Co-management Of Protected Areas Research Articles

Forest co-management for improvement of livelihood and forest cover: Experience from Sal Forest of Bangladesh

Forest conservation and livelihood improvement are the prime goals of forest-protected area co-management widely practiced in tropical countries. In Bangladesh, the co-management of protected areas (PA) started in 2004 with the funding of donor agencies involving the forest department (FD), non-government organizations (NGOs), along with the communities living in and around the forests. Thus, it is imperative to decipher the impact of co-management on the livelihood of forest-dependent communities (FDC) and forest cover change. The data on livelihood improvement were collected through quantitative and qualitative methods, while satellite data (Landsat images of the years 2008, 2015, and 2022) were utilized to detect forest cover change. The finding indicates that the co-management approach has positively impacted the livelihood of FDC by securing their income sources. The alternate income-generating activities (IGAs) provided to the FDC aids in securing income and livelihoods. However, the communities have experienced antagonistic relationships with forest officials, undesirably influencing their livelihoods. Reducing the dissent on forest management activities between forest officials and participants of the co-management program might positively impact the restoration of the PA. The forest cover area has increased by 18 ha just after the finish of the co-management program, and 18.9 ha has risen from 2009 to 2022. This forest cover increase might be due to the plantation in the denuded areas and livelihood improvement through IGAs posing less pressure on the forest. Therefore, co-management of the Sal forest might increase forest cover and improve the livelihood of FDC.

Exploring the relationship between local participation and perceived Co-management performance: Evidence from China’s Giant Panda National Park

Understanding local perceptions is essential to ensure the good functioning of co-management in protected areas (PAs). However, more research is required quantitatively to assess the extent locals are empowered. This paper seeks to investigate the effects of varied participation types and levels on perceived performance in a centralized co-management regime in Giant Panda National Park, China. Using 353 survey questionnaires, we identified six co-management subtypes that were classified into four empowerment levels: instruction, consultation, agreement, and cooperation. Notably, our analysis suggests that involvement at the cooperation level was not clearly linked with more favorable local perceptions of conservation. In contrast, local residents engaged in the instruction level of co-management (support, training, and employment subtypes) were more inclined to develop positive perceptions across the ecological, social, and livelihood dimensions. This study suggests the conclusion that merely empowering locals might not facilitate favorable perceptions of conservation. Instruction co-management intended to enhance social well-being if it is tailored to the needs of local residents.

Conflicting governance realities: Aligning historical and cultural practices with formal marine protected area co-management in Senegal

This study examines governance strategies in the Joal Fadiouth Marine Protected Area (MPA) in Senegal with the aim to identify constraints to ensuring biodiversity conservation and socio-economic sustainability for coastal populations. We present a mixed-method empirical analysis that combines participatory mapping, focus group interviews, and individual semi-structured interviews with over 200 individuals from various stakeholder groups. The findings point to two divergent governance realities. One reality is the formal co-management institution – which is tasked with governing a defined space with specific rules, including direct and indirect stakeholder involvement. Another governance reality is that of traditional uses and norms, where, for example, cultural practices contribute to the protection of spawning areas or the conservation of species. Yet another reality is that negotiated in situ by actors who may be from diverse cultural backgrounds operating in an area. At Joal Fadiouth, a key point of misalignment between these realities is that neither traditional authorities nor traditional migrant users of the MPA are represented in the formal decision-making body. This undermines the legitimacy of formal co-management in the eyes of both locals and migrant users. In addition, formal governance has largely failed to consider the vast array of existing cultural and traditional uses of coastal and marine resources, as well as the inclusion of more diverse stakeholders, such as faith-based organizations and women, who are locally important and influential users. As a result, formal zoning and laws do not conform to local expectations, leading to perceptions of illegitimacy that motivate illicit income strategies and a lack of investment into co-management to showcase discontent.

Drivers of global mangrove loss and gain in social-ecological systems

Mangrove forests store high amounts of carbon, protect communities from storms, and support fisheries. Mangroves exist in complex social-ecological systems, hence identifying socioeconomic conditions associated with decreasing losses and increasing gains remains challenging albeit important. The impact of national governance and conservation policies on mangrove conservation at the landscape-scale has not been assessed to date, nor have the interactions with local economic pressures and biophysical drivers. Here, we assess the relationship between socioeconomic and biophysical variables and mangrove change across coastal geomorphic units worldwide from 1996 to 2016. Globally, we find that drivers of loss can also be drivers of gain, and that drivers have changed over 20 years. The association with economic growth appears to have reversed, shifting from negatively impacting mangroves in the first decade to enabling mangrove expansion in the second decade. Importantly, we find that community forestry is promoting mangrove expansion, whereas conversion to agriculture and aquaculture, often occurring in protected areas, results in high loss. Sustainable development, community forestry, and co-management of protected areas are promising strategies to reverse mangrove losses, increasing the capacity of mangroves to support human-livelihoods and combat climate change.

Catalytic and structural factors behind advancements of co-management in protected areas: Contributions for its evaluation

Over the past few decades, the literature has pointed out pathways to success in co-management processes based on key conditions. Rather than offering prescriptive conclusions for successful co-management in protected areas, in this article, we highlight the importance of the “process” and certain elements that contribute to advancements of formal and informal co-management. We analyzed the trajectory of two protected areas for sustainable use in coastal Brazil - Extractive Reserves of Prainha do Canto Verde and São João da Ponta. Advancements of co-management were understood as processes of shared environmental and territorial governance, with levels of community participation and/or social control. Advancements were observed in both formal co-management arenas, such as deliberative boards for protected area management, and informal spheres, such as the implementation of projects and other actions involving traditional populations and partners. Drawing on Grounded Theory, the advancements were explained based on two categories of inter-related factors: (i) catalytic factors – crises, threats and other factors of social mobilization, emancipatory partnerships, and political identity, and (ii) structural factors, based on resources of community power and citizenship. Beyond diagnoses or rankings of success, the explanatory dimension of these phenomena highlights their inherent complexity.

Impact of protected areas and co-management on forest cover: A case study from Teknaf Wildlife Sanctuary, Bangladesh

Deforestation is a matter of serious global concern. Establishing protected areas (PAs), which cover nearly 15% of the world’s surface, is one of the leading approaches to forest conservation. The recent global expansion of PAs has led to the inclusion of local communities in the forest management process, an approach referred to as “co-management.” PAs under co-management are expected to conserve biodiversity while providing support to local communities. This trend for forest co-management has shown mixed results, and a better understanding of its impact on forests and people is required. This study attempts to explore the forest-cover change in a PA of Bangladesh—the Teknaf Wildlife Sanctuary (TWS). Remote sensing will be used to assess the land-cover change, followed by a household survey to define the impact of local settlements responsible for this change. To analyze the impact of PA and co-management on forest cover, satellite images from 1989, 2007, 2009, and 2015 were considered due to the availability of quality images. The study found that from 1989 to 2015, the region saw a 46% decrease in forest cover compared to 64% inside the PA boundary; deforestation occurred more inside the PA than outside. Moreover, after the implementation of a co-management approach, the rate of deforestation increased inside the PA. Besides the forest conversion, the tree coverage shifted from the core forest area toward the settlement area, causing serious negative impacts on biodiversity. The household survey listed 57,404 households in the region, among which 5195 were situated inside the PA. Co-management in PAs was intended to involve local communities in forest management, but this study showed that the local community is causing more deforestation and shifting the tree coverage towards the forest boundaries. The creation of a large, multi-use buffer zone to ensure the long-term tenure of the core forest area could be a viable option. Such buffer zones can provide effective security and enhance local people’s livelihoods.

The political ontology of protected area co-management: worlding and nature perceptions among stakeholders

Political ontology reveals the processes of domination at play in the enactment of realities in a(post-) colonial context. In this article, we illustrate the implications of the power asymmetries inherent in conservation and co-management of protected areas involving Indigenous populations. We do so by exploring the case of Pilón Lajas in the Bolivian Amazon region, an area with double legal status as an Indigenous Territory and Biosphere Reserve. Drawing from our ethnographic fieldwork, we describe how indigenous relational ontology and the modern ontology of 'cultural diversity' are enacted by different stakeholders, and analyse critically the problems that arise for protected area management owing to the domination of a single ontology in a context where different ontologies are enacted. We finish by presenting our argument that solving such problems requires a cognitive justice approach.

(Re)Centering socioenvironmental justice: Thinking about co-management of and access to parks and protected areas in the United States

An international group of graduate students utilized the 2021 George Wright Society Student Summit to come together and discuss potential practices to bolster socioenvironmental justice implementation within the United States National Park Service (NPS). Focusing on accessibility and co-management perspectives, this group reflected on various definitions of terms, historical contexts of the Park Service nationally and globally, and how partnerships are essential to inclusivity and relevance building. This led to further discourse about potential methods of incorporating socioenvironmental justice aims into specific areas of NPS by reviewing its current practices and global case studies surrounding accessibility and co-management of protected areas. Major conclusions emphasize streamlining definitions surrounding access, accessibility, and co-management; understanding that co-management is not a monolithic framework but one dependent on local communities; continued recognition of historical exclusions of marginalized peoples; and embracing partnerships by providing stakeholders with equal positions of power, authority, and access. This thought piece aims to catalyze discourse surrounding a potential transition toward more inclusive co-management practices within US protected areas, while still remaining true to the missions and goals of their respective organizations. We recognize and do not intend to discredit any of the work that NPS and other organizations have produced towards improving sustainable co-management strategies, but rather suggest that there is always room for improvement. In doing so, we offer some potential strategies and big picture notions to be mindful of when engaging in socially just co-management practices.

Dual Governance and the Shadow of State Authority: Co-Management Realities in Rema-Kalenga Protected Area of Bangladesh

ABSTRACT Forest co-management models between local communities and the state have gained considerable attention over the past two decades to reconcile ecological conservation with sustainable livelihoods of local communities. Grounded in an exploratory qualitative methodological focus, this study examines how forest co-management realities have fared vis-à-vis continued asymmetrical power relationships between communities and the state in Bangladesh’s top-down forest governance system, specifically de facto forest governance structures in the case of Rema-Kalenga Wildlife Sanctuary and its larger landscape zone. Rema-Kalenga’s regional forest actors have been struggling to develop a shared understanding regarding the goals and distribution of power in protected area co-management. The study points toward two developments: First, a low realized level of devolution as Rema-Kalenga’s co-management institutions operate as mere unpaid “helpers” under the shadow of the state’s centralized top-down governance in the Wildlife Sanctuary. Second, this study found signs of emerging dual governance in which local co-management institutions have created their own spaces of engagement and de facto influence in the larger Rema-Kalenga landscape zone, while significantly lacking active involvement in the core zone. Connections between these two spheres are sporadic, hampering ecosystem-approaches in Rema-Kalenga, and questioning the cohesiveness of co-management purposes in the studied area.

Stakeholders’ Perception on Conservation Outcomes of Forest Protected Area Co-management in Bangladesh

ABSTRACT Co-management of forest protected areas (PA) in Bangladesh was initiated in 2004 with the aim of involving forest-dependent people in the PA governance for the conservation of forest resources. This study was conducted in two deliberately selected PA (Lawachara national park and Teknaf wildlife sanctuary) to understand stakeholders’ (co-management participants, forest officials, and non-participants of co-management) perception toward conservation outcomes. We interviewed 105 respondents using a pre-tested structured questionnaire, applied generalized logistic regression to model their perception of forest conservation outcomes, and did a content analysis of related literature. Forest officials and non-participants were less likely to perceive that co-management had brought something better for PA in terms of the existence of native tree species (odds ratio (OR) = 0.87), wildlife population (OR = 0.67), and agricultural activities (OR = 0.85) inside the PA, which are in conformity with related published literature. However, co-management participants were found positive (ORs are 1.59, 1.24, and 0.97, respectively) for the above conservation outcomes. The findings of this study would be useful for the Bangladesh forest department to identify the divergent perception of stakeholders and find ways toward better conservation outcomes.

Evaluating capital assets in governing protected area co-management in the Rema-Kalenga Wildlife Sanctuary, Bangladesh

Co-management in the Rema-Kalenga Wildlife Sanctuary was evaluated to assess how fairly capital assets were considered in the beneficiary selection, and to what extent it affected vegetation cover. A semi-structured questionnaire survey was employed to collect necessary information along with satellite images. The study revealed that many variables of social capital and a few variables of natural and financial capital played a significant role in the participant selection process. Analysis of dependency showed that the participants did not rely significantly on the forest both in terms of resource collection and their monetary value implying that the most dependent people were not adequately represented in the co-management team. The dominance of local leaders suppressed the voices of others in the management venture. An increase in forest vegetation cover was observed during the project period, although shortly after the end of co-management projects a slight deterioration of forest cover was noted. The findings of the study can serve as a guide in the future application of community forestry programmes in protected areas of Bangladesh and elsewhere in the world within similar socio-physiographic settings.

The State of Conservation in North America’s Boreal Forest: Issues and Opportunities

The North American Boreal Forest biome has been recognized as containing some of the highest proportions of intact, primary forest left on Earth. Over 6 million km² of the Boreal Forest biome is found in Canada (5.5 million km²) and the U.S. (0.74 million km²) across 10 provinces and territories and one U.S. state (Alaska). All of it is within the traditional territories of hundreds of Indigenous governments, many of whom are now asserting their rights to make decisions about its future and current land-use including for conservation and development. The biome is considered to be 80% intact and between 8% and 13% formally protected. The North American Boreal Forest biome’s intactness has allowed it to retain many globally significant conservation features including long-distance mammal and fish migrations, healthy populations of large predators, one to three billion nesting birds, some of the world’s largest lakes and North America’s longest undammed rivers, massive stores of carbon and ecological functionality. The biome’s forests, minerals, and hydropower potential are also recognized as economic opportunities so that the industrial footprint is rapidly increasing, sometimes without careful land-use planning decisions. Indigenous, federal, state, provincial and territorial governments and conservation organizations have strived over recent decades to recognize the conservation opportunity inherent in such a still-intact landscape, resulting in implementation of some of the world’s largest land conservation set-asides. Indigenous governments, in particular, have been at the forefront in developing and implementing world-leading, modern land-use plans that achieve land conservation at massive scales. Supporting efforts to ensure that a high proportion of North America’s Boreal Forest biome is protected and remains as intact habitat with unimpeded ecosystem processes should be a priority of the global conservation community. Federal, state, and provincial/territorial governments should support Indigenous protected area proposals, vastly increase financial support for Indigenous government land conservation and stewardship activities, and should develop new protected area co-management models with Indigenous governments. Governments should also be strongly advocating for raising the global Convention on Biological Diversity protected area goal to at least 30% by 2030.

Assessing the Impacts of Co-Management on Protected Area Landscape under Socio-Imagery Lens: Evidence from Bangladesh

ABSTRACT Bangladesh Forest Department had undertaken co-management of protected area (PA) initiatives for halting the rapid rate of forest degradation and deforestation in the country. However, only few research has been conducted to assess the effectiveness of co-management. In this study, drawing empirical data from two co-managed PA, namely, Bariyadhala National Park (BDNP) and Hazarikhil Wildlife Sanctuary (HWS), we investigated the impacts of co-management on spatio-temporal patterns of land use and land cover change, forest fragmentation, and local peoples’ perception on how co-management approach was underpinning these changes in the studied PA landscape. Results showed that forest cover (4800 ha gain) and forest patches (26 patch gain) had increased in two studied PA while agricultural practices and resources extractions from forest had decreased during the study period. The increase in forest coverage might be attributed to the reforestation program (3253.81 ha) undertaken under the co-management project. More than 90% of respondents admitted that various activities on co-management such as awareness creation, restriction on hunting, and forest products collection have had positive impacts on biodiversity conservation. The findings of this research would be useful to formulate future course of actions regarding forest PA co-management in Bangladesh, and elsewhere.

Co-management of protected areas: a property rights point of view

Co-management is an increasinglyused tool in natural resource management around the world, in situations where the protection of natural resources has to ensure the livelihoods of local people who have traditionally relied upon these resources. It is a mechanism of sharing power in decision-making and sharing the benefits of natural resources between stakeholders (usually governments and local communities). In Vietnam, several governmental pilot projects on comanagement of PAs were launched over the past decade, with the purpose of eventually scaling up as a national policy. Nationwide, co-management initiatives have been implemented for protected areas (PAs). Therefore, a full assessment of the PAs co-management paradigm is needed. This paper aims to increase the understaing of the ''state-of-the-art" of the management that exist within PAs and to direct attention to the issues associated with property rights in conservation. It assesses the comanagement of PAs in terms of concepts, practices and implications that relate to indigenous peoples and community land and resource rights. The paper begins with a theoretical discussion about comanagement of PAs and property rights. Next, it analyzes a wide range of biodiversity-rich countries that have different time schedules for applying comanagement in PAs. The analysis also focusses on various types of PAs such as forests, game reserves, pastureland reserves, marine PAs, etc. It then encompasses experienced cases of community based forest management in Vietnam that may be applicable to co-managed PAs. This paper reveals that co-management could be an effective tool for PAs management as long as the property rights of local communities and their members are defined clearly and satisfactorily. Among them, land ownership/land-use rights have the most influence on the nature of the co-management agreements. The co-management of PAs officially acknowledges the rights of locals who live in and around forests, to enter, use and manage PAs. These management rights of communities are collective rights rather than individual rights, while ultimately management rights belong to governments. Governments retain the rights to control forest resources; to make decisions about forest products with high value; and to approve policies related to the PA management plan, exploitation license, development of forest management guidelines. In conclusion, governments usually do not empower local communities regarding their exclusion and alienation rights.

Protected area co-management and land use conflicts adjacent to Phu Kao – Phu Phan Kham National Park, Thailand

ABSTRACTThis study examined land use conflicts between three villages and Phu Kao – Phu Phan Kham National Park in northeast Thailand that resulted from its access and utilization during 2013–2015. The source of conflict is usufruct rights, a government entitlement program designed to honor villagers who lived on the land before it was established as a national park or forest reserve. Ironically, designation of protected areas is not a safeguard for biodiversity. A complex set of rules and regulations control access to resources, but compliance is subject to government oversight and economic pressure to improve quality of life. Granting usufruct rights may reduce certain land use conflicts, but they fail to address agricultural expansion inside park and forest boundaries. For example, agricultural encroachment in this protected area increased by 13.1% during the study period, mainly through cassava plantings. Cassava requires a small amount of maintenance and has a high market value since it is being promoted as an energy crop by the Thai government. A variety of management strategies are needed for sustainable forestry, such as regular forest patrols, reduction of agricultural-based income, and community-based initiatives.

Analyzing multi-temporal satellite imagery and stakeholders' perceptions to have an insight into how forest co-management is changing the protected area landscapes in Bangladesh

Forest protected area co-management, which is viewed as an effective forest conservation strategy in many parts of the world, got rooted in Bangladesh in 2004. Nevertheless, its success in maintaining healthy status of forest landscapes is subject to strong challenges in Bangladesh where anthropogenic pressure on forest resources is extremely high. In his study, satellite imageries of two randomly selected important PAs of the country - Lawachara National Park (LNP) and Teknaf Wildlife Sanctuary (TWS) - were analyzed and linked to people's perception in understanding the conservation dynamics in the co-managed PAs. While the overall rate of forest cover loss declined from 33.56% during 2004–2011 to 11.23% during 2011–2017, the net impact on individual PA was not so positive: forest cover declination rate increased in LNP but decreased in TWS. However, even though bushy area is on significant rise in LNP (4.72% during 2004–2011, 40.12% during 2011–2017), it showed a little falling trend in TWS (7.44% during 2004–2011, 6.61% during 2011–2017). While people engaged in co-management were more inclined to highlight the success of co-management activities (Odds ratio = 1.721), the forest officials were less likely to say so (Odds ratio = 0.758). All parties except the direct beneficiaries of co-management activities had the same perception that co-management did not significantly improve the forest cover conditions in the PAs. The study, a combination of science and the society, has come up with a succinct conclusion that common people have strong insights into the extent of impact of forest management policy, and thus, their opinion should be accounted for while formulating or implementing such policy.

From conflict to collaboration: the contribution of co-management in mitigating conflicts in Mole National Park, Ghana

AbstractFew studies exist about the extent to which co-management in protected areas contributes to conflict prevention or mitigation and at what level of the conflicts such collaborative efforts are possible. Following varying degrees of conflict, Mole National Park, Ghana, embarked on a collaborative community-based wildlife management programme in 2000. Using Glasl's conflict escalation model, we analysed the contribution of co-management to mitigating and preventing conflicts from escalating. We conducted a total of 22 interviews with local traditional leaders, Park officials and local government officials, and 26 focus group discussions with farmers, hunters, women and representatives of co-management boards, selected from 10 of the 33 communities surrounding the Park. Our findings indicate that co-management can help mitigate or prevent conflicts from escalating when conflicting parties engage with each other in a transparent manner using deliberative processes such as negotiation, mediation and the use of economic incentives. It is, however, difficult to resolve conflicts through co-management when dialogue between conflicting parties breaks down, as parties take entrenched positions and are unwilling to compromise on their core values and interests. We conclude that although co-management contributes to successful conflict management, factors such as understanding the context of the conflicts, including the underlying sources and manifestations of the conflict, incorporating local knowledge, and ensuring open dialogue, trust and transparency between conflicting parties are key to attaining sustainable conflict management in protected areas.

Protected area co-management and perceived livelihood impacts

Creation of protected areas to conserve biodiversity can have both positive and negative impacts, with impacts unequally distributed within local communities. A global shift towards local community involvement in protected area governance and co-management has aimed to reduce costs of protected area establishment and their uneven distribution. Yet, there is mixed evidence to support whether such initiatives are succeeding. Here, a protected area in Madagascar is used as a case study to explore how co-management governance processes impact upon livelihood strategies and outcomes, and how these impacts are distributed within and between villages.Focus groups, interviews and questionnaires were conducted in 2015/16 with households surrounding a protected area, co-managed by local community associations and a national NGO. Data analysis was framed around the Sustainable Livelihoods Framework.The majority of respondents perceived negative livelihood outcomes, and impacts were unevenly distributed between social groups. Respondents were more likely to report negative livelihood outcomes if they were from remote villages, poorer households and reliant on provisioning ecosystem services before protected area establishment. Qualitative data showed that the main drivers of this were protected area-related rules and regulations restricting forest activities. Drivers of improved livelihood outcomes were training and materials improving agricultural yields and increased community cohesion. Although co-managed protected areas may be overall more effective in meeting biological and socio-economic goals than protected areas of other governance types, the evidence here suggests that governance processes can lead to local perceptions of inequity.

Co-Managers or Co-Residents? Indigenous Peoples’ Participation in the Management of Protected Areas: a Case Study of the Agta in the Philippines

Indigenous peoples’ participation in the co-management of protected areas is recognised as essential for conserving both cultural and biological diversity. While this practice is increasingly common, few studies have quantitatively evaluated the efficacy of these initiatives. Here we examine levels of knowledge and involvement among the Agta, a hunter-gatherer population who co-manage the Northern Sierra Madre Natural Park, the largest protected area in the Philippines. We find that the Agta generally possess low levels of knowledge about the protected area they are supposed to co-manage. Participation in park management is hampered by several factors, including a lack of cultural sensitivity regarding the Agta’s foraging lifestyle among park officials and little political will to realistically empower and support the Agta as co-managers. Recommendations to strengthen Agta participation – and indigenous peoples’ participation in protected area management more widely – are made to help protect the world’s remaining cultural and biological diversity.

Changing governance, changing inequalities: Protected area co-management and access to forest ecosystem services: a Madagascar case study

Access, in reference to Ecosystem services (ES), is defined as the capacity to gain benefits from the environment. There has been a global shift in natural resource governance, particularly increased co-management of protected areas (PAs). Yet there has been little research on how this change may be affecting access to ES. We aim to fill this research gap by considering: (a) what ES are considered most important, (b) what factors are important in determining whether a person can access ES, and (c) how rules and regulations regarding ES access are decided and enforced.Qualitative and quantitative data were collected using questionnaires, focus groups and interviews with stakeholders in a case study PA in Madagascar, co-managed by local community associations (VOIs) and an NGO. Data analysis was framed around the IPBES framework and access factors.Respondents considered provisioning services most important, but also valued cultural and regulating services. Institutions and social identity had the largest impact on access to ES. VOI members and individuals who knew VOI committee members had greater access to ES than non-members. Findings show that co-management may be shifting ES access inequalities rather than reducing them, and we outline a number of challenges relating to PA co-management.