Other Effective Area-Based Conservation Measures, Biodiversity Stewardship and Statutory Intervention – A South African Perspective

Alexander Paterson
{"title":"Other Effective Area-Based Conservation Measures, Biodiversity Stewardship and Statutory Intervention – A South African Perspective","authors":"Alexander Paterson","doi":"10.17159/1727-3781/2023/v26i0a15441","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Area-based approaches are a central component of global efforts to conserve biodiversity. While the focus of many countries has been mainly on protected areas, other effective area-based conservation measures (OECMS) have been accorded global recognition in the past decade as a vital complementary approach to protected areas. This recognition has been reemphasised in the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework adopted by parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity in December 2022, with its Target 3 ratchetting up area-based coverage targets to 30 per cent by 2030. A growing focus and reliance on OECMs to contribute towards achieving this target is anticipated. The international community has in the past few years introduced some guidance to identify, secure, manage, monitor and verify the anticipated long-term biodiversity conservation outcomes of OECMs. Some commentators have argued for domestic legal intervention to complement this general international guidance. The South African Government has recognised the potential contribution of OECMs towards the achievement of domestic and global area-based biodiversity targets in its National Protected Areas Expansion Strategy (2018) but has alluded to the need for legal intervention to ensure that they achieve positive and sustained long-term outcomes for the in situ conservation of biodiversity. Some domestic commentators have highlighted the strong link between biodiversity stewardship (particularly conservation areas) and OECMs, advocating that these conservation areas should form the priority focus of domestic efforts to identify OECMs. This article scopes this potential link and specifically considers whether the current domestic legal and policy framework applicable to these conservation areas is sufficiently robust to ensure that only appropriate areas are identified as OECMs and that once recognised, they are governed and effectively managed in the long term. It highlights several frailties of the existing framework and drawing from anticipated legal reform in the Western Cape relating to biodiversity stewardship, it proposes a possible model for future national legislation regulating OECMs.","PeriodicalId":55857,"journal":{"name":"Potchefstroom Electronic Law Journal","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Potchefstroom Electronic Law Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17159/1727-3781/2023/v26i0a15441","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Area-based approaches are a central component of global efforts to conserve biodiversity. While the focus of many countries has been mainly on protected areas, other effective area-based conservation measures (OECMS) have been accorded global recognition in the past decade as a vital complementary approach to protected areas. This recognition has been reemphasised in the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework adopted by parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity in December 2022, with its Target 3 ratchetting up area-based coverage targets to 30 per cent by 2030. A growing focus and reliance on OECMs to contribute towards achieving this target is anticipated. The international community has in the past few years introduced some guidance to identify, secure, manage, monitor and verify the anticipated long-term biodiversity conservation outcomes of OECMs. Some commentators have argued for domestic legal intervention to complement this general international guidance. The South African Government has recognised the potential contribution of OECMs towards the achievement of domestic and global area-based biodiversity targets in its National Protected Areas Expansion Strategy (2018) but has alluded to the need for legal intervention to ensure that they achieve positive and sustained long-term outcomes for the in situ conservation of biodiversity. Some domestic commentators have highlighted the strong link between biodiversity stewardship (particularly conservation areas) and OECMs, advocating that these conservation areas should form the priority focus of domestic efforts to identify OECMs. This article scopes this potential link and specifically considers whether the current domestic legal and policy framework applicable to these conservation areas is sufficiently robust to ensure that only appropriate areas are identified as OECMs and that once recognised, they are governed and effectively managed in the long term. It highlights several frailties of the existing framework and drawing from anticipated legal reform in the Western Cape relating to biodiversity stewardship, it proposes a possible model for future national legislation regulating OECMs.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
其他有效的基于区域的保护措施、生物多样性管理和法定干预——一个南非的视角
基于区域的方法是全球保护生物多样性努力的核心组成部分。虽然许多国家的重点主要放在保护区上,但在过去十年中,其他有效的基于区域的保护措施(OECMS)作为保护区的重要补充办法已得到全球承认。《生物多样性公约》缔约方于2022年12月通过的《昆明-蒙特利尔全球生物多样性框架》再次强调了这一认识,其中的目标3将到2030年基于区域的覆盖率目标提高到30%。预计将越来越重视和依赖东经合组织为实现这一目标作出贡献。国际社会在过去几年中提出了一些指导方针,以确定、保护、管理、监测和核查东经合组织预期的长期生物多样性保护成果。一些评论员主张国内法律干预,以补充这一一般性国际指导。南非政府在其国家保护区扩张战略(2018年)中认识到东经合组织在实现国内和全球基于区域的生物多样性目标方面的潜在贡献,但暗示需要进行法律干预,以确保它们在生物多样性就地保护方面取得积极和持续的长期成果。一些国内评论员强调了生物多样性管理(特别是保护区)与东东欧国家经济机制之间的紧密联系,主张这些保护区应成为国内努力确定东东欧国家经济机制的优先重点。本文对这种潜在联系进行了界定,并特别考虑了目前适用于这些保护区的国内法律和政策框架是否足够健全,以确保只有适当的地区被确定为oecm,并且一旦得到承认,它们就会得到长期的治理和有效管理。它强调了现有框架的若干弱点,并借鉴西开普省有关生物多样性管理的预期法律改革,提出了未来国家立法管理东加勒比国家组织的可能模式。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
67
审稿时长
24 weeks
期刊介绍: PELJ/PER publishes contributions relevant to development in the South African constitutional state. This means that most contributions will concern some aspect of constitutionalism or legal development. The fact that the South African constitutional state is the focus, does not limit the content of PELJ/PER to the South African legal system, since development law and constitutionalism are excellent themes for comparative work. Contributions on any aspect or discipline of the law from any part of the world are thus welcomed.
期刊最新文献
Artificial Intelligence and Blockchain Technologies in Online Dispute Resolution: A Solution to Consumer Disputes in South Africa? Safeguarding the Rights of Children Living in Kinship Care in South Africa "Cause of Action": How Could the Supreme Court of Appeal Get it so Wrong? Olesitse v Minister of Police (SCA) (Unreported) Case No: 470/2021 of 15 June 2022 Navigating Reputational Risks: Cautionary Considerations for South African Banks in the Unilateral Termination of Bank-Customer Relationships An Overview of the Extent of the Powers of South African Competition Authorities in the Regulation of Price Discrimination under the Competition Act 89 of 1998 in the Context of Digital Transformation
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1