Abstract

This study applied the Korean framework of wetland management effectiveness evaluation to national wetland protected areas and identified key insights into developing a national wetland management policy. The framework is based on the basic evaluation framework of the International Union for Conservation of Nature and reflects the characteristics of South Korea’s wetland management policy. The evaluation framework comprises a total of 29 items and 21 detailed items in the design, appropriateness, and delivery sectors. Based on a cluster analysis, which considered the management levels of 22 sites that conducted first-stage self-assessment, the sites were divided into Groups A, B, and C. The second and third stages of qualitative evaluation were conducted on the representative target sites of each group by external research teams. The average score for the overall management level was the highest for Group B, followed by Groups C and A. Significant differences were observed among the groups for five items in the design sector, seven items in the appropriateness sector, and two items in the delivery sector. The management levels in the pilot sites were 43.9% in Yongneup of Mt. Daeam, 37.4% in the Damyang riverine wetland, and 59.8% in the Upo wetland, compared to the ideal condition. Important suggestions were derived through the evaluation framework. First, management effectiveness evaluation should consider national environmental and management policy characteristics based on an international framework. Second, an integrated management system should be established. Third, stakeholders should participate in building governance. Lastly, the participation of an external expert is essential.

Highlights

  • This study applies the Korean framework of wetland management effectiveness evaluation for national wetland protected areas to obtain key insights into developing national wetland management policy

  • The Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) has made efforts to improve the quality of protected areas through the Programme of Work on Protected Areas (PoWPA) since 2004 (Ervin et al, 2008); since 2010, it has recommended the implementation of management effectiveness evaluation of the parties through the adoption of Aichi targets and related resolutions (Decision X/31)

  • This study aimed to efficiently derive management issues and solve problems at the site-level by applying the Korean wetland management effectiveness evaluation framework to improve the quality of national wetland protected areas

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Protected areas are geographical spaces encompassing cultural values and biodiversity conservation and are managed by legal or other effective measures to conserve ecosystems (Dudley, 2004). For the effective management of such protected areas, the international community has recommended the implementation of management effectiveness evaluation for qualitative improvement and a quantitative increase in protected areas. The Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) has made efforts to improve the quality of protected areas through the Programme of Work on Protected Areas (PoWPA) since 2004 (Ervin et al, 2008); since 2010, it has recommended the implementation of management effectiveness evaluation of the parties through the adoption of Aichi targets and related resolutions (Decision X/31). In the Ramsar Convention, the Ramsar Site Management Effectiveness Tracking Tool (R-METT) was adopted (Resolution XII.15) In the 4th Ramsar Strategic Plan (2016–2024), the implementation rate of management effectiveness evaluation (%) was recommended. The basic assessment framework was developed by the World Commission on Protected Areas (WCPA) of the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) to provide to the international community (Hockings et al, 2004; 2006). The World Bank, the Global Environment Fund (GEF), and the Worldwide Fund for Nature (WWF) have supported budget and manual development to evaluate management effectiveness in protected areas (Belokurov et al, 2009)

Objectives
Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call