Border of What: Ecology or Human?

Abstract

Objective: The issue of human boundaries (political borders) vs. the natural boundaries (ecotones) has been controversial in recent studies. The political borders have negatively impacted the ecology and resulted in ecological and spatial fragmentation and biodiversity reduction in a country like Iran. The work aims to find a practical way to mitigate the environmental problems in the borderlands of Iran. This article evaluates the effect of creating a “Transboundary Conserved Area” or “Peace Park” in Iran with the purpose of ecological conservation.Material and Methods: This article attempts to explain the structures and functions of ecotones and natural boundaries. To search for a feasible solution to protect the ecologically unique zones over the political borders of Iran, this article discusses whether human boundaries can act as a natural boundary and reduce its ecological effects. Therefore, five common characteristics of natural and human borders, including location and size, origination, form, function, and stability over time, are explained and compared.Results: By analyzing the political borders of Iran, it shows that Iran needs different protected zones in most of its borderlands, and the idea of the “Transboundary Conserved Area” may not be possible due to the current complicated political matters over the borderlands.Conclusion: The human boundaries should be flexible with the changes in their surrounding nature; they should be in tune with the current geographical structures and maintain ecological connectively and seasonal animal migrations.