The Queensland Government in Australia is applying a values-based approach to park management across the State’s protected areas based on international effective and equitable management principles. To showcase successful park management in practice and to identify areas requiring improvement in the approach, the Queensland Government is participating in the IUCN Green List programme. Nomination of Lamington National Park, Australia’s first World Heritage protected area to be assessed, has shown the importance of linking strategic planning to in-park operations, the advantages of working collaboratively internally and externally, the importance of capacity for park management and establishing long-term goals and investment, effective ways to ‘close the gap’ on adaptive management, and the flow of benefits to other protected areas across the State
{"title":"The benefits of the IUCN Green List in implementing effective park management in Queensland, Australia","authors":"Sherri Tanner-McAllister, Leanne Tudman, Jo Zadkovich, Wil Buch, Jacqueline Dupuy, Todd Doyle, Mykel Holmes","doi":"10.2305/hpds2115","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2305/hpds2115","url":null,"abstract":"The Queensland Government in Australia is applying a values-based approach to park management across the State’s protected areas based on international effective and equitable management principles. To showcase successful park management in practice and to identify areas requiring improvement in the approach, the Queensland Government is participating in the IUCN Green List programme. Nomination of Lamington National Park, Australia’s first World Heritage protected area to be assessed, has shown the importance of linking strategic planning to in-park operations, the advantages of working collaboratively internally and externally, the importance of capacity for park management and establishing long-term goals and investment, effective ways to ‘close the gap’ on adaptive management, and the flow of benefits to other protected areas across the State","PeriodicalId":37571,"journal":{"name":"Parks","volume":"30 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141136563","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Invasive species are a major threat to protected areas, as they disrupt native ecosystems and contribute to biodiversity loss. Invasive species management is faced with a challenge known as the ‘knowing–doing gap’, which refers to the disconnect between scientific research and its application in conservation efforts. Addressing this challenge requires collaboration between stakeholders (including researchers, managers, policymakers and the public), creating a need for tools that can clearly communicate invasive species and strategies to diverse audiences. Realistic, immersive geographical visualisations (geovisualisations), have the potential to serve a role in bridging this gap. This study engages people with management- and place-based relationships in a provincial park in British Columbia, Canada in the use of a novel geovisualisation tool for supporting invasive species management efforts. Using focus group methods, the research collects insights and perspectives on the usefulness of the developed tool. The results indicate that geovisualisations have the potential to engage and educate stakeholders in management options; however, it is important for geovisualisations to maintain realism and account for the diverse backgrounds of users. The paper concludes with suggestions from study participants on how to improve geovisualisation tools in ways that increase their effectiveness and appeal to park and protected area stakeholders.
{"title":"Geovisualisation for effective management of invasive species: Bridging the knowing–doing gap","authors":"Elvia Willyono, Christopher Bone, Robert Newell","doi":"10.2305/wicl5376","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2305/wicl5376","url":null,"abstract":"Invasive species are a major threat to protected areas, as they disrupt native ecosystems and contribute to biodiversity loss. Invasive species management is faced with a challenge known as the ‘knowing–doing gap’, which refers to the disconnect between scientific research and its application in conservation efforts. Addressing this challenge requires collaboration between stakeholders (including researchers, managers, policymakers and the public), creating a need for tools that can clearly communicate invasive species and strategies to diverse audiences. Realistic, immersive geographical visualisations (geovisualisations), have the potential to serve a role in bridging this gap. This study engages people with management- and place-based relationships in a provincial park in British Columbia, Canada in the use of a novel geovisualisation tool for supporting invasive species management efforts. Using focus group methods, the research collects insights and perspectives on the usefulness of the developed tool. The results indicate that geovisualisations have the potential to engage and educate stakeholders in management options; however, it is important for geovisualisations to maintain realism and account for the diverse backgrounds of users. The paper concludes with suggestions from study participants on how to improve geovisualisation tools in ways that increase their effectiveness and appeal to park and protected area stakeholders.","PeriodicalId":37571,"journal":{"name":"Parks","volume":"71 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141145701","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Prior political ecology studies have explored the vulnerability of pastoralism and conflicts between protected areas and pastoralist livelihoods. Some conservation regimes regard Indigenous pastoralists’ institutions, knowledge, self-governance and self-determination as incompatible with contemporary conservation on the grounds that the associated practices are unsustainable. Based on critical ethnography, this paper examines the moral ecology of Indigenous Magar agro-pastoralism in the Dhorpatan Hunting Reserve of mid-western Nepal. Traditional Magar management is in crisis due to reserve policies and practices. From a political ecology perspective, I show that the traditional moral ecology of agro-pastoralism sustains complex relationships with the rangelands. Traditional institutions uphold a moral ecology that is deeply rooted in spiritual practices and fosters a sense of responsibility for the preservation of biodiversity and nature. Current conservation policies inadequately recognise these Indigenous moral principles and weaken harmonious socio-ecological relations. In order to manage protected areas sustainably in high-altitude regions, it is crucial to manage agro-pastoralism within the framework of traditional moral ecology through Indigenous peoples’ self-governance and self-determination.
{"title":"A crisis of moral ecology: Magar agro-pastoralism in Dhorpatan Hunting Reserve, Nepal","authors":"Indra Mani Rai","doi":"10.2305/lcxc2811","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2305/lcxc2811","url":null,"abstract":"Prior political ecology studies have explored the vulnerability of pastoralism and conflicts between protected areas and pastoralist livelihoods. Some conservation regimes regard Indigenous pastoralists’ institutions, knowledge, self-governance and self-determination as incompatible with contemporary conservation on the grounds that the associated practices are unsustainable. Based on critical ethnography, this paper examines the moral ecology of Indigenous Magar agro-pastoralism in the Dhorpatan Hunting Reserve of mid-western Nepal. Traditional Magar management is in crisis due to reserve policies and practices. From a political ecology perspective, I show that the traditional moral ecology of agro-pastoralism sustains complex relationships with the rangelands. Traditional institutions uphold a moral ecology that is deeply rooted in spiritual practices and fosters a sense of responsibility for the preservation of biodiversity and nature. Current conservation policies inadequately recognise these Indigenous moral principles and weaken harmonious socio-ecological relations. In order to manage protected areas sustainably in high-altitude regions, it is crucial to manage agro-pastoralism within the framework of traditional moral ecology through Indigenous peoples’ self-governance and self-determination.","PeriodicalId":37571,"journal":{"name":"Parks","volume":"9 39","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141136494","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
James Fitzsimons, S. Stolton, N. Dudley, Brent Mitchell
The concept of ‘long-term’ is a key part of the definitions of both protected areas and other effective area-based conservation measures (OECMs). Draft principles for OECMs in Australia developed by the Australian Government propose a minimum period for OECMs of 25 years, where a landholder is not able to commit to in-perpetuity conservation. The proposal suggests this is consistent with IUCN Guidelines for Privately Protected Areas. As authors of the Guidelines for Privately Protected Areas we contend however that Australia’s proposed OECM guideline suggesting 25 years of “intention” to deliver biodiversity outcomes is ‘long-term’ is not supported by IUCN guidelines. Furthermore for protected areas, Australia has a long-established definition of ‘long-term’ – specifically a minimum timeframe of 99 years is required if permanent protection is not possible – embedded in both national policy and legal agreements. As national governments rapidly seek to define OECMs in response to the raised ambitions of the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework, there will be increasing interest in what counts towards Target 3. Ultimately, more land managed for conservation is good and all forms of area-based conservation should be encouraged. However, not all forms of area-based conservation qualify for inclusion in Target 3. Long-term intent and outcomes are fundamental, as outlined in the definitions of protected areas and OECMs.
{"title":"Clarifying ‘long-term’ for protected areas and other effective area-based conservation measures (OECMs): why only 25 years of ‘intent’ does not qualify","authors":"James Fitzsimons, S. Stolton, N. Dudley, Brent Mitchell","doi":"10.2305/glft980","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2305/glft980","url":null,"abstract":"The concept of ‘long-term’ is a key part of the definitions of both protected areas and other effective area-based conservation measures (OECMs). Draft principles for OECMs in Australia developed by the Australian Government propose a minimum period for OECMs of 25 years, where a landholder is not able to commit to in-perpetuity conservation. The proposal suggests this is consistent with IUCN Guidelines for Privately Protected Areas. As authors of the Guidelines for Privately Protected Areas we contend however that Australia’s proposed OECM guideline suggesting 25 years of “intention” to deliver biodiversity outcomes is ‘long-term’ is not supported by IUCN guidelines. Furthermore for protected areas, Australia has a long-established definition of ‘long-term’ – specifically a minimum timeframe of 99 years is required if permanent protection is not possible – embedded in both national policy and legal agreements. As national governments rapidly seek to define OECMs in response to the raised ambitions of the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework, there will be increasing interest in what counts towards Target 3. Ultimately, more land managed for conservation is good and all forms of area-based conservation should be encouraged. However, not all forms of area-based conservation qualify for inclusion in Target 3. Long-term intent and outcomes are fundamental, as outlined in the definitions of protected areas and OECMs.","PeriodicalId":37571,"journal":{"name":"Parks","volume":" 5","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141131497","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Given the dire state of health of rivers worldwide and their significant heritage values, there is a need to consider their current representation in protected areas inscribed under the World Heritage Convention and identify challenges and opportunities for increasing their coverage. This study identifies a total of 153 natural, mixed natural/cultural and cultural landscape World Heritage sites that recognise rivers as a source of Outstanding Universal Value. There are challenges associated with the recognition of river sites as World Heritage, but further nominations could be encouraged through amendments to the World Heritage Convention Operational Guidelines to allow greater discretion to be exercised in relation to integrity requirements at inscription and to explicitly acknowledge freshwater use as a basis for recognising mixed natural/cultural and cultural landscape sites. There is also an opportunity to encourage further nomination of river sites by recognising the important implications of World Heritage inscription for international water cooperation. Together, these recommendations provide a path forward for enhancing the place of rivers in World Heritage protected areas.
{"title":"The World Heritage Convention, Protected Areas and Rivers: Challenges for Representation and Implications for International Water Cooperation","authors":"Sam Campbell","doi":"10.2305/umkn8340","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2305/umkn8340","url":null,"abstract":"Given the dire state of health of rivers worldwide and their significant heritage values, there is a need to consider their current representation in protected areas inscribed under the World Heritage Convention and identify challenges and opportunities for increasing their coverage. This study identifies a total of 153 natural, mixed natural/cultural and cultural landscape World Heritage sites that recognise rivers as a source of Outstanding Universal Value. There are challenges associated with the recognition of river sites as World Heritage, but further nominations could be encouraged through amendments to the World Heritage Convention Operational Guidelines to allow greater discretion to be exercised in relation to integrity requirements at inscription and to explicitly acknowledge freshwater use as a basis for recognising mixed natural/cultural and cultural landscape sites. There is also an opportunity to encourage further nomination of river sites by recognising the important implications of World Heritage inscription for international water cooperation. Together, these recommendations provide a path forward for enhancing the place of rivers in World Heritage protected areas.","PeriodicalId":37571,"journal":{"name":"Parks","volume":"68 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141135924","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The paper explores the role of the UNESCO World Heritage Convention in safeguarding natural and cultural heritage, with a specific focus on sites facing armed conflict. The Convention acts as a global mechanism for the protection and conservation of sites with Outstanding Universal Value. The study investigates the use of ‘soft power’ and ‘nudging’ strategies by the World Heritage Committee to facilitate the restoration of World Heritage Sites facing threats, particularly in the Global South. The analysis is based on the examination of 32 natural sites inscribed on the List of World Heritage in Danger since 1984, nine of which are in the Global South and faced with armed conflict. Case studies illustrate how armed conflicts impact biodiversity and the steps taken to recover these sites. The study emphasises the soft power of the World Heritage Convention, backed by diplomatic ties and financial aid, as instrumental in achieving restoration. Nudging is observed in the strategic alignment of choices to encourage conservation efforts. The findings suggest that the World Heritage Committee’s influence extends beyond conservation, contributing to regional development, especially in the Global South. However, challenges persist, and the paper calls for a continuous evolution of the World Heritage Convention’s role in addressing conflicts, development, and climate change to ensure effective global heritage conservation.
{"title":"Nudging to glory: the World Heritage Convention’s influence in conflict-prone Global South natural sites","authors":"Pallabi Chakraborty, Sonali Ghosh","doi":"10.2305/spkg5887","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2305/spkg5887","url":null,"abstract":"The paper explores the role of the UNESCO World Heritage Convention in safeguarding natural and cultural heritage, with a specific focus on sites facing armed conflict. The Convention acts as a global mechanism for the protection and conservation of sites with Outstanding Universal Value. The study investigates the use of ‘soft power’ and ‘nudging’ strategies by the World Heritage Committee to facilitate the restoration of World Heritage Sites facing threats, particularly in the Global South. The analysis is based on the examination of 32 natural sites inscribed on the List of World Heritage in Danger since 1984, nine of which are in the Global South and faced with armed conflict. Case studies illustrate how armed conflicts impact biodiversity and the steps taken to recover these sites. The study emphasises the soft power of the World Heritage Convention, backed by diplomatic ties and financial aid, as instrumental in achieving restoration. Nudging is observed in the strategic alignment of choices to encourage conservation efforts. The findings suggest that the World Heritage Committee’s influence extends beyond conservation, contributing to regional development, especially in the Global South. However, challenges persist, and the paper calls for a continuous evolution of the World Heritage Convention’s role in addressing conflicts, development, and climate change to ensure effective global heritage conservation.","PeriodicalId":37571,"journal":{"name":"Parks","volume":"30 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141141219","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Protected areas depend on a reliable and strong workforce to achieve biodiversity conservation goals. The Kunming Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework adopted a target to protect at least 30 per cent of the planet’s land and seas by 2030, also known as 30x30. To reach and maintain this ambitious goal, an expanded conservation workforce is indispensable. Despite this, most protected areas are currently critically understaffed. This study examines staffing in shared governance protected areas in Madagascar - a biodiversity hotspot that has significantly expanded its protected area network since 2015. We explore factors that attract and retain protected area workers in order to suggest recommendations for workforce development. We employ a qualitative approach utilising face-to-face interviews and a survey of protected area staff and local communities in Madagascar. We obtained data from 62 individuals across 10 protected areas, under IUCN management categories II, V and VI. Findings indicate that understaffing is a dynamic rather than a static phenomenon. A key motivation for working in the protected area sector is place attachment. Non-monetary work practices including place-based empowerment of community groups and gender-inclusive approaches can improve organisational culture to meet growing human resource needs in protected areas. By charting a new path for workforce development, protected areas may be able to address long standing human resources issues and contribute to community empowerment and sustainable livelihood.
{"title":"Strengthening a resilient protected area workforce to advance the 30x30 goal: the case of Madagascar","authors":"Domoina Rakotobe, G. Dabelko, Nancy J. Stevens","doi":"10.2305/ketw5223","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2305/ketw5223","url":null,"abstract":"Protected areas depend on a reliable and strong workforce to achieve biodiversity conservation goals. The Kunming Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework adopted a target to protect at least 30 per cent of the planet’s land and seas by 2030, also known as\u202830x30. To reach and maintain this ambitious goal, an expanded conservation workforce is\u2028indispensable. Despite this, most protected areas are currently critically understaffed. This study examines staffing in shared governance protected areas in Madagascar - a\u2028biodiversity hotspot that has significantly expanded its protected area network since\u20282015. We explore factors that attract and retain protected area workers in order to\u2028suggest recommendations for workforce development. We employ a qualitative approach\u2028utilising face-to-face interviews and a survey of protected area staff and local\u2028 communities in Madagascar. We obtained data from 62 individuals across 10 protected\u2028 areas, under IUCN management categories II, V and VI. Findings indicate that understaffing is a dynamic rather than a static phenomenon. A key motivation for working\u2028in the protected area sector is place attachment. Non-monetary work practices including\u2028place-based empowerment of community groups and gender-inclusive approaches can improve\u2028organisational culture to meet growing human resource needs in protected areas. By\u2028charting a new path for workforce development, protected areas may be able to address\u2028long standing human resources issues and contribute to community empowerment and\u2028sustainable livelihood.","PeriodicalId":37571,"journal":{"name":"Parks","volume":"39 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139292685","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The Russian Federation’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine has become a humanitarian and political crisis. Since the very start of the invasion, it has also been an ecological disaster, with Russian troops utilising protected areas both in an attempt to access strategic Ukrainian settlements, but also as locations in which to conduct active warfare. The frontline has now crossed and retreated from many protected areas, many are still occupied and many are still the sites of active hostilities. This study found the most common damages to protected areas are: physical destruction of habitats and wildlife and wildlife behavioural changes from explosions; chemical and physical pollution from explosive materials; fires caused by shelling; damages to soil and plant cover from heavy military vehicles, equipment and defence infrastructure; and military exploitation of natural resources. Given the occupation, combat and mining with explosives, it will be years before Ukraine can account for the full extent of damage to its protected area system. This paper provides an interim assessment of the damages to protected areas so far and urges the conservation and policy communities to monitor the situation moving forward.
{"title":"The State of Ukraine's Protected Areas: an interim update on damages from the full-scale invasion","authors":"Hannah Timmins, Olesya Petrovych, Anastasiia Drapaliuk, Kateryna Polianska, Oleksii Vasyliuk, Jody Bragger, Anna Kuzemko, Denis Vishnevsky","doi":"10.2305/wuer4443","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2305/wuer4443","url":null,"abstract":"The Russian Federation’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine has become a humanitarian and political crisis. Since the very start of the invasion, it has also been an ecological disaster, with Russian troops utilising protected areas both in an attempt to access strategic Ukrainian settlements, but also as locations in which to conduct active warfare. The frontline has now crossed and retreated from many protected areas, many are still occupied and many are still the sites of active hostilities. This study found the most common damages to protected areas are: physical destruction of habitats and wildlife and wildlife behavioural changes from explosions; chemical and physical pollution from explosive materials; fires caused by shelling; damages to soil and plant cover from heavy military vehicles, equipment and defence infrastructure; and military exploitation of natural resources. Given the occupation, combat and mining with explosives, it will be years before Ukraine can account for the full extent of damage to its protected area system. This paper provides an interim assessment of the damages to protected areas so far and urges the conservation and policy communities to monitor the situation moving forward.","PeriodicalId":37571,"journal":{"name":"Parks","volume":"84 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139296927","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Sara Barrueco, Iraola María Jesús, Monika Bertzky, Rohit Singh, Chris Galliers
Rangers are on the frontline of conservation, providing a crucial service to nature – and humanity. Many of them face difficult and dangerous situations on a regular basis. They may encounter poachers and other criminal and potentially armed groups while on patrol, support rescue missions, fight fires or prevent wildlife from damaging crops, thus risking and sometimes even losing their lives. Despite these dangers and hardships, the provisions in place to safeguard their interests and safety often fall short of providing meaningful response and protection and they lack the same acknowledgement other frontline workers receive. The ‘Principles for Safeguarding the Rights and Well-being of Rangers’ were developed in an effort to contribute towards the improvement of the situation rangers face around the world and to provide clear standards for practitioners and decision-makers to guide policy and action. Guidance and tools for the implementation of the principles were also developed to help close the gap between theory and practice.
{"title":"Safeguarding the rights and well-being of rangers","authors":"Sara Barrueco, Iraola María Jesús, Monika Bertzky, Rohit Singh, Chris Galliers","doi":"10.2305/pvzm4213","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2305/pvzm4213","url":null,"abstract":"Rangers are on the frontline of conservation, providing a crucial service to nature – and humanity. Many of them face difficult and dangerous situations on a regular basis. They may encounter poachers and other criminal and potentially armed groups while on patrol, support rescue missions, fight fires or prevent wildlife from damaging crops, thus risking and sometimes even losing their lives. Despite these dangers and hardships, the provisions in place to safeguard their interests and safety often fall short of providing meaningful response and protection and they lack the same acknowledgement other frontline workers receive. The ‘Principles for Safeguarding the Rights and Well-being of Rangers’ were developed in an effort to contribute towards the improvement of the situation rangers face around the world and to provide clear standards for practitioners and decision-makers to guide policy and action. Guidance and tools for the implementation of the principles were also developed to help close the gap between theory and practice.","PeriodicalId":37571,"journal":{"name":"Parks","volume":"11 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139302618","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Christopher J. Lemieux, Trina D. King, Scott R. Parker, Daniel T. Kraus
Despite coastal area being recognised as an important subcomponent in protected and conserved areas targets for over a decade, it has been orphaned in both national and international reporting. In this paper, we provide the first progress report on protected and conserved coastal area in Canada. While 13.6 per cent of Canada’s coastal area is protected and conserved, there is substantial variation across Canada’s three oceans and Great Lakes, jurisdictional authorities, and marine/terrestrial ecosystems. Importantly, Manitoba (37.3 per cent) and the Yukon (45.1 per cent) have already achieved the 30 per cent coastal protection target of the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (KM-GBF). However, Newfoundland and Labrador (7 per cent) and the Northwest Territories (8 per cent) currently fall significantly short. Very poor protection is evident in several marine bioregions and terrestrial ecozones, including across the Arctic, the Newfoundland and Labrador Shelves (0.7 per cent) and the Hudson Bay Complex (5.1 per cent). The Great Lakes require urgent and focused conservation attention, with lakes Ontario (3.6 per cent) and Erie (3.7 per cent) exhibiting a dismal amount of coastal protected and conserved area. Our results highlight the importance of explicitly reporting on the status of coastal area protection and we outline several considerations that can be used by the global conservation community to support more effective coastal protection, accounting and reporting vis-à-vis Target 3 of the KM-GBF
{"title":"Protected and conserved coastal areas in Canada: insights with respect to Target 3 of the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework","authors":"Christopher J. Lemieux, Trina D. King, Scott R. Parker, Daniel T. Kraus","doi":"10.2305/rzvd9721","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2305/rzvd9721","url":null,"abstract":"Despite coastal area being recognised as an important subcomponent in protected and conserved areas targets for over a decade, it has been orphaned in both national and international reporting. In this paper, we provide the first progress report on protected and conserved coastal area in Canada. While 13.6 per cent of Canada’s coastal area is protected and conserved, there is substantial variation across Canada’s three oceans and Great Lakes, jurisdictional authorities, and marine/terrestrial ecosystems. Importantly, Manitoba (37.3 per cent) and the Yukon (45.1 per cent) have already achieved the 30 per cent coastal protection target of the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (KM-GBF). However, Newfoundland and Labrador (7 per cent) and the Northwest Territories (8 per cent) currently fall significantly short. Very poor protection is evident in several marine bioregions and terrestrial ecozones, including across the Arctic, the Newfoundland and Labrador Shelves (0.7 per cent) and the Hudson Bay Complex (5.1 per cent). The Great Lakes require urgent and focused conservation attention, with lakes Ontario (3.6 per cent) and Erie (3.7 per cent) exhibiting a dismal amount of coastal protected and conserved area. Our results highlight the importance of explicitly reporting on the status of coastal area protection and we outline several considerations that can be used by the global conservation community to support more effective coastal protection, accounting and reporting vis-à-vis Target 3 of the KM-GBF","PeriodicalId":37571,"journal":{"name":"Parks","volume":"43 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139292215","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：