The Philippine government recognizes the critical importance of protecting and maintaining biodiversity for the present and future generations. This recognition is formally articulated in Section 2 of Republic Act 7586, otherwise known as “The National Integrated Protected Areas System Act of 1992″ or NIPAS Act. At the same time, the Philippine government recognizes and promotes the rights of the Indigenous Cultural Communities (ICCs) or Indigenous Peoples (IPs), who are mostly occupants of the protected areas. The State’s recognition of the ICCs/IP’s rights is embodied in the Philippine Constitution (Art. II, Sec. 22) and reiterated in Section 13 of the NIPAS Act. This recognition is further given substance by the enactment of Republic Act 8371, also known as “The Indigenous Peoples Rights Act of 1997” or IPRA. The passage of IPRA into law is a major victory for the ICCs/IPs who, for several decades, have struggled for the recognition of their rights over their ancestral domains. Both NIPAS and IPRA are aimed to improve the well-being and livelihood of the upland small holders while maintaining ecological diversity. It is in this context of multiple government policy objectives of preserving biodiversity, recognizing ICCs/IPs rights, and improving smallholder livelihoods that this study is conducted. In the province of Bukidnon, nine groups of indigenous cultural communities have already been granted with their Certificate of Ancestral Domain Claims (CADC). The processing of their applications was completed in a timely fashion primarily because their claims were not within a protected area. Among the indigenous cultural communities near and within the Mount Kitanglad Range Natural Park (MKRNP), their application for a tenurial instrument has not been granted in spite of the existence of NIPAS and IPRA laws that explicitly recognize their rights over their ancestral domains. The key question is what prevents governmental authorities from granting CADC to ancestral right claimants Do NIPAS and IPRA have procedures on how to deal with ancestral claims within and around a national park Do they provide clear provisions about the processes that will lead to complementary management approaches between ancestral domains and protected areas Do they have guidelines for how consultations with local communities are to be conducted What is the best way to propose and determine ancestral domain claims within the protected area When there is conflicting land use pattern within the protected area and ancestral domain, which law should be followed Mt. Kitanglad Range National Park provides a unique case study to answer these questions because it is both an ancestral domain claim of the Talaandig-Higaonon tribe and at the same time a protected area
Tag: national parks
Use of Forest Resources by Residents of Jigme Singye Wangchuck National Park, Bhutan
This paper examines the use of forest resources by local residents in Jigme Singye Wangchuck National Park, Bhutan. It also inquires into local residents’ knowledge and perceptions of park management interventions. The data were collected through a questionnaire survey, group discussions, and observations. The results show that local people depend on forest resources for their livelihoods, and that their knowledge and perceptions of the park and of park management are influenced mainly by constraints on their access to forest resources, and by benefits and incentives obtained from the park administration through socioeconomic development.
Buffer zone management and agroforestry
This paper distilled some of the lesson learned from the global experience with integrated conservation development projects, drawing upon the review by wells and Brandon (1992). Historically, park management emphasized a policing role to exclude local people. Gradually it was recognized that communities near protected areas often bear substantial costs as a consequence of their proximity to these areas, yet gain little in return. Yhis led protected area management critically depends on the support of local people.
National parks in China: Experiments with protecting nature and human livelihoods in Yunnan province, Peoples’ Republic of China (PRC)
Beginning in 1956, China has built a large protected areas system, but has struggled to implement effective management. There remain ongoing problems with administrative authority, unclear regulations, inadequate funding, inappropriate development within protected areas, a dearth of professional capacity, and more. To address these concerns, since 2001, international nongovernment organizations led by The Nature Conservancy have encouraged various levels of government in China to experiment with an international model of national parks. The government in Yunnan province, the center of China’s biological and cultural diversity, has acted to create a national park experimental system with new administrative bureaus, comprehensive regulations, park master plans, and several national park pilots. We review two of these pilots, Pudacuo National Park and Laojun Mountain National Park, to evaluate whether this park model, as it is being applied in Yunnan, offers an improvement to existing nature reserve regulations and implementation. Though the experiment is in its early stages, issues remain around regulatory authority, community participation, park funding and staff capacity.
Impacts of Payment for Forest Environmental Services in Cat Tien National Park
This paper assesses the impacts of Payment for Forest Environmental Services (PFES) in Cat Tien National Park, Vietnam. We analyze the impacts and additionality of PFES on local livelihoods by comparing the socio-economic situations in four pairs of villages before and after its implementation, and between places where PFES is and is not applied. In total, 149 people participated in focus group discussions, while 244 households (123 in areas with PFES and 121 in areas without) took part in household surveys. Our research shows that 92% of the people interviewed are from ethnic minorities participating and benefiting directly from PFES. In villages with PFES, the numbers of participating households ranged from 45% to 88% of all poor households in those villages. Of the poor households participating in PFES in the studied villages, 22% have no source of cash income other than their forest protection contracts, while 81.4% have escaped poverty, based on self-defined poverty criteria, through additional income from forest protection. Since the implementation of PFES, the area of forests allocated for community and household management is estimated to be three to 3.64 times higher than it had been previously. Although the number of communities under PFES contracts has not changed, the number of households participating in forest protection contracts is now much lower than before PFES started. On average, PFES contributes 16% to 74% of total household income in villages with PFES. Incomes in places with PFES are significantly higher than in places without. Although our research demonstrates immediate positive socio-economic impacts on livelihoods, it also highlights weaknesses in the current monitoring and evaluation system and a lack of reliable data for measuring PFES impacts in Cat Tien National Park.
Ecological challenges for the buffer zone management of a West African National Park
In sub-Saharan Africa, the management of buffer zones around protected areas does not often take into serious account the needs of resource exploitation by the local populations or the conservation needs of these areas. We described the ecological characteristics and management issues affecting the buffer zone around the Fazao-Malfakassa National Park; a 192,000-ha protected area in central-western Togo of utmost conservation importance within the Dahomey Gap region. Within the buffer zone (10 km radius, 334,800 ha), we focussed on four high conservation value areas totalling 65,594 ha (20% of the total buffer zone area). Using 2015 sentinel-2 images we analyzed land cover patterns and described existing ecological zones. We complemented these with field surveys and interviews with 300 people living in 22 villages within the buffer zone to describe the conditions affecting the resident human population. Although over 60% of the total buffer zone area is degraded, we identified four areas of high conservation value (total area = 65,594 ha). Interviewees recognized that slash-and-burn was the most common form of land use, followed by agroforestry practices. Agriculture, charcoal, and firewood production were the main drivers affecting habitats, and land conflicts were recurrent due to the rise in human population. The decline in agriculture, reported by interviewees in some sectors, was attributable to ravages of crops by elephants. Three independent diversity indices showed that, in preserved zones, a greater diversity of animals (with similar utilization frequencies) were hunted than in degraded sites (where grasscutters were the dominant hunted species). There were also significant differences between degraded and preserved zones in terms of plants used for charcoal production and for non-timber forest products. We advocate the development of community-controlled hunting areas to enhance the conservation value of the four well-preserved zones. Instead, promoting sustainable agricultural production systems in the degraded areas can help to further stabilize the agricultural front and reduce land pressure on the park.