Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A Conservation View: Towards New Urban Protected Area Governance?

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
From Urban National Parks to Natured Cities in the Global South

  • 315 Accesses

Abstract

In his opening speech at the fifth IUCN World Parks Congress in 2003, South African President Nelson Mandela put the issue of governance at the heart of the discussions held in Durban around the theme of “Benefits Beyond Boundaries”: “We know that the key to a sustainable future for protected areas lies in the development of partnerships. It is only through alliances and partnerships that protected areas can be made relevant to the needs of society …. A sustainable future for humankind depends on a caring partnership with nature as much as anything else” (IUCN and WCPA 2004).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 99.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 139.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    The notion of territory, as used here, goes beyond the geographic area or spatial entity. It is understood as a dynamic system which is the result of interaction processes between people and the environment.

  2. 2.

    The expression “indigenous”, as used here, does not refer only to populations characterised by common genetic and cultural heritage. It also refers to an autocatalysis capacity between the society concerned and its living environment (Bruno et al. 2016).

  3. 3.

    Preserving Tijuca, as the national forest, goes back to 1861. In Cape Town, the Cape of Good Hope Nature Reserve was created in 1939, Table Mountain Nature Reserve in 1963 and Silvermine Nature Reserve in 1965.

  4. 4.

    In 2012, income from tourism in Kenya was estimated at USD 1.2 billion (KNBS 2013).

  5. 5.

    Deep Ecology integrates the human species in the biosphere as a whole. The notion of anthropo-ecosystem developed by Deep ecology concerns a co-evolutionary process that takes into account the needs of the fauna and flora, as well as those of human beings (Næss 1973; Foreman 1991).

  6. 6.

    The Cape Floral Kingdom contains 9,600 indigenous plant species, of which 70% are endemic and 1,406 are on the IUCN’s Red List of endangered species (Katzschner et al. 2005).

  7. 7.

    A report published in 1974 by two botanists from the University of Cape Town, Eugène Moll and Bruce Campbell, pointed out the flaws of managing public natural area properties, which at the time were managed by 14 different organisations, and put forward for the first time the idea of management carried out by only one authority. In 1977, a new report concerning the “Future Control Management of the TM and the Southern Peninsula Mountain Chain” concluded in favour of a form of management controlled by the South African National Parks Board (SANParks 2004).

  8. 8.

    The eight sectors of TMNP and their managers: Table Mountain National Park–SANParks; Kirstenbosch National Botanical Gardens–SANBI; Cedarburg Wilderness Area–CapeNature; Groot Winterhoek Wilderness Area–CapeNature; Boland Mountain Complex–CapeNature; De Hoop Nature Reserve–CapeNature; Boosmansbos Wilderness Area–CapeNature; Swartberg Complex–CapeNature; and Baviaanskloof Protected Area–ECNCB.

  9. 9.

    Joint participation in managing Indian national park resources was not legally possible before the adoption of the Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006, aiming at recognising rights for certain rural minorities on the protected areas where they live. The law was notified close to one year after its adoption and has been in force since the January 1, 2008. However, only the northern part of the park of Mumbai is considered as “rural” and is therefore affected by this law.

  10. 10.

    In order to discourage the construction of fences in the scattering area south of the park, NGO Wildlife Foundation launched the Lease Programme (no longer running today) which paid land owners an indemnity in exchange for their accepting not to subdivide their plots or prevent the wildlife from passing during migration (Trzyna et al. 2014).

  11. 11.

    Compensation measures make up for the impact of a planning exercise or project execution on the environment.

  12. 12.

    The provincial nature reserve of Driftsands is managed by CapeNature; the Cape Flats Nature Reserve is managed by the University of the Western Cape; the Plattekloof Natural Heritage Site and the Koeberg Nature Reserve are managed by Eskom (the country’s electricity supplier).

  13. 13.

    A first draft was realised in 2014 during the international conference on Biodiversities, organised by the UNPEC programme in partnership with SANParks and the city of Cape Town. On that occasion, a field trip had been proposed in order to follow two rivers linking the park and the city (www.upa-network.org).

  14. 14.

    The following were part of this category of governmental and non-governmental institutions identified as important partners for the park: the Brazilian Fund for Biodiversity (FUNBIO); the Institute of Urbanism Pereira Passos (Town Hall of Rio); the Environmental Commission of the Chamber of the Deputies of the Federated State of Rio; the Research Institute of the Botanical Garden of Rio de Janeiro; the Nature Conservancy and the School of Visual Arts of Lage Park.

  15. 15.

    Oficina de renovaçao do conselho consultivo. http://www.parquedatijuca.com.br/#noticia?id=238 Consulted on March 6, 2016. Accessed on June 11, 2018.

  16. 16.

    http://www.paineirascorcovado.com.br/proj.html.

  17. 17.

    http://peoplefoodandnature.org/. Accessed on June 11, 2018

  18. 18.

    “Cape Action for People and the Environment (CAPE) is a 20-year partnership of government and civil society aimed at conserving and restoring the biodiversity of the Cape Floristic Region and the adjacent marine environment, while delivering significant benefits to the people of the region.” http://www.capeaction.org.za/.

  19. 19.

    Motto of Table Mountain National Park.

Bibliography

  • Adams, W. M. (1990). Green development, environment and sustainability in the third world. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • African Convention on the Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources. (1968). https://treaties.un.org/doc/Publication/UNTS/Volume%201001/volume-1001-I-14689-English.pdf.

  • Anderson, D., & Grove, R. (1987). Conservation in Africa: People, policies and practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Borrini-Feyerabend, G., Bueno, P., Hay-Edie, T., Lang, B., Rastogi, A., & Sandwith, T. (2014a). Lexique sur la gouvernance des aires protégées et conservées, Courant Renforcer la diversité et la qualité de la gouvernance, Congrès Mondial des Parcs 2014 de l’UICN. Gland: UICN.

    Google Scholar 

  • Borrini-Feyerabend, G., Dudley, N., Jaeger, T., Lassen, B., Broome, N. P., Phillips, A., et al. (2014b). Gouvernance des aires protégées: de la compréhension à l’action. Collection des lignes directrices sur les meilleures pratiques pour les aires protégées No. 20. Gland: UICN.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brandon, K. E., & Wells, M. (1992). Planning for people and parks: Design dilemmas. World Development, 20(4), 557–570.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bruno, L. (2005). Chez soi en ville: un regard sur Rio. Travaux de l’Institut de Géographie de Reims, 115–118, 9–30.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bruno, L. (2008). La forêt au cœur de la ville. Le Parc National de Tijuca, Rio de Janeiro. Géographie et Cultures, 62, 27–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bruno, L. (2012). Y a-t-il une place pour la nature en ville ? In L. Bruno, E. Lézy (dirs.), Biodiversities. Les aires protégées urbaines, des laboratoires grandeur nature (pp. 251–283). Paris: Editions Le Manuscrit.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bruno, L., & Lézy, E. (Eds). (2012). BiodiverCities. Les aires protégées urbaines, des laboratoires grandeur nature. Paris: Editions Le Manuscrit.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bruno, L., Landy, F., & Lézy, E. (2016). Des parcs nationaux et leurs métropoles: L’évolution des rapports à Rio de Janeiro, Mumbai, Nairobi et au Cap. In S. Barles, & N. Blanc (dirs.), Ecologies Urbaines (pp. 79–116).

    Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, B. M., Sayer, J. A., & Walker, B. (2010). Navigating trade-offs: Working for conservation and development outcomes. Ecology and Society, 15(2), 16. [online] http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol15/iss2/art16/.

  • Camphora, A.-L. (2005). Análise socioambiental dos condicionantes da gestão de recursos hídricos no Parque Nacional de Tijuca. Rio de Janeiro: instituto Terrazul, relatório, programa Petrobrás ambiental – Projeto água em unidade de conservação.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chape, S., Harrison, J., Spalding, M., & Lysenko, I. (2005). Measuring the extent and effectiveness of protected areas as an indicator for meeting global biodiversity targets. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 360(1454), 443–455. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2004.1592.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Christensen, J. (2004). Win-win illusions. In Parks (Vol. 14, No. 2, pp. 34–41). Durban World Parks Congress, Gland. Produced by the Nature Bureau, UK.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cock, J., & Fig, D. (2002). From colonial to community-based conservation: Environmental justice discourse. In D. A. Mc Donald (Ed.), Environmental justice in South-Africa (pp. 131–135). Cape Town: UCT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Colloque International Biodiversities Le Cap (2014). http://www.upa-network.org/.

  • Colloque International Biodiversities Paris (2010). http://biodivercities.net/.

  • Colloque International Biodiversities Rio (2012). http://upa-network.org/.

  • Cronon, W. (1995). The trouble with wilderness; or, getting back to the wrong nature. Uncommon ground: Rethinking the human place in nature (pp. 69–90). New York: W. W. Norton & Co.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crosby, A. W. (2004). Ecological imperialism: The biological expansion of Europe (2nd ed., pp. 900–1900). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Dahlberg, A. C., & Burlando, C. (2009). Addressing trade-offs: Experiences from conservation and development initiatives in the Mkuze wetlands, South Africa. Ecology and Society, 14(2), 37. [online] http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol14/iss2/art37/.

  • Dearden, P., Bennett, M., & Johnson, J. (2005). Trends in global protected area governance, 1992–2002. Journal of Environmental Management, 36(1), 89–100.

    Google Scholar 

  • Depraz, S. (2008). Géographie des espaces naturels protégés: genèse, principes et enjeux territoriaux. Paris: Armand Colin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Derose, A. M. (2004). Overview of community participation at the Vth IUCN World Parks Congress. In Parks (Vol. 14, No. 2, pp. 18–29). Gland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Diegues, A. C. (1994). O mito moderno da natureza intocada, 4e éd., Hucitec. São Paulo: USP.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elmqvist, T., Alfsen, C., & Colding, J. (2008). Urban systems. In S. E. Jørgensen, & B. D. Fath (Eds.), Ecosystems. Encyclopedia of ecology (Vol. 5, pp. 3665–3672).

    Google Scholar 

  • Everhart, W. C. (1972). The national park service. New York and London: Praeger.

    Google Scholar 

  • FoNNAP (2011). How the proposed greater southern bypass will affect Nairobi Park. Friends of Nairobi National Park. http://fonnap.wordpress.com/2011/08/23/how-the-proposed-greater-southern-bypass-will-affect-nairobi-park/. Retrieved from March 11, 2016.

  • Foreman, D. (1991). Confessions of an eco-warrior. New York: Crown Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fynn, R., & Bonyongo, M. (2011). Functional conservation areas and the future of Africa’s wildlife. African Journal of Ecology, 49(2), 175–188.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ghimire, K. B., & Pimbert, M. P. (Eds.). (1997). Social change and conservation: Environmental politics and impacts of national parks and protected areas. London: Earthscan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Graeme, L. W., Lockwood, M., Kothari, A., Feary, S., & Pulsford, I. (2015). Protected area governance and management. Canberra: Australian National University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Graham, J., Amos, B., & Plumptree, T. (2003). Governance principles for protected areas in the 21st century. Ottawa: Institute on Governance in collaboration with Parks Canada and CIDA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grove, R. H. (1995). Green imperialism: Colonial expansion, tropical island Edens, and origins of environmentalism 1600–1860. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holdgate, M., & Phillips, A. (1999). Protected areas in context. In M. Walkey, I. Swingland, & S. Russell (Eds.), Integrated protected areas management. Boston: Kluwer Academic.

    Google Scholar 

  • IBAMA (2002). Como o Ibama exerce a educação ambiental. Brasília.

    Google Scholar 

  • IBASE (2006). Educação ambiental em unidades de conservação. Rio de Janeiro.

    Google Scholar 

  • Irving, M. A., Corrêa, F. V., & Zarattini, A. C. (Eds.). (2013). Parques nacionais no Rio de Janeiro. Desafios para uma gestão social da biodiversidade. Rio de Janeiro: Editora Letra e Imagem.

    Google Scholar 

  • IUCN, & WCPA (2004). 2003 Durban World Parks Congress. In Parks (Vol. 14, No. 2). Gland: IUCN.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jepson, B., & Whittaker, R. J. (2002). Histories of the protected areas: Internationalization of conservation values and their adoption in the Netherlands Indies (Indonesia). Environment and History, 8, 129–172.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jessop, B. (2003) Governance and metagovernance: On reflexivity, requisite variety, and requisite irony. Lancaster University. http://www.lancaster.ac.uk/fass/resources/sociology-online-papers/papers/jessop-governance-and-metagovernance.pdf.

  • Katzschner, T., Oelofse, G., Wiseman, K., Jackson, J., & Ferreira, D. (2005). The city of Cape Town biodiversity strategy. In T. Trzyna (Ed.), The urban imperative (pp. 91–104). Sacramento: California Institute of Public Affairs.

    Google Scholar 

  • KNBS (2013). Economic survey 2013 highlights. Kenya National Bureau of Statistics. http://www.knbs.or.ke/Economic%20Surveys/Cabinet_Secretary_Presentation_on_Economic_Survey_May_2013.pdf. Retrieved from March 11, 2016.

  • Landy, F., & Bautès, N. (2013). Local and translocal systems of actors. In M. C. Saglio-Yatzimirsky, & F. Landy (Éds.), Megacity slums. Social exclusion, space and urban policies in Brazil and India (pp. 257–306). London: Imperial College Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Laslaz, L., Gauchon, C., Duval, M., & Héritier, S. (2014). Les espaces protégés. Entre conflits et acceptation. Paris: Belin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lézy, E. (2002) b. « Primitifs du passé » ou « primitifs du futur » essai pour une nouvelle géographie des peuples dits « primitifs » . In Discours sur le primitif, McIntosh-Varjabédian Fiona (Ed.), Edition du Conseil Scientifique de l’Université Charles de Gaulle-Lille (Vol. 3, pp. 191–212).

    Google Scholar 

  • Lézy, E. (2012). Out of the park, le Parc National de Nairobi dans la géodynamique Maasai. In L. Bruno, & E. Lézy (dirs.), Biodiversities. Les aires protégées urbaines, des laboratoires grandeur nature (pp. 179–196). Paris: Editions Le Manuscrit.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lézy-Bruno, L. (2014). Usages et conflits sous fond de protection de la nature en ville. Le cas du Parc national de Tijuca à Rio de Janeiro. In L. Laslaz et al. (Eds.), Les espaces protégés. Entre conflits et acceptation (pp. 209–227). Paris: Belin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Magnaghi, A. (2014). La biorégion urbaine, petit traité sur le territoire bien commun. Paris: Association culturelle Eterotopia.

    Google Scholar 

  • McNeely, J. A. (Ed.). (1993). Parks for life: Report of the IVth world congress on national parks and protected areas. Gland: IUCN.

    Google Scholar 

  • MEMR. (2012). Mapping wildlife dispersal areas and migratory routes/corridor (Part I): Southern Kenya Rangelands. Nairobi: Ministry of Environment and Mineral Resources (MEMR).

    Google Scholar 

  • Næss, Arne. (1973). The shallow and the deep, long-range ecology movement. Inquiry, 16, 95–100.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nkedianye, D., Radeny, M., Kristjanson, P., & Herrero, M. (2009). Assessing returns to land and changing livelihood strategies in Kitengela. In K. Homewood, P. Kristjansen, & P. Chenevix Trench (Eds.), Staying Maasai? Livelihoods, Conservation and Development in East African Rangelands, (pp. 115–149). New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Noss, A. (1997). Challenges to nature conservation with community development in central African forests. Oryx, 31(3), 180–188.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ogutu, J., Piepho, H., Dublin, H., Bhola, N., & Reid, R. (2009). Dynamics of Mara-Serengeti ungulates in relation to land use changes. Journal of Zoology, 278, 1–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ogutu, J., Owen-Smith, N., Piepho, H., Said, M., Kifugo, S., Reid, R., et al. (2013). Changing wildlife populations in Nairobi National Park and adjoining Athi-Kaputiei plains: Collapse of the migratory wildebeest. Open Conservation Biology Journal, 7, 11–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Philips, A. (2003). Turning ideas on their head: The new paradigm for protected areas. In the George Wright Forum, 20(2), 8–32.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pulsford, I., Lindenmayer, D., Wyborn, C., Lausche, B. Vasilijevic, M., & Graeme L. W. (2015). Connectivity conservation management. In L. W. Graeme et al. (Eds.), Protected area governance and management (pp. 851–889). Canberra: Australian National University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Redclift, M. R. (1989). Sustainable development: Exploring the contradictions. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Redford, K. H. (1991). The ecologically noble savage. Cultural Survival Quarterly, 15(1), 46–48.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sandbrook, C. (2015). What is conservation? Oryx, 49(4), 565–566.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • SANParks (2008). Table mountain national park conservation development framework—Volume 2: Technical report. Cape Town.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sowman, M., & Wynberg, R. (Eds.). (2014). Governance for justice and environmental sustainability: Lessons across natural resources sectors in sub-Saharan Africa. London: Earthscan/Taylor and Francis.

    Google Scholar 

  • Trzyna, T. (Ed.). (2005). The urban imperative. Sacramento: California Institute of Public Affairs.

    Google Scholar 

  • Trzyna, T. et al. (2014). Urban protected areas: Profiles and best practice guidelines. Best practice protected area guidelines series no. 22. Gland, Switzerland: IUCN. http://cmsdata.iucn.org/downloads/bpg_urban_protected_areas.pdf.

  • UICN. (1997). Congrès mondial de la nature: Résolutions et recommandations. Gland: UICN.

    Google Scholar 

  • United Nations (2014). World urbanization prospects: The 2014 revision, highlights, population division. New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Utting, P. (1994). Social change and political dimensions of environmental practice in central America. Development and Change, 25(1), 231–259.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Washington Convention (1940). Convention on nature protection and wild life preservation in the Western Hemisphere. http://www.ecolex.org/ecolex/ledge/view/RecordDetails?index=treaties&id=TRE-000085.

  • Wells, M., & Brandon, K. (1992). People and parks: Linking protected area management with local communities. Washington: The World Bank.

    Google Scholar 

  • West, P. C., & Brechin, S. R. (Eds.). (1991). Resident peoples and national parks: Social dilemmas and strategies in international conservation. Tuscon: The University of Arizona Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yeld, J., & Barker, M. (2004) Mountains in the sea: Table Mountain to Cape Point. An interpretive guide to the Table Mountain national park (p. 183). SAN PARKS.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zérah, M. H., & Landy, F. (2013). Nature and urban citizenship redefined: The case of the national park in Mumbai. Geoforum, 46, 25–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Urban Conservation Strategies Specialist Group, IUCN-WCPA, Gland, Switzerland

    Louise Bruno-Lézy

Authors
  1. Louise Bruno-Lézy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Louise Bruno-Lézy .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. French Institute of Pondicherry, Pondicherry, India

    Frédéric Landy

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Bruno-Lézy, L. (2018). A Conservation View: Towards New Urban Protected Area Governance?. In: Landy, F. (eds) From Urban National Parks to Natured Cities in the Global South. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-8462-1_10

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-8462-1_10

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore

  • Print ISBN: 978-981-10-8461-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-981-10-8462-1

  • eBook Packages: Social SciencesSocial Sciences (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation