Pub Date : 2019-11-01DOI: 10.2305/iucn.ch.2019.parks-25-2ss.en
S. Stolton, N. Dudley, A. Belokurov, M. Deguignet, N. Burgess, M. Hockings, Fiona Leverington, K. Mackinnon, Llewellyn Young
Understanding the successes and failures of management of protected areas is vital for the conservation of global biodiversity. The Management Effectiveness Tracking Tool (METT) is a simple, questionnaire-based approach for assessing protected area management effectiveness (PAME). Since it was developed in 1999, it has become the most widely applied PAME tool, used in at least 127 countries worldwide. This paper reviews the development of the METT and how it has been implemented and adapted. A combination of literature review on implementation and implementation experience from the original authors and key users of the METT confirms that the METT is a relatively quick and simple way of collecting information about the status and trends of management in protected areas, and provides information to help drive management improvements. As such it is suitable for protected area managers, national protected area agencies, donors, and NGOs aiming to improve area management, and as a component of national reporting to the Convention on Biological Diversity. The paper examines issues related to METT implementation and concludes with 12 recommendations, from using the METT to verification of results, which together help ensure the tool is implemented in the most effective way and improves the credibility of PAME assessments.
{"title":"Lessons learned from 18 years of implementing the Management Effectiveness Tracking\u0000 Tool (METT): A perspective from the METT developers and implementers","authors":"S. Stolton, N. Dudley, A. Belokurov, M. Deguignet, N. Burgess, M. Hockings, Fiona Leverington, K. Mackinnon, Llewellyn Young","doi":"10.2305/iucn.ch.2019.parks-25-2ss.en","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2305/iucn.ch.2019.parks-25-2ss.en","url":null,"abstract":"Understanding the successes and failures of management of protected areas is vital for the conservation of global biodiversity. The Management Effectiveness Tracking Tool (METT) is a simple, questionnaire-based approach for assessing protected area management effectiveness (PAME). Since it was developed in 1999, it has become the most widely applied PAME tool, used in at least 127 countries worldwide. This paper reviews the development of the METT and how it has been implemented and adapted. A combination of literature review on implementation and implementation experience from the original authors and key users of the METT confirms that the METT is a relatively quick and simple way of collecting information about the status and trends of management in protected areas, and provides information to help drive management improvements. As such it is suitable for protected area managers, national protected area agencies, donors, and NGOs aiming to improve area management, and as a component of national reporting to the Convention on Biological Diversity. The paper examines issues related to METT implementation and concludes with 12 recommendations, from using the METT to verification of results, which together help ensure the tool is implemented in the most effective way and improves the credibility of PAME assessments.","PeriodicalId":37571,"journal":{"name":"Parks","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42088761","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}
Pub Date : 2019-05-03DOI: 10.2305/IUCN.CH.2019.PARKS-25-1REG.EN
Rafael Diez García, Lionel Hernandez, Maria Isabel Silva, Yolinda Sumoza, Miyel Rodriguez, José Antonio Rodríguez García
{"title":"Remarks on the Venezuelan protected area system as listed on the World Database on Protected Areas and CBD Aichi Target 11","authors":"Rafael Diez García, Lionel Hernandez, Maria Isabel Silva, Yolinda Sumoza, Miyel Rodriguez, José Antonio Rodríguez García","doi":"10.2305/IUCN.CH.2019.PARKS-25-1REG.EN","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.CH.2019.PARKS-25-1REG.EN","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":37571,"journal":{"name":"Parks","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-05-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43592673","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}
Pub Date : 2019-05-03DOI: 10.2305/IUCN.CH.2019.PARKS-25-1TDA.EN
T. Allendorf, Volker Radel, N. Keuler
{"title":"People’s perceptions of protected areas across spatial scales","authors":"T. Allendorf, Volker Radel, N. Keuler","doi":"10.2305/IUCN.CH.2019.PARKS-25-1TDA.EN","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.CH.2019.PARKS-25-1TDA.EN","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":37571,"journal":{"name":"Parks","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-05-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43524157","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}
Pub Date : 2019-05-03DOI: 10.2305/IUCN.CH.2019.PARKS-25-1SM.EN
S. Mansourian, Gretchen Walters, E. Gonzales
Governance challenges – including ownership, decision-making, accountability, and sharing of costs and benefits – can impede forest landscape restoration in protected area landscapes. Understanding and addressing these challenges can improve the outcomes of forest landscape restoration. We tested the utility of applying an existing framework that focuses on three actions to understand governance – mapping stakeholders, contextualising and re-scaling. The framework was applied to large-scale restoration initiatives in New Caledonia’s dry forest, Canada’s Cape Breton Highlands National Park and a Community Resource Management Area in Ghana’s Western Region to identify governance challenges and solutions in forest landscape restoration implementation in different contexts. Application of the framework revealed four types of governance challenges: overlapping jurisdictions, inter-institutional relationships, tenure and property rights conflict, and stakeholder power dynamics, and five types of governance solutions: supportive national-level policies, clarifying tenure, convening structures, benefit sharing and compensation, and cultural incentives. Overall, we found that the framework helped interviewees to conceptualise governance challenges and identify ways to address them.
{"title":"Identifying governance problems and solutons for forest landscape restoration in protected area landscapes","authors":"S. Mansourian, Gretchen Walters, E. Gonzales","doi":"10.2305/IUCN.CH.2019.PARKS-25-1SM.EN","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.CH.2019.PARKS-25-1SM.EN","url":null,"abstract":"Governance challenges – including ownership, decision-making, accountability, and sharing of costs and benefits – can impede forest landscape restoration in protected area landscapes. Understanding and addressing these challenges can improve the outcomes of forest landscape restoration. We tested the utility of applying an existing framework that focuses on three actions to understand governance – mapping stakeholders, contextualising and re-scaling. The framework was applied to large-scale restoration initiatives in New Caledonia’s dry forest, Canada’s Cape Breton Highlands National Park and a Community Resource Management Area in Ghana’s Western Region to identify governance challenges and solutions in forest landscape restoration implementation in different contexts. Application of the framework revealed four types of governance challenges: overlapping jurisdictions, inter-institutional relationships, tenure and property rights conflict, and stakeholder power dynamics, and five types of governance solutions: supportive national-level policies, clarifying tenure, convening structures, benefit sharing and compensation, and cultural incentives. Overall, we found that the framework helped interviewees to conceptualise governance challenges and identify ways to address them.","PeriodicalId":37571,"journal":{"name":"Parks","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-05-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47346946","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}
Pub Date : 2019-05-03DOI: 10.2305/IUCN.CH.2019.PARKS-25-1IBA.EN
I. B. Adewumi, Carolin Funck, Van Hoang Nguyen, Rie Usui
National Parks (NPs) are established with the aim of protecting important natural environments. However, numerous conflicts have emerged due to the introduction of park rules restricting local communities from utilising resources within national parks. The aim of this paper is to examine ways in which national parks in various nations employ the collaboration of stakeholders in park management and conflict resolution by focusing on four countries: Germany, Japan, Nigeria and Vietnam. A review of literature available in multiple languages, analysis of administrative documents and informal interview were the methods adopted. We show that challenges hindering comanagement in the four countries range from unclear responsibilities of various actors, to weak institutionalised framework, and centralisation of park management. The result implicates that each country can learn different techniques of co-management from other countries, leading to more productive approaches towards national park management and conflict resolution in and around national parks.
{"title":"A cross‐national comparative study on collaborative management of national parks","authors":"I. B. Adewumi, Carolin Funck, Van Hoang Nguyen, Rie Usui","doi":"10.2305/IUCN.CH.2019.PARKS-25-1IBA.EN","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.CH.2019.PARKS-25-1IBA.EN","url":null,"abstract":"National Parks (NPs) are established with the aim of protecting important natural environments. However, numerous conflicts have emerged due to the introduction of park rules restricting local communities from utilising resources within national parks. The aim of this paper is to examine ways in which national parks in various nations employ the collaboration of stakeholders in park management and conflict resolution by focusing on four countries: Germany, Japan, Nigeria and Vietnam. A review of literature available in multiple languages, analysis of administrative documents and informal interview were the methods adopted. We show that challenges hindering comanagement in the four countries range from unclear responsibilities of various actors, to weak institutionalised framework, and centralisation of park management. The result implicates that each country can learn different techniques of co-management from other countries, leading to more productive approaches towards national park management and conflict resolution in and around national parks.","PeriodicalId":37571,"journal":{"name":"Parks","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-05-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45373332","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}
Pub Date : 2019-05-03DOI: 10.2305/IUCN.CH.2019.PARKS-25-1HVZ.EN
H. V. Zyl, J. Kinghorn, L. Emerton
Setting protected area entrance fees at appropriate levels can be extremely challenging. We provide benchmarking data across a sample of 62 countries and construct an Index of Affordability (IOA), showing protected area entry fees relative to citizens’ per capita income adjusted for purchasing power. Using this measure, Australian parks are the most affordable (IOA of 0.10) to citizens, those in Benin are the least affordable (10.69), while Indonesia is closest to the global average IOA of 2.09. Protected areas in low-income countries are on average 30 times less affordable to citizens than in high-income countries. This has equity implications, and may supress visitation rates, thereby reducing the degree to which citizens attach value to, and are willing to support, national parks. International tourist fees are lowest in Armenia (US$1.04) and highest in Tanzania (US$43.72), while Costa Rica is closest to the global average (US$11.21), a relatively small proportion of the US$165 average daily spend estimated for European middle to higher income tourists. International tourists to low-income countries pay an average entrance fee of US$20, four times that paid in high-income countries. This is arguably fair, given their far smaller protected area funding bases and much greater reliance on tourism earnings. Our findings support fee differentiation between citizens and international tourists as a means of equating affordability.
{"title":"National park entrance fees: A global benchmarking focussed on affordability","authors":"H. V. Zyl, J. Kinghorn, L. Emerton","doi":"10.2305/IUCN.CH.2019.PARKS-25-1HVZ.EN","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.CH.2019.PARKS-25-1HVZ.EN","url":null,"abstract":"Setting protected area entrance fees at appropriate levels can be extremely challenging. We provide benchmarking data across a sample of 62 countries and construct an Index of Affordability (IOA), showing protected area entry fees relative to citizens’ per capita income adjusted for purchasing power. Using this measure, Australian parks are the most affordable (IOA of 0.10) to citizens, those in Benin are the least affordable (10.69), while Indonesia is closest to the global average IOA of 2.09. Protected areas in low-income countries are on average 30 times less affordable to citizens than in high-income countries. This has equity implications, and may supress visitation rates, thereby reducing the degree to which citizens attach value to, and are willing to support, national parks. International tourist fees are lowest in Armenia (US$1.04) and highest in Tanzania (US$43.72), while Costa Rica is closest to the global average (US$11.21), a relatively small proportion of the US$165 average daily spend estimated for European middle to higher income tourists. International tourists to low-income countries pay an average entrance fee of US$20, four times that paid in high-income countries. This is arguably fair, given their far smaller protected area funding bases and much greater reliance on tourism earnings. Our findings support fee differentiation between citizens and international tourists as a means of equating affordability.","PeriodicalId":37571,"journal":{"name":"Parks","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-05-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43508654","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}
Pub Date : 2019-05-01DOI: 10.2305/IUCN.CH.2019.PARKS-25-1CVC.EN
C. Cuong, P. Dart, Sharon M. Brown, T. V. Thắng, Vo Thi Minh Le
U Minh Thuong National Park, one of the two largest remaining peat swamp, melaleuca forests in Viet Nam is a very Important Bird and Conservation Area because of its diverse wetland habitats. A devastating forest fire in 2002 resulted in a new regime of fire control based on an imposed permanent flooding regime over large areas of the Park that led to severe wetland and forest degradation. This in turn negatively impacted on bird species diversity and populations. In 2009, the Government of Viet Nam and the park authority adopted an improved water management practice. A survey four years later recorded two new species in the list of 159 bird species for the park. Of these, 25 threatened species were using the wetland park and adjacent Buffer Zone for living and feeding habitat. Based on the largest count occurring during three continuous days, the water bird population in the bird colony in 2013 increased by 33 per cent compared to the 2009 level. The positive response of avifauna to the changes in U Minh Thuong with respect to the hydrology of seasonally flooded melaleuca wetland forest indicates the need to understand how the ‘normal’ wetland processes operate in support of biodiversity conservation before modifying them for fire management.
{"title":"Enhancing bird diversity through improved water management in a Viet Nam wetland national park","authors":"C. Cuong, P. Dart, Sharon M. Brown, T. V. Thắng, Vo Thi Minh Le","doi":"10.2305/IUCN.CH.2019.PARKS-25-1CVC.EN","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.CH.2019.PARKS-25-1CVC.EN","url":null,"abstract":"U Minh Thuong National Park, one of the two largest remaining peat swamp, melaleuca forests in Viet Nam is a very Important Bird and Conservation Area because of its diverse wetland habitats. A devastating forest fire in 2002 resulted in a new regime of fire control based on an imposed permanent flooding regime over large areas of the Park that led to severe wetland and forest degradation. This in turn negatively impacted on bird species diversity and populations. In 2009, the Government of Viet Nam and the park authority adopted an improved water management practice. A survey four years later recorded two new species in the list of 159 bird species for the park. Of these, 25 threatened species were using the wetland park and adjacent Buffer Zone for living and feeding habitat. Based on the largest count occurring during three continuous days, the water bird population in the bird colony in 2013 increased by 33 per cent compared to the 2009 level. The positive response of avifauna to the changes in U Minh Thuong with respect to the hydrology of seasonally flooded melaleuca wetland forest indicates the need to understand how the ‘normal’ wetland processes operate in support of biodiversity conservation before modifying them for fire management.","PeriodicalId":37571,"journal":{"name":"Parks","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49304871","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}
Pub Date : 2018-11-14DOI: 10.2305/IUCN.CH.2018.PARKS-24-2AMCK.EN
Annie Mckee, K. Blackstock, José Miguel Barea Azcón, P. Ciucci, M. Hošek, Michael Huber, M. Neubert, Carole A. Ritchie, A. Sovinc, Hamish Trench, Z. Végvári
There are many calls for more effective science-policy interaction and knowledge exchange in order to tackle persistent conservation problems; however, more clarity is needed surrounding the roles and practices involved. To address this challenge, we present the outcomes of an iterative, transdisciplinary process between researchers and protected area managers, to identify good practice in the development of what we call ‘learning landscape partnerships’. This was achieved by a series of deliberative workshops, informed by the literature, to consolidate pan -European experience of those who manage and study protected areas. The resultant ‘learning landscape partnership’ model highlights the key role of a ‘neglected actor’ in such partnerships the protected area manager. Critically, protected area managers can act as intermediaries in interpreting science for use in conservation. However, this requires the recognition of: the boundary spanning work of individual researchers and protected area managers; the need for support and encouragement by their respective organisations; and the multi-dimensional institutional setting by which the relationship building occurs. Working with protected area managers therefore requires transformation in these three areas. Transformation is rarely straightforward but may be required to respond to the urgent conservation challenges facing our most valuable landscapes.
{"title":"Developing Learning Landscape Partnerships: Why and how to work with protected area\u0000 managers","authors":"Annie Mckee, K. Blackstock, José Miguel Barea Azcón, P. Ciucci, M. Hošek, Michael Huber, M. Neubert, Carole A. Ritchie, A. Sovinc, Hamish Trench, Z. Végvári","doi":"10.2305/IUCN.CH.2018.PARKS-24-2AMCK.EN","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.CH.2018.PARKS-24-2AMCK.EN","url":null,"abstract":"There are many calls for more effective science-policy interaction and knowledge exchange in order to tackle persistent conservation problems; however, more clarity is needed surrounding the roles and practices involved. To address this challenge, we present the outcomes of an iterative, transdisciplinary process between researchers and protected area managers, to identify good practice in the development of what we call ‘learning landscape partnerships’. This was achieved by a series of deliberative workshops, informed by the literature, to consolidate pan -European experience of those who manage and study protected areas. The resultant ‘learning landscape partnership’ model highlights the key role of a ‘neglected actor’ in such partnerships the protected area manager. Critically, protected area managers can act as intermediaries in interpreting science for use in conservation. However, this requires the recognition of: the boundary spanning work of individual researchers and protected area managers; the need for support and encouragement by their respective organisations; and the multi-dimensional institutional setting by which the relationship building occurs. Working with protected area managers therefore requires transformation in these three areas. Transformation is rarely straightforward but may be required to respond to the urgent conservation challenges facing our most valuable landscapes.","PeriodicalId":37571,"journal":{"name":"Parks","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-11-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43585822","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：