Biodiversity Conservation: The Process of Economic Assessment and Establishment of a Protected Area in Vanuatu

Abstract

This article describes the framework adopted for the socio‐economic assessment of protected areas intended to safeguard biodiversity. This framework, which can be described as a three‐tiered approach to conservation, is applied to the process of assessment and establishment of a protected area (PA) in Vanuatu. The potential benefits that the landowners of the PA could derive from logging activities, and the subsistence values derived from the PA are considered. It appears that if the PA was to be established without the payment of any compensation, the landowners would face substantial net costs. During the research process, it was suggested that the Government of Vanuatu could take up a lease on the land to compensate the landowners for the loss of potential logging royalties. When the benefits accruing to the landowners from a lease agreement are compared with the foregone logging royalties, it is found that the net present value of a seventy‐five year lease agreement is approximately equivalent to the net present value of logging royalties.

Decentralization, forests and livelihoods: Theory and narrative

“…Biodiversity planning and planning related to potential carbon-related schemes need to occur at the national level and implemented with appropriate management systems that involve local governments and local people. Financial rewards for conservation would be required as noted above, and they can be made compatible with customary claims to land and its resources (Tacconi and Bennett, 1995). To summarize, the following aspects will need to be taken into account in designing decentralized forest management systems: clear and appropriate authority and responsibility assigned to the various levels of government and other stakeholders, including community groups where appropriate; specific objectives and indicators for management at various ecosystem levels by central and local governments, and other stakeholders; participatory planning, monitoring and evaluation of performance; and performance-based financial support and penalties for local governments linked to agreed environmental standards.…”