Biodiversity, protected areas and the law

Author(s):  
Jamie Benidickson ◽  
Alexander Paterson
Keyword(s):  
2020 ◽  
pp. 195-215
Author(s):  
Alice S.J. Puritz-Evans ◽  
Amy Hill

2000 ◽  
Vol 4 (3) ◽  
pp. 293-317
Author(s):  
Sam Middlemiss

There have been remarkable developments in some areas of discrimination law in the United Kingdom over recent years along with a notable lack of development in other areas with both relative success or failure (in terms of extending the protection of the law) often being determined by the appropriate comparator which can be used in presenting a claim for discrimination and/or the influence and constraints of rules set down in UK and European Community Legislation. It is contended that a lack of uniformity of approach to these issues both hinders and helps the equality cause. It hinders by presenting uncertainty about the appropriate comparator in these cases and helps where the law recognises uniformity of approach in determining comparators across differing kinds of equality cases is both illadvised and inappropriate. It is contended in this article that reform of the areas of law where protection is weak or badly-structured is best served by borrowing from approaches in the better protected areas of UK discrimination law or from strategies utilised in other jurisdictions. In the interests of brevity and consistency of argument and analysis it has been necessary to refrain from considering this issue as it relates to equal pay.


2018 ◽  
pp. 113-142
Author(s):  
Nenad Rankovic ◽  
Jelena Nedeljkovic ◽  
Mladen Prvulovic

The paper analyzes the laws related to the management of protected areas, i.e., determining the meaning of the content and characteristics of the texts of the laws regarding management, in order to identify possible identities, absences or contradictions in meaning. The aim of this research is to find out the nature of the legislation related to the management of protected areas, on the basis of the characteristics of the paragraphs in the observed laws of the selected countries. The analysis was carried out for three countries: Serbia, Montenegro and Croatia. Bearing in mind that these issues are subject of several different laws, the following acts were taken into account: the Law on Forests, the Law on Environmental Protection, the Law on Nature Conservation and the Law on National Parks. In all the observed countries, general entries are predominated (63.9%), while the entries with organizational (24.9%) and economic (11.2%) characters are much less common. When it comes to individual entries, ?Protection? is the most frequent, followed by ?Ecology? and ?Status / Function?, all of which belong to the group of general entries. In the group of entries with organizational character, ?Users? is dominant, and in the group of entries with economic character, the most important is ?Forestry?. When regulating protected area management issues, law drafters should be more focused on defining concrete solutions, which will improve work in practice, and thus satisfy the basic purpose of their adoption (protection of selected areas of social significance).


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Snežana Štrbac ◽  
Milica Kašanin-Grubin ◽  
Gorica Veselinović ◽  
Gordana Gajica ◽  
Sanja Stojadinović ◽  
...  

<p>Human activities have changed ecosystems and today ≈ 60% of the world’s ecosystems are already degraded. These changes have caused growing environmental costs, including biodiversity loss and land degradation, which in turn has resulted in many economic, social and cultural losses. Protected areas (PAs) are the key tool in biodiversity conservation, moreover they may help to maintain water supplies and food security, strengthen climate resilience and improve human health and well-being. International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) defined PA as „a clearly defined geographical space, recognized, dedicated, and managed, through legal or other effective means, to achieve the long-term conservation of nature with associated ecosystem services (ES) and cultural values”. Such areas represent Earth systems in which influence of human interactions with preserved ecosystems are readily evident. The coverage of PA is a widely used indicator of sustainable development, because the loss of biodiversity is recognized as one of the most serious global environmental threats. The “Big Five” threats to global biodiversity are fragmentation, habitat loss, overexploitation of natural resources, pollution, and the spread of invasive alien species. New interventions for governing nature are captured by the umbrella of nature-based solutions (NBS) in the European Union (EU) policy context. NBS can offer accessible, sustainable, and feasible benefits via a range of areas affecting public health and social well-being. According to IUCN NBS are defined as “actions to protect, sustainably manage, and restore natural or modified ecosystems, that address societal challenges effectively and adaptively, simultaneously providing human well-being and biodiversity benefits”. NBS address these societal challenges over the delivery of ES. The main objective of this study is to use the effect of NBS to enhance the sustainability of management of the PAs that would have environmental, social and economic benefits. The methodology includes determination of heavy metals in soils and needles of Picea alba, and quantification and qualification of PAs benefits based on Protected Areas Benefits Assessment Tool + (PA-BAT+) in six sites: Zlatibor, Golija, Tara, Đerdap, Stara planina, and Fruška gora. Zlatibor, Golija, and Stara planina are protected as a Nature Park – protected areas of international, national, i.e., exceptional importance Category I (first) in accordance with the Law on Nature Protection ("Off. Gazette of RS", No. 36/2009, 88/2010 , 91/2010 and 14/2016). By the decision of the UNESCO commission within the MAB program in 2001, Golija was declared as Biosphere Reserve ”Golija - Studenica”. Tara, Đerdap, and Fruška gora are protected as National Parks – protected area of international, national, i.e., exceptional importance Category I (first) in accordance with the Law on National Parks ("Off. Gazette of RS", No. 39/1993, 44/1993-correction, 53/1993, 67/1993, 48/1994, 101/2005 and 36/2009). According to categorization of the IUCN Zlatibor, Golija, and Stara planina are classified in Category V, while Tara, Đerdap, and Fruška gora are classified in Category II. Based on heavy metals content in soils and needles, different interventions in managed ecosystems are proposed.</p>


2019 ◽  
pp. 105-144
Author(s):  
Jelena Nedeljkovic ◽  
Dragan Nonic ◽  
Mladen Prvulovic ◽  
Nenad Rankovic

In accordance with the Law on National Parks (NP) from 2015, the manager is obliged to cooperate with the stakeholders in the area of NP. The aim of the paper is to determine the attitudes of the representatives of the Public Enterprise ?NP Djerdap? and Public Enterprise ?NP Kopaonik? and stakeholders in the area of these two NPs, towards the existing cooperation, as well as the possibilities for its improvement. Primary data were collected in two phases. In the first phase, 52 stakeholders' representatives from the public, private and civil sectors from the areas of both NPs were surveyed and 9 representatives of the NP managers were interviewed. In the second phase, interviews were conducted with 16 stakeholders' representatives, 2 representatives of NP managers and 2 experts (representatives of institutions and organizations, whose business activities are directly or indirectly related to the management of protected areas). Representatives of NP managers emphasize that they have cooperation with stakeholders from the public, private and civil sectors. They are satisfied with this cooperation, but also have the interest to improve it. Most stakeholders? representatives from the area of NP Djerdap (92.6%) and NP Kopaonik (76.0%) noted that they are satisfied with the managers? work. They also have cooperation with other stakeholders in the NP area, but they are interested in improvement. Proposals refer to sharing more information and education of stakeholders, establishing of their association and joint work on projects.


2015 ◽  
Vol 20 (3) ◽  
pp. 72-84 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paula Leslie ◽  
Mary Casper

“My patient refuses thickened liquids, should I discharge them from my caseload?” A version of this question appears at least weekly on the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association's Community pages. People talk of respecting the patient's right to be non-compliant with speech-language pathology recommendations. We challenge use of the word “respect” and calling a patient “non-compliant” in the same sentence: does use of the latter term preclude the former? In this article we will share our reflections on why we are interested in these so called “ethical challenges” from a personal case level to what our professional duty requires of us. Our proposal is that the problems that we encounter are less to do with ethical or moral puzzles and usually due to inadequate communication. We will outline resources that clinicians may use to support their work from what seems to be a straightforward case to those that are mired in complexity. And we will tackle fears and facts regarding litigation and the law.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document