Search Results

Protected areas currently comprise a substantial land use and cover 14% of the Earth’s land surface. Their expansion in recent decades, combined with increasing economic growth and aspirations in high biodiversity areas, has brought the relevance of socio-ecological systems (also known as coupled human-natural systems) to the fore for conservation. Socio-ecological processes operate at multiple scales: within protected areas, for example resource use by people living inside protected areas; surrounding protected areas, for example poverty alleviation for communities on the fringes; and larger landscapes, for example conflicts between infrastructure expansion and corridors for animal movement between networks of protected areas. National-and global-scale processes such as climate change, shifting priorities of international donors, and market forces that lead to land use change influence outcomes for conservation and people at all of these scales. Protected area management faces several mismatches in addressing these socio-ecological dimensions: conflicting objectives for conservation and development; ecological and social processes that operate at larger spatial scales than protected areas; and governance of land use in the larger landscape in which protected area managers have no authority. The next step in the historical evolution of protected area management is incorporating socio-ecological dynamics and addressing these mismatches.

Wildlife species worldwide are under threat from a range of anthropogenic threats, with declines primarily caused by overexploitation and habitat loss associated with an increasing human population and per capita resource use. Exploitation is driven by numerous factors, but is often the result of illegal activities, such as hunting, logging, and wildlife trade. Protected areas, designed to safeguard threatened species and their habitats, are the foundation of biodiversity conservation, and several analyses have demonstrated that effective protected areas are critical to the maintenance of biodiversity. However, other analyses show that most protected areas suffer from a lack of resources and poor management. Numerous technologies have been developed to address these challenges by facilitating adaptive management via ranger-based data collection, data analysis and visualization, and strategic planning. This chapter reviews the Spatial Monitoring and Reporting Tool (SMART) platform, with a particular emphasis on conservation law enforcement monitoring, and demonstrates both how SMART has been used to improve management of conservation areas, and how complementary systems and emerging technologies can be integrated into a single unified platform for conservation area management. In a relatively short period of time, SMART has grown to become the global standard for conservation area management. More than 800 national parks and other conservation areas are currently using SMART in more than 65 countries worldwide. SMART sites have seen improvements in patrol effectiveness, increases in populations of critically endangered species like tigers, and reductions in threats from poaching and habitat loss.

This chapter explores various ways that the cultural and spiritual significance of nature can play a key role in addressing challenges that the US National Park Service faces in engaging people and diversifying its visitor base. It draws on case studies developing interpretative materials for national parks that evoked the cultural and spiritual meanings of natural features in mainstream American, Native American, Native Hawaiian, and other cultures around the world. Rather than simply conveying information, interpretation focused on enriching people’s experience and appealing to the cultural backgrounds of diverse ethnic groups in order to inspire deep-seated, sustainable motivations for supporting parks and protecting the environment. The chapter also discusses ideas for a new International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) project that brings international protected area managers together with representatives of indigenous traditions, mainstream religions, and the general public. Here the goal is to integrate the cultural and spiritual significance of nature into protected area management and governance. The chapter concludes with remarks on the need to supplement objective scientific knowledge with subjective personal knowledge that connects people with nature and inspires conservation.

On 25 August 1916, the National Park Service Organic Act was signed into law by President Woodrow Wilson, thereby establishing the agency and its mission in a mere 731 words. The key mission, still in force today, is “to conserve the scenery and the natural and historic objects and the wild life therein and to provide for the enjoyment of the same in such manner and by such means as will leave them unimpaired for the enjoyment of future generations.” Since then, the demographic, social, political, environmental, and economic landscape of the United States has dramatically changed. This strategic discussion, which transpired at the Berkeley summit “Science for Parks, Parks for Science” on 26 March 2015, focuses on the legacy of the National Park Service mission, its relevance in the 21st century, and protected area management.

In a world with rapidly changing climate, rising sea levels, invasive species, and shifting disturbance regimes, national parks face huge stewardship challenges. Parks are challenged with reconciling management in the face of these changes while sustaining the preservationist values embedded in history, law, and policy. To maintain and restore ecosystem functions and combat climate change, should national parks embrace species once considered nonnative to a region, organisms produced by de-extinction, or populations introduced through rewilding? Should managers use historical baselines as goals for restoration, in the face of shifting climate and disturbance regimes? Is active management appropriate to resist novel ecosystems, or should trajectories of disturbance and succession be allowed to proceed unimpaired? This strategic discussion, which transpired at the Berkeley summit “Science for Parks, Parks for Science” on 26 March 2015, focuses on the role of stewardship and science in national parks and their role in confronting these looming challenges.