Transaction Search Form: please type in any of the fields below.
Date: November 22, 2024 Fri
Time: 11:43 am
Time: 11:43 am
Results for biodiversity
6 results foundAuthor: Ervin, J., N. Sekhran, A. Dinu. S. Gidda, M. Vergeichik andJ. Mee. Title: Protected Areas for the 21st Century: Lessons from UNDP/GEF's Portfolio Summary: The world’s biodiversity – the species, ecosystems and ecological processes that compose the natural world – are of incalculable value to humanity. The world’s agricultural systems depend upon biodiversity to sustain genetic plant and animal diversity, to provide pollination services, and to maintain irrigation services. The world’s cities depend upon biodiversity to provide clean drinking water to their burgeoning populations. The world’s coastal communities, in which one-half to two-thirds of all of humanity resides, depend upon the natural infrastructure of coral reefs, sea grass beds, and mangroves to buffer them from the impacts of climate change, including sea-level rise and increased storm surges. The world’s inland communities depend upon the natural infrastructure of healthy forests, grasslands and wetlands to buffer them against increased drought, flooding, disease and natural disasters. While biodiversity provides the fundamental goods and services upon which all life depends, including human societies, it is of particular importance to the 2.7 billion people – more than a quarter of the world’s population – who survive on less than $2 a day. As much as 70 percent of the world’s poorest people depend critically upon biodiversity to provide them with life’s most basic necessities, including food, water, shelter, medicine and their livelihoods, and a sixth of the world’s population depends upon the biodiversity within protected areas for their livelihoods. Despite the fundamental importance of biodiversity to human life and social development, the world is facing unprecedented and largely irreversible losses in biodiversity. Current extinction rates are approaching 1,000 times the background rate, and may climb to over 10,000 times the background rate during the next century if present trends in species loss and climate change continue. As many as 70 percent of the world’s known species are at risk of extinction by 2100 if global temperatures rise more than 3.5o Celsius. The loss of biodiversity and the resulting destabilization of ecosystem services undermine the very foundations of human welfare – in short, the social costs of biodiversity loss are enormous and immeasurable. Protected areas are the cornerstone of global biodiversity conservation. Over the past 40 years, governments and non-governmental organizations alike have made unprecedented investments in the establishment of protected areas around the world. As a result, the world’s terrestrial protected areas encompassed more than 18 million sq km in 2010, compared with just over 2 million sq km in 1970. As the first decade of the 21st Century comes to a close, emerging drivers of change are transforming our concept of protected areas – what they are and what they should do. Protected areas are expected to do more – in terms of their ecological, social and economic contributions – than ever before. Not only are they expected to provide habitat for endangered wildlife, but also to contribute to livelihoods for local communities, to generate tourism revenues to bolster local and national economies, and to play a key role in mitigation of and adaptation to climate change, among many other diverse functions and contributions. Purpose and objectives of this publication The following report looks at how changing 21st Century expectations about the roles and functions of protected areas are beginning to shape protected area management around the world and identifies emerging best practices for protected areas under a new paradigm that views protected areas as part of a planetary life support system. The report is based on case studies drawn largely from the portfolio of projects financed by the Global Environment Facility (GEF) through the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). The GEF is the world’s most significant multilateral funding source for protected areas. Since the Convention on Biological Diversity’s Programme of Work on Protected Areas was ratified in 2004, UNDP/ GEF has supported work in more than 700 protected areas around the world, covering nearly every goal, target and action under the Programme of Work. Following this introductory section, which presents background on historical and evolving concepts of protected areas and their roles, the report is organized according to eight key themes that are shaping protected areas management in the 21st Century. These themes range from enabling policy environments to management planning, governance, participation, and sustainable finance, to name but a few. For each of the eight themes, the report presents a snapshot of the current status of implementation, a set of emerging best practices, and one or more case studies that illustrate innovative and successful approaches. Details: New York: United Nations Development Programme and Montreal: Convention on Biological Diversity, 2010. 132p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed March 23, 2013 at: http://www.undp.org/content/undp/en/home/librarypage/environment-energy/ecosystems_and_biodiversity/protected_areas_forthe21stcentury.html Year: 2010 Country: International URL: http://www.undp.org/content/undp/en/home/librarypage/environment-energy/ecosystems_and_biodiversity/protected_areas_forthe21stcentury.html Shelf Number: 128095 Keywords: BiodiversityConservationNatural ResourcesWildlife Management |
Author: Sandbrook, Chris Title: Linking Conservation and Poverty Alleviation: the case of Great Apes An overview of current policy and practice in Africa Summary: The International Institute for Environment and Development IIED has coordinated an international network of conservation, development and indigenous/local community rights organisations who are interested in improving their understanding of, and sharing their experience in, the links between biodiversity conservation and poverty reduction. The Poverty and Conservation Learning Group (PCLG) works by collecting, analysing and disseminating information that can help shape better policy and practice – through its web portal (www.povertyandconservation.info), through workshops and symposia, and through occasional publications. Since 2009 the PCLG has received additional support from the Arcus Foundation to help achieve three goals: 1. To promote ongoing learning and dialogue on poverty-conservation linkages at the international level. 2. To increase attention to mainstreaming poverty concerns within conservation policy and programmes – particularly at the national level – and to build better and stronger linkages with existing initiatives that are focusing on development policy. 3. To introduce a great ape component to PCLG - by including ape-specific elements within our core networking and information dissemination activities and by focusing our mainstreaming efforts on conservation policies, programmes and locations that are relevant to great ape conservation. This report is the third PCLG output supported by the Arcus Foundation grant. The purpose of this report is to document current efforts to link great ape conservation and poverty reduction in the African, ape range states. It is intended to provide a quick inventory of which organisations are working in which countries and using which approaches in order to highlight potential areas of collaboration and/or potential sources of experience and lessons learned. It is also intended to highlight other initiatives that are intended to link environmental management with social concerns - poverty reduction, governance, economic development - with a view to encouraging greater linkages between these initiatives and those that are focussed on conservation. Following this report we are planning the following activities: 1) A learning event for ape conservation organisations to share experiences on their attempts to link conservation and poverty reduction. This would improve their effectiveness and efficiency, where so many conservation organisations still carry out development oriented interventions uninformed by previous experiences elsewhere, both good and bad. 2) South-South learning exchanges / events around key issues where knowledge gaps are the major problem. Examples emerging include (i) experience of other species-based programmes in addressing poverty reduction; (ii) community-based monitoring approaches;, (iiii) human wildlife conflict mitigation strategies and experiences with compensation, and (iv) REDD / carbon mechanisms that accommodate biodiversity conservation and poverty alleviation. 3) Establishment of multi-stakeholder learning groups in selected countries, potentially building on existing groups where there is interest, and using models of good practice. These might include the IIED-supported Forest Governance Learning Groups (FGLG) and Environmental Mainstreaming Learning and Leadership Groups. 4) Facilitating a high-level workshop in at least one country to encourage mainstreaming of biodiversity into development policy / practice – in coordination with the UNDP/UNEP Poverty Environment Initiative. Details: The Poverty and Conservation Learning Group, 21010. 94p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed march 23, 2013 at: http://pubs.iied.org/pdfs/G02770.pdf Year: 1010 Country: Africa URL: http://pubs.iied.org/pdfs/G02770.pdf Shelf Number: 128104 Keywords: BiodiversityGreat ApesNatural ResourcesPovertyWildlife Conservation (Africa) |
Author: India. Ministry of Environment and Forests Title: Committee Constituted to Holistically Address the Issue of Poaching in the Andaman and Nicobar Islands: Report Summary: 1. Biodiversity of Andaman and Nicobar Islands: The Andaman and Nicobar Islands are very rich in biodiversity, harbouring unique endemic life forms. The islands have both rich terrestrial as well as marine ecosystems, such as mangroves, coral reefs and sea grass beds. The marine biodiversity includes marine mammals such as whales, dolphins, dugong; marine turtles; estuarine or salt water crocodile; fishes; prawns and lobsters; corals; sea shells including rare and endangered Trochus species and Giant Clam Shells and numerous other marine life forms including coelenterates and echinoderms etc. 2. Reasons for threat to biodiversity: Economically also, many of the above species are highly valuable and some of them such as sea cucumbers, sea-shells, sharks, marine turtles, salt water crocodiles etc. are under severe pressure of over exploitation from illegal foreign fishing boats and poachers. Historically, these species had been exploited by people from neighbouring countries, mainly due to the low protective cover and low priority accorded to conservation of the marine biodiversity in general by the enforcement agencies of the country. 3. Legal measures for protection of biodiversity in the Andaman and Nicobar Islands: Several legal measures have been in place for protection of the marine biodiversity of the region. The Regulation of Fishing by Foreign Vessels Act, 1981, Coastal Regulation Zone Notification, 1991 (last amended in 2011), Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972, etc. coupled with establishment of 9 National Parks and 96 Wildlife Sanctuaries for a more focused conservation initiative, have all strengthened the enforcement regime in the region. Besides, the Andaman and Nicobar Administration has also taken measures for protecting the flora and fauna of the islands. Some of these National Parks are exclusively for the protection of the marine species. These include Mahatma Gandhi Marine National Park, Rani Jhansi Marine National Park, etc. As on date, an area of 1619.786 sq. kms has been covered under the Protected Area network in the Andaman and Nicobar Islands. 4. Management of biodiversity in Andaman and Nicobar Islands: Forest Department-The Wildlife Wing of the Andaman and Nicobar Administration, responsible for the protection of the biodiversity of the islands, is headed by the Chief Wildlife Warden, in the rank of the Principal Chief Conservator of Forests and has four divisions under his control. In addition to this, there are six territorial Divisions that carry out protection duties outside the designated Protected Area network. Coastal Police- Twenty Coastal Police Stations have also been established on the islands to upgrade regulatory and law enforcement regime in the coastal waters. The Coastal Police Stations are being equipped with latest infrastructural communication and patrolling equipments. Coast Guard: The Coast Guard has been assisting the Forest Department in apprehending the poachers in the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) as well as along the coast. 5. Issues that require attention: (a) Issue of foreign poachers: Despite the concerted efforts by various departments and agencies, the very availability of rich marine resources attracts foreign poachers to Indian territorial waters. Although, the enforcement agencies routinely apprehend several foreign poachers, it is believed that a large number of them get away undetected. Most of the poachers are habitual offenders and had been in Indian prisons several times. It has been observed that the western part of the Andaman Islands was the most vulnerable to poaching and also that the volume of the poaching has considerably increased over the years inspite of the best efforts by the Administration to contain the problem. Further, it is also believed that the problem of foreign poachers in the Andaman and Nicobar Islands has a long history, and there are a large number of ethnic people of Myanmar origin settled in the Andaman and Nicobar Islands. These people are believed to be often conniving with the poachers. (b) Issue of Trochus and Sea cucumbers: It has been observed that although there was good population of Sea Cucumbers in Andaman and Nicobar Islands, there were contradicting reports of the status of the species as a whole in the country’s waters. Therefore, there is need for carrying out detailed scientific study on the population status of Sea Cucumbers. The Zoological Survey of India (ZSI), who has the required wherewithal for carrying out such scientific studies, is being requested for undertaking the study. The report of ZSI would be dovetailed with this report, as soon as the same is received from ZSI. A similar study on Trochus niloticus, would also be taken up. (c) Issue of livelihood: The reduction in forestry operations has reduced the employment opportunities considerably for the local people of islands. It may be added that this sector was one of the biggest local employers for the last five decades. Subsequent ban on certain marine species after their inclusion in the Scheduled lists of the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972 has also adversely affected the livelihoods of the fishers community in the last decade. Strategy and measures suggested for improvement: In order to reach the desired goal, a three pronged strategy has been suggested which, inter alia, includes tightening and improving the protection regime for conservation of marine resources, taking care of the livelihoods of local fisher folk, both qualitatively and quantitatively so as to increase their stake in conservation of marine biodiversity, and to open a diplomatic channel with the Government of Myanmar to address the issue of ingress of its illegal fishers (poachers) into the waters and shores of A&N Islands with a view to finding a solution to this problem and stop the illegal practice jointly. The report concludes with a number of recommendations to address the various issues. Details: New Delhi: Ministry of Environment and Forests, 2011. 29p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed March 23, 2013 at: http://moef.nic.in/downloads/public-information/report-on-andaman-and-nicobar-islands-poaching-issue.pdf Year: 2011 Country: India URL: http://moef.nic.in/downloads/public-information/report-on-andaman-and-nicobar-islands-poaching-issue.pdf Shelf Number: 128105 Keywords: Animal PoachingBiodiversityForest ManagementIllegal FishingWildlife ConservationWildlife Crimes (India)Wildlife Management |
Author: Bromley, Tom Title: Development AND Gorillas? Assessing fifteen years of integrated conservation and development in south-western Uganda Summary: Bwindi Impenetrable National Park and Mgahinga Gorilla National Park are two afromontane forests considered as extremely important biodiversity areas, with global significance, due to their population of highly endangered Mountain Gorilla. Threats to the two parks include uncontrolled exploitation of forest resources as well as fire damage and the indirect pressures of demand for land. In response to these threats, a range of “integrated conservation and development” strategies have been applied in and around Bwindi and Mgahinga. This report summarises the findings of a study which tested the effectiveness of these strategies in reconciling biodiversity conservation and socio-economic development interests. It confirms the validity of the assumption that linking local people to a resource and helping generate a steady stream of benefits increases willingness to manage and protect that resource, over the long term but notes inconclusive evidence that providing alternative livelihoods is an effective conservation strategy. Details: London: International Institute for Environment and Development, 2010. 84p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed March 23, 2013 at: http://pubs.iied.org/14592IIED.html Year: 2010 Country: Uganda URL: http://pubs.iied.org/14592IIED.html Shelf Number: 128108 Keywords: BiodiversityGorillasWildlife ConservationWildlife CrimesWildlife Management |
Author: Morgera, Elisa Title: Wildlife Law and the Empowerment of the Poor Summary: There is a wide variety of interests to be balanced in wildlife management. These interests range from the conservation of biodiversity and specific endangered species and their habitats, to valuable opportunities in ecotourism or hunting tourism, to the needs and traditions of the local population relating to hunting and collection of animals or their product for cultural/religious practices. Although revenues from the wildlife sector may be considered irrelevant as a contribution to the national gross domestic product, wildlife’s influence on local economies can be significant. Some rural communities see wildlife as a source of food. Some see wildlife habitat as potential timber or farmland. And some see wildlife hunting or ecotourism as a source of cash. Good laws can provide a framework for good wildlife management. An appropriate legal framework can conserve wildlife while reducing poverty and increasing food security. Enacting effective legal reforms, though, remains challenging. In 2007–2008, FAO and the International Council for Game and Wildlife Conservation (CIC) reviewed legislation on wildlife management in Western and Central Asia. This review launched a regional dialogue on international obligations and standards on wildlife management, based on current challenges at national and regional levels. This regional initiative led to a set of design principles on how to develop effective national legislation on sustainable wildlife management (available at www.fao.org/legal). These principles sought to provide tools for the analysis of existing legal frameworks, as well as provide guidance for developing new legislation based on international standards and best practices. In addition, the principles aim to help decision-makers, legal drafters and resource managers to understand wildlife legislation, engage in participatory and interdisciplinary legislative drafting, and use legislation to support sustainable wildlife management for the empowerment of the poor and environmental sustainability. In 2009, FAO undertook to further refine these principles, taking into account the challenges faced and lessons learnt by wildlife legislators in other regions of the world. To this end, a series of regional studies examined the legislation of selected countries in Africa, Latin America, South-east Asia and Oceania.1 These studies analysed laws concerning wildlife tenure (ownership and use rights and obligations, links with land and forest tenure), public participation in wildlife decision-making and planning, and community-based wildlife management. The purpose was to identify legal tools that allow disadvantaged people to directly benefit from wildlife management, thereby improving food security, alleviating poverty, enhancing rural livelihoods and ultimately contributing to the legal empowerment of the poor.2 The studies also considered the strengths and weaknesses of current legal frameworks in promoting environmental sustainability and socio-economic development. The present study synthesizes and analyses the findings of the abovementioned regional legal reviews, identifies current trends and shortcomings, and singles out innovative legal solutions. On this basis, it also refines the design principles to develop effective national legislation on sustainable wildlife management, emphasizing the legal tools that empower the poor, particularly local and indigenous communities. Details: Rome: Development Law Service, FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations) Legal Office, 2010. 340p. Source: Internet Resource: FAO Legislative Study 103: Accessed March 30, 2013 at: http://www.fao.org/docrep/013/i1906e/i1906e00.pdf Year: 2010 Country: International URL: http://www.fao.org/docrep/013/i1906e/i1906e00.pdf Shelf Number: 128176 Keywords: BiodiversityWildlife ConservationWildlife CrimesWildlife Law (International)Wildlife Management |
Author: Caillabet, Olivier S. Title: The Trade in Tokay Geckos Gekko gecko in South-East Asia: with a case study on Novel Medicinal Claims in Peninsular Malaysia Summary: South-east Asia is rich in biodiversity. It is also a global hub for wildlife trade, both as a source and as a consumer. Wildlife trade, for use in Traditional Medicine (TM), as pets and for food, poses a significant threat to the conservation of many species in the region. The Tokay Gecko Gekko gecko is one such species potentially threatened by trade. This species is found throughout South-east Asia in both urban and naturally forested environments. It has been traded for traditional medicine for hundreds of years and more recently as a pet, mainly to the EU and North America. In 2009 a novel trade emerged in Tokay Geckos Gekko gecko reportedly as a cure for HIV/AIDS. This trade spread throughout South-East Asia with a demand purportedly centred on Peninsular Malaysia. In late 2011, TRAFFIC was granted funding by WWF and Wildlife Reserves Singapore to investigate the trade related to Novel Medicinal Claims (NMCs) in late 2011 in Peninsular Malaysia and the wider trade in South-east Asia for TM. The aims of the study were to substantiate some of the claims surrounding NMCs; highlight the trade routes and trade hotspots for targeted enforcement action and; provide a regional overview of the trade through a desk top study and provide data to support a CITES Appendix II listing for this species. Informal interviews were held with private dealers and pet shops/aquaria selling Tokay Geckos throughout the peninsula. Nineteen dealers were interviewed and more than 250 Tokay Geckos were observed for sale. Several questions surrounding the recent Tokay Gecko trade spike for NMCs remain unanswered, however; following this study, some of the claims can be substantiated. There is no evidence to support the claims of an HIV/AIDS cure. Interviews with dealers in Peninsular Malaysia indicate that considerable sums of money have been paid, in particular, for large individuals weighing over 300 g. Several dealers stated that Tokay Geckos weighing over 400 g are valued above USD 1 000 000, however; TRAFFIC does not believe these claims to be true. The significance of this weight-price threshold is unclear. Price data gathered during this study are inconsistent with claims that heavier individuals are more valuable. Additionally, it is doubtful that Tokay Geckos can naturally reach 400 g. This is the likely reason why some dealers are said to have artificially augmented the weight using silicone or metal pieces. There is no evidence that such huge sums of money, as claimed by dealers in Peninsular Malaysia, have been paid for Tokay Geckos weighing over 400 g. TRAFFIC does not believe that these statements are credible. The motivations for dealers to make these claims are not known though it has previously been suggested that it could be part of an elaborate hoax. To what end, however, is not clear. Based on interviews with Tokay Gecko dealers and seizure records, the trade in Tokay Geckos for NMCs appears to have begun around late 2009 and peaked in 2010/2011. This trade now appears to be in decline. The reasons for this are unclear but could be related to a combination of improved enforcement, realisation among consumers that NMCs are unfounded or the prevalence of scams, as reported by Tokay Gecko dealers and in the media. Results of surveys and interviews with dealers suggest that the online trade in this species is populated by fake sellers. Additionally, private dealers interviewed highlighted that the trade in this species, particularly in Thailand, is dangerous and often involves robberies and hold-ups. Tokay Geckos traded in Peninsular Malaysia for NMCs appear to be originating in Thailand, as well as in Lao PDR and Myanmar. They are harvested from the wild and transported overland to Malaysia. Seizure records indicate that the Philippines is also an important origin for Tokay Geckos traded for NMCs in Peninsular Malaysia, however; no Tokay Geckos from the Philippines were encountered during field surveys. The more prominent Tokay Gecko dealers in Peninsular Malaysia appear to be concentrated close to the Thai border and also to be the source of Tokay Geckos entering the country. According to dealers interviewed during surveys, the primary consumers of Tokay Geckos for NMCs appear to be Singaporeans and local Malaysians. Some even claim use of Tokay Geckos by Europeans and North Americans for medical research. Tokay Geckos were openly sold in 11 pet shops/aquariums across the peninsula. This can be attributed to lax enforcement; however, interviews with pet shop/aquarium staff, as well as information gathered from private dealers, also suggest that there is a lack of awareness of the national law pertaining to the trade in Tokay Geckos. Several private dealers encountered during surveys had licences issued from local Department of Wildlife and National Parks (DWNP) (Malay acronym “PERHILITAN”) offices allowing them to trade in Tokay Geckos. However, according to PERHILITAN’s head of enforcement, no licences to trade in Tokay Geckos have ever been issued. Given the system in place, whereby state offices report permits issued to the PERHILITAN head office, this observation is surprising and potentially indicative of a miscommunication/lack of coordination between PERHILITAN headquarters and state offices. The trade in Tokay Geckos for NMCs is reported to have led to localised population declines of wild Tokay Geckos in Bangladesh. Regionally, however, the scale of this trade, in terms of numbers of individual Tokay Geckos removed from the wild, appears to be relatively small. This contrasts directly with the trade in Tokay Geckos for TM. The international trade in Tokay Geckos for TM is colossal. The vast majority of Tokay Geckos traded for TM originate from Thailand and Java, Indonesia. Customs import data show that Taiwan has imported ~15 000 000 Tokay Geckos since 2004, 71% of which were imported from Thailand with the remainder mostly coming from Indonesia. While this trade appears to be legal but unregulated in Thailand, the trade in Tokay Geckos from Java appears to be entirely illegal. It is important to note that Taiwan is not the sole consumer of Tokay Geckos for TM. A seizure in 2011 bound for Hong Kong from Indonesia is estimated to have consisted of 1 200 000 dried Tokay Geckos. Aside from Taiwan and Hong Kong, large quantities of Tokay Geckos are also consumed for TM in mainland China and Viet Nam. The extent of this trade is unknown but thought to be substantial. Considerable volumes of Tokay Geckos are also traded beyond Asia: between 1998 and 2004, 8.5 tonnes of dried Tokay Geckos were imported into the USA. Taking this into consideration, it is reasonable to believe that the total trade in Tokay Geckos exceed the already substantial known trade. Tokay Geckos consumed for TM in Southeast Asia are mostly harvested from the wild. In mainland China and Viet Nam, Tokay Geckos are reportedly bred in captivity to supply the local TM trade; however, the production cannot meet demand. Despite the fact that Tokay Geckos have a large geographical distribution, have high reproductive rates and can thrive in human dominated landscapes, populations are still susceptible to over-harvesting. The trade for NMCs is relatively small and does not does not appear to pose a threat to the conservation of wild Tokay Geckos. However, as mentioned, the trade for TM is substantial and could likely threaten wild populations of Tokay Geckos. This is evidenced by the reported declines of wild populations in Thailand and Java, as well as the past deterioration of populations in mainland China, Given the substantial volume of international trade in this species and the observed population declines, questions surround the legality and future sustainability of the Tokay Gecko trade, particularly for use in TM. Details: Petaling Jaya, Selangor, Malaysia, TRAFFIC Southeast Asia, 2013. 44p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 16, 2013 at: Year: 2013 Country: Malaysia URL: Shelf Number: 128379 Keywords: BiodiversityGeckosIllegal Wildlife Trade (Malaysia)Wild Animal TradeWildlife ConservationWildlife CrimesWildlife Management |