Abstract

Integrated conservation and development projects (ICDPs) have recently been criticized for their ignorance of community heterogeneity, mismatch between project output and expectations, and lack of connection between conservation and development initiatives. Using Nepal’s Annapurna Conservation Area Project (ACAP) as an example this paper examined how perceived benefits from one ICDP varied between stakeholder groups and how local resources were allocated. Data collection for this research was conducted through 96 interviews with three groups, that is, ICDP staff, local management committee members, and marginalized peoples. Results showed that the programs introduced by ACAP and their resource allocations were not perceived as having a fair and equitable impact across all households, community, and regions within the protected area. Moreover, there was a perceived discrepancy between ACAP allocation of resources in certain sectors, local residents’ expectations from ACAP and outcomes of the funding, that is, conservation vs. tourism. Future research is suggested for collecting more data from additional residents, communities and with other ICDPs.

Key words: Annapurna conservation area, conservation, development, integrated conservation and development project, marginal groups.