consolidate a space for dialogue that allows the inclusion of campesino initiatives, with potential discussions on resource management, economic activities, protection of the páramo, and other challenges such as strengthening associativity. It also highlights the need for transition and training in agroecology in such a way that it is practical and operational in the territory. Finally, regarding changes in the agrarian structure, the community proposes to dignify their lives by recognizing the land ownership rights of the farmers and providing access to solutions such as land tenure regularization. They also propose access to essential services and strengthening the scope of territorial planning. |
|---|