Conservation and Sustainable Use of the Biosphere - WBGU

Integrating conservation and use at the regional level E 3.9
197
to achieve this difficult task most effectively, and at
what level.
A global biosphere policy based on the regulatory
approach, which aims at implementing objectives in
the region exclusively through state measures,
quickly realizes its limitations, as the above extreme
cases show, and is described in more detail in Section
I 2.A successful approach should therefore also seize
the opportunity that the motivation approach (Section
I 2.4) has to offer for application at the regional
level. In this process, it is much less a matter of
regional implementation of the rigid objectives of a
central governing body than – applying the subsidiarity
principle – allowing a variety of institutional
approaches and regional experiments so as to organize
a process of enquiry, which can better integrate
the diverging ideas of the individual actors from the
region.
If the intention is to link the protection of landscapes
and ecosystems with sustainable use, then a
concept is needed that also does justice to the complexity
of the various local requirements for conservation
and use. In the process, the various ecosystem
types and land use forms cannot be viewed separately
from each other because they are linked via
interactions, impinge upon each other or even overlap.
In view of the global diversity of the ecosystems
and forms of use, the specific design of such an
approach obviously has to be adapted to the local
conditions.This applies not only to the natural factors
(terrain, soils, climate, etc) but also to the social conditions
(culture, settlement density, structure of state
institutions, etc). Mutually contradictory conservation
and use demands lead to conflicts that make the
protection and the sustainable use of the biosphere
much more difficult.
The relationship to existing planning is of particular
importance: the approach with its principles
and instruments should help to incorporate the perspective
of integrating conservation and sustainable
use of the biosphere into spatial planning. In this context,
on the one hand the area must be large enough
to be able to implement effective measures for
ecosystem protection and, on the other hand, small
enough to develop locally adapted concepts that do
equal justice to the ecological, economic and social
framework conditions locally.
Another important spatial criterion results from
the fundamental considerations of biosphere policy
(Section I 2): the spatial equivalency principle. The
greater the spatial separation between the benefits
and costs of biosphere conservation, the more difficult
it will be to reach a consensus. Therefore, the
level that should be chosen for political action should
be the one that is best suited to balance the beneficiaries
with the bearers of the cost. This does not
always have to be the global level: the regional level
discussed here can also offer an interesting approach
– in line with the subsidiarity principle.
The task of central importance is therefore the following:
in the use of biological resources there must
also be a comparison of the three components of sustainability
(economic, ecological and social component).
In rural areas, it is of prime importance to consider
the different needs of intensive agriculture and
forestry, the conservation of natural ecosystems and
the interests of the local population.
In this respect, the main concern cannot be to give
one of the three components priority over the others.
There should not be a knee-jerk reaction to the
destructive exploitation of biological resources in the
form of a concept in which every economic use of
biological resources is informed by nature conservation
aspects alone. Much rather, all three aspects
have to be considered as integrated from the outset.
A successful concept will therefore be tailored more
to rural regions, which are characterized by the use of
biological resources, and less to regions where industry
or settlements are the predominant influences. In
the process, it is imperative to avoid bureaucratic
over-regulation within the context of local and
nationwide use-planning, in order to give the local
actors flexibility and to open up scope for action,
within the limits set by the guard rails (Section I 1)
and guidelines (Box I 1.1-1) which must still be
observed.
The following section introduces the principles
and instruments for a regional approach of this kind
for integrating the conservation and use of biological
resources. Obviously, these are not universally valid
and cannot be used as a template in all regions of the
world; they rather form building blocks which must
be assembled locally to form a ‘well-adapted’ and
flexible concept, given the particular local framework
conditions.
E 3.9.2
The proposal of bioregional management:
principles and instruments
The World Resources Institute (Miller, 1996) proposes
‘bioregional management’ as a method for
practically shaping the integration of conservation
and use; this term will be described here and evaluated
with regard to its suitability for the implementation
of these objectives in spatial and regional planning.
Bioregion refers to a geographically definable
area with a predominantly rural structure, characterized
by its typical ecosystems, its culture and history
and comprising several ecosystem and landscape use