Biological Resource Management: Pa Pers

Public Disclosure Authorized
--- ENVIRONMENT
1J D E PA RT M E N T
X > PA P E RS PAPER NO. 85
TOWARD ENVIRONMENTALLY AND SOCIALLY SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
BIODIVERSITY SERIES
Biological Resource
Management
Integrating Biodiversity
Concerns in Rural
Development Projects
and Programs
Robin Grimble
Martyn Laidlaw
January 2002
Preparedby the NaturalResources Institute(NRI) for the

Environment and Rural Departmentsof the World Bank,
with fundingfrom the DepartmentforInternational
Development (DFID), United Kingdom.
The World Bank

O THE WORLD BANK ENVIRONMENT DEPARTMENT
Biological Resource
Management
Integrating Biodiversity Concerns
in Rural
Development Projects
and Programs
Robin Grimble
Martyn Laidlaw
January 2002
Papers in this series are not formal publications of the World Bank. They are circulated to encourage thought and discussion. The use
and citation of this paper should take this into account. The views expressed are those of the authors and should not be attnbuted to
the World Bank. Copies are available from the Environment Department, The World Bank, Room MC-5-126.
The International Bank for Reconstruction
and Development/THE WORLD BANK
1818 H Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20433, U.S.A.
Manufactured in the United States of America

First printing December 2001
D_ _ ~~~~Departffent for
_ X ~~~International
D F I D Development
www.dfid.gov.uk
enquiry@dfid.gov.uk
Public Enquiry Point: 0845 300 4100
From outside the UK: +44 1355 84 312
Contents
FOREWORD V
PREFACE Vii
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS iX
EXECUnIvE SUMMARY xi
Chapter1
Introduction 1
1.1 Background 1
1.2 The challenge 1
1.3 Human-centred perspective 2
1.4 Target audience and paper structure 3
Chapter2
Conceptual Framework 5
2.1 Clarifying definitions 5
2.2 Disturbance and change 6
2.3 Bioresource values 7
2.4 The distribution of values 8
Chapter3
Strategies and Approaches to Conservation 11
3.1 Historical trends 11
3.2 Fortress conservation 12
3.3 Community-based initiatives 12
3.4 Conservation outside protected areas 14
3.5 The current paradigm 16
Chapter4
Improving Project Design 19
4.1 Summary of the argument 19
4.2 Barriers to progress 20
4.3 A framework for action 20
Biodiversity Series
Biological Resource Management - Integrating Biodiversity Concerns in Rural Development Projects and Programs
Step 1. Analysing the system 20

Step 2. Developing a vision and rationaleforaction 22
Step 3. Implementation andfeedback 22
A caveat 22
4.4 Concluding thoughts 23
Notes 25
References 27
BoxEs
1.1 The value of bioresources to local people 3
2.1 The science of biodiversity 5
2.2 An economic valuation of bioresources 7
2.3 Different local perceptions of the use value of bioresources 9
3.1 Uneven participation and success in CAMPFIRE 14
3.2 A successful example of community-based conservation 14
3.3 Current policies and procedures towards biodiversity in the World Bank 15
3.4 The effect of integrated pest management on biodiversity 16
3.5 Lake Tanganyika: An example of complex stakeholder interests and conflicts 17
3.6 Lessons for development from conservation experience in the U.K. 17
4.1 An example of good practice: Reconciling biodiversity and developmental interests in
Ghana's wetlands 23
FIGURES
4.1 Process for identifying and understanding bioresource problems from local perspectives and
preparing rural development projects with bioresource linkages 21
4.2 The people-ecosystem web: A simplified illustration of issues, questions,
and interactions 22
TABLES
2.1 Three land-use models on the disturbance continuum 6
2.2 The economic values, benefits, and beneficiaries of bioresources 8
iv Environment Department Papers

Foreword
The idea for this study originated during my The primary focus of the study is the planning
tenure as Chief of the Land, Water, and of rural development projects outside
Natural Resources Division of the World protected areas but it also concerns questions
Bank's Environment Department. It arose out of biodiversity management at strategic and
of plans for a World Bank Handbook on policy levels removed from the front line. Thus,
Natural Habitats and Ecosystem Management apart from new projects and programmes, the
and long-standing collaboration between the study aims also to contribute to the develop-
Bank's Environment Department and the ment of country assistance strategies (CASs),
Natural Resources Institute (NRI). The study national environmental action plans (NEAPS),
was generously funded by the Natural sectoral investment programmes, and policy
Resources and Advisory Department of the development more generally, both inside and
Department for International Development outside the Bank.
(DFID) of the UK within the framework of its
collaboration with multilateral agencies. Robin The first drafts of the papers were presented to
Grimble of NRI managed the study throughout. the World Bank and DFID in June 1998. The
main findings were later presented (January
The study examines the challenges that need to 1999) at an Environmental Department
be addressed if we are to control environmental workshop and subsequently reviewed by a
damage in the development process and sustain multi-disciplinary peer review panel established
the essential contributions of biodiversity to by the Bank (November 1999). The papers were
ecosystem functioning and thereby people's further discussed and revised to constitute this
livelihoods and rural development. The publication.
purpose is to identify ways by which
biodiversity conservation can be mainstreamed Colin Rees
in the planning activities and processes of Chief, 1993-98
national governments and development Land, Water, and Natural Habitats Division
agencies such as the World Bank. Environment Department
Biodiversity Series v
Preface
This study was commissioned by the 6. Participatory initiatives in biodiversity

Environment Department of the World Bank conservation: lessons from experience
and funded by the British Department for
International Development (DFID). It arose out A study was also made of World Bank policies
of plans for a World Bank Handbook on Natural and procedures relating to biodiversity
Resources and Ecosystem Management and management and rural development together
long-standing collaboration between the Bank's with three portfolio reviews. The findings of this
Environment Department and the Natural were not published separately but incorporated
Resources Institute (NRI) UK, including a into the main paper.
contribution on Carrying Capacity (World Bank,
1996). The present paper is a distillation of findings
from the various studies. It argues that
The aim of the study is to improve bioresources and people's livelihood systems
understanding of how biological resource are intricately interrelated, and opportunities
conservation concerns can be better for intervention for development purposes must
incorporated into projects and programs that start from good understanding of different
primarily address the objective of rural people's access to and use and management of
development rather than environmental these resources, and also the incentives,
conservation. A multi-disciplinary study team constraints and institutional factors governing
was assembled and six background papers the process. The paper identifies the necessary
produced, along with the main overview paper. conditions and barriers to improvement, and
The six papers were: develops an integrated framework for use in
strategic development and the preparation of
1. Measuring biodiversity, predicting impacts, projects and programs.
and monitoring change
2. Integrated pest management and The main findings of the study were presented
biodiversity conservation by the NRI team at an Environment Department
3. Biodiversity conservation in agricultural seminar in January 1999. Following further
landscapes in Britain: relevant issues for work the two volume draft report was peer
developing countries reviewed by a multi-disciplinary panel
4. Reconciling biodiversity and development established by the Bank (November/ December
issues in practice: the search for a win-win 1999). This overview paper takes full account of
situation in Ghana's coastal wetlands the detailed and valuable comments received
5. Strategies for biodiversity conservation: but the views expressed are those of the authors
examples from Tanzania who take final responsibility for content.
Biodiversity Series vii

Life on earth has evolved into a unique, complex and beautiful phenomenon, in which there is
both change and stability. The stability resultsfrom interlocking checks and balances, in which
every species plays its role with little or no awareness of the true complexity of the biological,
ecological and physical dynamics that constitute the system of which it is part. 7he rate and
scale of human impact on the global ecology is such that it is now necessary to think about these
system dynamics, and whether it is possible that our species could engineerits own decline or
even demise. This is the challenge of sustainability.
Changes in the global ecology indicate that we need to become more aware of the consequences of
our actions, and to start to manage our affairs more consciously than has been the case in the
past. This may mean that it will be necessary to evolve new political and economic structures
and decision-making mechanisms in orderto respond to these emerging global demands.
-Anthony Clayton and Nicholas Radcliffe,

Sustainability:A Systems Approach (1996)
viii Environment Department Papers

Acknowledgments
The idea for this study came from Colin Rees, authors of six background papers: Tony
then Chief of the Land, Water and Natural Russell-Smith, Keith Shawe, Richard Zanre, Lia
Habitats Division of the World Bank's Van Broekhoven, Monica Janowski, and
Environment Department. We gratefully Richard Lamboll. Finally we would also like to
acknowledge generous help and support given thank Mike Morris (NRI), Izabella Koziell
by Colin himself, as well as, Gonzalo Castro (DFID), and Felicity Proctor (DFID's
and Gunars Platais, both of the Environment representative in the Rural Development
Department's biodiversity team. We should Department of the World Bank) for their
also thank the members of the peer-review support and helpful contributions to the
panel for insightful comments, and Bank staff paper's development.
from the regional and technical departments
with whom we consulted too numerous to The study was generously funded by the Rural
mention individually. Livelihoods and Environment Division of the
Department for International Development
We have also enjoyed and benefited from (DFID) of the UK within the framework of its
healthy debate with colleagues of the Natural collaborative programme in rural development
Resources Institute (NRI) who sat on the with the World Bank. Without this support the
advisory panel. We would like to thank the study would not have been possible.
Biodiversity Series ix
Executive Summary
The paper examines how to better The paper reviews the historical progression in
accommodate biological resource concerns in strategies and approaches to conservation up to
rural development projects where poverty the present day. Most development agencies
alleviation and welfare improvement are the have moved well beyond protectionist
primary aims and considerations. It notes that approaches to conservation and, at least at a
habitat change and land-use intensification theoretical level, recognise the need for
outside Protected Areas (in their various forms) community participation in bioresource
are to an extent inevitable given population and management. However, there is limited
economic growth, human value systems, and understanding of the operational means of
the demands of the market. The challenges it achieving participation in large rural
addresses are to ensure that change and development projects and programmes or for
development occur without unnecessary loss of representing the economic and livelihood
bioresources, that sustainable as well as interests of key stakeholder groups in these. To
productive systems are established, and that the help overcome this, the paper develops a broad
social groups most dependent on biological planning framework that incorporates detailed
resources do not suffer. analysis of the perspectives and economic
interests of different stakeholders, and the
The term biodiversity is used in different ways, representation of these interests in project and
often to describe the wider values of nature programme design.
associated with abundance as well as its
variability and variety. To avoid confusion, the In conclusion the paper reinforces two
paper uses the term biological resources in overlapping themes:
considering the totality of economic goods and
services that nature provides and reserves the * That every rural development project,
term biodiversity for use in its strict or scientific including agricultural projects, is location-
sense. It also considers the distribution of use specific and it is critical to appreciate the
and non-use values and the way these benefit importance of local realities, particularly the
different groups in society, differentiating detailed interactions between local people
between those who suffer and those who gain and biological resources.
from bioresource loss and habitat change (or
indeed conservation). While there are * That while every project must be assessed at
undoubted synergies between development and an overall (macro) level, it is equally critical
conservation, there are also trade-offs and to consider micro-economic incentives, and
conflicts of interest between stakeholders that particularly the cost-benefit distributions of
are important to identify and understand at an project impact and biological resource
early stage in project development. change.
Biodiversity Series xi
The paper suggests that failure to attend to undermine the broader goals of poverty
these issues in the preparation and design of alleviation). It is hoped that application of the
interventions can lead to resistance to project methodology put forward will contribute to the
activities, poor uptake of messages and design of effective interventions and increase
technologies, and unforeseen negative impacts the likelihood of project success.
on groups of stakeholders (which may
xii Environment Department Papers

1 Introduction
1.1 Background up with conservation and the sustained use of

wild resources while others are driven by
The critical role that biological resources play in market opportunities and investment in the
sustaininvg human life has in the last two mre potnfe n neteti h
decudestain eingehmnsliferhas in
thelastetconversion of natural systems to productive
decades received considerable if belated
attention. In 1992 a broad framework for the agriculture.
conservation and use of the world's biological Biological resources, their management, and
resources-the Convention on Biological people's lvelihood systems are thus complex
Diversity (CBD)-was agreed by the United and intricately inter-connected. In this paper we
Nations Conference on Enviroanment and develop the argument that opportunities for
Development (the Earth Summit). Despite intervention designed for the purpose of rural
increasing recognition, however, the world's development must start from a knowledge and
biological resources continue to be lost at an understanding of what these resources
alarming rate, and particularly so in developing contribute to different sets of people, the
countries where many of the remaining economic incentives and institutional factors
resources are concentrated. governing the process, and the costs and
benefits of change. We suggest that failure to
The reasons for loss are complex and locally-taecoutfmirlvleon i-
specific but frequently relate to the processes of environ ntal inractions andtec-
an agriclturalenvironrnental
habitatconverion interactions and the cost-benefit
hintensifiationversion agiulturaldh distributions of project or programme impact
intensification brought about by demographic can seriously threaten their performance and
and market-driven pressures (Pagiola and cnsrosytrae hi efrac n
aeendbmarket-driv Pressures (Fageinlatadby the lead to less than anticipated economic benefits
Kellenberg, 1997). Pressures are inflated by the anunesarbilgcleoue
'public good' characteristics of biological adain.
resources and difficulties of intemalising values v
in land-use management. The immediate land- 1.2 The challenge
managers in the developing world are
commonly the many millions of farmers, A central challenge facing development
livestock keepers, forest dwellers and other sets agencies is how to better accommodate
of rural people, both men and women, whose ecological concerns in rural development
livelihoods are closely dependent upon the projects and programs where the fundamental
availability and productivity of biological and aims are poverty reduction and economic
other natural resources. Their situations may development, particularly raising the living
not be identical, however, and different standards of poor rural people. Associated with
stakeholder groups have different interests in this is the notion of sustainability and the
the way the resources are exploited and assurance that future generations will not suffer
managed. Some have livelihoods closely bound from today's 'short-termist' decisions and
Biodiversity Series
actions. Development and conservation have particularly the wild resources and niche
much in common and it is imperative to seek habitats of modified landscapes, together with
convergence whenever this is possible. the natural ecological functions and services
However the two' are'not always rnutually such as plant pollination and nutrient cycling
supportive and trade-offs between development that they support.' As discussed in section 2.1,
and conservation sometimes occur, perhaps the term biological resources is used to
increasingly with population growth and other encompass not just biodiversity but also the
pressures for change. Unfortunately these trade- totality and abundance of living organisms (see
offs are often ignored or downplayed in project section 2.1). 2
and programmne preparation and seldom form a
considered and costed part of development 1.3 Human-centred perspective
planning. There are two distinct ways of considering the
value of biological resources and the case for
The focus of the study is on rural development their conservation that can give rise to major
in landscapes already modified or converted by differences in understanding (Pearce, 1994;
human activity, where socio-economic Grimbie, 1996). The ecocentic paradigm suggests
development rather than ecosystem that all living species have a moral and equal
conservation is the primary concern of local right to exist. In this argument all species are
people and development planners alike. It is deemed to have an intrinsicvalue irrespective of
worth a reminder that few if any landscapes are any value thai humans derive from or attribute
untouched by human activity and most- to them. The anthropocentrticparadigm, on the
perhaps 80 percent or more of the globe-are other hand, views biological resources as a
largely a product of it. Unlike national parks collection of goods and services that support the
and other protected areas, modified landscapes maintenance and enhancement of human life.
are managed primarily for productive purposes Conservation is necessary where their loss
such as agriculture in its various forms, reduces the stock of natural capital and the
livestock rearing or commercial forestry. By resource base available for current or potential
global standards, these areas are not generally, future use. Their loss may also endanger local
seen as biologically rich or diverse and and global life-support systems and ultimately
biological resource management takes a back threaten the future of humankind.
seat. The importance of biological resources in
these areas should not be minimised, however, For both theoretical and practical reasons we
and they form an integral part of the livelihood take an anthropocentric position in this study:
systems and diets of many of the world's
poorest people (see Box 1.1). * The ecocentric concept of intrinsic value is
unmeasurable or even unknowable, and
In this context the study examines the issues to seemingly has little utility for practical
be addressed to minimise environmental management. Without some assessment of
damage and retain wherever possible the relative importance there is no rational way
essential contributions that biological resources for choosing or prioritising between actions3
make to rural livelihoods and social and
economic development. The study covers both * Rural development is itself anthropocentric,
agricultural biodiversity-the range of soil, aimed at reducing poverty and improving
plant and animal organisms, species and the welfare of people, particularly the poor.
ecological functions that contribute to If this is the case, and with the proviso that
agricultural productivity-and more development should be sustainable, people-
2 Environment Department Papers

Introduction
Box 1.1
The value of bioresources to local people
Though many bioresources do not enter markets or provide financial income, they contribute significantly to
many people's nutrition and livelihoods. They are particularly important in times of hardship and in marginal
areas, especially for the very poor, women and children. The IIED document "The Hidden Harvest" (1992)
identifies some examples:
* wild foods from common property are estimated to contribute some 20% of the nutrition of the poor in the
dry season in parts of India
* in 1973, the Berti tribe in Sudan survived a famine in large part by collecting wild grass seeds
* unmarried and divorced women in Usambara in Tanzania support themselves by the collection and selling
wild leaves and berries
* some 41 percent of the Karimojong population in Uganda subsisted largely off wild foods in a famine in 1980.
The following uncultivated products are of value:
* wild foods such as fruit, berries, nuts, fungi, bush-meat and insects such as grasshoppers
* housing construction and roofing materials, such as poles and grasses
* raw materials (e.g. rattan, raffia, reeds) for manufacture of furniture, tools & ropes
* traditional herbal medicines
* clothing and bedding (e.g. bark cloth and kapok)
* fuel for cooking and heating (e.g. firewood and charcoal)
* animal feed, fodder and litter.
In agriculture, bioresources provide:
* inputs such as manure, compost and mulch.
* crop and livestock varieties, cultivars and landraces (including wild relatives)
* wild and domesticated pollinators and associated products (honey and wax)
* soil organisms that contribute to soil fertility and nutrient recycling
* predators of important pests that damage cultivated crops
* coppiced poles and other products
* livestock feed and forage.
More generally, bioresources provide:
* protection against the adverse effects of climatic variability and extremes
* resilience and maintenance of a healthy agro-ecosystem
* new potential crops and livestock types
* genetic material for breeding improved yields and pest/ disease/ drought resistance
* culturally and spiritually preferred environments for human habitat and leisure.
centred objectives logically take precedence vital to ensure that the social groups most
over other considerations. dependent upon biological resources are not
harmed by development or habitat change, or
In taking our people-centred position, we give are properly compensated where they are.
central consideration to distributional as well as
global aspects of biological resources, and 1.4 Target audience and paper structure
particularly the values ascribed to them by The paper is targeted at the following sets of
different sets of local people. These people, people:
many of whom are directly dependent on
biological resources for their livelihoods, are * Task managers, desk officers, and others in
commonly under-represented in society both development agencies such as the World
economically and politically. In both Bank and national government with front
development and conservation planning, it is line responsibility for planning and
Biodiversity Series 3
managing rural development projects and The paper is divided into four chapters. Chapter
programmes 2 outlines the conceptual basis of the study,
discussing the values and relevance of
* Staff in development agencies with higher- biological resources in their various forms to
level responsibilities, able to determine or different sets of people. Chapter 3 reviews
influence policy direction, strategic different approaches to nature and biodiversity
thinking, operational procedures, and 'good conservation over the years and the thinking
practice' and strategies guiding practice today. Chapter 4
brings the paper to a practical conclusion by
* While not the primary target audience, the identifying the necessary conditions and
paper will also benefit specialists and barriers for improvement, and developing a
technicians who conduct professional broad framework for planning rural
studies and contribute to project and development.
programme design and management.
4 Enviromnent Departmnent Papers

2 Conceptual Framework
2.1 Clarifying definitions millions of them. Moreover, the variability focus

leads to an emphasise on physical attributes
Biodiversity is anc oen to multip (particularly genes and species) and underplay
interpretafions and meanings and as such is the values associated with its less tangible
vaguely defined and understood. The most functions such as pollination and nutrient
widely accepted definition is set out in the cycling, and on a wider scale, its contribution to
Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD, 1992) watershedp on a nd ecos trilience.
in terms of the variety and variability of life.
This is broken down into its genetic, species and These dilemmas move us from biology into the
(generally) its ecosystem components with world of social science and the values and
secondary reference to the ecological complexes benefits derived by humankind from nature.
of which they are part (see Box 2.1). In everyday Some authors have argued the need to separate
parlance this may be simplified to refer to rare the value of diversity from the wider attributes
and threatened habitats and animals of global of biological resources (Aylward, 1991). Others
importance. have stretched the concept of biodiversity in
such a way to encompass not only diversity but
The emphasis on variety and variability in to include ideas not associated with variability
scientific interpretations leads to questions alone. Indeed, increasingly commonly the term
concerning its local (as well as global) validity, is used more or less as a synonym for nature in
and at what place and scale diversity is general, and the terms nature and biodiversity
necessary and should be assessed. The focus on conservation are used interchangeably.
variability also underplays the practical
importance of quantity and abundance. One bee We believe it is important to reduce confusion
is hardly important by itself; its value to by distinguishing between biodiversity, defined
pollination is the fact that there are many in its scientific sense as the variability and
Box 2.1
The science of biodiversity
As noted above, the scientific definition of biodiversity focuses on the variety and variability of biological life
considered in terms of its hierarchical composition at genetic, species and ecosystem levels. All species and
differences between them are the result of evolutionary change caused by the effect of natural selection on
genetic variability within the ancestral heritage.
Levels in the hierarchy are not discrete, however, and there is overlap and connectivity between them all. In
effect, they are ways of looking at the same thing at different scales. Many genes are found within species,
many species are found within ecosystems, and many ecosystems are found within the biosphere. Thus ulti-
mately all levels can be defined by their genes.
variety of life, and the abundance of living end of1the spectrum lie highly-specialised
resources and ecological functions found in all. commercial farms and plantations practising
landscapes throughout the world. We suggest industrial agricultural and animal-rearing
that biodiversity and bioabundance are two systems, using artificial chemicals, heavy
distinct qualities associated with biological mechanisation and purchased inputs, creations
resources, each of which are of potential major that in the future can be expected to
importance to local people and others. In this increasingly incorporate genetically modified
study we use the term biological resources, or organisms (GMOs).
bioresources,to encapsulate diversity and
abundance when taken together, and reserve the In between lie a vast array of partially
term biodiversity for use in its narrower sense.! converted agricultural landscapes whose
In Table 2.2 we distinguish between the two sets position along the disturbance continuum can
of value (diversity and abundance) and give be assessed in terms of input or output intensity.
examples of lik.ly
ben.eficiaries ofA movement from subsistence to market based
ventures and a rise in resource productivity
2.2 Disturbance and change may parallel this disturbance. Land extensive
systems include shifting or slash and burn
In bioresource terms, the world's landscapes can systems barely discernible from natural forests,
be viewed along a 'disturbance' continuum, traditional mixed crop systems producing a
from purely natural states to the artificial variety of food for domestic consumption or
creations of man (Table 2.1). At one end lie sale, and numerous systems incorporating tree
pristine ecosystems, though apart from the crops and livestock combinations.
tundra it would be difficult to find completely
natural landscapes untouched by local people There are always changes, and frequently losses,
(e.g. even remote tropical forests are used by in both biodiversity and bioabundance across
pygmies and others for hunting and gathering). the disturbance continuum, as intensification
Disregarding the built environment, at the other and specialisation continues (Table 2.1). With
Table 2. 1. Three land-use models on the disturbance continuum

Natural state Partialconversion Total conversion
Land system Pristine natural Multiple types and degrees Predominantly man-
landscapes and of conversion and made systems and
habitats intensification mono-crop production
Bioresources Generally diverse Diversity & abundance Intensification leads to

and abundant dependent upon the losses in diversity and
intensity and nature of abundance
management
Market values Low, but under- Values dependent upon High, but may be
estimated because nature and degree of overestimated and
functions & values change disregard external costs
unknown/ unpriced
Sustainability. All states may managed sustainability but threats and uncertainties to both
biodiversity and abundance greatly increase across the continuum

Conceptual Framework
the arguable exception of industrial agriculture, While this framework is helpful for
however, losses are not absolute and many conceptualising the total economic value of
managed as well as natural landscapes can bioresources, there are many theoretical and
incorporate a great deal of environmental value. practical difficulties in its use. These values are
The ecological values of these landscapes is generally extremely difficult to measure and
often only recognised with development. In apply, including contingency valuation
Britain, for example, conservation is seen to techniques that assess people's willingness-to-
require the return to the relatively-extensive pay for conservation. Moreover the values
farming systems of the recent past-now seen to assigned are not 'socially neutral' and may be
contain much biodiversity and to provide many reckoned differently by different stakeholder
valuable ecological services-rather than to the groups. Intemational comparison poses a
natural state and vegetation of the area. particular dilemma; for example, it would
hardly seem ethical for (inevitably) vague
2.3 Bioresource values estimates of the existence value of the North to
We earlier alluded to the fact that both dominate the direct-use values of poor local
biodiversity and bioabundance provide a range people in marginal parts of developing
of goods and services of value to humans and it countries.
is these that drive anthropocentric arguments
for conservation. A number of analytical We mentioned above that some of the values of
frameworks for the economic valuation of the bioresources relate to the abundance of the
environment have been developed which we resource while others are derived from diversity
have applied to bioresources. These are itself. The utility of fuelwood collected by rural
described in Box 2.2 and developed further in people is likely to be more dependent on its
Table 2.2. availability and abundance than its diversity,
Box 2.2
An economic valuation of bioresources
The primary distinction in valuing bioresources is between use and non-use values. Use values refer to the
purposeful use of bioresources to gain some economic benefit or utility. Goods can be consumed by the house-
hold that hunts, collects or grows them, used as raw materials, or traded and sold. Other use values relate to
activities such as trophy hunting, ecotourism, and bird-watching. Indirect use values are associated with the
ecological functions that maintain the stability and productivity of the environment. Locally, wild pollinators
such as bees and insects are vital for crop production as are soil organisms for nutrient cycling and fertility
maintenance. On a wider scale values include the protection bioresources afford water catchments and hydro-
logical regimes, and the contribution of forests and vegetation to atmospheric balance and climate regulation.
Bioresources can also be valued for the aesthetic, cultural, spiritual or recreational benefits they provide.
Bioresources also provide intangible non-use benefits relating to their potential future use or to their very
existence. Species that currently have no known use, or are themselves unknown, may yet become important
foodstuffs or provide valuable medicinal compounds or genetic resources in the future. Similarly, species that
are currently unimportant to an ecological complex could in future be critical. Acknowledgement of present
uncertainty and the potential for future values suggests that society may be willing to pay for the option of
maintaining diversity.
Existence values represent the satisfaction that an individual derives from the knowledge that a given element
of biodiversity exists, irrespective of whether that individual ever expects to use or benefit from it directly.
Such value may be associated with ethical, moral, or cultural beliefs, reflecting, for example, the concem that
many feel for endangered species such as whales or tigers, or threatened ecosystems such as rainforests.
though people will also be aware of critical rural development lies the vexed question of
differences in the burning and heating qualities cost/benefit distributions. Most but not all local
of different species. In other situations it is the values are direct use values, which provide
diversity which is of direct value: for example, a immediate and practical benefits to local people.
farmer may plant a range of different crops and At a regional level direct use values are less in
varieties so as to minimise damage from pest evidence and the contributions made by indirect
attack or weather extremes, or to take functions and services become more important. At
advantage of local micro-climate and soil-types. the international and global scale, the
The way farmers deliberately select and grow a importance of non-use existence value becomes
large number of local varieties of beans in the paramount, though retaining options for
Tanzanian central highlands is discussed in potential future use can also be critical (Table
Lamboll and Van Broekhoven (1999). 2.2).
Generally, then, biodiversity is used to reduce
risk and improve sustainabilty and productivity, It is now accepted that structural and
and forms an essential part of many poor institutional matters such as property rights,
people's livelihood systems. local culture and resource access are likely to
2.4 The distribution of values govem the distribution of values in any
particular situation (Hanna and Munasinghe,
At the heart of the debate about the 1995). For example, indigenous people with
conservation of bioresources and its relevance to long-standing access rights to a forest may
Table 2.2. The economic values, benefits, and beneficiaries of bioresources

Use values Non-use values
Direct use values
Consumptive Nonconsumptive I Indirect use values Option values -Existence values
Definition: goods for Non-tradable or Ecological functions Possible future Satisfaction from
home consumption, subtractive for maintaining use or knowledge of
manufacture or sustainability and serendipity existence
trade productivity
Example values from

diversity: Aesthetic value Diversity of Gene pool; Special concern
mixed crop varieties; of diverse species assists potential for diverse
mixed food landscapes; some ecosystem medicines and species and
combinations birdwatching resilience and drugs ecosystems
stability
Example values from
abundance: Birdwatching and Carbon storage, None identified Cultural and
food, fuel, fodder, recreation nutrient cycling, spiritual assets
raw materials photosynthesis,
waste assimilation
Example
beneficiaries: Visitors and Downstream users The young and Environment
poor rural people tourists of of land, water, and future lobbies and
including women various kinds energy; the world generations concerned people
community
Source: Developed from Barbier, 1992; Pearce and Moran, 1994; Blaikie and Jeanrenaud, 1996; and Hodge, 1997.

Conceptual Framework
utilise a variety of non-timber forest products, Box 2.3

both animal and vegetable. Similarly, forest- lox 2.3
margin groups may supplement their Different local perceptions of the
livelihoods with wild products and retain
sacred areas (forest groves) for spiritual While wild foods may be an important part of the
purposes (see Box 2.3). Collecting and gathering diets and livelihoods of some rural people, others
wild products from common land is frequently may consider them weeds or pests of agricultural
the task
mosthe of task
women
ffectedbymen and
dirit is they
lss ty who
whonare ooftenn
, farmers crops. For example:
*Caterpillars are widely eaten and marketed but
most affected by their loss. In contrast, farmers are a major pest of many crops such as cotton
with secure cultivation rights are likely to * Green leafy plants are extracted as weeds from
benefit more from the agricultural service agricultural fields but provide valuable addi-
attributes of bioresources such as the mulching tions to the diets of many people and domestic
and composting properties of microbes and soil animals
Termites can be an important food supplement
organisms. in many parts of southern Africa but reduce
yields and handicap cultivation in other situa-
As the values of bioresources are unevenly tions.
distributed in society, it follows that the costs In circumstances such as these, different stake-
and benefits of loss or conservation are also holders may view the same bioresource quite dif-
unevenly spread. It is now well-established that ferently, a cost to one being a benefit to another.
attempts to conserve a habitat by evicting, The complexity of dealing with such issues is il-
lustrated on a wider scale by different sets of in-
restricting access, or preventing certain usage terest towards the conservation or conversion of
has an opportunity cost borne by those directly forest land. In the Himalayan foothills, for ex-
dependent on the area. Similarly, developmental ample, livestock keepers practising seasonal tran-
activities such as road construction or shumance may clash at certain times of the year
groundwater development schemes impact in with those groups and government departments
groundwater development with an economic interest in maintaining forest
various ways on the economic interests of plantations.
different rural populations. As stakeholders
themselves, development agencies and Source: lIED 1992.
conservation bodies make policy choices that
implicitly make trade-offs between different therefore, to identify ways to minimise trade-
objectives. Despite increasing use of project offs between environmental, economic and
designations designed to encompass the twin equity objectives, and where at all possible
objectives of conservation and development develop win-win-win situations. We return to
(such as 'sustainable development' or this question later but at this point can indicate
'community-based conservation', not all two needs. Firstly, to give priority to protecting
activities are beneficial to all and difficult those elements of biodiversity that provide most
judgements have to be made between short and benefits to local rural populations, especially the
long-term objectives. poor; and secondly, to ensure that the benefits
obtained from conserving bioresources
With the rise in global populations and the outweigh the full operational and opportunity
scarcity value of natural resources, there is an costs of conservation. It is important that this is
increasing demand for the goods and services done not just as a project-level calculation but
that bioresources provide and especial concem also from the viewpoints of the stakeholder
for unnecessary loss. A key policy objective is, groups most directly concerned.
Strategies and Approaches
3 to Conservation
The word 'biodiversity' is a relatively recent one good began in the 1860s when legislation was
that has become widely used only since the passed to widen public access to common lands
mid-1980s; prior to this most of the approaches (e.g. the London parks such as Clapham
to bioresource conservation referred to nature or Common). Running parallel to this was a
wildlife conservation. Though many of the growing romantic interest in nature and also a
issues and challenges remain the same, the scientific concern. In 1869 the philosopher and
considerations have moved well-beyond the economist J S Mill advanced arguments for the
scope of earlier approaches. This chapter briefly preservation of species for their own sake,
reviews historical developments that have led to independent of their economic utility (Western
the current situation and considers the issues and Wright, 1994). Out of this developed the
that guide conservation practice today. notion of a nature reserve managed for its wild
and diverse species.
3.1 Historical trends
References to environmental degradation go On a much grander scale conservation
back to Egyptian and Grecian times, notably movements developed in the United States, led
Plato's description of an over-grazed landscape by John Muir founder of the Sierra Club, and
in Attica as being "like the skeleton of a sick other spiritualists and romantics. The dominant
man, all the fat and soft earth having been theme was the attempt to reserve nature for its
wasted away, and only the bare framework of intrinsic value and in separation from humans.
the land being left" (Rhodes and Odell, 1992). The fact that most environments are shaped by
Early attempts by authorities to protect the human activities was not recognized and the
environment were generally undertaken for economic interests of local communities were
utilitarian or recreational reasons, particularly entirely discounted. Thus Yellowstone, the first
for use by the powerful. In Lower Egypt, for in a series of national parks, was established in
example, the Pharoes retained areas for 1872 to preserve the pristine wilderness,
hawking and hunting and in England William evicting the native Shoshone, Crow and
the Conqueror extendedforest law to large tracts Blackfoot Indians in the process. Only later were
of land (including the present day New Forest) developing tensions, such as those between
"to protect and provide for sport and the preservationists and forest logging interests,
provision of game" for his retinue. publicly acknowledged. In the Roosevelt era,
stand-offs arose over plans to flood a valley in
The rise of modern conservation consciousness the Yosemite National Park for the provision of
in Britain gathered momentum in the late 19th water to San Francisco, followed in the post
century with urbanisation and the World War II period by a series of water
disappearance of wildlands. State involvement conflicts. The split later widened when the
in the regulation of natural areas for the public animal rights and deep ecology movements
surfaced and began to champion the interests of living within the park were evicted and
species and nature on ethical and moral excluded from use of the natural resources on
grounds (Western and Wright, 1994). which they had previously been dependent.
3.2 Fortress conservation The outcome of this was often ongoing

In developing countries, early conservationists confrontation between the PA authorities and
were similarly motivated by the desire to local people. In East Africa the Maasai and other
protect wildlife and nature in their pristine and pastoralists continued to graze their livestock,
undisturbed condition. The main focus was the hunt game (or poach, depending on
establishment and management of protected perspective) and cultivate land within newly
areas (PAs) in the form of forest reserves, nature established park boundaries. In an effort to
reserves and national parks. Early initiatives prevent such practices, the authorities were
included the establishment of forest reserves in forced to commit greater resources to
the West Indies and a botanical garden in South maintaining and patrolling boundaries and
Africa (1820). The momentum to preserve forest enforcing regulations. Problems became more
and game in various parts of the colonial serious over time, brought about by increasing
empires built up towards the turn of the population pressure on PAs and surrounding
century, and there was renewed activity after areas, and the escalating cost of protection. The
World War II (e.g. in East Africa). During this fencing of areas sometimes also had a
period the colonial focus on hunting and game deleterious effect on the wildlife for which the
management merged with a growing PAs had been established, particularly where
intemational interest in wildlife conservation, fences crossed migratory routes.
and many controlled hunting areas and game
reserves were reclassified as national parks The problems of fortress conservation with its
(Adams and Hulme, 1997). top down and centralised approach to PA
management generally failed to protect the
The process of identification, establishment and wildlife as fully as intended and often caused
management of all such areas was top-down hardship to local communities. The attempt to
and politically-led, with selection taking place separate conservation from development
centrally and implementation by government concerns was increasingly challenged and the
ministries. Emphasis was given to protecting approach was ultimately overtaken by another
areas of high species-diversity or those where discourse often termed community-based
high-profile animals or natural habitats were conservation (Westem and Wright, 1994; Adams
threatened. Selection criteria were based on the and Hulme, 1997).
need to protect features of global (or Northem?) 3.3 Community-based initiatives
importance and local interests were barely
recognized or taken into account. The In contrast to fortress conservation,
management aim was to minimize human community-based conservation (CBC) is based
disturbance witin PA boundaries so that on an improved understanding of the linkages
natural, ecological processes would maintain and mutual dependence between conservation
the environment and continue to provide and local people, and the need for people to
habitat suitable for wildlife. As in the early participate in conservation activities. It is the
years of conservation experience in the USA, decisions and actions of local people that
this followed a protectionist or 'fortress commonly bring about bioresource loss and the
conservation' approach in which local people approach sees working with them, and getting
12 Envirornent Department Papers

Strategies and Approaches to Conservation
them on management's side, as being of key programs, there is only limited evidence of
importance to conservation. Development of local people's views being assessed and
the CBC narrative runs alongside improved incorporated in the planning, management
understanding of the economic rationality of and implementation of projects (IIED, 1994;
poor rural people and growing recognition of Brandon, 1993; Little, 1994). Moreover there is
the depth and value of indigenous knowledge. little recognition of the complexities of
participation and methodological difficulties
This linking of conservation and development are often swept under the carpet (Amstein,
interests was developed and reiterated in 1969). Many programs still fail to fully analyse
many documents important to biodiversity problems from stakeholder perspectives or
conservation, most notably the Biodiversity properly consider who bears the cost of
Convention, signed by some 170 nations at the conservation (see the example in Box 3.1). This
United Nations Conference on Environment is especially critical when what is to be
and Development in 1992. Numerous attempts conserved is of national or global value but of
have been made to operationalise the approach limited relevance to poor local people.
including UNESCO's Man and Biosphere
program (which promoted buffer zones 3.4 Conservation outside protected areas
around PAs in an attempt to meet the needs of Though conservation practice has moved on a
both local communities and the PAs
themselves), and integrated conservation and lon wa frmtelgc,ffrrs
dhevselopmes),ant projerats. endenst tiong
the conservation, conservation funding is still
development projects. Understanding thedoiaebytesabhmnad
interdependence of nature and local people has dmntdb h salsmn n
since been taken further: for example, the management of Protected Areas (PAs) chosen
sincebeentakenfurter: or exmple thefor their contribution to global biodiversity and
theme of the African Regional Biodiversity f t c
Forum held in Mombassa in February 2000 was containing high species diversity or rare or
"Using Biodiversity to Strengthen endemic habitats under threat (World Bank,
Livelihoods". The aim of the forum was to 2000). Even where project activities are
"explore ways to integrate poverty alleviation classified as relating to conservation outside
considerations into local, national and regional PAs, this often means the management of
actions aimed at conserving, using sustainably, buffer zones rather than areas with no
and sharing equitably, the benefits of connection to PAs at all. Such a continued
biodiversity." focus on PAs reflects the continued nature or
wildlife conservation mindset and the
The positive legacy of community-based- emphasis this places on the protection of
conservation is thus now widely recognised, natural habitats and rare and threatened
including the need to involve local people in species (see Box 3.2).
the planning and implementation of projects.
The jury is out, however, as to whether the As more and more natural ecosystems are
structural shift has been as successful in reality converted or heavily modified, exclusive
as in rhetoric. The oVerarching aim remains reliance on a PA network becomes less viable.
one of bioresource conservation with the Examination of environmental policy and
unwritten assumption that, when done in the practice in developed countries demonstrates
right way, conservation is of automatic benefit that managed areas, as well as natural
to local people. While most if not all landscapes, contain much of environmental
conservation practitioners now advocate the value and should be considered as important
involvement of local communities in their for conservation (see the UK case study, Box
Box 3.1
Uneven participation and success in CAMPFIRE-
The structure of the well-known CAMPFIRE initiative in Zimbabwe provides for decentralisation of decision-
making and the devolution of resource management responsibilities, passing incentives for conservation man-
agement down to local communities. The devolution of power has had considerable success in changing atti-
tudes from dependency on central institutions to self-reliance and self-sufficiency. In the process, local institutions
have also been strengthened in terms of project management and accountability.
However, whilst comrmunity participation has been effectively implemented in some areas, in others this has
been much less successful. The problem has usually concerned the nature and effectiveness of the devolution
process. In some cases devolution has gone no further than the district councils, leaving local communities
frustrated and powerless, let alone the individual households where resource management decisions are com-
monly made. This has led to misunderstanding and sometimes hostility towards CAMPFIRE, increasing mis-
trust of district councils, lack of effective environmental controls, and intolerance of wildlife that cause dam-
age and provide no local benefit. Environmentally the result has been negative, with continued illegal poaching
and further encroachment into wildlife areas. The problems of participatory conservation management have
been more acute in marginal areas with fewer elephants or other wildlife valued by tourists and hunters, and
thereby attracting less finance.
Source: Janowsky and Zanr6, 1999.
3.6). Many highly modified and fragmented Many of the world's poor live in such
landscapes in developed and developing agricultural landscapes greatly changed from
nations alike provide habitats for a large variety their natural state and where natural resources
of adaptable and new species and for the are exploited for productive purposes. 4 The
numerous ecological functions that sustain
agriculture (Srivastava et al, 1996). Exclusive of donontrntio frinhareasnt
concentration on global concerns for their rarity poverty reduction and welfare enhancemen
or diversity is no longer appropriate and it is and, though sustainability concerns are also
necessary to widen our appreciation and considered important, bioresource
consider the value of bioresources in all areas conservation as such usually takes a back seat.
and to all people. This is despite the recognition of the role wild
Box 3.2
A successful example of community-based conservation
The sal forests of West Bengal in India had traditionally provided an important resource for local people.
However the assumption of state ownership and control undermined traditional property management re-
gimes, and the forest became badly degraded with no standing trees outside village environs, and in some
areas even tree roots were extracted for fuelwood. Local people were aware of the negative changes arising
from forest degradation, and reported impacts such as temperature increase, lower rainfall, drier earth, diffi-
culty in finding wood for tools and fuel, and drying up of water sources.
The subsequent establishment of Forest Protection Committees returned a degree of local control over forest
use to the villagers and re-established incentives for local people to protect forest areas. This has reportedly
resulted in forest regeneration with local people citing benefits such as reduced insect attack on rice crops (due
to increased bird populations), improved water infiltration and less runoff, and cleaner air. Villagers say the
forest is important in cleansing the air of disease and generally contributing to a healthy environment.
Source: Janowsky and Zanre, volurne 2.

Box 3.3
Current policies and procedures towards biodiversity in the World Bank
World Bank recognition of the importance and contributions of biodiversity for many years has focused on
PAs and the global values of rare and threatened species and habitats. In screening projects for Environmental
Assessment purposes, current Bank guidance highlights the need to identify "the potentialforsignificantconver-
sion or degradation of critical or other natural habitats" (OP/BP 4.04). Natural habitats are described as those
where "(i) the ecosystem's biological communities areformed largely by native plant and animal species and (ii) human
activity has not essentially modified the area's primary ecologicalfunctions." Critical natural habitats are those se-
lected on the basis of "species richness;degree of endemism ,rarity, and vulnerabilityof component species; representa-
tiveness; and the integrity of ecosystem processes.
The emphasis on natural and critical habitats is acknowledged in the Bank's second Environment Assessment
(EA) review (World Bank, 1996) which states that: "many EAs appear to be biased towards non-degradedforest
habitats as the principalconcern, even though other habitats can be importantforbiodiversity and its conservation. Few
of the EAs exploited opportunities within the project to cbnserve or increasebiodiversity even where this would be benefi-
cial for people in the project area." It is important to note, however, that there is an ongoing shift in the Bank to
correct these distortions, including the consideration of biodiversity issues in modified habitats and improv-
ing the integration of conservation with mainstream developmental activities.
bioresources play in the livelihoods of rural impacts of activities undertaken; for example,
communities, and especially of the poor.5 agroforestry and IPM activities are rated as
having positive effects on biodiversity, whilst
In the case of the World Bank, an examination pesticide use and plantation cropping of cash
of biodiversity in the agricultural sector crops are rated as negative activities. The
portfolio (ana and Cooke, 1996) shows that danger of such simplification is recognised by
only 40 out of 402 (less than 10%) projects authors: while IPM may generally have a
explicitly involved the conservation and favourable or neutral effect on biodiversity, in
management of biodiversity, and even in these some instances it may impact negatively on
biodiversity is generally treated as a separate local livelihoods (See box 3.4 and Russell-
issue rather than integrated with other project Smith, volume 2).
activities. The paper also indicates that
environmental assessment of agriculture- 3.5 The current paradigm
sector projects rarely directly discuss During the 1980s the notion of sustainable
biodiversity issues, and where they do, it is development developed, centred on the 'wise
usually in the context of the likely effect of use' of natural resources. 6 The work
project activities on PAs, or the establishment culminated in the Rio Declaration (1992), a set
of conservation areas as mitigation for certain of 27 principles for sustainable development,
negative environmental impacts of the project. and Agenda 21, a global action plan for their
Rarely is there any discussion of the impor- implementation. A number of different
tance of biodiversity within the agricultural approaches to integrating environmental and
lands themselves. developmental goals have since been
developed which fall within the framework of
Despite this apparently bleak position, the sustainable development. At the country level,
paper does provide some evidence of positive comprehensive development frameworks, national
trends towards more environmentally strategies for sustainable development, and
sustainable agricultural activities. The analysis poverty reduction strategy papers are designed
is based on a broad characterisation of the to provide strategic guidance.
Box 3.4
The effect of integrated pest management on biodiversity
In recent decades a variety of agro-ecological approaches including agro-forestry and integrated pest manage-
ment (IPM) have been developed to minimise the environmental impacts of agricultural activities and protect
biodiversity. IPM was developed in response to the enormous damage inflicted on the environment by the
widespread and intensive use of chemicals in the control of harmful insects and pests. The fact that it aims to
reduce or eliminate negative environmental impacts has led to the assumption that IPM techniques and pro-
grams are necessarily environmentally benign. Though it is undeniable that IPM is preferable to the heavy and
prescriptive use of chemical inputs (pesticides, herbicides and fungicides), there has been little or no research
to assess its actual impacts on biodiversity (Russell-Smith, volume 2). But it is perfectly clear that IPM pro-
grams will adversely affect specific taxonomic groups, if only the pests they are designed to control.
If IPM affects some taxonomic pest groups it is quite possible that some of the technologies used in an 1PM
program will also affect - directly or indirectly - other forms of life, including those deemed to be non-harmful
or even useful. While these impacts may appear negligible or unimportant, a huge variety of pests (such as
termites and caterpillars) and weeds are utilised by local communities, especially in hardship periods. Impacts
on biological systems may or not be significant but we cannot assume without study that IPM technologies
have no negative impacts or are necessarily technically and economically appropriate for all groups of local
people or in every situation.
Condensed within these are approaches that jurisdictional and other boundaries. While
aim to balance economic, social, and essentially aimed at maintaining ecosystem
environmental objectives in an integrated way. integrity and productivity over the long term,
The sustainable livelihoods approach (SLA) is a the approach emphasises the importance of
way of thinking about poverty elimination and local people and acknowledges a place for
the needs of the poor that rests on core "appropriate human modification" of these
principles stressing people-centred, responsive systems (World Resources Institute, 2000).
and multi-level approaches to development.
Like other sustainable development concepts, Neither the SLA nor the Ecosystem Approach
the SLA has multiple interpretations but is are strictly new but rather syntheses of lessons
essentially a holistic and systems-based learnt from earlier approaches. In effect they
approach to development-that incorporates the represent a convergence of development and
key ideas of participation, wise-use of natural conservation ideals, with both adopting the
same integrative and systems-based stance but
resources, and economic stability. The SLA thus lookingratise
looking at issues fro site sides
from opposite sides
of theefbth
aims to meet the developimental needs and coin. The current challenge is to find ways to
aspirations of the poor in a socially and operationalise these approaches that take full
environmentally sensitive way (Scoones, 1998; account of practical realities. While it is
Ashley and Carney, 1999). relatively easy to deal with situations where
multiple goals converge, in most situations
Whereas the SLA is first and foremost people- there are trade-offs between short and long-
centred, the ecosystem approach (EA) works term objectives and conflicts of interest
from the opposite side of the coin, addressing between multiple stakeholders (Grimble and
conservation issues and ecosystem integrity in a Wellard, 1997). For example, decisions
way that is sensitive to local communities. The regarding matters such as the clearance or
central idea is the need to manage ecosystems protection of forested land often have to be
as entities, but recognising that they cut across made where development or conservation
16 Environrment Department Papers

Box 3.5
Lake Tanganyika: an example of complex stakeholder interests and conflicts
Lake Tanganyika is a globally important biodiversity site with 300 endemic fish-species and over 1,200 in total,
the second highest species count of any lake. The lake's global importance prompted the establishment of a
major UNDP/GEF funded biodiversity conservation project aimed at identifying major threats and prevent-
ing biodiversity loss. The project reflects the high non-use (existence and option) value placed on it by the
international community. However the lake's fisheries are also an important local bioresource with high use
values to local people. These differing values have led to a number of conflicts between stakeholders. Local
people have little or no appreciation of global biodiversity concems and why outsiders deem conservation so
important, nor apparently do outsiders appreciate the livelihood concerns of local people. -
When one area was designated as a National Park, changes in fishing regulations gave rise to conflict over
fishing rights between the National Park Authorities and neighbouring villages. Traditionally, fishermen had
followed the movement of fish into the newly designated exclusion zone but with the changed status this was
no longer permitted. The problem was magnified by the absence of markers or buoys indicating the boundary
leading to unintentional entering of the park and the confiscation and destruction of equipment. While the
new status has led to widespread and unforeseen problems, the fishermen from one village have apparently
benefited from the exclusion, as the sanctuary acts as a reservoir for the particular type of fish they catch.
To offset the loss of fishing rights, compensation payments have been made in the form of building materials
for classrooms and teacher's offices. While the provision of improved educational facilities is welcome and
potentially beneficial to the communities, the impact is seen as indirect and long term. The villagers do not
consider such help as sufficient compensation for the loss of fishing rights, which has severely affected their
livelihood-sustaining activities. Nor does it provide any incentive for fishermen to reduce their fishing inten-
sity. To maintain their livelihoods, the fishermen must either continue to fish (illegally) in the exclusion zone or
increase their catch from other parts of the lake.
Source: Lamboll and Van Broekhoven, in press.
initiatives are contemplated. Addressing these assigning economic values to unmarketed

matters is no small challenge given the major goods and services, and locally-variable
gaps in our understanding of people-ecosystem political, social, and institutional barriers to
interactions, the methodological difficulties of truly participatory approaches.
Box 3.6
Lessons for development from conservation experience in the U.K.
For many generations the vast majority of land in Britain was managed for agriculture, forestry or other pro-
ductive purpose, and today virtually no areas remain that could be described as truly natural. Until recent
decades these agricultural environments were both bioresource rich and attractive places much valued by the
general public. With incentives provided by the European Common Agricultural Policy (CAP), changes be-
came more radical since the 1960's and traditional extensive agricultural systems were replaced by highly-
productive systems and technologies characterised by heavy mechanisation and chemical usage. Until re-
cently all state assistance was designed to raise input productivity and no mechanism existed whereby farmers
could profit by reducing production or promoting the existence of biodiversity on his or her land.
Two major agro-environmental schemes have been introduced in the last decade to reverse this process. The
Environmentally Sensitive Areas (ESA) and Countryside Stewardship (CS) schemes provide mechanisms by
which farmers receive payments for managing their land in environmentally-positive ways, including the
(continued)
Box 3.6 (continued)

Lessons for development from conservation experience in the U.K.
enhancement of biodiversity. Neither scheme sets out to restore virgin habitats untouched by man, or to reduce
people's dependence on a particularly valuable piece of land. Rather the aim is to return to a more extensive
and perhaps idealised form of agriculture where extemalities are minimal and man and nature live in har-
mony.
In both schemes carefully-calculated payments are made to land managers to provide an incentive to join and
compensation for income foregone. These are enacted through management agreements or contracts made by
the Ministry of Agriculture with individual farmers. Studies have indicated that the British public values the
protection of the rural countryside for its aesthetic beauty, the opportunities for recreation it offers, and for the
flora and fauna it attracts. Under the ESA and CS schemes farmers are paid for the provision of these goods
and services by the government which acts as a surrogate consumer for the general public.
However the establishment of these schemes has been prompted by fears of over production as much as
biodiversity loss. In developing countries priorities differ and food production and economic development are
at the top of the list. In no way would most developing countries give the same priority to conservation con-
cerns, or without outside funding have the capacity or afford the cost of running equivalent schemes. The
value of the UK comparison is not that similar schemes should be promoted at this stage of development but
rather as evidence that poor people cannot be expected to pay for conservation out of their own pocket when
livelihood considerations and price signals reflect other priorities. If we wish to give encouragement to poor
people to conserve their biodiversity and abundance then economic incentives and institutional structures
must reflect these priorities.
Source: Grimble and Laidlaw, in press.

4 Improving Project Design
In this final chapter we start by summarising bioresources to describe the values of diversity
some of the main conclusions and arguments and abundance when taken together. The study
presented in the earlier chapters before considers the way bioresources are valued,
discussing the means of achieving the goal of distinguishing between those derived from
integrating bioresource conservation into the diversity and those from abundance. It also
policies, plans and processes for rural considers the distribution of these values and
development. We identify barriers to integration the way they benefit different groups in society,
and discuss how these affect the treatment of differentiating between those who suffer or gain
bioresources at the project level. Finally, we from bioresource loss and environmental
propose a broad framework for action and point change. While there are undoubted synergies
to the need for more thorough assessment of the between development and conservation, there
impacts of rural development projects on the are also trade-offs and conflicts that are
interacting processes of environmental change important to identify and understand at an
and stakeholder livelihoods. early stage in project development.
4.1 Summary of the argument Most development agencies have moved well
beyond protectionist approaches to
The study sets out to examine how to better conservation and, at least at a theoretical level,
accommodate biological and ecological concerns recognise the need for community involvement
in rural development where poverty alleviation and participation in bioresource management.
and welfare improvement are the primary aims However, there is less appreciation of the
and considerations. It suggests that habitat operational means of achieving this ideal in
change and land-use intensification outside PAs large rural development projects or the
are to an extent inevitable given population and methodological difficulties of people-
economic growth, human value systems, and participation in project design and
the demands of the market. The challenge is to management. Many initiatives fail to analyse
ensure that change and development occur with problems from stakeholder perspectives or
minimum loss of bioresources, that sustainable properly consider who bears the cost of
as well as productive systems are established, environmental change or conservation. The
and that the social groups most dependent on unwritten assumption remains that
biological resources do not suffer. conservation and development are mutually
supporting and, when done in the right way,
The term biodiversity is used in different ways, benefit all stakeholders alike. We believe this is
often to describe the wider values of nature as an oversimplification that lies at the root of
well as its variability and variety. To avoid many problems, and of special concern when
confusion, we use the term in its strict or there are differences in perception between local
scientific sense, and apply the word and global interests.
Biological Resource Management - Integrating Biodiversity Concems in Rural Development Projects and Programs
4.2 Barriers to progress * The problem of in-country institutional

Although much progress has been made in the capacity can be a significant barrier to
effective implementation of an information-
treatment of bioresources in the context of rural intensive appoc.ntitional
development, it is useful to ask ourselves why eicenies may Includime x t
the problems outlined above still exist and to i micrenconomia'nalysi wmith axsyse
consider a number of institutional barriers and pe.rsectivman tnabiity o goveme
challenges:
challenges: ~~~~~~~perspective and the inabihty of governunent
or local NGOs to adequately represent
stakeholder interests.
• There is a continuing emphasis on global
values of biodiversity associated with rare, * The large scale of most donor-assistedprojects
threatened and endemic species and means that taking account of locally-specific
habitats and the establishment of protected variation and cost-benefit distributions is
areas (of various types) to conserve them. A difficult and costly. This problem can in part
broadening of the way policies and be addressed through the adoption of a
procedures currently address biodiversity process approach that allows for non-
and wider bioresources concerns in structured and flexible management, and a
productive and degraded landscapes would decentralisation of decision-making where
facilitate the incorporation of local possible to grassroots level.
bioresource values into project and
programme development. 4.3 A framework for action
* The demand for an in-depth understanding In this paper we have considered the
of local interactions has a high information importance of understanding people's
requirement. The collection and analysis of interactions with bioresources in project
information represents a potential increase planning and management and the need for
in project preparation costs. This can at least representing the interests and perspectives of
parhallybe
ddresed by
partially be addressed y uing
using a proesslocal
process peo
PP le in the process. The challenge now is
approach designed to facilitate the to develop operational systems for taking ideas
incorporation of newly-acquired knowledge forward and incorporating these ideas into
and understanding into the work of the mainstream developmental activities. To this
project. end we have developed a broad framework for
planning (Fig 4.1) to assist the process of
* The influence of environmental assessments preparing specific local actions from broadly-
(EA) on project design remains problematic. A stated strategic goals. An essental element of
more thorough integration of EA into this framework is the adoption of a stakeholder
project cycle activities, and a widening of approach that incorporates detailed analysis of
the assessment process to include micro- the perspectives and economic interests of
economic/ envirocnental interactions- different stakeholders, and the representation of
would i!prove project design. these interests in project and programme design
(Grimble and Wellard, 1997).
* The identificationof negative impacts of projects Step 1. Analysing the system
and the mitigatory measures necessary to
offset them is important but should not take The starting point in the process is the
precedence over the need to seek positive development of an understanding of the local
management options for the use of biological environment and people's interaction with it.
resources to sustain local livelihoods. This includes:

Improving Project Design
* The identification of stakeholder groups * The impacts of project activities on

with different sets of interest in project environment-people interactions, including
activities and environmental change who bears the cost or gets the benefit from
* The economic value and role of goods and change
services provided by bioresources, including * The trade-offs between short and long term
both their diversity and abundance management ideals and practices
* The importance of these to different * The potential conflicts of interest between
stakeholder groups in livelihood and stakeholders at different scales and levels.
functional terms
* An appreciation of what is happening to the A partial illustration of the web of issues,
system in the absence of intervention, questions and interactions concerned is given in
including the impact of shocks and stresses Fig 4.2.
Figure 4.1 Process for identifying and understanding bioresource problems from local perspectives
and preparing rural development projects with bioresource linkages
Analyse system
Step
I
Step I
~~~linkages betwveen
bioresources
and people
Identify _ Assess affect of

stakeholders and social, economic,
their perceptions and environmental
of interest trends impacting
the system
..................................... ........ t ............. .........................
Step 2 Prioritise problems to be

addressed and define\
objectives/desired outcomes
Assess institutional Analyse past experience

and policy and options for Iterative
constraints intervention febc
Build local capacity and Determine required process

systems for stakeholder intervention in
representation broad terms
....................................... ............... ......................
Step 3 Plan and implement local actions
based on local understanding and
knowfledge
Figure 4.2 The people-ecosystem web: A simplified illustration of issues, questions, and interactions
What ecological
functions and services
What species and T third stAge ofere global
habitats are found and or option values
in what quanotioies?
f e to be considered?
What stakehonders f p What current

needtobe identified i exogenous trends
and thei diffe on and herstandinges
interests understood? avaeiolabe,an are under tnay?
influencing the rofrmnuiinteraction! v \
Who benefits and in o a e feWhat are the local
what ioay from the s is environmental and
bioresource t s stake hoelsdeer imcpacts
conservation? of ongoing changes?
What are the How are biodiversity

perspectives, needs and and bioabundance used
aspirations of different and valued by local and
stakeholder groups? other stakeholders
Step 2. Developin a visi on and rationaledfor Step 3. Implementation andfeedback

action The third stage of the process is the action stage
In light of the above, the second stage in the in which field level activities are planned and
process is to consider the options for iaplemented. This stage needs to be highly
intervention, draw on lessons from past iterative and flexible, ensuring that
experience, and consider the institutional and interventions are able to incorporate new
plcninformation and understanding as they became
influencing the room for manoeuvre.avibl,ndlstorpndoney
identified problems and challenges. The design
T'he information from various sources is thenofaefctvfedcklpfrinrmgad
modffying the management process iS therefore
drawn together to determine the scope and especially critical.
form of intervention. An important element in
the process is the effective representation of A caveat
stakeholder interests in decision-making, Teei agrta h bv rmwr
particularly those groups with fittle influence or mgtb nesodadue ehnsial
power. This follows from properly conducted whereas in fact there is fluidity between the
stakeholder analysis but is also likely to require steps and processes. The distinction b etween
mechanisms for direct participation (e.g. local adjacent boxes in Fig 4.1 is artificial in that the
committees and forums, consensus building, steps overlap, interact and influence each
and conflict resolution). other. The framework is therefore not a
22 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Environmnent
Department Papers
Improving Project Design
Box 4.1
An example of good practice:
Reconciling biodiversity and developmental interests in Ghana's wetlands
Ghana's 550 km coastline includes over 50 lagoons, river deltas and estuaries which range in size from a few
dozen hectares to over 300 km2. Five of these sites have been recognised under the Ramsar Convention as
wetlands of intemational importance because of their function as over-wintering points for a large number of
migratory birds. The sites are Muni-Pomadze, a small wetland just west of Winneba; Densu Delta, a wetland
close to Accra with a major salt. panning concession; Sakumo, a small wetland bordering Tema under the
authority of the Tema Development Corporation; Songor, a lagoon complex forming the western part of the
Volta delta; and Keta, a large wetland forming the eastern side of the delta. The sites encompass shallow
lagoons of fresh and saline water and their immediate catchments. Besides functioning as bird habitats, the
sites are used by local people for a range of livelihood-sustaining activities such as fishing, agriculture, man-
grove exploitation, pottery and brick manufacture, and salt production. Economic activities have been con-
ducted at an increasing degree of intensity and commercialisation which in some cases present a significant
threat to these fragile ecosystems.
Under the Ramsar Convention the principal management objective of the five sites is wise use of resources
intended to "safeguard their ecological integrity as wildlife habitats". Investigations carried out under World
Bank/GEF Coastal Management Project, part of the Ghana Environmental Resources Management (GERM)
Project, showed that local people value the wetlands not so much for their bird life or scenery but for the
livelihood-supporting resources and services they provide. The potential trade-off between wetland conserva-
tion and micro-economic interests was recognised and a Study of Development Options was commissioned by
Ghana's Environmental Protection Agency, funded by IDA. The aim of the study was to identify ways that the
five Ramsar wetlands in their present largely-undisturbed form could contribute to the livelihoods and eco-
nomic well-being of local communities.
A team from NRI was commissioned to conduct a detailed study of wetland-people interactions and identify a
range of prospective development options compatible with the environmental objectives. The overriding prin-
ciple they followed was the need to identify initiatives that benefited local stakeholders in a practical way,
with particular emphasis given to the provision of economic incentives and mechanisms for local people to
benefit from resource conservation. Enterprises identified included the development of improved small-scale
aquaculture, agriculture, livestock, agro-forestry, salt harvesting, low-impact tourism and the establishment of
a field centre for environmental education and management. To support these enterprises, vocational training
was to be provided in technical subjects and business management, including business plan development,
wherever possible making use of existing facilities. Particular emphasis was given to the identification of
initiatives that would provide economic incentives for local people to conserve and sustainably-manage the
wetlands.
Source: Grimble, Ellenbroek and Willoughby, 1998.
prescriptive tool but should be considered as a specific and it is critical to appreciate the
system for guiding the process of developing importance of local realities, particularly the
locally-specific and environmentally-sensitive detailed interactions between local people
interventions. and bioresources.
4.4 Concluding thoughts That while every project must be assessed at

In conclusion we would like to reinforce two an overall (macro) level, it is equally
overlapping themes of this paper: irnportant to consider micro-economic
incentives and particularly the cost-benefit
* That every rural development project, distributions of project impact and
including agricultural projects, is location- bioresource change.
We suggest that failure to attend to these issues marginal, that may undermine the broader
in the preparation and design of projects will goal of poverty alleviation. The aim of the
continue to lead to resistance to project paper is to develop a broad methodology for
activities, or poor uptake of messages and countering these problems. We hope that its
technologies, that result in less than optimal application will help build effective projects
project performance. It can also give rise to and programmes and increase the likelihood of
unforeseen negative impacts on groups of them achieving what they set out to do.
stakeholders, including the poorest and most

Notes
1. Wild resources may be found both on and activity (Hannah and others, 1994).
off farm and include uncultivable rocky and Though in developing countries large
marginal areas, forests and woodlands, field unbroken wildlands remain, fragmentation
headlands and boundaries, and water- and disturbance have already given rise to
courses and wetlands. While often species extinction and ecological damage
associated with common land, they are also over wide areas.
found on land that is held privately. 5. We should also bear in mind that, from the
2. It would be wrong to assume that only perspective of local people, the contribution
natural landscapes are of value for of nature is not entirely positive. Local
conservation and, indeed, some of the most farmers may see their management task as a
valuable landscapes are largely man-made. struggle to 'control' nature, or at least to
The Norfolk Broads in Britain, for example, utilise it to best advantage. Over time this
is a wetland area of special conservation struggle normally leads to human
attention today that only exists because of domination.
peat mining activities in medieval times. 6. The ideas were set out in three key
3. For example, consider the question of publications-the World Conservation
whether or not to destroy the remaining Strategy (IUCN, 1980), the Brundtland
samples of a smallpox virus that no longer Report (WCED, 1987) and Caring for the
exists in the wild. Earth (IUCN, 1991)-and developed at the
4. Most of the world's surface (73 percent United Nations Conference on Environment
other than rock, ice, or barren land) has and Development in 1992 (the Rio Earth
been significantly modified by man's Summit).
Biodiversity Series
References
Arnstein SR (1969), A Ladder of Citizen Management: a Review of Principles,

Participation, Journal of the American Institute Contexts, Experiences and Opportunities,
of Planners, 35, 2166-224. Agricultural Systems, 55 (2) 173-193.
Ashley C and Camey D (1999), Sustainable Hanna S and Munasinghe M, eds. (1995),
livelihoods: Lessonsfrom early experience, PropertyRights and the Environment - Social
Department for International and EcologicalIssues, World Bank,
Development, London. Washington DC.
Aylward B (1991), The Economic Value of Hannah L, Lohse D, Hutchinson C, Car JL and
Ecosystems: 3 - Biological Diversity. Lankerani A (1994), A preliminary inventory
Gatekeeper Series, No LEEC GK 91-03, IIED, of human disturbance of world ecosystems,
London. Ambio 23, 46-250.
Barbier EB (1992), Economics for the Wilds. In Hodge I (1997), The Production of Biodiversity:
Swanson TM and Barbier EB (eds), Institutions and the Control of Land. In
Economics for the Wilds: Wildlife, Wildlands, Dragin A and Elgar KJE (eds), New
Diversity and Development, Earthscan, Dimensions in Environmental Policy, 235-
London. 250.
Biggs S (1989), Resource-poor farmer IIED (1992), The Hidden Harvest: Wild Foods and
participation in research: a synthesis of Agricultural Systems - A Literature Review
experience from nine national agricultural and Annotated Bibliography, International
research systems, OFCOR Project Study No.3, Institute for Environment and
ISNAR, The Hague. Development, London.
Blaikie P and Jeanrenaud S (1996), Biodiversity IUCN (1980), World Conservation Strategy:
and Human Welfare, United Nations Living resource conservationfor sustainable
Research Institute for Social Development, development, International Union for the
Discussion PaperNo. 72. Conservation of Nature and Natural
Blaikie P and Jeanrenaud S (1996), Biodiversity Resources, Gland.
and Human Welfare, in Ghimire K B and IUCN (1991), Caringforthe Earth: A Strategyfor
Pimbert M P, eds. (1996), Social Change and Sustainable Living, International Union for
Conservation, Earthscan. the Conservation of Nature and Natural
Grimble R (1996), Carrying Capacity: Resources, Gland.
Sustainable Use and Demographic Jana S and Cooke S (1996), Biodiversity and the
Determinants of Natural Habitats and World Bank's Agricultural Portfolio. In
Ecosystems Management, Environment Srivastava JP, Smith NH, and Forno DA
Department Papers, World Bank. (1996).
Grimble R and Wellard K (1997), Stakeholder Janowski M and Zanr6 R (1999), Partiticipatory
Methodologies in Natural Resource Initiatives in Biodiversity Conservation:
Lessons, In Biodiversity Conservation in Scoones, I (1998), Sustainable rural livelihoods: A

Rural Development: Mainstreaming frameworkfor analysis, Working paper 72,
Biodiversity Considerations in Planning Institute of Development Studies, Brighton.
Rural and Agricultural Development Shawe K (1999), Measuring Biodiversity and
Projects, volume 2. Monitoring Change, in Biodiversity
Lampietti JA and Subramanian U (1995), Taking Conservation in Rural Development:
Stock of National Environmental Strategies. Mainstreaming Biodiversity Considerations
World Bank Environment Department in Planning Rural and Agricultural
Papers, EnvironmentalManagement Series, Development Projects, volume 2.
No 10. Smith NJH (1996), Effects of Land-use Systems
Lamboll R and Van Broekhoven L (1999), on the Use and Conservation of
Strategiesfor Biodiversity Conservation: Biodiversity. In Srivastava JP, Smith NH,
Examplesfrom Tanzania, in Biodiversity and Fomo DA (1996).
Conservation in Rural Development: Srivastava JP, Smith NH, and Fomo DA (1996),
Mainstreaming Biodiversity Considerations Biodiversity and Agricultural
in Planning Rural and Agricultural Intensification: Partners for Development
Development Projects, volume 2. and Conservation, Environmentally
Michon G, Mary F, and Bompard J (1983), Sustainable Development Studies and
Multistoried agroforestry garden system in Monographs Series, No 11. World Bank,
West Sumatra, Indonesia, Agroforestry Washington DC.
Systems, 4(4), 315-338. Wells M (1992), Biodiversity Conservation,
Pagiola S and Kellenberg J with Vidaeus L and Affluence and Poverty: Mismatched Costs and
Srivastava J (1997), Mainstreaming Benefits and Efforts to Remedy Them, Ambio,
Biodiversity in Agricultural Development: 21 (3), 237-243.
Towards Good Practice, World Bank Western D and Wright RM, eds (1994) Natural
Environment Paper No. 15. World Bank, Connections: Perspectives in Community
Washington DC. Based Conservation. Island Press,
Pearce DW (1994), The Great Environmental Washington DC.
Values Debate, Environment and Planning,A, WCED (1987), Our Common Future, World
26, 1329-38. Commission on Environment and
Pearce DW and Moran D (1994), The Economic Development. Oxford University Press,
Value of Biodiversity. Earthscan, London Oxford.
Pretty JN (1994), Alternative systems of WCMC (1992), Global Biodiversity: Status of the
inquiry for sustainable agriculture, IDS Earth's Living Resources. A report by the World
Bulletin 25(2), 37-48. ConservationMonitoring Centre, Chapman
Pretty JN (1995), RegeneratingAgriculture: and Hall, London.
Policies and Practiceforsustainabilityand self- World Bank (1991), Environmental Assessment
reliance, Earthscan, London. Sourcebook: Volume 1 - Policies, Procedures,
Redwood J, Robelus R, and Vetleseter T (1998), and Cross-SectoralIssues, World Bank
Natural Resource Management Portfolio Technical Paper, No 139.
Review, Environment Department Papers, World Bank (1996), Carrying Capacity:
Natural Habitatsand Ecosystems Management Sustainable Use and Demographic
Series, No 58. World Bank, Washington DC. Determinants of Natural Habitats and
Rhodes B and Odell R, compilers (1992), A Ecosystems Management, Environment
Dictionaryof Environmental Quotations, Department papers, Natural Habitats and
Simon and Schuster, New York. Ecosystems Management Series No. 3.

References
World Bank (1996), The Impact of Environmental Ecosystems Management Series, No 59,
Assessment - The World Bank's Experience: World Bank, Washington DC.
Second EnvironmentalAssessment Review, World Bank (2000), Supporting the Web of Life:
Environment Department, World Bank, The World Bank and Biodiversity - A
Washington DC. Portfolio Update (1988-1999). World Bank,
World Bank (1997), Mainstreaming Biodiversity Washington DC.
in Agricultural development: Towards Good World Resources Institute (1992), Global
Practice. Stefano Pagiola and John Biodiversity Strategy: Guidelines for Action
Kellenberg, Global Overlays Program, to Save, Study, and Use Earth's Biotic Wealth
World Bank Environment Paper No. 15. Sustainably and Equitably, World Resources
World Bank (1997), Rural Development: From Institute, Washington DC.
Vision to Action - A Sector Strategy Paper. World Resources Institute (2000), A Guide to
World Bank, World Bank, Washington DC. World Resources 2000-2001: People and
World Bank (1998), Biodiversity in World Bank ecosystems, thefraying web of life, World
Projects: A Portfolio Review. Environment Resources Institute, Washington DC.
Department Papers, Natural Habitatsand
Environment Department
The World Bank
1818 H Street, N.W
Washington, D.C. 20433
Telephone: 202-473-3641
Faxsimile: 202-477-0565
®V Printed on 100% post-consumer recycled paper

Biological Resource Management: Pa Pers

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Biological Resource Management: Pa Pers

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Biological Resource Management: Pa Pers

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Public Disclosure Authorized

TOWARD ENVIRONMENTALLY AND SOCIALLY SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT

Preparedby the NaturalResources Institute(NRI) for the

The World Bank

Manufactured in the United States of America

Step 1. Analysing the system 20

iv Environment Department Papers

This study was commissioned by the 6. Participatory initiatives in biodiversity

Biodiversity Series vii

-Anthony Clayton and Nicholas Radcliffe,

viii Environment Department Papers

xii Environment Department Papers

1.1 Background up with conservation and the sustained use of

2 Environment Department Papers

4 Enviromnent Departmnent Papers

2.1 Clarifying definitions millions of them. Moreover, the variability focus

Table 2. 1. Three land-use models on the disturbance continuum

Bioresources Generally diverse Diversity & abundance Intensification leads to

6 Environment Department Papers

Table 2.2. The economic values, benefits, and beneficiaries of bioresources

Example values from

8 Environment Department Papers

utilise a variety of non-timber forest products, Box 2.3

3.2 Fortress conservation The outcome of this was often ongoing

12 Envirornent Department Papers

14 Environment Department Papers

16 Environrment Department Papers

Source: Lamboll and Van Broekhoven, in press.

initiatives are contemplated. Addressing these assigning economic values to unmarketed

Box 3.6 (continued)

Source: Grimble and Laidlaw, in press.

18 Environment Department Papers

4.2 Barriers to progress * The problem of in-country institutional

20 Environment Department Papers

* The identification of stakeholder groups * The impacts of project activities on

Identify _ Assess affect of

Step 2 Prioritise problems to be

Assess institutional Analyse past experience

Build local capacity and Determine required process

What stakehonders f p What current

What are the How are biodiversity

Step 2. Developin a visi on and rationaledfor Step 3. Implementation andfeedback

4.4 Concluding thoughts That while every project must be assessed at

24 Environment Department Papers

Arnstein SR (1969), A Ladder of Citizen Management: a Review of Principles,

Lessons, In Biodiversity Conservation in Scoones, I (1998), Sustainable rural livelihoods: A

28 Environment Department Papers

®V Printed on 100% post-consumer recycled paper

You might also like

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.