scholarly journals Landscape Level Efforts to Biodiversity Conservation in Nepal: A Review of Current Approach and Lessons Learned

2019 ◽  
Vol 2 (3) ◽  
pp. 16-24
Author(s):  
Pramod Ghimire
Keyword(s):  
Biodiversity Conservation ◽  
National Parks ◽  
Population Distribution ◽  
Transitional Zone ◽  
Current Approach ◽  
Lessons Learned ◽  
Western Himalayas ◽  
Buffer Zones ◽  
Conservation History ◽  
Landscape Level

Nepal’s location in the centre of the Himalayan range places the country in the transitional zone between the eastern and western Himalayas. Nepal’s rich biodiversity is a reflection of this unique geographical position as well as its altitudinal and climatic variations. It is recorded that Nepal has a total of 118 types of ecosystem, 75 vegetation and 35 types of forests. Nepal has put utmost efforts to conserve its rich biodiversity resources. The conservation history began formally after promulgation of National Parks and Wildlife Conservation Act in 1973. National parks and wildlife reserves were established across the country during the 1970s. However, very soon not only some of the adversities were faced by the local people living around the parks and reserves but also the space constraint was realized for the population distribution and dynamics. By realizing the need of people’s participation in the conservation initiatives, country has tested the concept of different types of protected areas system such as national park, wildlife reserve, conservation areas, and buffer zones over the years. Taking the advantage of new progresses in conservation biology, Nepal adopted landscape level approach to biodiversity conservation and implemented such approaches in some of the key areas since 2000s. This paper discusses Nepal’s effort in implementing landscape level approach to biodiversity conservation and the lessons learned at national context.

scholarly journals Conservation of Protected Areas in Federal System, How?

1970 ◽  
Vol 3 ◽  
pp. 161-166
Author(s):  
Santosh Mani Nepal
Keyword(s):  
Federal Government ◽  
National Parks ◽  
Buffer Zone ◽  
Local Communities ◽  
Provincial Government ◽  
Federal System ◽  
Governance System ◽  
Conservation Areas ◽  
Buffer Zones ◽  
Conservation History

The formal conservation history of Nepal is relatively shorter one. The protection and conservation of National Parks, Wildlife Reserves, Conservation Areas and Buffer Zone are creating a burning debate amongst all stakeholders along with the debate of the state restructuring. The federal system of Nepal is quite different compare to other countries. All the rational designed in the face of unitary governance system needs a redefinition now. We have to create a suitable road-map for the division power among different levels of governments using the general orientation of international conservation framework. Constitutional provision should be designed in such a way that there should be little political intervention on natural resources. Mostly the National Parks and Wildlife Reserves are listed under the jurisdiction of federal government in federal countries. Environment has been a matter of concurrent power among many other federal countries. In Nepal, there is a growing consensus in favor of federal responsibility for the large infrastructures based on their inter-provincial importance, impact and extent. National Parks, Wildlife Reserves, Buffer Zones and Conservation Areas should be matter of concurrent authority where the federal government makes a framework policy but works in collaboration with the provincial government and local communities when it comes of implementing it. This will be the only way where by federal government could comply with the international commitments. Similarly, provincial government can implement the conservation functions with the support of local communities, indigenous people and groups dependent on the natural resource. The framework for such mechanism should be designed through an extensive consultation with the key stakeholders during the formulation of legislation and bylaws following the promulgation of the new constitution.The full text of the article is in Nepali. DOI: 10.3126/init.v3i0.2518 The Initiation Vol.3 2009 p.161-166

scholarly journals Partnerships and Stakeholder Participation in the Management of National Parks: Experiences of the Gonarezhou National Park in Zimbabwe

Land ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (11) ◽  
pp. 399
Author(s):  
Walter Musakwa ◽  
Trynos Gumbo ◽  
Gaynor Paradza ◽  
Ephraim Mpofu ◽  
Nesisa Analisa Nyathi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
National Parks ◽  
National Park ◽  
Stakeholder Management ◽  
Stakeholder Participation ◽  
Lessons Learned ◽  
Community Relations ◽  
Natural Ecosystems ◽  
Parks Management ◽  
The Impact ◽  
The Relationship

National parks play an important role in maintaining natural ecosystems which are important sources of income and livelihood sustenance. Most national parks in Southern Africa are managed by their states. Before 2007, Gonarezhou National Park was managed by the Zimbabwe Parks Management and Wildlife Authority, which faced challenges in maintaining its biodiversity, community relations and infrastructure. However, in 2017 the Frankfurt Zoological Society and the Zimbabwe Parks Management and Wildlife Authority formed an innovative partnership under the Gonarezhou Conservation Trust (GCT). This study examines the relationship between GCT management, Gonarezhou National Park stakeholders and communities as well as the impact of the relationship on biodiversity and ecosystems. The study also highlights challenges faced and lessons learned in managing Gonarezhou as a protected area. To obtain the information, key informant interviews, Landsat satellite imagery, secondary data from previous studies and government sources were utilized. The results indicate that the concerted efforts of the Gonarezhou Conservation Trust to manage the park are starting to bear fruit in improving biodiversity conservation, ecosystem management and engaging communities. However, challenges such as governance obstacles, problematic stakeholder management, maintaining trust in community relations, ensuring sustainability, managing the adverse impacts of climate change and human-wildlife conflicts must still be navigated to ensure the park’s sustainable management. Notwithstanding challenges, we argue that a partnership arrangement such as the Gonarezhou Conservation Trust is a desirable model that can be applied in national parks in Zimbabwe and Africa for better biodiversity management and tourism.

Low wolverine (Gulo gulo) density in a national park complex of the Canadian Rocky Mountains

2020 ◽  
Vol 98 (5) ◽  
pp. 287-298
Author(s):  
M. Barrueto ◽  
M.A. Sawaya ◽  
A.P. Clevenger
Keyword(s):  
National Parks ◽  
Edge Effects ◽  
Rocky Mountains ◽  
Population Data ◽  
Home Ranges ◽  
Large Carnivores ◽  
Canadian Rocky Mountains ◽  
High Quality ◽  
Buffer Zones ◽  
Gulo Gulo

Large carnivores are sensitive to human-caused extirpation due to large home ranges, low population densities, and low reproductive rates. Protected areas help maintain populations by acting as sources, but human-caused mortality, habitat displacement, and edge effects occurring at protected area boundaries may reduce that function. The national parks Banff, Yoho, and Kootenay in the Canadian Rocky Mountains are refugia for large carnivores, including wolverines (Gulo gulo (Linnaeus, 1758)). Despite growing conservation concern, empirical baseline population data for wolverines remain scarce throughout their range, including most of Canada. We hypothesized (i) that in these national parks, wolverine density matched values expected for high-quality habitat, and (ii) that edge effects decreased density towards park boundaries. We conducted systematic non-invasive genetic sampling surveys covering >7000 km2 (2011 and 2013). Using spatial capture–recapture models, we estimated mean (±SE) female (1.5 ± 0.3 and 1.4 ± 0.3 wolverine/1000 km2), male (1.8 ± 0.4 and 1.5 ± 0.3 wolverine/1000 km2), and combined (3.3 ± 0.5 and 3.0 ± 0.4 wolverine/1000 km2) densities for 2011 and 2013, respectively. These estimates were lower than predictions based on density extrapolation from nearby high-quality habitat, and density decreased towards park boundaries. To benefit the population, we recommend creating buffer zones around parks that protect female habitat and prohibit harvest.

Ecotourism and biodiversity conservation - two way track

2000 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 89 ◽  
Author(s):  
Penny Van Oosterzee
Keyword(s):  
Nature Conservation ◽  
Biodiversity Conservation ◽  
Environmental Impacts ◽  
National Parks ◽  
World Wide ◽  
Tourism Industry ◽  
Natural Areas ◽  
Nature Appreciation ◽  
Economic Studies

While not denying that tourism has environmental impacts, tourism's potential to aid biodiversity conservation world-wide is great and needs to be harnessed. However, unless precisely explained, the notion of ecotourism clouds the role of tourism in nature conservation. Therefore I define ecotourism as all visits that focus on nature appreciation and the associated infrastructure (park facilities, tours, accommodation, airlines that bring tourists to the area etc.) that supports these visits. This definition, which is used throughout this paper, helps eliminate the false distinction being made between tourism and ecotourism. Tourism, at the international and national political level, has an influential role as a force for biodiversity conservation by being a rationale for plaCing extra land in conservation reserves, or otherwise by sustainably managing natural areas for their natural values. Using World Heritage Areas (WHA) as an example - perhaps even as an indicator of tourism and its impacts on natural areas ? the little information available suggests that tourism is not often a threat, but that warfare, clearing for agriculture, and poaching are. Regions with an intact tourism industry are also those more likely to have an intact ecosystem. National parks do act as a catalyst for tourism growth. The question is whether tourism can deliver the financial means to undertake management to neutralize the impacts of tourism on biodiversity, or, perhaps more importantly, to fund more extensive works for biodiversity conservation? Few rigorous economic studies have been carried out to provide answers to this question; to define the link between biodiversity conservation and tourism, and to explore ways of making tourism maintain and expand the resource on which its profits are based, thus making the industry world-wide a major force for conservation.

The USA national parks in international perspective: have we learned the wrong lesson?

2001 ◽  
Vol 28 (4) ◽  
pp. 300-304 ◽  
Author(s):  
John Schelhas
Keyword(s):  
Biodiversity Conservation ◽  
National Parks ◽  
National Park ◽  
Developed Countries ◽  
International Perspective ◽  
Local People ◽  
Developed Country ◽  
Community Based Conservation ◽  
The Usa ◽  
Extractive Reserves

A highly polarized debate has emerged in the conservation literature about whether national parks in lesser developed countries should follow a strict protectionist model or find ways to accommodate the development and livelihood needs of local people. A number of social science critiques of national park practice and policy in lesser developed countries have argued that one of the chief problems facing national parks in particular, and biodiversity conservation in general, has been the USA national park model, often termed the ‘Yellowstone model’. This model, in which local and indigenous people and uses have been excluded from parks, has been blamed for harming local people, providing benefits to developed country interests at the expense of local people, high costs of park protection, and ineffective biodiversity conservation (Machlis & Tichnell 1985; West & Brechin 1991; Pimbert & Pretty 1995). Alternatives (henceforth referred to as ‘parks and people’ approaches) seek accommodations between parks and local people, and include community-based conservation, which promotes local involvement and/or control in park decision-making, and integrated conservation and development projects, which attempt to ensure conservation by meeting social and economic needs of local people through agroforestry, forestry, tourism, water projects, extractive reserves, and wildlife utilization.

Co-management and the creation of national parks in Indonesia: positive lessons learned from the Togean Islands National Park

2013 ◽  
Vol 57 (8) ◽  
pp. 1183-1199 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mochamad Indrawan ◽  
Celia Lowe ◽  
Sundjaya ◽  
Christo Hutabarat ◽  
Aubrey Black
Keyword(s):  
National Parks ◽  
National Park ◽  
Lessons Learned ◽  
The Creation
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document