scholarly journals Hitchhikers’ guide to the legal context of protected area management plans in South Africa

Bothalia ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 49 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Magda Goosen ◽  
Andrew C. Blackmore
Keyword(s):  
Protected Areas ◽  
Protected Area ◽  
Management Plan ◽  
Protected Area Management ◽  
World Heritage Convention ◽  
Legal Context ◽  
The World ◽  
Management Plans ◽  
National Environmental ◽  
Area Management

Background: Although formal protected areas in South Africa date back to the turn of the 19th century, requirements for protected area management plans only became mandatory a century later. Prior to the promulgation of the World Heritage Convention Act 49 in 1999, and subsequently the National Environmental Management: Protected Areas Act 57 in 2003, requirements for management plans were voluntary, and guidance to the plan’s content was fragmented across an array of international, national and provincial policy instruments.Objectives: As there has been little academic debate on the relevance and content of protected area management plans, an improved understanding of these plans, and the role they play in biodiversity conservation, is required.Method: This article explores the evolution of the management plan, revisiting its historical and current legal context at international and national scales.Results: Despite being the principal legislative framework for management plans, the World Heritage Convention Act and the National Environmental Management Protected Area Act did not consolidate the plethora of management plan requirements, and hence did not bring clarity when these conflicted or were ambiguous.Conclusion: Legal provisions for management plans are highly fragmented. This risks plans not being complete, falling short of the requirement to ensure that protected areas fulfil the purpose for which they were established. A consolidation of relevant provisions, as well as emerging best practices is recommended. This may require the revision of South Africa’s environmental law, to provide greater clarity on the contemporary understanding of the contribution of protected areas to conservation and the well-being of people (viz. the ‘purpose’).

Are Protected Areas undervalued? An asset-based analysis of Brazilian Protected Area Management Plans

2019 ◽  
Vol 249 ◽  
pp. 109347 ◽  
Author(s):  
Norah Costa Gamarra ◽  
Ricardo Aleixo Correia ◽  
Chiara Bragagnolo ◽  
João Vitor Campos-Silva ◽  
Paul R. Jepson ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Protected Areas ◽  
Protected Area ◽  
Protected Area Management ◽  
Management Plans ◽  
Area Management

scholarly journals ANALYZING TEMPORAL AND SPATIAL TRENDS IN MANAGEMENT PLANS OF FEDERAL PROTECTED AREAS IN BRAZIL

2021 ◽  
Vol 25 (04) ◽  
pp. 846-854
Author(s):  
Alessandro Ribeiro Morais ◽  
◽  
Mariana Nascimento Siqueira ◽  
Roniel Freitas-Oliveira ◽  
Daniel Brito ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Protected Areas ◽  
Protected Area ◽  
Sustainable Use ◽  
Management Plan ◽  
Conservation Strategies ◽  
Effective Management ◽  
Management Plans ◽  
Group A ◽  
The Creation ◽  
Group B

Protected areas are the most frequently used tool for the mitigation of threats to biodiversity. However, without effective management, the creation of new protected areas may be ineffective. In Brazil, protected areas must have both a governing body (consultative or deliberative council) and an official management plan. Here, we analyzed general trends and patterns in the approval of the management plans for Brazilian federal protected areas. We considered all federal protected areas, and compiled data on (i) the year the area was created, (ii) the type of protected area (integral protection vs. sustainable use), (iii) year its management plan was approved, (iv) year in which the management plan was revised after its approval, (v) total area (in hectares), and (vi) the biome in which the area is located. We stablished three groups of protected area: 1) Group A: protected areas created prior to 1979, 2) Group B: protected areas created between 1979 and 1999, and 3) Group C: protected areas created between 2000 to the present time. Finally, we tested whether time for the approval of the management plan suffered a simultaneous effect of the type of biome and type of categories of protected area (strictly protected vs. sustainable use areas). We found 211 (63.17% of the 334) protected areas with management plan. On average, the time taken for the creation and approval of a management plan far exceeds the deadlines (5 yrs.) defined under current Brazilian law. All Brazilian biomes are poorly covered by protected areas with effective management plans, with the highest and lowest value observed in the Pantanal (100%) and Caatinga (46.42%), respectively. Our results suggest that the effectiveness of many federal protected areas in Brazil can be reduced considerably by the lack of a management plan, with deleterious consequences for the country’s principal conservation strategies.

scholarly journals Measuring benefits of protected area management: trends across realms and research gaps for freshwater systems

2015 ◽  
Vol 370 (1681) ◽  
pp. 20140274 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vanessa M. Adams ◽  
Samantha A. Setterfield ◽  
Michael M. Douglas ◽  
Mark J. Kennard ◽  
Keith Ferdinands
Keyword(s):  
Protected Areas ◽  
Impact Evaluation ◽  
Protected Area ◽  
National Park ◽  
Protected Area Management ◽  
Time Lags ◽  
Research Gaps ◽  
Freshwater Systems ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Area Management

Protected areas remain a cornerstone for global conservation. However, their effectiveness at halting biodiversity decline is not fully understood. Studies of protected area benefits have largely focused on measuring their impact on halting deforestation and have neglected to measure the impacts of protected areas on other threats. Evaluations that measure the impact of protected area management require more complex evaluation designs and datasets. This is the case across realms (terrestrial, freshwater, marine), but measuring the impact of protected area management in freshwater systems may be even more difficult owing to the high level of connectivity and potential for threat propagation within systems (e.g. downstream flow of pollution). We review the potential barriers to conducting impact evaluation for protected area management in freshwater systems. We contrast the barriers identified for freshwater systems to terrestrial systems and discuss potential measurable outcomes and confounders associated with protected area management across the two realms. We identify key research gaps in conducting impact evaluation in freshwater systems that relate to three of their major characteristics: variability, connectivity and time lags in outcomes. Lastly, we use Kakadu National Park world heritage area, the largest national park in Australia, as a case study to illustrate the challenges of measuring impacts of protected area management programmes for environmental outcomes in freshwater systems.

scholarly journals The Importance of Partnerships for Effective Protected Area Management

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mirjam de Koning ◽  
Oliver Avramoski
Keyword(s):  
Protected Areas ◽  
Protected Area ◽  
Lessons Learned ◽  
Civil Society Organizations ◽  
Protected Area Management ◽  
Western Balkans ◽  
Clear Vision ◽  
Communications Skills ◽  
To Come ◽  
Area Management

Protected areas work in complex environments in which they have to liaise with governments, scientific and civil society organizations, volunteers, local stakeholders, visitors, and funders. This requires next to thematic expertise on conservation, among others legal, management, financial, administrative and communications skills and capacities. Especially the smaller protected areas struggle to efficiently operate in all these specialized fields and often lack enough in-house capacity and resources. This chapter highlights the lessons learned and evolvement of various forms of partnerships in different countries on different continents (collaborative arrangement in Laos and different formal and informal arrangements in the Western Balkans). Core to the success is to build sufficient capacity within the protected area management authorities so they understand the priorities and the resources needed to fund, manage and implement these priorities. Specialized skills and capacities needed for effective protected area management are limited in most countries and it is inefficient and too expensive to build this capacity in-house. Having a clear vision on what needs to be done and building a strong cooperation between partners through effective communication is the key to success to come to more effective protected area management either on a national, regional or transboundary level.

scholarly journals Predicting Attitudes towards Protected Area Management in a Developing Country Context

2018 ◽  
Vol 11 (6) ◽  
pp. 99
Author(s):  
David Mwesigye Tumusiime ◽  
Patrick Byakagaba ◽  
Mnason Tweheyo ◽  
Nelson Turyahabwe
Keyword(s):  
Protected Areas ◽  
Protected Area ◽  
Positive Attitude ◽  
Local Communities ◽  
Protected Area Management ◽  
Local People ◽  
Economic Factors ◽  
Material Benefits ◽  
Socio Economic Factors ◽  
Area Management

Biodiversity conservation through use of protected areas relies significantly on the attitudes of local adjacent communities. Some studies suggest that attitudes are often shaped by the associated positive and negative externalities and socio-demographic and economic characteristics of local communities living adjacent to protected areas. The current study sought to identify useful predictors of local attitudes towards protected area management. It was conducted at Bwindi Impenetrable National Park in Uganda where several interventions in form of benefits to improve local people’s attitudes towards the park have been implemented for the last 30 years. The study examined the extent to which these benefits can influence local people’s attitude towards management of the Protected Area (PA). A household survey was conducted among 190 randomly selected respondents and Generalised Linear Mixed Models (GLMMs) fitted where the dependent variable was a binary “Good” or “otherwise” response to how the respondent considered own relationship with park management. Socio-economic attributes of the respondents were used as control variables. The importance of cost variables (e.g. crop raiding) was also examined. The study found that only direct and material benefits were consistent predictors of a positive attitude towards management. Non-material and indirect benefits as well as the socio-economic factors and costs did not influence the attitude of local communities towards management. It can be concluded that positive attitude towards protected area management is determined by access to direct and material benefits by local communities and not socio-economic factors or costs incurred. Interventions intended to influence local communities to have a positive attitude towards management ought to emphasize direct and material benefits.

scholarly journals Evaluating and reflecting on coproduction of protected area management plans

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dirk J. Roux ◽  
Jeanne L. Nel ◽  
Stefanie Freitag ◽  
Peter Novellie ◽  
Eureta Rosenberg
Keyword(s):  
Protected Area ◽  
Protected Area Management ◽  
Management Plans ◽  
Area Management

scholarly journals Monitoring and Assessment of Protected Areas’ Management Capacities in the Republic of Serbia

2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 666 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nikola Banjac ◽  
Rado Maksimović ◽  
Katarina Dragaš ◽  
Jelena Ivetić
Keyword(s):  
Protected Areas ◽  
Protected Area ◽  
Sensu Stricto ◽  
Professional Staff ◽  
Assessment Model ◽  
Protected Area Management ◽  
Management Effectiveness ◽  
Aggregate Function ◽  
The Republic ◽  
Area Management

The necessity to measure the effectiveness of the management of protected areas has been widely recognized. This paper aims to show a realistic state of affairs in protected area management in the Republic of Serbia on the basis of the results of managers’ monitoring and their obligations stipulated by law. It will also answer questions on which form of management is optimal, by means of a proposed assessment model. The research has been performed on a sample of 30 sensu stricto protected areas, managed by 21 different managers. For the purpose of ranking and comparing the degree of protected area management effectiveness, the use of a normalized aggregate function (scoring) has been introduced. Results show that about half of the analyzed protected areas have no adequate management in terms of legally prescribed management criteria, as well as that management effectiveness is related to several external factors. The authors conclude that meeting all criteria stipulated by law, and the existence of professional staff represent fundamental factors for the effective management of protected areas.

What happens on the beach stays on the beach: a speculative legal analysis of nudism in South African protected areas

2020 ◽  
Vol 24 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew Blackmore
Keyword(s):  
Environmental Management ◽  
Protected Areas ◽  
South African ◽  
Protected Area ◽  
Management Plan ◽  
Legal Analysis ◽  
Sexual Offences ◽  
The Public ◽  
Physical Risk ◽  
National Environmental

ABSTRACT The Hibiscus Coast Municipality assumed it had the authority to issue or amend bylaws to formalise an existing nudist friendly beach within the Mpenjati Nature Reserve. Following a complaint, the Public Protector concluded the same when she investigated the legality of the Municipality's actions. Two immediate questions arise. The first, whether the Municipality and the Public Protector were correct in their view that the Municipality has the authority over the beach irrespective of the presence of a protected area, and the second, whether nudism is a legal activity therein. Both the Municipality and the Public Protector overlooked the relevance of the nudist friendly beach being located within a protected area and the power of the management authority to determine the nature of the tourism that takes place therein. Nudism within a protected area appears not to be in conflict with the Sexual Offences Act 23 of 1969 and hence may be a legitimate activity within such area. The National Environmental Management: Protected Areas Act 57 of 2003 and the Regulations thereunder appear not to contain provisions that prohibit nudism or other niche nature based tourism activities. Provided that the activity conforms to the purpose of the Act and proteced area management plan and zonation and does not pose a significant physical risk to the integrity of the protected area, the conservation agency may be hard-pressed to refuse a request for a niche nature based tourism activity, such as nudism, to be included in the zonation - should one be received.1 Key words: Municipality, National Environmental Management: Protected Areas Act, nature based tourism, nudist friendly beach, protected area, Public Protector, Sexual Offences Act, zonation.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document