Refine
Document Type
- Doctoral Thesis (4)
Has Fulltext
- yes (4)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (4)
Keywords
- protected areas (4) (remove)
Institute
- Institut für Geographie und Geologie (4) (remove)
Die Idee von UNESCO-Biosphärenreservaten besteht darin, den Erhalt der biologischen Vielfalt mit der nachhaltigen Regionalentwicklung unter Beteiligung der Bevölkerung zu verbinden. Inwiefern die Idee unterstützt und in der eigenen Lebensweise berücksichtigt wird, wurde exemplarisch für die Bürgermeisterinnen und Bürgermeister aus drei Regionen analysiert. In Deutschland sind die UNESCO-Biosphärenreservate im Bundesnaturschutzgesetz rechtlich gesichert und gehören in den Zuständigkeitsbereich der Landesumweltministerien. Damit fehlt es ihnen oftmals an Zuständigkeiten, Personal und Geldern über naturschutzfachliche Themen hinaus. Mit dem Auftrag der Gewerbeförderung und dem Ausbau der Infrastruktur ergänzen die Gemeinden die naturschutzfachlichen Kompetenzen der deutschen UNESCO-Biosphärenreservate. Daher ist eine Zusammenarbeit für den Erfolg entscheidend. Die Forschungsfrage lautet somit: Wie ist die Idee der UNESCO-Biosphärenreservate in dem Wissen, den Einstellungen und dem Handeln der Bürgermeisterinnen und Bürgermeister aus den UNESCO-Biosphärenreservaten Schaalsee, Schorfheide-Chorin und Südost-Rügen verankert? Den Anforderungen der qualitativen Sozialforschung entsprechend, wurden die Bürgermeisterinnen und Bürgermeister der drei UNESCO-Biosphärenreservate 2010 interviewt. Das neuartige Konzept Verankerung der UNESCO-Biosphärenreservats-Idee bei Bürgermeisterinnen und Bürgermeistern ergab sich aus einem abduktiven Forschungsprozess: Er bestand aus einem Wechselspiel zwischen der Analyse von 45 leitfadengestützten Interviews nach der Grounded-Theory-Methodologie und dem Studium der sozialwissenschaftlichen Forschungen zu Akzeptanz, Partizipation und Governance in Schutzgebieten. Das Konzept Verankerung umfasst drei Dimensionen: Wissen, Einstellung und Handeln. Diese wurden mit jeweils vier bis fünf Kategorien gefüllt, die durch die explorative Analyse der Interviews identifiziert wurden. Orientiert an der Gesamtbeurteilung der Vor- und Nachteile des UNESCO-Biosphärenreservates vor Ort konnten die Bürgermeisterinnen und Bürgermeister in fünf unterschiedliche Typen der Verankerung unterteilt werden: Für die Unterstützer bringt das Biosphärenreservat vor Ort deutlich mehr Vorteile als Nachteile. Sie verfügen über umfangreiches Wissen zum Biosphärenreservat und zeigen eine hohe Eigeninitiative zur Umsetzung der Biosphärenreservats-Idee. Für die Befürworter überwiegen ebenso die Vorteile gegenüber den Nachteilen, jedoch nicht so deutlich wie bei den Unterstützern. Sie wissen weniger genau über das Biosphärenreservat vor Ort Bescheid, beteiligen sich aber bei Projekten der Biosphärenreservats-Verwaltung. Für die Unentschiedenen sind die Vor- und Nachteile des Biosphärenreservates ausgewogen. Sie kennen im Prinzip die Aufgaben von Biosphärenreservaten, konkrete Aktivitäten vor Ort sind ihnen aber kaum bekannt. Bei formellen Beteiligungsverfahren haben sie negative Erfahrungen in der Zusammenarbeit mit der Biosphärenreservats-Verwaltung gemacht. Sie loben jedoch einzelne Projekte. Für die Kritiker überwiegen die Nachteile gegenüber den Vorteilen des Biosphärenreservates. Sie bemängeln die Beteiligung der Gemeinden bei der Ausweisung des Biosphärenreservates als unzureichend und beanstanden die Zusammenarbeit mit der Biosphärenreservats-Verwaltung in formellen Beteiligungsverfahren. Sie sind Einheimische und haben im Alltag sehr starke Einschränkungen durch das Biosphärenreservat erfahren. Die Unbeteiligten können weder Vor- noch Nachteile des Biosphärenreservates benennen. Sie wissen kaum etwas über die Aktivitäten der Biosphärenreservats-Verwaltung und arbeiten selten mit ihr zusammen. In der komparatistische Analyse der Typen in den drei Biosphärenreservaten zeigen sich folgende Unterschiede: Im Biosphärenreservat Schaalsee sind die meisten Unterstützer und Befürworter zu finden, so dass dort die Biosphärenreservats-Idee am stärksten bei den Bürgermeisterinnen und Bürgermeistern verankert ist. Im Gegensatz dazu sind im Biosphärenreservat Südost-Rügen die meisten Kritiker. Im Biosphärenreservat Schorfheide-Chorin ist der Anteil der Unentschiedenen am größten. Diese Unterschiede sind eine Momentaufnahme und unterliegen einem ständigen Wandel. Da es durch die Kommunalwahlen regelmäßig zu neuen Konstellationen kommt, sollte diese Untersuchung nach jeder Wahl wiederholt werden. Die Ergebnisse können nicht mit der Verankerung der Biosphärenreservats-Idee bei der Bevölkerung gleichgesetzt werden, wie eine Gegenüberstellung mit den Ergebnissen einer Bevölkerungsbefragung aus 2010 gezeigt hat. Alles in allem liefert das Konzept Verankerung der Biosphärenreservats-Idee und die Differenzierung der Bürgermeisterinnen und Bürgermeister in Typen der Verankerung einen neuen Ansatz zur Analyse von Stakeholdern im Schutzgebietsmanagement. Es gibt dem Management eine bessere Handlungsorientierung: Es geht darum, eigenverantwortliches Handeln der Bürgerinnen und Bürger differenziert anzuregen und zu unterstützen.
Mind the gap: Information gaps and bridging options in assessing in-situ conservation achievements
(2008)
The biodiversity crisis has gained political attention on a global level. The “2010 Target” of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) aims to significantly reduce the loss of biodiversity by 2010. In order to achieve this, a network of representative and effectively managed protected areas is to be established. The effectiveness of protected areas thus represents one indicator for progress towards the CBD’s 2010 Target. However, indicators require information. The present study, in a first step, reviews the availability of open access long-term ecological data for assessing protected area effectiveness. This review shows two parallel – though contradictory – phenomena: data overkill and data scarcity. While the number of online databases providing open access data on biodiversity has grown tremendously, no long-term ecological data for a larger set of protected areas can be openly accessed. Reasons for this data scarcity are discussed. Based on this lack of information, in a second step, a method to bridge information gaps through social science research is aspired. An innovative Conservation Success Framework is developed, which defines and relates conservation needs, conservation capacity and conservation actions, its three main components. The basic assumption is that conservation can only be successful where the conservation capacity exists that is required to implement the conservation actions determined by the conservation needs. The framework was used to develop open and closed questionnaires for application in two Mexican biosphere reserves, the Sierra Gorda and the Sierra de Manantlán. As "conservation success" is often immeasurable in protected areas in practice due to unspecific conservation objectives the term is for the case studies substituted by “conservation achievements”, i.e. clearly noticeable effects from conservation actions. Overall, almost 60 interviews were conducted with different stakeholder groups. The gained information is validated through social science research techniques, such as triangulation of perspectives and active and passive observation. Based on this, conservation needs are identified and conservation capacities summarised and discussed for both case study sites. Implemented conservation actions addressing identified conservation needs and conservation capacity constraints are then analysed. In addition, noticeable effects from conservation actions on the state of biodiversity at case study sites, i.e. the conservation achievements, are described. Where locally available, non-open access data (as opposing open access data) are used to verify the findings from the social science research. Identified conservation achievements at both case study sites are evident both from quantitative information (for example forest cover increase according to non-open access data) and qualitative information (for example perceived change in the occurrence of illegal activities according to interviews). In addition, rather “intangible” indicators that can only be revealed through qualitative surveys are identified for both sites. This study thus highlights the crucial importance of integrating different types of data, ecological and socio-economic, as well as quantitative and qualitative ones. The present study concludes with a series of recommendations 1) to local practitioners at the two case study sites, and 2) to the international conservation community. Local practitioners may benefit from the present study because its results provide for each site a) an overview of existing conservation needs and implemented conservation actions; b) an easy way to identify action gaps; c) a baseline to identify progress indicators; and d) an overview of diverse perspectives on the current effectiveness of the biosphere reserves. These benefits are considered of particular importance as they can be influential in the revision of the site’s management plans, which both are now approximately ten years old and will soon be revised. The international conservation community will not be able to make a clear statement in the year 2010 about the effectiveness of protected areas on a global level due to a lack of information and transparency. However, the year 2010 should not be considered an end point for measuring progress in in-situ conservation; instead protected area quality standards must be created, effectiveness evaluations institutionalised and efforts to foster regular reporting must continue. Consequently, a scheme of consolidated actions from local to national and international level is proposed that could help to sustainably bridge existing information gaps and close them on the long run. In the end, progress reporting on the effectiveness of protected areas, and other indicators, can only improve if different governance levels “mind the information gaps” in cooperation, until continued information gathering and sharing hopefully closes these gaps one day.
Governance and Management of Tourism in two Biosphere Reserves in Ecuador: Galapagos and Sumaco
(2014)
Tourism is multi-faceted phenomenon and various stakeholders, levels of government, and sectors are closely interlinked. Governmental and non-governmental institutions, local communities, diverse professionals, and different sectors and tourists do show various perspectives about the management of tourism. In this dissertation, a comprehensive analysis on the current situation of tourism in two biosphere reserves (Galapagos and Sumaco) in Ecuador is presented. Tourism is considered as one of the key strategies to promote environmental conservation and socio-economic development of local communities living in these places. UNESCO biosphere reserves are protected areas of extraordinary natural and cultural value, conceived as places for reconciliation between conservation and development. The concept of sustainable tourism can be seen as an umbrella that unites various forms of tourism in these protected areas (e.g. ecotourism, community-based tourism). The primary objective was to evaluate the main factors of success and failure in the management of tourism and its contribution to biodiversity conservation. Thus, a detailed review of the legal, political, and institutional framework of the country and a description of the two biosphere reserves (physical, biogeographic, demographic, socio-economic, institutional and legal elements) was given. Data collection for the case studies (Galapagos and Sumaco) was performed by the combination of qualitative and quantitative methods. As for qualitative tools, in-depth semi-structured interviews with the main stakeholders in both biosphere reserves were applied. Experts and specialists in the management of protected areas, as well as representatives of different sectors directly and indirectly associated with tourism were interviewed. Moreover, surveys were applied to two different target groups. Tourists were surveyed in order to establish their socio-demographic profile, travel preferences, and degree of knowledge about sustainable tourism, as well as their perception of the sustainability of tourism in the destinations visited. Furthermore, residents in both reserves were surveyed in order to find out about their socio-demographic characteristics, their main economic activities for supporting themselves and their attitude towards tourism, their level of knowledge about biosphere reserves, and their perception about advantages or disadvantages of living in a biosphere reserve. In general, although tourism is a concept that could be developed in accordance with the environment in these natural areas, in the case of Galapagos it is one of the main risk factors for the conservation of biodiversity in the archipelago due to the increasing number of tourists. In contrast, in Sumaco tourism could be an important sustainable alternative to mining, oil extraction and hydroelectric projects, which are the current threats to the conservation of the area. From the environmental point of view, there are serious problems in both reserves, mainly linked to the contamination of water resources. Such pollution imposes risks to the health to both, residents and tourists. The lack of freshwater is particularly critical in Galapagos, given its insular habitat. The invasion of exotic species in Galapagos is one of the most serious threats to the conservation, while deforestation in combination with illegal logging and mining activities is the greatest danger in Sumaco. In terms of sociocultural factors, migration processes undoubtedly shape the attitudes and values of the current population in both reserves. In Galapagos most residents are immigrants, whereas in Sumaco a significant portion are Kichwa people who belong to the area’s native population. In general, the inhabitants in both areas have not yet developed a true environmental awareness. The distribution of human population groups is also associated with the different types of tourism. In both reserves, tourist services offered by local communities have low quality standards and are targeted on a market segment consisting of tourists with a low budget. Thus, the community revenues obtained from tourism are generally only a small percentage of the total tourism market. This situation is much more noticeable in Galapagos where large companies that operate luxury cruises and hotels gain most of their revenues from tourism. Many of them have their headquarters in the main cities of Ecuador and abroad, which means that they pay their taxes in those cities and not in the places where they operate. Inequality in the distribution of the economic benefits of tourism leads to a situation of frustration and discontentment among the residents of the regions involved. Despite this situation, tourism is still a profitable business and residents try to make the most of it, no matter the cost impacts. Temporary and illegal tourism activities is often the normal state of the things: unregistered houses that offer rooms for tourists, taxi drivers who offer tours without being in possession of permits, tourist boat owners, tour guides and even large tourist companies that operate without legal licenses. This situation inevitably leads to a decrease of the quality of services, an uncontrolled increase of business, a consequent dumping of prices and the overall decline of the destination. Ultimately, this means fewer tourists, more environmental degradation and less economic benefits for residents. In this context, there is a serious conflict between the local community and large foreign companies. Governance and management of tourism are essential elements to ensure its development in a sustainable way. The country has a large number of laws, rules, regulations, and plans that regulate the development of sustainable tourism legally and institutionally, especially in protected areas. However, monitoring and law enforcement are major constraints for achieving proper management of tourism. This problem is particularly noticeable in small communities such as Galapagos and Sumaco where interpersonal relationships of kinship and friendship are close, which complicates control and regulation. There are some serious limitations regarding the technical and logistical capacity of the institutions responsible for controlling and managing the tourist activity; they consist mainly in the lack of staff and funding. Galapagos, given its special status, has increased the number of funding managers and staff members for controlling and management, but in many cases, these people are not fully qualified for their positions. Sumaco has only few tourism experts who can help to develop the tourism. The coordination and planning among all stakeholders involved in tourism is still a work in progress to ensure proper management of the tourist destinations. In any case, local communities are developing important initiatives in both biosphere reserves. After all, sometimes planning, coordination and local activities do not necessarily coincide with the national agenda. In general, in both biosphere reserves it is necessary to ensure higher standards of education, both formal and informal. Also it is urgent that the government as a regulating entity ensures the equitable participation of local communities in tourism benefits, control, monitoring, and law enforcement. Moreover, there is the need to encourage and ensure integrated planning of tourism in the different levels of government: local, regional, and national. Sustainable tourism means that the protection of cultural heritage and natural resources is granted at least the same level of importance as the involved economic interests. The unique nature that currently attracts tourists to Galapagos and Sumaco should be preserved not only for ensuring the continuity of the tourism activity itself, but also in order to safeguard biodiversity and natural resources for the coming generations. Responsible tourism practices which care about their social and environmental impacts are not necessarily opposed to economic interests. On the contrary, they need each other for a long-term development.
The establishment and management of protected areas has become a universally accepted way to conserve biodiversity and the wide range of goods and services they offer. Sustainable management of forest resources requires good decision-making from a range of different stakeholders. This dissertation develops a model based on spatial data and expert judgments to assess the vulnerability of the most threatened species of fauna and flora in a selected protected area. Based on the study objectives, the availability of data and technology, the study concludes vulnerability as composed of multidimensional losses, which can be measured as a function of the three components: exposure, sensitivity and adaptive capacity. In order to measure vulnerability, the research applies the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP), a well-known multi-criteria decision making approach, using the open access Super Decisions software in a spatial database context with the help of Geographic Information Systems (GIS).