Loading presentation...

Present Remotely

Send the link below via email or IM


Present to your audience

Start remote presentation

  • Invited audience members will follow you as you navigate and present
  • People invited to a presentation do not need a Prezi account
  • This link expires 10 minutes after you close the presentation
  • A maximum of 30 users can follow your presentation
  • Learn more about this feature in our knowledge base article

Do you really want to delete this prezi?

Neither you, nor the coeditors you shared it with will be able to recover it again.


Copy of Preserving Tibetan pastures

No description

Wallace Correy

on 17 May 2012

Comments (0)

Please log in to add your comment.

Report abuse

Transcript of Copy of Preserving Tibetan pastures

Qinghai-Tibetan Plateau Location Statistics Wallace, Sophie, Luke, Katherine, Renny Group 4 Human Impacts of enclosure Environment Altitude: >4000m
Climate: 'third pole'
Conditions: harsh, fragile, variable
Environment: glacial, permafrost, grasslands, lakes, rivers
Resources: Resource rich, minerals, water
Ecology: Unique, many rare or endangered species
Desertification: 20.5 million Ha degraded by human activity already
Water Tower: Downstream influence on 40% of the world population
Pastoralist Population: ~ 2.5 million Enclosure of the Qinghai-Tibetan Plateau Policy Points Balance
Recent degradation
Conversion to farming plots
Human factor causing degradation VS climate change (controlled VS uncontrolled)
Reaction to perceived threat of degradation
Knowledge and traditional management expertise
Perceived that extensive mobile pastoralism based on communal pasture use is backward and inefficient? Rationale for Developing Tibet (Stated)

Nomadic lifestyle seen as backward and uncivillized
Push to achieve ‘modernity’
Reduce poverty and inequality
Bring economic expansion

Rationale for Developing Tibet (Unstated)

Maintain control
Ensure Han superiority
Foster dependence on central government Policy Rationale Collectivisation Policy
- Four Ways Scheme
- Grasslands Law Enclosure and Internal Territorialisation
under the pretext of ‘Environmental Protection’ Mobility
new patterns of inequality and conflict
Structure of community and family
Economic shifts
Gender roles Fencing
Zones and boundaries extend state control over territory
State control over pastoralists' access to natural resources
Sedentarisation and control of pastoralist populations Possible Solutions Recognition of the customary rights of pastoralists
Interdisciplinary coordination
Integrated sustainable rangeland and pastoral development programs
Mediatory role of Non Government Organisations in facilitating environmental protection that improves environmental conditions and local livelihoods
Full transcript