A Management Model for Improve the Governance of Protected Areas since an Institutional Perspective and an Empirical Case in a Spanish Natural Park

  1. Mónica de Castro Pardo 1
  2. Vicente Urios 2
  1. 1 Universidad Complutense de Madrid
    info

    Universidad Complutense de Madrid

    Madrid, España

    ROR 02p0gd045

  2. 2 Universitat d'Alacant
    info

    Universitat d'Alacant

    Alicante, España

    ROR https://ror.org/05t8bcz72

Actas:
International Journal of Engineering Technology, Management and Applied Sciences

Editorial: ijetmas

ISBN: 2581-4621

Año de publicación: 2016

Tipo: Aportación congreso

GOOGLE SCHOLAR

Resumen

This paper propose a management model for improve the governance of protected areas from an institutionalperspective. The good governance in protected areas is based in seven principles: Legitimacy, Inclusiveness,Accountability, Performance, Equity, Connectivity and Institutional sustainability. This proposal is based on an overviewof work at the institutional framework level and incorporates factors that affect to the efficiency of governance andimprove it. A collaborative multi-criteria method is proposed to improve the good governance and ensure theInstitutional Sustainability dimension, by integrating the stakeholder preferences in decision making. This model allowsfor obtain priorities on the management objectives of the stakeholders in a protected area and identify equivalences withIUCN protection categories using a multi-criteria outranking technique. It also presents an application in the AlbuferaNatural Park in Valencia, a strongly man-modified wetland located in Eastern Spain. This holistic approach allowsensure the incorporation of elements associated with the institutional sustainability that are not sufficiently representedin the governance in protected areas and to lay the theoretical basis for improve the governance for the global networkof protected areas. The application of the model in the Albufera Natural Park has identified the V-Protected Lanscape /Seascape IUCN category as the equivalent international protection category. The results obtained by the park staff andother stakeholders have no major discrepancies. This suggests that this protection category seems well adapted to thesocial context of this protected area, moreover, the V protection category usually fits well to ecosystems stronglymodified by human activities as is the case of the Albufera of Valencia. This model achieves improve two subdimensionsof the Institutional Sustainability in the governance of protected areas: the Institutional Resilience, with a flexibleintegration of the preferences of the stakeholders and the Institutional Robustness, including the priorities of thestakeholders in the decision making of the protected areas.

Referencias bibliográficas

  • Abrams, P., Borrini-Feyerabend, G.,Gardner, J. and Heylings, P., 2003. Evaluating Governance.A Handbook to accompany a participatory process for a protected area.PARKS CANADA and TILCEPA—Theme on Indigenous and Local Communities, Equity and Protected Areas of IUCN CEESP /WCPA.
  • Alcorn J.,B, Luque, A. and Valenzuela, S.,2005. Global Governance and Institutional Trends Affecting Protected Areas Management: Challenges and Opportunities Arising from Democratization and Globalization Durban, South Africa: Governance Stream of the Vth World Parks Congress; 2005.
  • Alcorn J. ,2010. Indigenous People and Conservation. Theme on Governance, Equity , and Rights of the World Conservation Union Commission on Environmental, Economic , and Social Policy. McArtur F. White Paper Series.
  • Baral, N., 2012.Empirical analysis of factors explaining local governing bodies’ trust for administering agencies in community-based conservation. Journal of Environmental Management 103, 41-50.
  • Brans ,J.P. ,Mareschal,B.2005.PROMETHEE Methods, chapter 5 in Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis, State of the Art Surveys.Edited by Figueira,J;Greco,S. and Ehrgott,M. Springter. pp.163-195
  • Brucker de,K.,Macharis, C. , Verbeke, A.,2013. Multi-criteria analysis and the resolution of sustainable development dilemmas: A stakeholder management approach. European Journal of Operational Research 224: 122-131
  • Clements ,T., John, A., Nielsen, K., An, D., Tan, S. and Milner-Gulland, E.J.,2010. Payments for biodiversity conservation in the context of weak institutions: Comparison of three programs from Cambodia. Ecological Economics 69, 1283-1291.
  • Dearden, P.,Bennett,M. and Johnston, J., 2005. Trends in Global Protected Area Governance, 1992-2002. Environmental Management Vol 36: 89-100.
  • Folke, C.; Hahn, T.; Olsson, P. and Norberg, J. , 2005. Adaptative Governance of Social- Ecological Systems Annual Review of Environment and Resources 30, 441-473.
  • Graham, J, Amos, B and Plumptre, T., 2003.Governance Principles for Protected Areas in the 21st. Century. Fifth World Parks Congress, South Africa in September 2003.
  • Gregory , R. ,Keeney,R.L., 1994.Creating Policy alternatives using stakeholders value .Management Science 40:1035-1048
  • Griffith, R, Davidson, J and Lockwood, M., 2009. NRM Governance for change: Revisiting good governance
  • Hayes T., 2006. Parks, People, and Forest Protection: An Institutional Assessment of the Effectiveness of Protected Areas. World Development 34, 2064-2075.
  • Hardin, G., 1968. The tragedy of the commons. Science 162, 1243-1248.
  • Howlett, M., and Rayner, J., 2006. Convergence and divergence in new governance arrangements: evidence from European integrated natural resource strategies. Journal of Public Policy 26 (2), 167–189.
  • IUCN, 2010.Enhancing the contribution of Protected Areas to Biodiversity Conservation .The role of the CBD Programme of Work on Protected Areas (POWPA) Tenth Meeting of the Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD COP10), 18-29 October, 2010, Nagoya, Japan.
  • IUCN and UNEP-WCMC, 2011. The World Database on Protected Areas (WDPA): January 2011. Cambridge, UK: UNEP-WCMC.
  • Kijazi, M.H. ,Kant, S. 2011. Social acceptability of alternative forest regimes in Mount Kilimanjaro, Tanzania, using stakeholder attitudes as metrics of uncertainly. 2011. Forest Policy and Economics 13: 242-257
  • Kothari, A., 2008. Parks 17: Protected areas and people: the future of the past. Nº 2 Durban +5.
  • Lockwood, M., 2010. Good governance for terrestrial protected areas: A framework, principles and performance outcomes. Journal of environmental management 91: 754-766.
  • López Ornat, A., Pons ,A. and Noguera,M. 2007.Utilización de las categorías de gestión de áreas protegidas de UICN en la región mediterránea. Consejería de Medio Ambiente de la Junta de Andalucía, Sevilla, España y UICN, Gland, Suiza y Málaga, España. 211 pp.
  • [Mendoza, G.A. ,Martins, H.,2006. Multi-criteria decision analysis in natural resource management:A critical review of methods and new modelling paradigms. Forest Ecology and Management 230 : 1–22
  • Nordstrom, E., Eriksson, L.O. ,Ohman, K.,2010. Integrating multiple criteria decision analysis in participatory forest planning: Experience from a case study in northern Sweden. Forest Policy and Economics 12: 562-574
  • Ostrom, E.; Burguer, J.; Field, C.B.; Norgaard, R.B. and Policansky, D. ,1999. Revisiting the commons: Local Lessons, Global Changes. Science 284, 278-282.
  • Ostrom, E., 2000. Collective Action and the Evolution of Social Norms. Journal of Economic Perspectives 4, 137-158.
  • Ostrom, E.2009. A general Framework for Analyzing Sustainability of Social-Ecological Systems. Science 325, 419- 422.
  • Ostrom, E., 2010. Polycentric systems for coping with collective action and global environmental change. Global Environmental Change 20, 550-557.
  • Smith, R. J., Muir, R.D.J., Walpole, M.J., Balmford, A. and Leader-Williams, N., 2003.Governance and the loss of biodiversity. Nature 426, 67–70.
  • Schmoldt, D.L. ,Peterson, D.L.,2000. Analytical group decision making in natural resources: methodology and application. ForestScience 46: 62-75
  • Stoll-Klemann,S. 2010. Evaluation of management effectiveness in protected areas: Methodologies and results. Basic and Applied Ecology 11: 377-382
  • UNDP, 1997.Governance for sustainable human development.A UNDP policy document.
  • Vollan, B and Ostrom, E., 2010. Cooperation and the Commons. Science 330, 923-924