MANAGEMENT OPTIONS FOR BIODIVERSITY PROTECTION AND POPULATION

Maria C. J. Cruz The World Bank*
Experiences with managing biodiversity in government-owned or -controlled protected areas have shown that success depends on the involvement of local residents and users of resources. However, for the governments of many developing countries, taking into account the views and needs of local people requires a shift from traditional, custodial management to more participatory and development-focused initiatives. A fundamental conflict arises when governments treat land and resources as strictly protected, while local residents use the same resources for their livelihoods. Unless people who are directly affected by conservation projects are regarded as partners in achieving environmental objectives, strict enforcement - guard patrols, penalties - alone will probably not prevent unsustainable uses.
Many complex factors influence and exacerbate the negative impacts of human uses on biodiversity. Population growth, and the long history of high fertility rates in developing countries, are important factors contributing to the flow of migrants into remote, protected areas. Economic policies, which historically created surplus labor and worsened poverty, induce movements out of traditional agriculture. Together with unequal access to arable lands, credit, and extension services, these policies promote migration of landless, poor households in search of income-earning opportunities in protected areas.
Likewise, ill-defined property rights in government protected areas, and the opening of these areas by large-scale commercial ventures (e.g., concession logging, hunting and trading, commercial fishing) make these sites attractive to would-be migrants. Furthermore, because tenure is insecure and the institutional risks associated with encroachment on public lands are high, livelihood and resource-using practices are highly exploitative of the resource. Often, households have short-term time horizons, and thus, overharvest the resource.
Attempts have been made to control the negative impacts of some of these factors by experimenting with community-based resource management programs. Some of these programs are based upon the livelihood practices of indigenous peoples, practices in which human uses of resources have coexisted with the maintenance of habitats over long periods of time. One such program is the Integrated Conservation and Development Project (ICDP), which seeks to "conserve biological diversity...by reconciling the management of protected areas with the social and economic needs of local people through protected area management, buffer zone development, and local social and economic improvements."
However, while most ICDP projects use participatory approaches to promote biodiversity conservation, the applications and experiences from implementing these approaches have been limited. Yet, funding agencies, governments, and non-governmental organizations (NGOs) need to learn from such experiences. The complexity of human and resource interactions and the urgency of adopting effective measures to address conservation requirements as well as social needs demands attention.
The key questions in evaluating such experiences follow:
What is the balance between human uses and the preservation of biodiversity?
What factors influence human impacts on biodiversity?
What are the appropriate management options for making human uses of resources compatible with biodiversity protection?
This chapter attempts to answer these questions by first, describing the key issues involved in defining the scope of biodiversity protection in relation to local needs. Human stress on resources is measured by various indicators of population and carrying capacity, or, the minimum number of people that an area can support given its supply of biodiversity resources.
Secondly, this chapter presents studies that examined the impacts of human uses on biodiversity, specifically the relationships between population, poverty, and environmental degradation. Studies that quantify some of the interactions include cross-country and regional statistical analyses of population, agriculture, and deforestation in Africa; comparative country studies of frontier migration; case studies of biodiversity conservation and forestry projects financed by the World Bank (Bank) and the Global Environment Facility (GEF); and case studies of women and the environment.
The third section on people and diversity offers management options for dealing with population-related issues, issues that need to be incorporated into international development assistance programs, policies of executing agencies of governments, and activities of NGOs and research institutions.
MEASURING BIODIVERSITY IN RELATION TO LOCAL NEEDS
The increasing loss and degradation of natural resources is an indication of the imbalance between human needs for livelihood and recreation and nature's capacity, which is often measured in terms of the Earth's biological diversity or biodiversity. Three ways to measure biodiversity exist: by the genetic diversity among species; by the diversity of species within a given ecosystem; and by the diverse assemblages of species habitats or ecosystems. Biodiversity values cannot be restricted to measurements of economics or money. These values include species and genetic richness, recreational satisfaction and aesthetics, religious and cultural significance, or ecological balance and integrity. Human diversity is an important component of total diversity, representing the richness of human cultures in a given habitat or environment.
Scientific Measures of Biodiversity
Only a small percentage of the world's biodiversity has been inventoried; at present, no systematic database of ecosystems, flora, fauna, and genetic races exist. The estimates of global species diversity vary from 2 million to 100 million (WRI, 1992). Only 1.4 million of the world's animal species have been named or scientifically identified and classified. For example, about 40% of freshwater fishes in South America have yet to be classified.
Monitoring changes in biodiversity are done in protected areas, which are largely supported by governments. But only 5% of the global area has been designated as protected and the extent, purpose, and biogeographical distribution of protected areas vary widely across countries. The most important issue in protected areas is the effectiveness of the protection provided. Although zoning is enforced and activities inside the protected areas are restricted, many of the protected areas are actually paper parks. Illegal poaching, hunting, grazing, and farming still occur inside the protected areas even when these areas have been legally demarcated.
In addition to the limited scope of biodiversity protection offered by protected areas, measurements of species richness within protected areas also vary by the scale of consumption (e.g., commercial exploitation versus subsistence livelihood) and type of biome. Information on biodiversity by biome, areas subjected to human disturbances, and areas protected provide rough indications as to which types of biomes are in greater stress, and therefore require interventions. As shown in Table 1, threats from human disturbances are highest in mixed island systems (C) where large tracts remain unprotected and subject to human uses. Over 25% of temperate grasslands (M) remain relatively undisturbed. By contrast, evergreen sclerophyll forests (G) have a larger proportion of area protected, but only less than 2.8% of lands outside the biome are undisturbed.
Measuring Human Disturbances
Given the variability and complexity of measuring biodiversity, determining per capita impacts of human disturbances on resources has become a critical issue. For example, in biomes with significant numbers of endangered species, the impacts of each person's hunting activity may be larger than the combined impacts of larger groups of people in another biome where fewer species are under severe stress. A framework for sorting the types of interventions that reduce various types and degrees of human impacts should be used.
Referencing Table 1, box 1 biodiversity conservation broadly consists of the following categories:
areas designated for full protection, such as those where key species are close to extinction;
areas with valuable species but low threats from human uses (e.g., remote forests and marine sites), and;
areas with valuable species but subjected to heavy human uses (e.g., hunting grounds, fishing areas).
Within these types of biodiversity classifications, human disturbances vary by the degree of population pressure on the resource. In general, increasing numbers of people are migrating into open access areas (e.g., boxes 1-3) in search of land and economic opportunities (e.g., hunting, fuelwood collecting, fishing). At the same time, low density or small numbers of users may have large impacts on the resource if uses are commercial or large scale (see boxes 4-6). Population pressures may be low because of seasonal movements of people or gender-specialized activities (see boxes 7-9).
TABLE 1. Preliminary Classification of Biodiversity Projects By Ecological Value and Population Pressure on Resources
Categories of Population Pressures
Biodiversity Values
Critical, full protection due to species extinction
Valuable with few threats
Valuable with many threats
High with large numbers and growth rates
Box 1
Box 2
Box 3
Moderate with low numbers and growth rates
Box 4
Box 5
Box 6
Low with seasonal movements
Box 7
Box 8
Box 9
In the absence of scientific and clear-cut measurements of biodiversity at the site or ecosystem level, this preliminary classification allows planners and executing agencies to prioritize interventions that may require specific measures or policy reforms. The classification also helps define criteria for allocating limited financial resources across biodiversity sites with different levels of population pressures.
Useful indicators of population pressure include population density across resource types or biomes, yearly population growth, fertility and density, and migration factors. Ethnicity and gender are important factors that require specific attention. For example, gender-specialized roles are especially significant in low density populations where seasonal movements are high (e.g., coastal and marine environments). Remote areas of forest or marine reserves will affect particular indigenous peoples and the demographic and property rights issues are just as critical in these areas as maintaining the balance with nature.
Some activities in protected areas target factors that induce habitat destruction. As shown in Table 2, habitat fragmentation from land use changes (e.g., agriculture, infrastructure) accounts for 76% of human-induced pressures on mammals and 60% on birds. Solutions to reducing fragmentation involve rezoning or regazetting areas for protection, but this approach has sometimes led to the relocation and displacement of resident populations. Human disturbances due to the hunting of mammals and birds by residents and large-scale commercial groups, comprising 54% and 29% of pressures, respectively, have required less drastic solutions. For example, restrictions on hunting rights and licensing as well as controls over the pricing and trading of (hunted) goods have been imposed in some areas.
Different types of biomes, and micro environments within a biome, require different interventions depending upon the degree of biodiversity required and the seriousness of human threats. Examples of the possible interventions and the range of biodiversity and population pressures are shown in Table 2.
Human Impacts On Biodiversity
Biodiversity depletion is caused by multiple and complex factors, all of which are interconnected. The effect of one cannot be separated from another. One way of looking at how these factors interact is to trace the linkages between the nexus of population growth, poverty, and environmental degradation. For example, a particular form of population growth, migration of people into biodiversity protection sites, is viewed as a complicated
TABLE 2. Range of Biodiversity and Population Pressures, Key Issues, and Possible Interventions
Biodiversity and Human Threats
Key Issues and Possible Interventions to Reduce Negative Human Impacts on Biodiversity
Type 1
Biodiversity critical
Population pressure high (large numbers and growth rates)
Reduce fertility and emphasize the importance and value of women's education.
Control of migrant encroachments critical.
Possible rezoning or relocation of human populations to protect core or sanctuary.
Strict enforcement and policing in areas with heavy threats from encroachments in conjunction with the opening of areas as buffers or livelihood zones.
Type 2
Biodiversity valuable
Few threats
Population pressures high (large numbers and growth rates)
Reduce fertility and implement or develop controls for future in-migration.
Emphasize the key roles of women in maintaining households and procuring a livelihood.
Create buffers outside of core or sanctuary.
Implement/develop/enforce community controls to maintain low threats to resources due to possible encroachments.
Rezoning or relocating may not be necessary but may require creation of corridors to absorb large populations.
Type 3
Biodiversity values high
Many threats
Moderate population pressures
Control migrant encroachment.
Introduce fertility reduction programs.
Introduce gender-specific interventions.
Introduce alternative livelihoods.
Encourage local management of resources to reduce threats.
Classify sources of threats by sub-population (livelihood grouping, ethnicity, gender, etc.).
Biodiversity and Human Threats
Key Issues and Possible Interventions to Reduce Negative Human Impacts on Biodiversity
Type 4
Biodiversity critical
Population pressures moderate
Despite having small populations with relatively small growth rates, they may have to be relocated if human uses are not compatible with species protection.
Migrant encroachments will have to be anticipated through the strengthening of local controls.
Ethnicity and gender issues will be critical.
Type 5
Biodiversity valuable
Few threats
Population pressures moderate
Fertility controls may not be critical in the short term.
In-migration and possible increases in women's fertility may occur as the site is opened for tourism.
Few threats are observed.
Importance of village institutions and cultural moderate practices should be recognized.
Type 6
Biodiversity high
Many threats
Population pressures moderate
Pressures from commercial exploitation
Policies that control harvesting, trading and marketing, pricing, and licensing help control extraction.
Village controls should be developed.
Access and rights need to be defined.
Enforcement of commercial extraction rules may be necessary.
Type 7
Biodiversity critical
Population pressures low
Recognize the importance of ethnicity.
Recognize tribal rights.
Emphasize women's roles and contributions to managing resources.
Support cultural beliefs, practices, and local rules for controlling access to resources.
Biodiversity and Human Threats
Key Issues and Possible Interventions to Reduce Negative Human Impacts on Biodiversity
Type 8
Biodiversity valuable
Few threats
Low pressures
Accessibility may induce seasonal movements or seasonal harvests.
Gender considerations.
Encourage local controls and conflict resolution mechanisms.
Type 9
Biodiversity valuable
Many threats
Low pressures
Issues concerning gender, commercialization, and access to markets.
The possibility of creating buffers or corridors to absorb future expansion of settlements should be evaluated.
Boundary demarcation, especially in ancestral lands, may be needed.
response to a number of influences, including national population increase, lack of economic opportunities, and maldistribution of agricultural lands. Deepening poverty among rural farmers adds to other factors that were already propelling the landless into fragile lands and coastal areas.
Various studies by the World Bank and the GEF attempt to quantify, through statistical analysis and mapping, the interconnections of poverty and the environment as well as the effects of population increases on biodiversity. These studies range from cross-country or regional statistical analyses of population trends and changes in land cover (e.g., deforestation rates). Others use national or country-level data across time periods to detect shifts in resource use during different periods of population growth. Geographic information systems (GIS) data are also applied across regions in a country. A third set of studies focuses on the micro- or local-level processes of environmental degradation. Changes in population are matched with corresponding changes in land use, social structure, and gender-specialized activities over a given time period.
*Author's Note: This text was prepared for the AAAS meeting on "Human Population, Biodiversity, and Protected Areas: Science and Policy Issues." The views expressed herein are solely those of the author, who is a social scientist, formerly with the Environment Department, Social Policy and Resettlement Division, the World Bank. These views should not be attributed to the World Bank, to its affiliated organizations, its Board of Executive Directors, or the countries they represent.