Global warming and conflict management: Resident native peoples and protected areas

2020 ◽  
pp. 187-196
Author(s):  
Patrick C. West
Oryx ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 54 (4) ◽  
pp. 483-493 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ophelia Soliku ◽  
Ulrich Schraml

AbstractFew studies exist about the extent to which co-management in protected areas contributes to conflict prevention or mitigation and at what level of the conflicts such collaborative efforts are possible. Following varying degrees of conflict, Mole National Park, Ghana, embarked on a collaborative community-based wildlife management programme in 2000. Using Glasl's conflict escalation model, we analysed the contribution of co-management to mitigating and preventing conflicts from escalating. We conducted a total of 22 interviews with local traditional leaders, Park officials and local government officials, and 26 focus group discussions with farmers, hunters, women and representatives of co-management boards, selected from 10 of the 33 communities surrounding the Park. Our findings indicate that co-management can help mitigate or prevent conflicts from escalating when conflicting parties engage with each other in a transparent manner using deliberative processes such as negotiation, mediation and the use of economic incentives. It is, however, difficult to resolve conflicts through co-management when dialogue between conflicting parties breaks down, as parties take entrenched positions and are unwilling to compromise on their core values and interests. We conclude that although co-management contributes to successful conflict management, factors such as understanding the context of the conflicts, including the underlying sources and manifestations of the conflict, incorporating local knowledge, and ensuring open dialogue, trust and transparency between conflicting parties are key to attaining sustainable conflict management in protected areas.


2020 ◽  
Vol 47 (4) ◽  
pp. 295-303
Author(s):  
Malena Oliva ◽  
Eduardo García-Frapolli ◽  
Luciana Porter-Bolland ◽  
Salvador Montiel

SummaryTo manage widespread conservation conflicts, building a shared understanding among the parties involved has been considered key. However, there is little empirical evidence of the role this understanding might play in the context of imposed biosphere reserves. Using semi-structured and in-depth interviews in two communities within the Calakmul Biosphere Reserve, we explored whether or not there is a shared understanding of conflicts between local people and reserve managers, and we analysed its contribution to conflict management. We found that a shared understanding is not a determining factor when the conflict solution demands actions that exceed stakeholders’ functions. While a shared understanding helps with the global process of conflict management, there are other challenges: local impairment resulting from the exclusionary creation and the operation of protected areas and the need for action to solve a conflict that exceeds the functions of stakeholders.


PLoS ONE ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (7) ◽  
pp. e0254879
Author(s):  
Rhosanna L. M. Jenkins ◽  
Rachel F. Warren ◽  
Jeff T. Price

Climate change is projected to have significant effects on the distribution of species globally, but research into the implications in parts of Africa has been limited. Using species distribution modelling, this study models climate change-related risks to the terrestrial biodiversity (birds, mammals, reptiles, amphibians and plants) of Kenya’s economically-important and ecologically diverse Tana River Basin. Large reductions in species richness are projected with just 2°C warming (relative to preindustrial levels) with birds and plants seeing the greatest impact. Potential climate refugia for biodiversity are identified within the basin, but often overlap with areas already converted to agriculture or set aside for agricultural expansion, and the majority are outside protected areas. Similarly, some protected areas contain no projected refugia at higher levels of global warming, showing they may be insufficient to protect the basin’s biodiversity as climate changes. However, risks to biodiversity are much smaller if the Paris Agreement’s goal of limiting global warming to ‘well below 2°C’ warming, rather than 2°C only, is met. The potential for refugia for plants and animals decreases strongly with warming. For example, 82% of the basin remaining climatically suitable for at least 75% of the plants currently present at 1.5°C warming, as compared with 23% at 2°C and 3% at 4.5°C. This research provides the first assessment of the combined effects of development plans and climate change on biodiversity of the Tana River Basin, including identifying potential areas for restoration, and contributes to a greater understanding of biodiversity protection and adaptation options in Kenya.


2021 ◽  
pp. 1-8
Author(s):  
Marília Gomes Teixeira ◽  
Eduardo Martins Venticinque ◽  
Marília Bruzzi Lion ◽  
Míriam Plaza Pinto

Summary The semiarid Caatinga is the largest Seasonally Dry Tropical Forest and Woodland (SDTFW) in the Neotropics. Yet the vast majority of the Caatinga is unprotected, with severe chronic anthropogenic use, exotic species and global warming among its most immediate threats. Here, we contrast the current Caatinga protected areas (PAs) scenery with that of other SDTFWs in the Neotropics. We also analyse the growth process of the PAs in the Caatinga over time across Brazilian PA categories and jurisdictions. The percentage of Caatinga that is protected is average among the SDTFWs. Caatinga has more state than federal PAs; however, the size of the PAs is greater under a federal jurisdiction. Nonetheless, in both jurisdictions, Environmental Protected Areas, one of the least restrictive categories, are more representative in terms of total area, corresponding to nearly 80% of the Caatinga PA system. Our results are relevant for international conservation goals because they depict the current PA scenery and clarify the challenges for achieving the actual preservation of the unique Caatinga biome.


PLoS ONE ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 10 (3) ◽  
pp. e0121137 ◽  
Author(s):  
H. Mauricio Ortega-Andrade ◽  
David A. Prieto-Torres ◽  
Ignacio Gómez-Lora ◽  
Diego J. Lizcano

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document