10 Vivienne Solís Rivera Patricia Madrigal Cordero Marvin Fonseca Borrás Hugh Govan Vera Varela 9998 community conserved areas, governance, land rights Recognizing the rich biocultural diversity of Central America as well as the social, economical and legal marginalization of its native people, this paper calls for the strengthening of indigenous people's legal rights to their land and natural resources. Though the number of legally protected areas in Central America has more than doubled in the last 30 years, conservation goals have not been met and the authors attribute these failures to widespread disregard for indigenous forms of land organization, management and governance. The paper reviews an increasing international discourse on the links between biodiversity conservation and community rights. It cites Agreement 169 of the ILO (International Labor Organization); the World Parks Conference in 2003 in Durban, South Africa; and the Second Mesoamerican Congress on Protected Areas. Stressing the social and monetary burden of conservation that excludes people, the authors call for 1) land rights for communities in CCAs, 2) recognition of indigenous and traditional culture in protected areas, 3) broad ecosystem approaches to conservation, and 4) in-depth analysis of tourism in order to support human rights. Examples of some Central American CCAs are given. Panama is identified as a one of the few countries in Central America with legislature for the creation of precincts (comaracas) granting land and resource rights to indigenous people. The wetlands and turtle nesting grounds of the Ngobe-Bugle Comarca in Panama are governed by traditional authorities. The Kuna Yala Comarca, in accordance with its founding laws and traditional land use practices, has its own protected area featuring 253,435 ha of land and sea divided into five different management zones. Also, Nicaragua's autonomous regions are governed by local community representatives and cover 43% of the national territory. Inhabited chiefly by indigenous people and featuring different levels of management or strict conservation, Nicaraguan CCAs feature high amounts of in tact forests, watershed zones, lakes and wetlands. Examples of effective community mapping by and for indigenous people in Honduras, Panama and Nicaragua are provided. To open more opportunities for CCAs and indigenous people in the region, the authors suggest 1) collaboration by governments, NGOs and indigenous peoples to define and agree upon key areas for sustainable management; 2) building local capacity to map traditional territories to support planning and elucidate legal issues; and 3) revision of legal frameworks to improve their interpretation and implementation tools. Finally, main opportunity/challenge areas for Central American CCAs are identified: 1) global-local information exchange and clear delimitation of levels and forms of government; 2) implementation of CCAs as intersectoral benefit tools; 3) recognition of their cost/benefit efficiency; 4) social strengthening approaches that draws from development, agricultural, cooperative and other sectors; 5) integration of CCA initiatives into local people's life plans; and 6) political-legal frameworks that fundamentally recognize the multi-cultural character of each country. 10 Vivienne Solís Rivera Patricia Madrigal Cordero Ivannia Ayales Cruz Marvin Fonseca Borrás Felipe Matos González Alejandro Salazar Dreja Thora Amend 2002 CMWG-CEESP-UICN Cooperativa Autogestionaria de Servicios Profesionales para la Solidadridad Social R.L. 38 12/2002 Caribbean, civil society, co-management, government, Mesoamerica, protected natural area This paper, a collaborative review by associates of the Sol i Dar Co-op (Cooperativa Autogestionaria de Servicios Profesionales para la Solidaridad Social R.L., or in English, Self-managed Cooperative of Professional Services for Social Solidarity R.L.), analyzes the spreading phenomenon of co-management of protected natural areas in Mesoamerica and the Caribbean. Co-management of these areas is a joint responsibility between states and civil society that aspires to more democratic and sustainable forms of natural resources use and conservation. The purpose of this article is to share lessons learned from co-management cases studied throughout the region, and to contribute to the formulation of a conceptual framework for better understanding and advancement of the phenomenon. While analysis and recommendations are provided, examples of diverse cases of co-management constitute the paper's main content. The authors note that a single, technical definition of co-management is lacking and certain international definitions disregard the important contributions of community conserved areas. A universal concept of co-management will help to identify its duties and limitations and to establish norms that guarantee fair participation of actors at all levels. For the construction of a conceptual framework, identification of co-management objectives, ethics, and beneficiaries are necessary. The regional context of the state of environmental management as the authors see it is offered at the outset of the article: 1) the well-being of poor people merits higher priority, 2) economic policies must offer incentives for conserving natural resources, 3) social equity and poverty reduction programs are at times threatened by investments in human capital and natural resources, 4) stronger links are needed between government institutions and civil society, 5) states are generally interested in involving NGOs in co-management projects and 6) many different schemes to integrate government and civil society exist. Lessons learned from the authors' analysis of co-management in the region lead to the following recommendations: 1) the complex process should include planning, identification and assignment of rights and responsibilities as well as the declaration of a common code of ethics; 2) changes in government attitude and policy are needed in order to fully involve Mesoamerican civil society; 3) concepts of national heritage should be promoted that view protected natural areas as the rightful homes of local people; 4) promotion of equity, transparency and solidarity is fundamental; 5) capacities of marginalized actors, especially women, should be assessed and strengthened; 6) creative, participatory methodologies should be innovated and used; 7) traditional land management practices must be recovered, recognized and modified in line with current conservation and community development goals; 8) just forms of participation must respect the right to information, access to information, previous informed consent, and cultural objection; 9) fair and equitable distribution of the benefits of in situ conservation is necessary; 10) technical, financial and administrative capacities of local actors must be built and 11) along with recognizing the unique, non-universal aspects of each case, their analysis should culminate in the design of new national policies and legal and institutional frameworks. Contact information for actors involved in co-management projects in the region is annexed. Prepared by Megan Glore