(which was adopted at the beginning of the
XIX century). This capacity to adapt
exploitation of natural capital to changing
historical conditions is evidence of the
dynamic and evolutionary character of
Umbrian peasant livelihood systems.
The story also suggests that the success of
La Sommaas an enterprise depends not
only on the wise use of natural capital, but
also on mobilisation of the intangible capital
assets embedded in local social and cultural
background. Most of the know-how that the
Bevilacqua family is using for managing for-
est and breed animals has been inherited
from the previous generations (and is being
transmitted to the new ones). Extended
family social capital plays a pivotal role in
the economy of enterprise. Persisting “peas-
antish” values, attitudes and pattern of
behavior continue to be essential factors in
ensuring the cohesion and loyalty among
household members needed to make the
new business work. Notwithstanding the
adoption of new productive technologies
and a pattern of consumption largely influ-
enced by the industrial society in which
their lives take place, the Bevilacqua’s liveli-
hoods are largely based on the same assets
that allowed traditional Umbrian peasants to
survive and prosper. Their new “ruralness”,
is indeed a syncretic construct melding tra-
dition with innovation in a new synthesis.
Sustainable use of forest resources is one of
the primary elements of continuity between
traditional peasant farming and the new
enterprise. Like Zi’ Bruno and Nonno Pietro,
the new generations of Bevilacqua depend
so heavily on forest and landscape that
there is no point for them to abuse these
resources. Their interest is rather to nurture
and protect an environment that attracts
horse-trekkers and tourists, feed horses,
generate additional income and supply their
table with tasty foods. As owners of their
ancestral land, the Bevilacqua believe them-
selves to be the only stakeholders fully enti-
tled and really competent to make sound
forest management decisions. They perceive
conservation laws and regulation as a dis-
turbing, useless and expensive paper work.
The paradox is that these laws and regula-
tions have been designed precisely to oblige
and motivate people to do in the name of
environmental conservation what the
Bevilacqua are already doing with the pri-
mary aims of enhancing their wealth,
improving the quality of their life and repro-
ducing their cultural identity.As policy does matter, some questions for
national and regional conservation policy-
makers arise from these considerations:
how can conflicts between land manage-
ment bureaucracy and new rural livelihoods,
such as that illustrated in this paper, be
dealt with? Can collaborative relationships
among authorities, small entrepreneurs and
other actors be established and nurtured in
the context of rural central Italy? Is it possi-
ble to devolve natural resource manage-
ment responsibilities to competent rural (or
neo-rural) people, while maintaining a strict
(or even stricter) control over speculative
forms of forest and landscape exploitation?
How can sound collaborative management
processes, based on the ‘conservation-by-
use principle’ be promoted in this social
environment? The experience of the
Bevilacqua family suggests that there is
plenty of room to find workable answers to
these questions.Conservation aas ccultural aand ppolitical ppractice
Patrizio Warren ([email protected]) teaches
applied and development anthropology at the
post-graduate course in anthropology of the
Università di Roma I, “La Sapienza”. He works as
an independent consultant for FAO, the European
Union, and several Italian NGOs. Since 1993 he
has been contributing to several IUCN publications
on co-management of natural resources. Patrizio is
a member of CEESP/CMWG