Management effectiveness in UNESCO Biosphere Reserves: Learning from Canadian periodic reviews

Reed, Maureen G.; Egunyu, Felicitas

doi:10.1016/j.envsci.2012.09.008

Cited by 32 publications

(36 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Since the 1970s, many researchers and international organizations have devoted to the topic on how to coordinate relation between a nature reserve and neighborhood residents and come up with a series of coordination mechanism, such as the concept of biosphere reserve (Price, 2002;Price et al, 2010;Reed & Egunyu, 2013), comprehensive protection and development projects, and community co-management. All of them are common in that both of protection and development are included into functions of a nature reserve.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Special Issue 4 : 2016

Conference¹

2016

PMJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Special Issue 4 : 2016

Conference¹

2016

PMJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The ten-year interval between reviews also hinders the process of active learning, adjusting and adapting management action (Price et al, 2010;Reed and Egunyu, 2013).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The conceptual model behind the BR idea was first developed in the 1970s and is based on integrated management across a landscape through a new approach to zonation of core, buffer and transition zones in order to harmonise conservation and development (Ishwaran et al, 2008;Axelsson et al, 2011). However, the gap between theory and practice is still a significant challenge for BR management due to poor understanding of how a BR should work on the ground to achieve the goals of sustainability by harmonising interactions between people and the environment across the landscape (Matysek et al, 2006;UNESCO, 2010;Reed and Egunyu, 2013).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As a result, the evaluation reports focus on assessment of zonation schemes while disregarding other aspects such as management practices and governance (Reed and Egunyu, 2013).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Hence, the Aichi Target (BR) aim to reconcile biodiversity conservation with economic development, in a way that is not possible under conventional PA management (Batisse, 1997). The conceptual BR model as outlined by the Seville Strategy (UNESCO, 1996a) is built around PAs as the core of the BR, but with a defined buffer zone and transition area, each with different rules/strictures defining activities that can be undertaken in each zone and which support delivery of the three principal functions defined for BRs of conservation, sustainable development and logistic support (UNESCO, 1996b, Price, 2002Price et al, 2010;Reed and Egunyu, 2013;Matar and Anthony, 2017). However, BR activities occur in both the legally defined PA with designated natural resource management operational "rules" as well as the buffer zone and transition area that are commonly without legal status and across which there are a range of different land uses and stakeholders (Batisse, 1997;Ishwaran et al, 2008).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Factors influencing the management effectiveness of the biosphere reserve model: The case of Vietnam

Chu¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Vietnam allows the province and city authority some flexibility in interpreting the central policies and regulations that could benefit BR operation and management locally, the way this is interpreted varies with the commitment and engagement of the provincial leaders. Lack of true understanding ii of the BR approach coupled with unclear guidance on BR planning and management led to most of the management effort being paid to the conservation of the core PAs.Specific study of the Kien Giang Biosphere Reserve (KGBR) showed a similar operational "disconnect" between concept and practice as in most other BRs in Vietnam. Whilst major attention has been paid to compliance with the UNESCO Man the Biosphere rules, little effort and investment has been made in the practical implementation of the concepts they embody. Lack of public awareness and understanding, state-control based on a strong sectoral approach to BR planning and management hindered broader stakeholder participation. Weak engagement from provincial leader in BR governance limited cross-sectoral collaboration process for effective delivery BR mandate functions that differentiates BRs from the conventional conservation PA approach. The study found that external projects only have a temporary impact on operation of the KGBR because they often start with small, time-bound demonstration models which negatively condition the community attitude to the projects and by association the BR.Using Enhancing our Heritage Toolkit (EoH) developed by IUCN and UNESCO for evaluation of management effectiveness, the study found that while the KGBR has been operating for a decade, the management planning process has not been completed. While a management system was established in KGBR it has proved inadequate to the task in operation because of structural deficiencies in the BR Management Board, lack of trained staff with BR knowledge and no allocation of operational funding specifically for BR activities. There appears a difficulty to achieve desired outcomes. Due to the absence of an approved operational plan with a monitoring and evaluation system has meant that assessment of management effectiveness of the KGBR against the key performance indicators has not been possible.To improve performance and effectiveness of the BR model in Vietnam, BRs should have nationally legal recognition that provides legitimacy for setting up clear BR governance structure and cross sectoral collaboration, and increase funding opportunity from central government for BR delivery. Additionally, BR sustainability and effectiveness greatly depends on the implementation of appropriate, locally-based management solutions that need a strong stakeholder's awareness, and engagement for a stable and strong governance leadership based on a strategic participation and public-private stakeholder partnerships in planning, operating resource allocation and implementation.iii DECLARATION BY AUTHORThis thesis is composed of my original work, and contains no material previously published or written by another p...

show abstract

Global knowledge–action networks at the frontlines of sustainability: Insights from five decades of science for action in UNESCO's World Network of biosphere reserves

et al. 2023

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Generating actionable knowledge to meet current sustainability challenges requires unprecedented collaboration across scales, geographies, cultures and knowledges. Intergovernmental programmes and place‐based knowledge–action networks have much potential to mobilize sustainability transformation. Although many research fields have benefited from research networks and comparative sites, the potential of site‐based research networks for generating knowledge at the people–nature interface has yet to be fully explored. This article presents the World Network of biosphere reserves (WNBR) of UNESCO's Man and Biosphere Programme, intentionally established for generating actionable knowledge through comparative sites envisioned as learning spaces for sustainable development. Drawing on experiences over five decades, and we offer six categories of insights. Our intent is to share the story of this network widely, distil the learnings from the network to enhance its potential to support both knowledge co‐production and collaborative action for sustainability and inform wider efforts to establish place‐based sustainability networks aimed at improving human–environment relations through knowledge and action. The WNBR has generated insights on the challenges of creating and supporting an international and inter‐governmental sustainability network to generate and mobilize place‐based interdisciplinary knowledge in the long term. Despite the challenges, site‐ and place‐based research facilitated by this network has been fundamental in creating space for sustainability science, knowledge co‐production and transdisciplinary research at the human–nature interface. We share insights on pathways to the implementation of global sustainability agendas through local networks, and the role of research in supporting learning and experimentation in local sites as they work to adapt global sustainability goals. Research in the WNBR has generated deeper understanding on social–ecological complexity and resilience in place‐based sustainability initiatives, and how collaborative platforms might facilitate collective action across landscapes. The network continues to offer a fundamental learning space on operationalizing pluralistic approaches to biodiversity conservation, for example, through its focus on biocultural diversity, offering a key opportunity for the implementation of the post‐2020 Global Biodiversity Framework. We conclude by arguing that WNBR, and similar place‐based knowledge–action networks, can support interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary research related to human–nature relationships and provide opportunities for comparative research that may yield more explanatory power than individual case studies. Read the free Plain Language Summary for this article on the Journal blog.

show abstract

Management effectiveness in UNESCO Biosphere Reserves: Learning from Canadian periodic reviews

Cited by 32 publications

References 25 publications

Special Issue 4 : 2016

Special Issue 4 : 2016

Factors influencing the management effectiveness of the biosphere reserve model: The case of Vietnam

Global knowledge–action networks at the frontlines of sustainability: Insights from five decades of science for action in UNESCO's World Network of biosphere reserves

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About