introduction to landscape approach context, evolution and principles
Post on 18-Dec-2015
232 views
TRANSCRIPT
Introduction to Landscape Approach
Context, evolution and principles
Learning objectives “Landscape Approaches” Be able to explain the context, principles and
relevance of landscape approaches (landscape level planning and management) for “good enough” natural resource governance (notably SFM);
Be able to relate this knowledge to your professional work experiences and context;
Assess the relevance of the landscape concept for the achievement of the EU project (most notably the successful operation of the MSD);
“Think beyond your box”
Structure of the presentation
Trends and developments in forest management & conservation
Characteristics of a landscape approach for sustainable management of resources (context of the MSD)
The value of landscape level planning for Sustainable Forestry Management (SFM) (afternoon)
Historical Developments in Forest Management Timber production ( - 1970):
site studies and growth and yield assessment timber quality, species genetics maximum sustained yield
Multiple use forestry (1970 - 1990): wood production leading principle & nature-oriented forest
mgt
Ecosystem management (1990 - ….) User involvement (sustainability demands, community
forestry) Wide diversification of forest uses
Sustainability, contribution to regional development, and poverty reduction Certification systems, increased complexity in planning
Conservation: Development & Trends
Traditionally: exclusive models for protection Categories of protected areas ( IUCN)
Conservation & Development Debate Starting in the 1970s, ICDPs with major landmarks in
international conventions e.g. Rio CBD (1992), WSSD (2002) Management from mono to multiple stakeholder approach: Man
& Biosphere; Core-Buffer zone; Ecological networks Ecosystem Approach:
Taking into account the interaction with surrounding area New insights in ecosystems and (dynamic) climax
Wider concerns over biodiversity and genetic resources conservation
Changing Paradigms(Philips 2002)
Twelve Principles of the ecosystem approach (adapted from the CBD Malawi Principles, 1995)
The objectives of management of land, water and living resources are a matter of societal choice
Management should be decentralised to the lowest appropriate level (subsidiarity principle)
Ecosystem managers should consider the effects (actual or potential) of their activities on adjacent and other ecosystems
Recognising potential gains from management, there is usually a need to understand and manage the ecosystem in an economic context. Any such ecosystem-management programme should:
Reduce those market distortions that adversely affect biological diversity Align incentives to promote biodiversity conservation and sustainable use: Internalise costs and benefits in the given ecosystem to the extent feasible
Conservation of ecosystem structure and functioning, in order to maintain ecosystem services should be a priority of the ecosystem approach
Ecosystems must be managed within the limits of their functioning The ecosystem approach should be undertaken at the appropriate spatial and temporal
scales Recognising the varying temporal scales and lag-effects that characterise ecosystem
processes, objectives for ecosystem management should be set for the long-term Management must recognise that change is inevitable The ecosystem approach should seek the appropriate balance between, and integration
of, conservation and use of biological diversity The ecosystem approach should consider all forms of relevant information, including
scientific and indigenous and local knowledge, innovations and practices The ecosystem approach should involve all relevant sectors of society and scientific
disciplines
Thinking in landscapes as a “new” paradigm
Both as analytical concept and planning concept (intermediate strategic planning/bioregional planning)
Human intervention essential component of healthy ecosystem Cultural and natural values of landscapes are closely
interlinked, f.i. communities surrounding PA are central in sustaining them
Holistic thinking with “the whole greater than the sum of the parts”
Root causes of problems of resource management often not site-specific
Response to “failing community management” Another word for “ecosystem management”?
Driving Forces for a landscape approach Conservation – Development Debate
Increasing pressure (and conflict) on PA system Broadening Development Agenda (linkages to
poverty Alleviation, MDG and new aid modalities (sector approach)
International Dialogues Indigenous rights of communities and minority
groups Linking policy dialogue (conventions, EA) to practice Multistakeholder dialogues (and negotiated
outcomes in NRM) increasingly recognized Innovations:
Merging ecosystem thinking with MSP (emphasis on social learning)
Attention for markets for environmental services
What is a landscape?
A landscape can be defined as: “a contiguous area, intermediate in size
between an eco-region and a site, with a specific set of ecological, cultural and socioeconomic characteristics distinct from its neighbours”.
However, in practice all landscapes are social constructs and the definition of a landscape lies largely in the eye of the beholder (Maginnis et al., 2004).
What is a landscape?
Landscape as a social construct is a meeting ground betweenNature and People- and these interact and create a distinct placePast and present – and how landscapes thus present a record of our natural and cultural historyTangible and intangible values providing a sense of identity
Characterising Landscape approach
It recognises: various ecosystem services (valued!) to multiple stakeholders, pursuing different land use objectives (or livelihood strategies)
Characterising Landscape approach
Seeks to link local-site level action, at farm, forest and protected area level, to the broader landscape level
recognises that land use trade-offs will need to be made, and using a multi stakeholder approach for negotiated
outcomes. offers opportunity to place local people’s needs at the
centre of all forest and agricultural land use decision-making.
while simultaneously incorporating ecosystem goods and services as well as human well-being objectives in order to develop more sustainable land use practices.
Advantages of landscape approach
Closer to reality than ‘ecosystem approach’ through identification with multi-stakeholder processes (negotiated outcomes)
Emerging recognition of added value of the “whole” of landscape components
Overcome the community approach which failed to address environmental problems beyond the community sphere of interest
Recent surge in thinking about valuation of environmental services and linking end-user to resource manager
Interdisciplinary concept not claimed /dominated by one perspective.
Still plenty of questions about landscape approach
Dealing with dynamics
Scale: What are the
boundaries of a landscape?
Linking scale levels: local – regional - (inter)national
How to deal with uncertainty & complexity
Challenges…
Performance measurement at a landscape scale. The complexity of assessing progress
considering multiple objectives of multiple stakeholders (benchmarks & trade-offs)
The complexity of deciding which values and ecosystem services need to be measured
The complexity of linking performance measures to management decisions and how to encourage adaptive management (Jackson, 2005).
Challenges: Dealing with high transaction costs
Negotiations cost time and money, especially when they involve large commercial interests or government bureaucracies.
Domination of technical language or legal frameworks inaccessible to the poor and to non-specialists.
Divers stakeholders with varying working relationships with and influence on government agents and decision-makers;
The parameters for decisions are often set in advance by non-local actors (policy, laws, budgets etc.)
Expectations of the role of community representatives may vary.
Challenges:
New institutional arrangements that are better suited to dynamic conditions The challenge ahead is to explore if indeed the
best way to attain a net increase in ecosystem services across a landscape is to allow more flexible short-term agreements at site level while ensuring there is a net balance of desired ecosystem services within the broader landscape.
Socio-cultural and economic dimension
Attitudes and values Agricultural industries
Local culture Farm economy
Sense of place Other industries
Sense of community
Historical development
Goals and aspirations
Natural and cultural dimension
GeologyLand use
SoilsFarm types
Topography Settlement pattern
ClimateInfrastructure
Vegetation Aesthetic qualities
Biodiversity Distinctive features
Institutional dimension
Existing local organisations
Institutions and stakeholders
Power relations
Legislation and bylaws
Land planning policies
Tenure arrangements
Developing trust and partnerships
Scenario planning
Environmental valuation
Progressive contextualization Multistakeholder analysis
STAGE 1
STAGE 2
STAGE 3
STAGE 4
STAGE 5
Landscape description Institutions Stakeholder perceptions and vision
Building landscape scenarios
Negotiated landscape scenarios and trade-offs
Monitoring for impact
New institutional arrangements
Identification of land use and management options
Multistakeholder discussion and negotiation
Action planning and implementation
Participatory monitoring
Action learning
Drivers of change (problem identification)
Environmental functions and values
Adapt and Learn
Perceptions of and experiences with the Landscape Perceptions of and experiences with the Landscape
conceptconcept
2 Groups
1: Your perceptions of the ‘pros’ and ‘cons’ of using the Landscape concept to better understand and influence the context of the MSD
2: Your own experiences relevant to Landscape approaches and the areas where you feel you lack experience or capacity
In every group choose 1 facilitator and 1journalist responsible for writing a news flash (maximum third of a page) to be distributed to everybody tomorrow morning.
Please be back at 14.30 hrs.