The 2003 World Parks Congress and 2004 Programme of Work on Protected Areas of the Convention on Biological Diversity brought unprecedented attention to the concept of governance of protected areas, with crucial implications for conservation worldwide.

Attention to governance has:

• broadened the spectrum of people recognised as legitimate protected area managers
• broadened the perspective on what can be included as part of national protected area systems
• introduced considerations of principles and values, affecting what is perceived as possible and desirable for protected areas.

A specific governance setting reflects what a society enables or is prepared to accept as fair in terms of who has authority, who is responsible and how this works in practice. For a specific area, governance is concerned with power, relationships, responsibility and accountability. Yet, it depends on more than formal institutions and processes; it also depends on history, culture, legal and customary rights, access to information, markets and informal influences on decisions.

Governance is clearly important, yet it was ignored for a long time. At the 2003 Congress, a first attempt was made to define the multidimensional concept of governance by asking: Who holds decision-making authority for protected areas? Who is responsible and can be held accountable for it?

This led to the designation of four main types of governance:

• government protected areas (government agencies at various levels)
• co-managed protected areas (various actors together)
• private protected areas (individual landowners)
• community conserved areas (indigenous peoples or local communities)

The fourth uses the term 'conserved' rather than 'protected' as indigenous peoples and local communities govern protected areas very differently to others. The 2003 Congress and 2004 Programme of Work recognised that any World Conservation Union (IUCN) category, from strictly protected reserves to cultural landscapes, can be effectively governed by any governance type. In particular, examples of biodiversity well managed by indigenous peoples and local communities can be found in terrestrial and coastal and marine ecosystems on all continents.

Territories and resources managed by indigenous people and local communities (agricultural, fishing and herding) are the oldest form of governance of natural resources, often revealing a close association between people and nature. Established and managed by customary institutions, they follow interlocking objectives and values (spiritual, religious, security- and survival-related). Biodiversity is thus conserved to respect sacred areas and species, to maintain the use of natural resources over time, or to ensure community safety and wellbeing. Communities are very able to conserve, alone or in co-management settings. This is what really counts.

Quality - or good governance - is also important, however. The Congress and Work Programme state that societies should seek to achieve good governance by establishing criteria, principles and values to guide action such as respect of human rights, equity, participation and voice, performance, transparency and accountability.

Clearly, the emergence of the concept of governance highlights some of the most delicate and powerful questions in the world of conservation. Real conservation - not a bureaucratic pretence - has everything to gain.

Source(s):
‘Indigenous and Local Communities and Protected Areas, Towards Equity and Enhanced Conservation’, IUCN, Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, UK by G. Borrini-Feyerabend, A. Kothari and G. Oviedo, 2004 Full document.
‘Sharing Power: Learning by Doing in Co-management of Natural Resources throughout the World’, IIED and IUCN/CEESP/CMWG, Cenesta, Tehran by G. Borrini-Feyerabend, M. Pimbert, M.T. Farvar, A. Kothari and Y. Renard, 2004 Full document.
'People and protected areas: new agendas for conservation', September 2005, id21 insights #57

id21 Research Highlight: 5 September 2005

Further Information:
Grazia Borrini-Feyerabend
IUCN Commission on Environmental, Economic and Social Policy
Ancienne Ecole
CH 1180 Bugnaux
Switzerland

Contact the contributor: gbf@cenesta.org

World Conservation Union (IUCN)

Other related links:
‘People and protected areas: new agendas for conservation’

‘Making waves: unique challenges for Marine Protected Areas’

‘Is forced displacement acceptable in conservation projects?’

‘Protecting nature, culture and people’

‘Agriculture versus protected areas’

‘Tourism in Nepal’

See id21's useful web links on people and protected areas