1.Front section - IUCN
1.Front section - IUCN
1.Front section - IUCN
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
Protected areas and development assistance agencies: at the inter<strong>section</strong> of conservation and development 7<br />
Actions required in the coming<br />
ten years<br />
Integrated conservation and development is intuitively<br />
appealing. It offers something for everyone. It<br />
promises to defuse the major threats to biodiversity,<br />
create better opportunities for people to earn a decent<br />
living and gain access to basic services, and equitably<br />
address the rights and interests of everyone who uses<br />
land and resources in and around protected areas. It is<br />
not a surprise that the integration of conservation and<br />
development has been so easy to sell to a broad range<br />
of interests, from park managers and conservation<br />
organizations, to local communities, governments and<br />
development assistance agencies.<br />
The problem is that the myth of “win-win” solutions<br />
has created a culture in which overly ambitious<br />
projects have proliferated based on weak assumptions<br />
and little evidence. There is no doubt that poverty<br />
reduction and conservation of biodiversity must work<br />
hand-in-hand in today’s world. However, some tradeoffs<br />
must be recognised, and mistakes need to be<br />
avoided for integrated conservation and development<br />
to work in the future. The following features are key to<br />
this success in the coming ten years (adapted from<br />
McShane and Wells, 2004):<br />
1. Clarity about goals and objectives. Biodiversity<br />
goals are often in partial opposition to<br />
development goals and this is rarely explicitly<br />
acknowledged and addressed from the start.<br />
2. Constraints of project structures. The constraints<br />
imposed by the project structures of many<br />
conservation and development agencies are still<br />
inhibiting real engagement with local<br />
stakeholders and preventing the integrated<br />
management of natural resource systems.<br />
3. The scale of intervention. Too many of the<br />
interventions of conservation and development<br />
agencies are scale-specific, often addressing local<br />
symptoms but ignoring underlying policy<br />
constraints or dealing with macro-level issues<br />
while ignoring local realities.<br />
Culture plays an important role in linking conservation and development. Traditional land use practices around Punakha Dzong in Bhutan ensures<br />
the maintenance of riverside habitat for endangered species such as the white-bellied heron.<br />
© Thomas O. McShane<br />
99