<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" media="screen" href="/~d/styles/rss2full.xsl"?><?xml-stylesheet type="text/css" media="screen" href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~d/styles/itemcontent.css"?><rss xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:fn="http://www.w3.org/2005/xpath-functions" xmlns:xs="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema" xmlns:feedburner="http://rssnamespace.org/feedburner/ext/1.0" version="2.0">
<channel>

<title>Eldis Environment</title>
<link>http://www.eldis.org/go/subscribe</link>
<description>One of the Eldis RSS newsfeeds on major development issues</description>
<copyright>Copyright ©2013 Eldis, Sussex</copyright>
<webMaster>kss-support@ids.ac.uk (KSS Support)</webMaster>
<language>en-uk</language>

<pubDate>Sat, 25 May 2013 01:05:50 GMT</pubDate>
<ttl>60</ttl>
<atom10:link xmlns:atom10="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/eldis-biodiversity" /><feedburner:info uri="eldis-biodiversity" /><atom10:link xmlns:atom10="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" rel="hub" href="http://pubsubhubbub.appspot.com/" /><feedburner:feedFlare href="http://add.my.yahoo.com/rss?url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeeds.feedburner.com%2Feldis-biodiversity" src="http://us.i1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/i/us/my/addtomyyahoo4.gif">Subscribe with My Yahoo!</feedburner:feedFlare><feedburner:feedFlare href="http://www.newsgator.com/ngs/subscriber/subext.aspx?url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeeds.feedburner.com%2Feldis-biodiversity" src="http://www.newsgator.com/images/ngsub1.gif">Subscribe with NewsGator</feedburner:feedFlare><feedburner:feedFlare href="http://feeds.my.aol.com/add.jsp?url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeeds.feedburner.com%2Feldis-biodiversity" src="http://o.aolcdn.com/favorites.my.aol.com/webmaster/ffclient/webroot/locale/en-US/images/myAOLButtonSmall.gif">Subscribe with My AOL</feedburner:feedFlare><feedburner:feedFlare href="http://www.bloglines.com/sub/http://feeds.feedburner.com/eldis-biodiversity" src="http://www.bloglines.com/images/sub_modern11.gif">Subscribe with Bloglines</feedburner:feedFlare><feedburner:feedFlare href="http://www.netvibes.com/subscribe.php?url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeeds.feedburner.com%2Feldis-biodiversity" src="http://www.netvibes.com/img/add2netvibes.gif">Subscribe with Netvibes</feedburner:feedFlare><feedburner:feedFlare href="http://fusion.google.com/add?feedurl=http%3A%2F%2Ffeeds.feedburner.com%2Feldis-biodiversity" src="http://buttons.googlesyndication.com/fusion/add.gif">Subscribe with Google</feedburner:feedFlare><feedburner:feedFlare href="http://www.pageflakes.com/subscribe.aspx?url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeeds.feedburner.com%2Feldis-biodiversity" src="http://www.pageflakes.com/ImageFile.ashx?instanceId=Static_4&amp;fileName=ATP_blu_91x17.gif">Subscribe with Pageflakes</feedburner:feedFlare><feedburner:feedFlare href="http://www.plusmo.com/add?url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeeds.feedburner.com%2Feldis-biodiversity" src="http://plusmo.com/res/graphics/fbplusmo.gif">Subscribe with Plusmo</feedburner:feedFlare><feedburner:feedFlare href="http://www.thefreedictionary.com/_/hp/AddRSS.aspx?http%3A%2F%2Ffeeds.feedburner.com%2Feldis-biodiversity" src="http://img.tfd.com/hp/addToTheFreeDictionary.gif">Subscribe with The Free Dictionary</feedburner:feedFlare><feedburner:feedFlare href="http://www.bitty.com/manual/?contenttype=rssfeed&amp;contentvalue=http%3A%2F%2Ffeeds.feedburner.com%2Feldis-biodiversity" src="http://www.bitty.com/img/bittychicklet_91x17.gif">Subscribe with Bitty Browser</feedburner:feedFlare><feedburner:feedFlare href="http://www.newsalloy.com/?rss=http%3A%2F%2Ffeeds.feedburner.com%2Feldis-biodiversity" src="http://www.newsalloy.com/subrss3.gif">Subscribe with NewsAlloy</feedburner:feedFlare><feedburner:feedFlare href="http://www.live.com/?add=http%3A%2F%2Ffeeds.feedburner.com%2Feldis-biodiversity" src="http://tkfiles.storage.msn.com/x1piYkpqHC_35nIp1gLE68-wvzLZO8iXl_JMledmJQXP-XTBOLfmQv4zhj4MhcWEJh_GtoBIiAl1Mjh-ndp9k47If7hTaFno0mxW9_i3p_5qQw">Subscribe with Live.com</feedburner:feedFlare><feedburner:feedFlare href="http://mix.excite.eu/add?feedurl=http%3A%2F%2Ffeeds.feedburner.com%2Feldis-biodiversity" src="http://image.excite.co.uk/mix/addtomix.gif">Subscribe with Excite MIX</feedburner:feedFlare><feedburner:feedFlare href="http://www.yourminis.com/subscribe.aspx?u=http%3A%2F%2Ffeeds.feedburner.com%2Feldis-biodiversity" src="http://www.yourminis.com/images/addtoyourminisbadge.gif">Subscribe with Yourminis.com</feedburner:feedFlare><feedburner:feedFlare href="http://download.attensa.com/app/get_attensa.html?feedurl=http%3A%2F%2Ffeeds.feedburner.com%2Feldis-biodiversity" src="http://www.attensa.com/blogs/attensa/WindowsLiveWriter/BadgeredintoBadges_10C02/attensa_feed_button5.gif">Subscribe with Attensa for Outlook</feedburner:feedFlare><feedburner:feedFlare href="http://www.webwag.com/wwgthis.php?url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeeds.feedburner.com%2Feldis-biodiversity" src="http://www.webwag.com/images/wwgthis.gif">Subscribe with Webwag</feedburner:feedFlare><feedburner:feedFlare href="http://hub.netomat.net/account/account.autoSubscribe.jspa?urls=http%3A%2F%2Ffeeds.feedburner.com%2Feldis-biodiversity" src="http://www.netomat.net/blogger/images/icon_netomat_feedbutton.gif">Subscribe with netomat Hub</feedburner:feedFlare><feedburner:feedFlare href="http://www.podcastready.com/oneclick_bookmark.php?url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeeds.feedburner.com%2Feldis-biodiversity" src="http://www.podcastready.com/images/podcastready_button.gif">Subscribe with Podcast Ready</feedburner:feedFlare><feedburner:feedFlare href="http://www.flurry.com/pushRssFeed.do?r=fb&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeeds.feedburner.com%2Feldis-biodiversity" src="http://www.flurry.com/images/flurry_rss_logo2.gif">Subscribe with Flurry</feedburner:feedFlare><feedburner:feedFlare href="http://www.wikio.com/subscribe?url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeeds.feedburner.com%2Feldis-biodiversity" src="http://www.wikio.com/shared/img/add2wikio.gif">Subscribe with Wikio</feedburner:feedFlare><feedburner:feedFlare href="http://www.dailyrotation.com/index.php?feed=http%3A%2F%2Ffeeds.feedburner.com%2Feldis-biodiversity" src="http://www.dailyrotation.com/rss-dr2.gif">Subscribe with Daily Rotation</feedburner:feedFlare><feedburner:browserFriendly>This is one of the news feeds from Eldis. &#xD;
&#xD;
You can also choose to receive the content of this feed as an email message. Or we can supply you with HTML code to add the feed to your own website. &#xD;
&#xD;
Visit http://www.eldis.org/go/newsfeeds for more information, or contact us at community@ids.ac.uk&#xD;
</feedburner:browserFriendly><item>
<title>Understanding relationships between biodiversity, carbon, forests and people: the key to achieving REDD+ objectives. A global assessment report</title>
<pubDate>21 Jan 2013 16:14:01 GMT</pubDate>
<description>This report seeks to better understand the relationships between biodiversity, carbon, forests and people, so as to support the achievement of REDD+ objectives. It summarises the latest scientific literature to make sense of the complex web of relationships, how they may be affected by the implementation of REDD+ management activities, and the potential trade-offs and synergies between and among environmental and socioeconomic objectives.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The introduction provides a summary of the issue, presenting contextual data to illustrate the importance of, and challenges faced by, forest ecosystems. It also discusses REDD+ and its aims of reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation, as well as conserving, managing and increasing forests as carbon stocks. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The report is split into four chapters. The first chapter explores the relationships and impacts of deforestation and forest degradation on biodiversity, carbon and other ecosystem services. Covering a range of forest types, it gives a broad overview of biodiversity and carbon relationships in potential REDD+ programme regions. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Impacts of forest and land management on biodiversity and carbon are the focus of the second chapter, which explores management and action approaches, identifying areas for improving agricultural practice, measures to reduce the impact of various extractive industries, and indicators for the effective monitoring of carbon and biodiversity.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Social and economic considerations relevant to REDD+ are covered by the third chapter, including the social and economic context of governance and its consequences. This chapter concludes that REDD+ activities can greatly benefit poor people (particularly through participatory practices) and generate significant financial flows.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The fourth chapter examines existing and future options for governance of REDD+, forest management and biodiversity. It explores options to synergise climate, forest management and biodiversity at both the national and international scale, including information on data collection, planning, policies and finance. The report concludes that governance is likely to remain pluralistic; rather than impose a singular solution, this complexity should be embraced.&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/eldis-biodiversity/~4/OGVdtGWr1uo" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.eldis.org/go/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=63521</guid>
<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/eldis-biodiversity/~3/OGVdtGWr1uo/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=63521</link>
<author>J. A. Parrotta (ed)</author>
<category domain="theme">Governance</category>
<category domain="theme">Mitigation</category>
<category domain="theme">Forestry</category>
<category domain="theme">REDD</category>
<category domain="theme">Environment</category>
<category domain="theme">Biodiversity</category>
<category domain="theme">Climate change</category>
<category domain="theme">Forestry</category>
<category domain="theme">forestry deforestation</category>
<category domain="theme">Natural resource management</category>
<feedburner:origLink>http://www.eldis.org/go/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=63521</feedburner:origLink></item>
<item>
<title>Turn down the heat: why a 4°C warmer world must be avoided</title>
<pubDate>12 Dec 2012 09:01:19 GMT</pubDate>
<description>This report, produced for the World Bank by the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research and Climate Analytics, attempts to describe what climate change impacts are likely to be felt in a &amp;lsquo;4&amp;deg;C world', i.e. a world where global average temperatures have risen four degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels. In doing so, it hopes to motivate actors and insert urgency into climate change mitigation and adaptation efforts.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The report first discusses presently observed climate changes and impacts, with extensive data and analysis provided across numerous areas. These include the following.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;ul&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;Rising greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions: from a pre-industrial concentration of around 278 parts per million (ppm), the levels of carbon dioxide, as of September 2012, have reached 391ppm (increasing at a rate of 1.9ppm per year).&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;Warming and rising sea levels: coral reefs are at particular risk and increased acidification is also an issue of concern.&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;Loss of ice: summer ice in the Arctic has halved in the last few decades.&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;Extreme weather and climate: increased severity and frequency of droughts and storms, and greater temperature extremes.&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;Welfare impacts: it is estimated that just a degree Celsius rise in temperature could reduce economic growth by around 1.3 per cent.&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;/ul&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;The paper then goes on to describe likely projections for the 21st century should a &amp;lsquo;4&amp;deg;C world&amp;rsquo; become reality. Particular focus is placed on sea level rise, changes in extreme temperatures and sectoral impacts (agriculture, water, ecosystems/biodiversity and human health). These impacts are largely determined through an assumed linear growth. However, the final section of the paper warns of non-linear accelerating effects and impacts should certain 'tipping-points' be breached (either by introducing 'feedback' or else triggering 'cascades' of interlinked effects). &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The concluding remarks stress the importance of cooperative, international actions to avoiding an unacceptable four degrees Celsius rise in global temperature. A &amp;lsquo;4&amp;deg;C world&amp;rsquo; would disproportionately impact less developed countries which are least equipped to deal with climate change. As well as the direct impacts on food security and loss and damage, a &amp;lsquo;4&amp;deg;C world&amp;rsquo; would likely greatly impact efforts to eradicate poverty.&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/eldis-biodiversity/~4/jG3VFpZMU-k" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.eldis.org/go/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=63289</guid>
<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/eldis-biodiversity/~3/jG3VFpZMU-k/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=63289</link>
<author />
<category domain="theme">Agriculture and food security</category>
<category domain="theme">Poverty and vulnerability</category>
<category domain="theme">Governance</category>
<category domain="theme">Health</category>
<category domain="theme">Water</category>
<category domain="theme">Mitigation</category>
<category domain="theme">Environment</category>
<category domain="theme">Biodiversity</category>
<category domain="theme">Climate change</category>
<category domain="theme">Climate Change Adaptation</category>
<category domain="theme">climate change adaptation and vulnerability</category>
<category domain="theme">climate change adaptation disaster risk reduction</category>
<category domain="theme">climate change adaptation key sectors</category>
<category domain="theme">climate change polar regions</category>
<feedburner:origLink>http://www.eldis.org/go/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=63289</feedburner:origLink></item>
<item>
<title>Mainstreaming community-based conservation in a transboundary mountain landscape: lessons from Kangchenjunga</title>
<pubDate>22 Nov 2012 09:00:59 GMT</pubDate>
<description>This paper draws recommendations for transboundary and participatory biodiversity conservation from the Kangchenjunga Conservation Landscape Initiative. This 'biodiversity hotspot' - shared by Bhutan, India and Nepal - is one of seven transboundary landscapes indentified by the International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development (ICIMOD) for regional cooperation development. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Until the mid-1990s, conservation efforts in Kangchenjunga were primarily focused on the creation of Protected Areas (PAs), resulting in a collection of 'conservation islands' with different management regimes surrounded by a landscape in which biodiversity continued to decline. Since then, concepts of best practice in sustainable biodiversity management have transitioned from protectionist to a participatory ecosystem approach. This has led ICIMOD to develop conservation corridors in order to link the PAs and to assist countries in managing this transboundary landscape in a sustainable way.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The influence of national policy in people-centred conservation in the area is discussed by country. Nepal has progressed significantly from strict protectionist strategies in the 1960's to initiate a number of new and amended legislative actions to recognise community rights, introduce buffer zone regulations to address needs and conflicts with locals, and further participatory forest conservation. Despite many progressive efforts, there have been mixed results in India with regard to implementation. Bhutan has empowered forest user groups in a representative system of conservation management covering 49 per cent of the country's geographical area.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The paper concludes with five recommendations for Bhutan, India and Nepal:&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;ul&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;include community conserved areas within PAs, embracing the needs and role of local people in conservation;&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;introduce legislation that grants rights regarding natural resources and participation in biodiversity management to community-based institutions, the poor and the socially marginalised;&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;develop institutions and management programmes to identify and establish corridors between PAs;&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;empower community-based institutions to fully participate in natural resource management;&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;adopt a formal framework to address transboundary issues in the Kangchenjunga region.&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/eldis-biodiversity/~4/PBewH122-2M" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.eldis.org/go/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=63115</guid>
<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/eldis-biodiversity/~3/PBewH122-2M/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=63115</link>
<author>K. Phuntsho</author>
<category domain="theme">Poverty and vulnerability</category>
<category domain="theme">Forestry</category>
<category domain="theme">Environment</category>
<category domain="theme">Biodiversity</category>
<category domain="theme">Climate change</category>
<category domain="theme">Climate Change Adaptation</category>
<category domain="theme">climate change adaptation community based</category>
<category domain="theme">Natural resource management</category>
<category domain="theme">Participation and local governance and institutions</category>
<category domain="theme">Participation and national and regional governance</category>
<category domain="region">South Asia</category>
<category domain="country">Bhutan</category>
<category domain="ISO 2 character country code">BT</category>
<category domain="country">India</category>
<category domain="ISO 2 character country code">IN</category>
<category domain="country">Nepal</category>
<category domain="ISO 2 character country code">NP</category>
<feedburner:origLink>http://www.eldis.org/go/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=63115</feedburner:origLink></item>
<item>
<title>Prospects and Constraints of Madhupur National Park Management</title>
<pubDate>31 Oct 2012 09:01:00 GMT</pubDate>
<description>The study was conducted in Madhupur National Park (MNP), which is very well known for its characteristics as deciduous forest. This study examined the constraints of park management, causes of deforestation and prospects of Madhupur Sal forests of Bangladesh. Data were collected from the Madhupur National Park authority and a study was done to have clear scenario of the park management and status of forest over time. It is evident from the study that due to various factors like anthropogenic disturbances, political abusement, absence of proper rules and regulations, willingless of the authority, encroachment of forest by locals/local leaders, illegal cutting of Sal trees, agro-forestry, and lack of adequate budget are main constraints for managing MNP. The study also revealed that about 1-3% of the forest is depleted each year, and about 50-80 years later, the forest will be completely vanished or scattered in somewhere.&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/eldis-biodiversity/~4/z-YWNs0bsGU" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.eldis.org/go/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=62938</guid>
<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/eldis-biodiversity/~3/z-YWNs0bsGU/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=62938</link>
<author>M Mia</author>
<category domain="theme">Environment</category>
<category domain="theme">biodiversity protected areas</category>
<category domain="theme">Forestry</category>
<category domain="theme">natural resource management forests</category>
<category domain="region">South Asia</category>
<category domain="country">Bangladesh</category>
<category domain="ISO 2 character country code">BD</category>
<feedburner:origLink>http://www.eldis.org/go/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=62938</feedburner:origLink></item>
<item>
<title>International regime on access and benefit sharing: negotiation dynamics and South Asian issues</title>
<pubDate>12 Sep 2012 22:34:15 GMT</pubDate>
<description>The Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) was instituted as the international regime that would serve as the basis to negotiate issues of access and benefit sharing (ABS) related to genetic resources. In this context, the current paper discusses the negotiation dynamics of the international regime on ABS, and issues for South Asian countries.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The paper states that after about two decades of the institution of the CBD, the issue of ABS is still fraught with significant problems, mainly because of the lack of enforceability of the Convention due to its legally non-binding nature. In this respect, although all the countries in South Asia have signed and ratified the CBD, only two countries in the region have put in place related national legislation.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;On the negotiations front, the author demonstrates that:&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;ul&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;despite the fact that most issues remain unresolved and controversial, the implications of realising the agenda put forth in 2008 would be manifold and greatly help countries strengthen measures on ABS &lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;on the other hand, the developing world should bear in mind that negotiations should not be rushed into, for it is extremely important to arrive at balanced and carefully thought-out solutions as envisaged in the ABS regime&amp;rsquo;s operational text&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;/ul&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;Concerning South Asia, the document indicates that:&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;ul&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;the legal environment in the region lacks not only regulatory measures, but also implementation of measures that already exist&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;therefore, South Asian countries should strive to strengthen their legal, regulatory and administrative frameworks on the ABS regime&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;/ul&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;The paper concludes that South Asia requires an exhaustive international ABS regime to address the issues of access to biological and/or genetic resources and traditional knowledge, and stop biopiracy.&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/eldis-biodiversity/~4/J3pyrHNd4vQ" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.eldis.org/go/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=62655</guid>
<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/eldis-biodiversity/~3/J3pyrHNd4vQ/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=62655</link>
<author>P. Ranjan</author>
<category domain="theme">Environment</category>
<category domain="theme">Biodiversity</category>
<feedburner:origLink>http://www.eldis.org/go/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=62655</feedburner:origLink></item>
<item>
<title>Global environmental outlook 5: environment for the future we want</title>
<pubDate>15 Jun 2012 10:49:30 GMT</pubDate>
<description>The fifth Global Environment Outlook (GEO-5) analyses the state, trends, outlook and responses to environmental change. It assesses progress towards meeting internationally agreed goals and identifies gaps in their achievement.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The outlook examines the drivers of environmental change and the overarching socio-economic forces that exert pressure on the environment. Drivers such as population dynamics, economic demand, and unsustainable consumption and production patterns are processes that affect the environment and result, directly or indirectly, in increased emissions and destructive resource extraction. The report notes that, as pressures on the Earth System accelerate, several critical global, regional and local thresholds are close or have been exceeded. This can lead to abrupt and possibly irreversible changes to the Earth's life support functions with significant adverse implications for human wellbeing. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;According to the report, lack of reliable and consistent time series data on the state of the environment is a major barrier to increasing the effectiveness of policies and programmes. Moreover, despite evidence of continuing deterioration, many important drivers of environmental change, or their impacts, are not systematically monitored.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The report makes the following recommendations for countries:&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;ul&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;monitor and assess the environment and integrate social, economic and environmental information into decision-making processes&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;standardise approaches and build capacity for data collection&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;invest in enhanced capacities and mechanisms at local, national and international levels to achieve sustainability&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;strengthen global institutions to fulfil human needs while avoiding environmental degradation&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;standardise approaches that address the underlying drivers of anthropogenic pressures on the Earth System, especially population growth and overconsumption.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/eldis-biodiversity/~4/AssiFB48nJ0" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.eldis.org/go/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=61790</guid>
<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/eldis-biodiversity/~3/AssiFB48nJ0/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=61790</link>
<author />
<category domain="theme">Climate change adaptation</category>
<category domain="theme">Governance</category>
<category domain="theme">Water</category>
<category domain="theme">Land use</category>
<category domain="theme">Forestry</category>
<category domain="theme">Biodiversity</category>
<category domain="theme">Climate change</category>
<category domain="theme">Climate Change Adaptation</category>
<category domain="theme">Environmental impact assessment</category>
<category domain="theme">Natural resource management</category>
<category domain="theme">Water</category>
<feedburner:origLink>http://www.eldis.org/go/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=61790</feedburner:origLink></item>
<item>
<title>Reefs at Risk Revisted</title>
<pubDate>23 Mar 2012 09:05:49 GMT</pubDate>
<description>Like the original Reefs at Risk, this study evaluates threats to coral reefs from a wide range of human activities. It also includes an assessment of climate-related threats to reefs. In addition, Reefs at Risk Revisited includes a global assessment of the vulnerability of nations and territories to coral reef degradation, based on their dependence on coral reefs and their capacity to adapt.&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/eldis-biodiversity/~4/z3MgTfzVGw0" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.eldis.org/go/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=60586</guid>
<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/eldis-biodiversity/~3/z3MgTfzVGw0/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=60586</link>
<author>L. Burke</author>
<category domain="theme">Biodiversity</category>
<category domain="theme">Climate change</category>
<category domain="theme">Water</category>
<category domain="region">Latin America and Caribbean</category>
<feedburner:origLink>http://www.eldis.org/go/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=60586</feedburner:origLink></item>
<item>
<title>Resuscitating the Sundarbans: customary use of biodiversity &amp; traditional culture practices in Bangladesh</title>
<pubDate>20 Mar 2012 09:05:00 GMT</pubDate>
<description>The study is participatory work of different research wings, local communities of Sundarban. It explores the crisis already has created in mantaining biodiversity in sundarban due mismanagement and over exploitation of the resources there. If such kind of measures continues it will break up the ecological balance and call on unfortubnate natural disastrous , already bangladesh is facing. so the paper invastigates the secnario and find out some possible solutions for the drastic situation continuing in the sundarban,the only largest mangrove forest of the world.It is urgent to save Sundarban to maintain the harmony of nature , otherwise Bangladesh will face more havoc than present in future&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/eldis-biodiversity/~4/e_wi6Gvtseg" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.eldis.org/go/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=60524</guid>
<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/eldis-biodiversity/~3/e_wi6Gvtseg/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=60524</link>
<author>D.M.H. Kabir</author>
<category domain="theme">Environment</category>
<category domain="theme">Biodiversity</category>
<category domain="region">South Asia</category>
<category domain="country">Bangladesh</category>
<category domain="ISO 2 character country code">BD</category>
<feedburner:origLink>http://www.eldis.org/go/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=60524</feedburner:origLink></item>
<item>
<title>Integrating protected areas into climate planning</title>
<pubDate>28 Feb 2012 01:38:52 GMT</pubDate>
<description>Though protected areas have increased considerably over the last 130 years, there are several troubling trends, including national and regional disparities, ecological gaps, a decline in the growth of new protected areas, and problems with ineffective management. However, society increasingly expects protected areas to provide an expanded array of benefits, including climate mitigation, resilience and adaptation. This paper discusses the integration of protected areas into climate planning.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The article argues that despite the overall growth in protected area coverage, the reality is that:&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;ul&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;there are great disparities in the world&amp;rsquo;s protected area estate&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;the rapid growth of protected areas is not uniform across countries reflecing several underlying factors&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;whereas growth of marine protected areas has been impressive, much of this gain can be attributed to a relatively small number of very large marine reserves&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;there has been a marked decline in the rate of growth for terrestrial protected areas in the last decade&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;legal designation of an area as protected does not always ensure effective management.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;/ul&gt;
The paper poses the following questions for policy makers in relation to the maximisation of climate change resilience, adaptation and mitigation.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;ul&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;Where should new protected areas be located?&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;How should protected areas be managed?&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;What factors and policies are necessary? &lt;br /&gt;&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;/ul&gt;
The article suggests the following policy direction:&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;ul&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;a robust and compatible policy environment is essential for an effective protected area system&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;planners should assess the economic value of protected areas in relation to climate change&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;protected area policy makers should explicitly link protected areas into national climate change planning&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;planners should take advantage of climate funding to improve the enabling environment by advocating for restoring degraded key protected areas&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;planners should incorporate climate change into ecological gap assessments and consider climate-related design features in the layout of new protected areas&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;planners can better integrate protected area planning into sectoral planning such as transportation, energy and invasive species; assess and communicate the full economic value of protected areas in addressing climate-related issues and ensure that protected areas are an integral part of climate adaptation planning. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;/ul&gt;
The paper concludes that although there are potential tradeoffs between managing protected areas for biodiversity and for climate, the overwhelming social, economic and ecological benefits of protected areas make them a natural and cost-effective investment.&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/eldis-biodiversity/~4/R3JGxuHvKPE" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.eldis.org/go/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=60156</guid>
<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/eldis-biodiversity/~3/R3JGxuHvKPE/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=60156</link>
<author>J. Ervin (ed)</author>
<category domain="theme">Biodiversity</category>
<category domain="theme">biodiversity protected areas</category>
<category domain="theme">Climate change</category>
<feedburner:origLink>http://www.eldis.org/go/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=60156</feedburner:origLink></item>
<item>
<title>Geographical indications, in situ conservation and traditional knowledge</title>
<pubDate>27 Feb 2012 21:44:42 GMT</pubDate>
<description>&lt;p&gt;Geographical indications (GIs) have been a neglected area in the various fora addressing biodiversity and intellectual property. This policy brief focuses on basic GI concepts and the overall conclusion of the overview of over 30 GI cases. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The document demonstrates the following observations:&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;ul&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;GI development may promote biodiversity conservation directly through the use of a specific genetic resource, or indirectly through management practices that include ecosystem considerations&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;current trends in multilateral and national GI protection systems show that the issue is moving in practice, and indicate that developing countries are active in GI development&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;value chain differentiation is a very important concept in terms of GIs and has important policy implications &lt;br /&gt;&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;/ul&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The paper concludes that indications of source, basic labelling of generics and the possibility of registering GIs according to the specific value chain should be considered within GI implementation strategies. In addition, promoting innovative approaches to marketing with a geographical identity is required as well. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Final general recommendations are that:&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;ul&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;GI protection systems should focus on the creation of an enabling institutional environment to prevent the false use of GIs&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;GI registration systems should be precise and flexible and also consider the legal framework for the development of governing bodies&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;the governance features of GIs should contribute to the respectful and creative use of traditional knowledge and practices&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;regarding hunger and poverty alleviation goals, it is important to avoid economic exclusion processes at the local and regional level as a consequence of developing only high-end valuable markets&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;in terms of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) agenda, the neglect of GIs within current conversations should end, and there should be deep discussions on GIs contributions to rural conservation &lt;br /&gt;&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/eldis-biodiversity/~4/PC8BoqhDJco" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.eldis.org/go/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=60155</guid>
<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/eldis-biodiversity/~3/PC8BoqhDJco/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=60155</link>
<author>J.L. Guerra</author>
<category domain="theme">Biodiversity</category>
<category domain="theme">Agriculture and food</category>
<category domain="theme">Intellectual Property Rights</category>
<feedburner:origLink>http://www.eldis.org/go/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=60155</feedburner:origLink></item>
<item>
<title>Bridging the gap on intellectual property and genetic resources in WIPO’s Intergovernmental Committee (IGC)</title>
<pubDate>25 Feb 2012 21:42:22 GMT</pubDate>
<description>&lt;p&gt;The World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) committee on intellectual property and genetic resources (IGC) was created in 2000. This report argues that the IGC has an historic opportunity to contribute towards providing meaningful responses to concerns relating to biodiversity and intellectual property (IP). &lt;br /&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;In this regard, the study emphasises that:&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;ul&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;the relationship of genetic resources and traditional knowledge to intellectual property protection is a controversial issue&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;one important challenge it raises stems from the fact that discussions have taken place simultaneously in a number of international forums that have different mandates&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;the IGC has generated significant research and resulted in some technical measures, yet it has to deliver with respect to international norm setting&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;in 2009, an important step was taken when the WIPO instructed the IGC to accelerate its work towards developing protective international instruments &lt;br /&gt;&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;/ul&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The document figures that while a binding instrument is favourable, soft law solutions should not be ruled out provided they address concerns effectively. Furthermore, it points out these recommendations:&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;ul&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;the Nagoya Protocol&amp;rsquo;s new access and benefit-sharing standards should be supported in the IP system and addressed in ongoing negotiations in the IGC, the TRIPS Council, and FTAs&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;a set of operational provisions should be added to the current IGC draft of objectives and principles in order to advance the process and facilitate their implementation&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;the substance of the recent proposal by the IGC&amp;rsquo;s Group of Like Minded Countries (GLMC) could provide a suitable basis for negotiations in the IGC&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;the introduction of Biodiversity-related Disclosure Requirements (BRDRs) at the multilateral level should be complemented by other policy developments&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;additional research on practical national experiences of BRDRs is urgently needed, which could be undertaken by IGC members directly or requested of the WIPO secretariat &lt;br /&gt;&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/eldis-biodiversity/~4/NYjjU1JYwtQ" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.eldis.org/go/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=60025</guid>
<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/eldis-biodiversity/~3/NYjjU1JYwtQ/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=60025</link>
<author>D. Vivas-Eugui</author>
<category domain="theme">Biodiversity</category>
<category domain="theme">Trade Policy</category>
<category domain="theme">Intellectual Property Rights</category>
<feedburner:origLink>http://www.eldis.org/go/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=60025</feedburner:origLink></item>
<item>
<title>Sundarbans: future imperfect climate adaptation report</title>
<pubDate>20 Feb 2012 17:53:34 GMT</pubDate>
<description>The eco-region of Sundarbans is unique and fragile because it is one of the most extensive mangrove forests in the world. This report describes the Sundarbans region and the impacts of climate change using evidence from the people who live there, scientific data, and efforts to address the problems of the imminent threats and vulnerabilities to this fragile ecosystem.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The report highlights the following recurrent themes from the voices of inhabitants of the Sundarbans.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;ul&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;Rising sea level: most of the islands in the Sundarbans are low lying, meaning that as the sea level rises, land is lost to the sea. This puts further pressure on agriculture production, yet the salinity of the water destroys the productivity of the soil. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;Unpredictable rainfall patterns: changing rainfall patterns are making conventional cultivation of crops difficult for farmers.&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;Impact on fisheries: there are fewer fish because the increased salinity of water has caused them to migrate. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;Frequency and intensity of storms has increased causing further vulnerability.&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;/ul&gt;
The publication uses data regarding the Sundarbans over eighteen years to verify the climate witness accounts scientifically as follows.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;ul&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;Environmental factors affecting farming: the contributing factors to decreasing rainfall and extreme weather can be scientifically measured using the ambient temperature change over land, as well as change in rainfall pattern and forest cover.&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;Environmental factors affecting fishing: the studies show a steady decline in the catch per unit effort of fish and confirm that increasing salinity in the estuarine water is leading to a depletion of freshwater fish species.&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;Sea level change and coastal erosion: the study concluded that the relative mean sea level in Sagar and adjoining areas of the Bay of Bengal was rising at 3.14mm per year, compared to a global estimate of between 0.5 and 3mm per year.&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;Change in high intensity events: both studies concluded that although storms and cyclones were rarer, they tended to do more damage when they occurred. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;/ul&gt;
The report concludes that the observations made by the inhabitants of the Sundarbans are mostly grounded in scientific fact.&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/eldis-biodiversity/~4/0La0T4zsSic" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.eldis.org/go/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=59893</guid>
<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/eldis-biodiversity/~3/0La0T4zsSic/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=59893</link>
<author>A. Danda (ed)</author>
<category domain="theme">Biodiversity</category>
<category domain="theme">Climate change</category>
<category domain="theme">Climate Change Adaptation</category>
<category domain="theme">Water</category>
<category domain="region">South Asia</category>
<category domain="country">India</category>
<category domain="ISO 2 character country code">IN</category>
<feedburner:origLink>http://www.eldis.org/go/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=59893</feedburner:origLink></item>
<item>
<title>Wildlife-human interactions: from conflict to coexistence in sustainable landscapes. A cooperative research project between India and Norway</title>
<pubDate>26 Sep 2011 17:57:09 GMT</pubDate>
<description>&lt;p&gt;Reports on a project which sought to understand the dynamics of wildlife human interactions in India and Norway (in a sample of multiuse landscapes) and to develop mechanisms of coexistence suitable to the countries. The project focussed on species that regularly come into conflict with humans, but which reflect &lt;br /&gt;the diversity of forms these conflicts can take. &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The report makes&amp;nbsp;numerous recommendations&amp;nbsp;for further research and addresses a number of policy implications arising from the study. These address wildlife management policy at both state and national level and some consideration is also given to the implications for Convention on Biological Diversity. The authors challenge stakeholders and decision makers&amp;nbsp;to assess and implement actions to achieve a better coexistence between humans and wildlife based on the report's findings.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/eldis-biodiversity/~4/2hIFVki5ldE" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.eldis.org/go/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=59056</guid>
<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/eldis-biodiversity/~3/2hIFVki5ldE/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=59056</link>
<author>J. Linnell (ed)</author>
<category domain="theme">Environment</category>
<category domain="theme">Biodiversity</category>
<category domain="theme">biodiversity vs development</category>
<category domain="theme">Norway</category>
<category domain="region">South Asia</category>
<category domain="country">India</category>
<category domain="ISO 2 character country code">IN</category>
<feedburner:origLink>http://www.eldis.org/go/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=59056</feedburner:origLink></item>
<item>
<title>High mountain glaciers and climate change: challenges to human livelihoods and adaptation</title>
<pubDate>26 Aug 2011 09:11:25 GMT</pubDate>
<description>&lt;p&gt;Climate change is causing significant mass loss of glaciers in high mountains worldwide. This report calls for accelerating research, monitoring and modeling of glaciers, snow and their role in water supplies. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Although glacier systems are inherently complex overall trends indicate that&amp;nbsp;globally glaciers are receding.&amp;nbsp;This is likely to accelerate in the coming decades. Impacts of the shrinkage of mountain glaciers include changes in the flow characteristics of glacier-fed rivers, glacier lake outburst floods&amp;nbsp;and changing flood severity and frequency. This will most likely increase human vulnerability in concerned areas, and&amp;nbsp;have major impacts on food security. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Recommendations of this report are as follows:&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;ul&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;strengthen glacial research and trans-national collaboration with emphasis on mass calculation and the effects of glacial recession on biodiversity and&amp;nbsp;water resources&amp;nbsp;availability downstream&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;improve modeling of precipitation patterns and effects on water availability in mountain regions, particularly in Asia and Latin America&amp;nbsp;&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;prioritise support to and development of adaptation to water-related disasters&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;prioritise programmes and support to development and implementation of adaptation strategies for too much and too little water including strengthening the role of women&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;urgently support the implementation and improvement of both small and large-scale water capture and storage systems&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;improve efficiency of current irrigation systems through the use of green technology and agricultural knowledge &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/eldis-biodiversity/~4/3_iNvwiiZ6M" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.eldis.org/go/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=58997</guid>
<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/eldis-biodiversity/~3/3_iNvwiiZ6M/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=58997</link>
<author>B. P. Kaltenborn (ed)</author>
<category domain="theme">Water stress</category>
<category domain="theme">Climate change</category>
<category domain="theme">Environment</category>
<category domain="theme">Biodiversity</category>
<category domain="theme">Climate change</category>
<category domain="theme">Climate Change Adaptation</category>
<category domain="theme">climate change adaptation disaster risk reduction</category>
<category domain="theme">Water</category>
<category domain="theme">Food security</category>
<category domain="theme">Norway</category>
<category domain="theme">food security</category>
<category domain="theme">water</category>
<category domain="region">Latin America and Caribbean</category>
<category domain="region">South Asia</category>
<feedburner:origLink>http://www.eldis.org/go/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=58997</feedburner:origLink></item>
<item>
<title>Agriculture biodiversity and food security: two sides of a coin</title>
<pubDate>25 Aug 2011 13:29:04 GMT</pubDate>
<description>This research paper explains the relationship between food production and agricultural biodiversity, and analyses the impact of indiscriminate loss of agricultural biodiversity on food security.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Bangladesh has been suffering from food shortage for its 150 million people, though it has favourable climatic conditions to produce highly productive native crop varieties. The study condemns two major reasons for this food crisis in agrarian Bangladesh - the lack of proper use of agriculture biodiversity, and the practice of modern agriculture systems that are based on hybrid seeds, chemical fertilisers, and pesticides without paying much attention to the native varieties.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The paper also blames the callousness of incumbent political regimes and obsolete agricultural tradition as the obstacles to achieve food sufficiency. Political decisions regulate the agro-sector in Bangladesh. After independence, most of the governments took attempts to gain self-sufficiency in food production. However, their short-sighted planning or narrow political interests hastened the loss of biodiversity. As one of the signatories to the Convention on Biological Diversity, Bangladesh is committed to conserving its biological diversity. Regrettably, no special attention has so far been given in the budgetary allocation to conserve and use its unique agricultural biodiversity.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;In conclusion the paper recommends some policies to maintain smooth food production and ensure food security. Replacing current mechanized agricultural production systems with sustainable production methods such as mixed farming systems and organic agriculture are highly encouraged for this purpose.&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/eldis-biodiversity/~4/E_gPf7pbZ7Y" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.eldis.org/go/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=58990</guid>
<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/eldis-biodiversity/~3/E_gPf7pbZ7Y/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=58990</link>
<author>M.A. Baten</author>
<category domain="theme">Biodiversity</category>
<category domain="theme">Food security</category>
<category domain="region">South Asia</category>
<category domain="country">Bangladesh</category>
<category domain="ISO 2 character country code">BD</category>
<feedburner:origLink>http://www.eldis.org/go/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=58990</feedburner:origLink></item>
<item>
<title>Climate change and biodiversity: IPCC technical paper V</title>
<pubDate>31 Aug 2010 12:40:57 GMT</pubDate>
<description>&lt;p&gt;With the current rate of biodiversity loss greater than the natural background rate of extinction, a critical question addressed by this technical paper is &amp;lsquo;how much might climate change (natural or human induced) enhance or inhibit these losses in biodiversity?&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Key findings of the document include:&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;ul&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;changes in climate exert additional pressure and have already begun to affect biodiversity&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;climate change is projected to affect all aspects of biodiversity, however, the projected changes have to take into account the impacts from other past, present, and future activities, including increasing atmospheric concentrations of CO2&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;the general effect of projected human-induced climate change is that the habitats of many species will move poleward or upward from their current locations&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;globally by the year 2080, about 20% of coastal wetlands could be lost due to sea-level rise&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;the risk of extinction will increase for many species that are already vulnerable&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;the effectiveness of adaptationand mitigation activities can be enhanced when they are integrated with broader strategies designed to make development paths more sustainable. &lt;/li&gt;
&lt;/ul&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The document&amp;rsquo;s conclusion includes the following suggestions:&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;ul&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;the development of monitoring systems, using multiple taxa, to assist in the detection of changes in ecosystems and biodiversity within them&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;development and use of detailed and reliable regional scenarios of climate change in vulnerability analysis&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;evaluation of case studies that deal with mitigation (including those in marine environments and carbon sequestration projects) ad adaptation projects on biodiversity&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;identification of biodiversity conservation and sustainable use activities and policies that would beneficially affect climate change adaptation and mitigation options&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;adaptation of project-, sector-, and regional-level environmental socio-economic assessment tools, and further development of a set of criteria and indicators to assess (quantitatively and qualitatively) the synergies and tradeoffs between climate change adaptation and mitigation options and sustainable development. &lt;/li&gt;
&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/eldis-biodiversity/~4/ywD4_Yo9_RY" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.eldis.org/go/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=56092</guid>
<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/eldis-biodiversity/~3/ywD4_Yo9_RY/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=56092</link>
<author>H. Gitay (ed)</author>
<category domain="theme">Environment</category>
<category domain="theme">Biodiversity</category>
<category domain="theme">Climate change</category>
<feedburner:origLink>http://www.eldis.org/go/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=56092</feedburner:origLink></item>
<item>
<title>Questioning conservation practice and its response: the establishment of Namaqua National Park</title>
<pubDate>08 Apr 2010 17:00:41 GMT</pubDate>
<description>&lt;p&gt;This article summarises research carried out in Namaqualand in South Africa that identifies the discrepancies between rhetoric and practices in conservation. The author points at an on-going conflict between conservation and redistribution of land, suggesting that powerful conservationists tend to win this competition.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The article underlines that apartheid resulted in Africans being dispossessed of land on a large scale and restricted to overcrowded reserves. Particularly, the resulting land dispossession in Namaqualand confined non-whites to mission stations, which acted as places of refuge. However, people continue to feel strongly about the loss of their ancestral land, and they are keen to increase their land base.&lt;/p&gt;
The article reviews the story of Namaqua National Park that was established in 2002. The paper demonstrates how the expansion of the park outcompetes land reform in the area by the conservation fund being willing to pay far above the market price, which resulted in remaining landless neighbouring communities as they are.
&lt;p&gt;Although land redistribution may be understood from a developmental point of view, the paper highlights the strong opposition from conservationists to this direction. In this respect, the article finds the following:&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;ul&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;scientists and conservationists have for a long time maintained that livestock farming, as historically and currently carried out by the people in communal areas, is a threat to the environment&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;livestock keeping represents a safety net against fluctuations in other incomes &amp;ndash; as a &amp;lsquo;bank account&amp;rsquo; that herders can dip into to make up for regular seasonal shortages or when other sources fail&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;conservationists may find it legitimate to neglect principles of ethics and transparency in order to pursue their goals&amp;nbsp;&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;this type of strategy may, however, in the longer term have adverse effects not only on local people&amp;rsquo;s livelihoods, but also on environments.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/eldis-biodiversity/~4/_Q_e9JXukU8" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.eldis.org/go/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=51684</guid>
<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/eldis-biodiversity/~3/_Q_e9JXukU8/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=51684</link>
<author>T.A. Benjaminsen</author>
<category domain="theme">Biodiversity</category>
<category domain="theme">biodiversity protected areas</category>
<category domain="theme">biodiversity vs development</category>
<category domain="theme">Norway</category>
<category domain="theme">conservation</category>
<category domain="region">Africa South of Sahara</category>
<category domain="country">South Africa</category>
<category domain="ISO 2 character country code">ZA</category>
<feedburner:origLink>http://www.eldis.org/go/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=51684</feedburner:origLink></item>
<item>
<title>Community Markets For Conservation Programme (COMACO) Phase II: appraisal of the proposal to the Royal Norwegian Embassy, Lusaka, Zambia</title>
<pubDate>18 Jan 2010 11:40:45 GMT</pubDate>
<description>This paper reviews the proposal for a Phase II of the Community Markets for Conservation Programme (COMACO) in Zambia. The programme is seen as a tool to offer poachers and charcoal burners incentives for abandoning illegal activities to protect wildlife and biodiversity through improved farming technologies and access to agricultural markets.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The paper notes that COMACO is well staffed with highly dedicated and talented employees, also willing to work in remote areas. Phase 2 of the programme emphasises improved food security and poverty alleviation. The paper finds the proposal for a Phase 2 of the programme is generally well argued and appears to fit with current Norwegian development assistance policies on food security and poverty alleviation, also in rural areas. However, it suggests a number of points to be considered in a revision of this proposal:&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;ul&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;there is a need for improved administrative clarity of the functioning of COMACO as a legal personality, and its legal ability to receive funding&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;the approach carries substantial risks, both in the farming technologies proposed, in the production processes, and in the marketing segment&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;more attention should be paid to agronomic detail, including planting densities of rice and maize&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;the proposal is somewhat under-defined with respect to sociological impacts of its business model&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;concern about HIV/AIDS and other communicable and vector-borne diseases have not been covered.&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;/ul&gt;
The paper recommends that following this revision the Norwegian government should seriously consider the proposal for full funding.&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/eldis-biodiversity/~4/G6zf_EKIvQQ" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.eldis.org/go/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=50287</guid>
<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/eldis-biodiversity/~3/G6zf_EKIvQQ/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=50287</link>
<author>S.W. Bie</author>
<category domain="theme">Biodiversity</category>
<category domain="theme">Norway</category>
<category domain="theme">conservation</category>
<category domain="region">Africa South of Sahara</category>
<category domain="country">Zambia</category>
<category domain="ISO 2 character country code">ZM</category>
<feedburner:origLink>http://www.eldis.org/go/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=50287</feedburner:origLink></item>
<item>
<title>Wild resources and livelihoods of poor households in Democratic Republic of Congo</title>
<pubDate>11 Nov 2009 12:37:10 GMT</pubDate>
<description>&lt;p&gt;Wild foods including bushmeat have long been recognised as important famine foods underpinning coping strategies for poor people. Yet there is mounting pressure from conservation agencies to limit the extraction of wild resources, particularly bushmeat. This ODI policy brief outlines research on the links between poverty and wild food use in a poor community of Congolese farming households with an average income of less than one dollar per person per day. &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Policy Conclusions &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;ul&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;Bushmeat and other wild foods play a vital part in the diets, livelihoods and food security of poor rural households. There are marked seasonal changes in wild food use, with major increases in the hungry season. These facts need to be taken into account in planning conservation strategies.&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;Wild foods form a moderately important component of household diets but a very important component of household sales, particularly for the poor. Bushmeat and fish figure as superior goods (in the sense that their consumption increases proportionately with increases in household income). Wild plant foods figure as inferior goods. &lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;Within a community that is universally poor by regional and international standards, clear differences in access to and use of wild foods are associated with degrees of poverty. The very poorest households are disadvantaged in absolute terms, and are the least likely to benefit from hunting or its proceeds. &lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;The case study contradicts the view that banning market sales of bushmeat, and restricting consumption to subsistence use, offers a &amp;lsquo;win-win&amp;rsquo; strategy to the benefit of both conservation and the poor. All but the very poorest are likely to rely on sales. Selling bushmeat benefits the poor relatively more than the rich (though the very poorest may not even benefit from subsistence use).&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/eldis-biodiversity/~4/2i6_9P7h-yQ" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.eldis.org/go/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=45226</guid>
<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/eldis-biodiversity/~3/2i6_9P7h-yQ/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=45226</link>
<author>E. de Merode</author>
<category domain="theme">Environment</category>
<category domain="theme">biodiversity vs development</category>
<category domain="theme">Poverty</category>
<category domain="theme">Household poverty</category>
<category domain="region">Africa South of Sahara</category>
<category domain="country">Congo, Democratic Republic</category>
<category domain="ISO 2 character country code">CD</category>
<feedburner:origLink>http://www.eldis.org/go/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=45226</feedburner:origLink></item>
<item>
<title>Reforming wildlife governance in East and Southern Africa: the role of corruption</title>
<pubDate>09 Oct 2009 12:58:50 GMT</pubDate>
<description>&lt;p&gt;This brief looks at the role corruption plays in structuring wildlife governance systems in Africa by comparing the differing governance structures which have elicited variant economic and ecological outcomes. Wildlife is an important economic asset in Africa worth billions of dollars annually. The biological diversity is a natural spectacle and priceless global heritage. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The author notes that Namibia is Africa&amp;rsquo;s best example of the role that institutional reforms play in increasing wildlife population and investment in wildlife-based enterprises. Local communities and private landholders have been involved in decision making about wildlife use on their lands what has in turn generated strong incentives for local investments in conservation. This attracts wildlife-based enterprises that contribute to local and national economic growth and encourages further investments in conservation in a sustainable and virtuous cycle. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;In Tanzania however, reforms have made limited headway in the country and wildlife populations are declining as a result. Although reforms have been proposed and donors have extended support, governments are maintaining centralised wildlife governance arrangements, resisting the use of market-based mechanisms and thus creating opportunities for corruption.This has led to reduced benefits at the national level, by preventing market-based pricing of wildlife, and at the local level, through the failure to devolve greater rights over wildlife to local communities. These factors undermine incentives for conserving wildlife at all levels. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The brief presents the following lessons from the comparison between Namibia and Tanzania: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;ul&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;reforms that decentralise user rights over wildlife can radically change the attitudes of landholders towards wildlife and shift incentives from eradication of wildlife towards conservation and investment &lt;br /&gt;&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;reforms are often incompatible with the private interests and motivations of influential political elites and policy-makers. This is because devolving rights over wildlife to local actors constitutes a shift in control over wildlife&amp;rsquo;s economic value, which involves losing direct access to money and resources. &lt;/li&gt;
&lt;/ul&gt;
&lt;p&gt;To attain better outcomes, the brief suggests the following strategic responses to the political challenges facing wildlife and natural resource governance reforms: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;ul&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;local activists, community based organisations, donor and government agencies all need to collaborate to improve the existing level of knowledge with regard to patterns of natural resource use&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;donors should deal directly with the reformist constituency itself, which comprises non-governmental actors such as local communities, civil society organisations, networks, and even private sector entrepreneurs. &lt;/li&gt;
&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/eldis-biodiversity/~4/6Cxi2Zjeuk8" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.eldis.org/go/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=44891</guid>
<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/eldis-biodiversity/~3/6Cxi2Zjeuk8/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=44891</link>
<author />
<category domain="theme">Biodiversity</category>
<category domain="theme">Natural resource management</category>
<category domain="theme">Corruption</category>
<category domain="theme">Good Governance</category>
<category domain="country">Namibia</category>
<category domain="ISO 2 character country code">NA</category>
<category domain="country">Tanzania</category>
<category domain="ISO 2 character country code">TZ</category>
<feedburner:origLink>http://www.eldis.org/go/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=44891</feedburner:origLink></item>
<item>
<title>Home gardens sustain crop diversity and improve farm resilience in Candelaria Loxicha, Oaxaca, Mexico</title>
<pubDate>08 Oct 2009 14:28:15 GMT</pubDate>
<description>The home garden is an integral part of smallholders&amp;rsquo; production strategies. This paper investigates how home gardens are integrated into local farming practices and how these influence biodiversity in Candelaria Loxicha, Oaxaca, Mexico. The paper finds that home gardens harbour high levels of biodiversity.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Further findings include:&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;ul&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;most home gardens are multipurpose, providing goods for home consumption, sales, environmental services, and experimentation and learning&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;plant diversity is higher in younger home gardens and in home gardens where owners actively exchange plant material with other people&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;through practices such as plant exchange, seed storage, and the dispersion of seeds in different land uses, farmers avoid homogenisation and encourage plant diversity &lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;farmers manage their lands for resilience taking advantage of the patchy distribution of resources and optimising labour allocation &lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;both men and women participate in the establishment, care and management of home gardens, yet men and women take interest in and responsibility for different plants &lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;participation in communal or political work enhances the ability of male farmers to become engaged in exchange networks &lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;through their increased mobility, migrants move plants both from abroad and to their international destinations. &lt;/li&gt;
&lt;/ul&gt;
The paper recommends that:&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;ul&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;future research and policies must be particularly responsive to social dynamics underlying land use management systems&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;the role of migration and other adaptive strategies of farmers which impact on decisions related to practices that enhance biodiversity have to be understood and taken into account.&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/eldis-biodiversity/~4/QL6oIX-4b5c" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.eldis.org/go/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=44879</guid>
<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/eldis-biodiversity/~3/QL6oIX-4b5c/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=44879</link>
<author>M. Aguilar-Støen</author>
<category domain="theme">Biodiversity</category>
<category domain="theme">Norway</category>
<category domain="region">Latin America and Caribbean</category>
<category domain="country">Mexico</category>
<category domain="ISO 2 character country code">MX</category>
<feedburner:origLink>http://www.eldis.org/go/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=44879</feedburner:origLink></item>
<item>
<title>Rights-based approaches: exploring issues and opportunities for conservation</title>
<pubDate>20 Jul 2009 14:40:12 GMT</pubDate>
<description>The links between the realisation of human rights and the conservation of natural resources and biodiversity are receiving increasing attention worldwide. Experience has demonstrated that exclusionary approaches to conservation can undermine those same rights of affected communities and can undermine conservation objectives.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The &amp;lsquo;rights-based approaches&amp;rsquo; (RBAs) to conservation presented in this document offer a number of positive ways forward, but they also raise a range of new challenges and questions. These include how to define RBAs in practical terms and how to determine what they mean for conservation policy and implementation. The experiences described in this volume make it clear that there is no one recipe for RBAs; however, each case study presents legal, policy, programming, or advocacy strategies that local people, government and NGOs and others can use to better understand their rights and responsibilities. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The papers in this volume also illustrate that engaging with rights means engaging with the social dimensions of conservation. RBAs challenge the conservation community to move beyond its traditional boundaries, engage in new partnerships, take on demanding new tasks and seize new&lt;br /&gt;opportunities. In conclusion, the authors highlight that there is a need to examine many more experiences in order to fully understand the implications of RBAs. This volume identifies many difficult questions for the conservation community and its partners to address.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Case studies examined include: &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;ul&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;fulfilling rights and responsibilities in natural resource management in Colombia&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;enhancing rights and local level accountability in water management in the Middle East: conceptual framework and case studies from Palestine and Jordan&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;where conservation and community coincide:a human rights approach to conservation and development in the Cape Floristic Region, South Africa&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;seeking respect for a Sherpa community conserved area in the Mount Everest region of Nepal&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;integrating gender equality and equity in access and benefit-sharing governance through a rights-based approach &lt;/li&gt;
&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/eldis-biodiversity/~4/Bes79jlwDUw" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.eldis.org/go/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=44126</guid>
<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/eldis-biodiversity/~3/Bes79jlwDUw/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=44126</link>
<author>J. Campese (ed)</author>
<category domain="theme">Livelihoods</category>
<category domain="theme">Climate change adaptation</category>
<category domain="theme">Natural resource management</category>
<category domain="theme">REDD</category>
<category domain="theme">Biodiversity</category>
<category domain="theme">Natural resource management</category>
<category domain="theme">Gender</category>
<category domain="theme">Environmental protection natural resource management</category>
<category domain="country">Australia</category>
<category domain="ISO 2 character country code">AU</category>
<category domain="country">Australia</category>
<category domain="ISO 2 character country code">AU</category>
<category domain="country">Bolivia</category>
<category domain="ISO 2 character country code">BO</category>
<category domain="country">Colombia</category>
<category domain="ISO 2 character country code">CO</category>
<category domain="country">Jordan</category>
<category domain="ISO 2 character country code">JO</category>
<category domain="country">Nepal</category>
<category domain="ISO 2 character country code">NP</category>
<category domain="country">Palestinian Territory</category>
<category domain="ISO 2 character country code">PS</category>
<category domain="country">South Africa</category>
<category domain="ISO 2 character country code">ZA</category>
<feedburner:origLink>http://www.eldis.org/go/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=44126</feedburner:origLink></item>
<item>
<title>The status and distribution of freshwater biodiversity in Southern Africa</title>
<pubDate>29 Apr 2009 17:03:46 GMT</pubDate>
<description>Biodiversity within inland water ecosystems in southern Africa is both highly diverse and of great regional importance to livelihoods and economies. However, development activities are not always compatible with the conservation of this diversity and it is poorly represented within the development planning process.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;This report cites that one of the main reasons for inadequate representation of biodiversity is a lack of readily available information on the status and distribution of inland water taxa. In response to this need for information, the IUCN Species Programme in collaboration with the South Africa Institute for Aquatic Biodiversity (SAIAB) and the South African National Biodiversity Institute (SANBI) conducted a regional assessment of the status and distribution of 1,279 taxa of freshwater fishes, molluscs, odonates, crabs, and selected families of aquatic plants from across southern Africa. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The key messages from the assessment are:&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;ul&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;the inland waters of southern Africa support a high diversity of aquatic species with high levels of endemism. Many of these species provide direct (e.g. fisheries) and indirect (e.g. water purification) benefits to people&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;current levels of threat across the region are relatively low with 7% of species threatened. However, predicted future levels of threat, in particular due to development of water resources, are very high &lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;data on the distributions, conservation status, and ecology of all 762 known species of fishes, molluscs, odonates, crabs, and 517 selected species of aquatic plants are now freely available to inform conservation and development planners&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;the current network of protected areas is not designed for protection of freshwater species with many falling outside of any protected area. Future protected areas must be designed for the effective conservation of freshwater species&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;data made available through this assessment must be integrated within the decision-making processes when planning for the conservation and development of inland water resources. Lack of available information should no longer be given as a reason for inadequate consideration for development impacts on freshwater species&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;species information remains very limited for many parts of the region with Angola and Mozambique, in particular, identified as priorities for future field survey.&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/eldis-biodiversity/~4/XkXloQTtCBU" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.eldis.org/go/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=43175</guid>
<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/eldis-biodiversity/~3/XkXloQTtCBU/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=43175</link>
<author>W., R. Darwall (ed)</author>
<category domain="theme">Biodiversity</category>
<category domain="theme">natural resource management water</category>
<category domain="theme">Water</category>
<category domain="region">Africa South of Sahara</category>
<feedburner:origLink>http://www.eldis.org/go/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=43175</feedburner:origLink></item>
<item>
<title>People, protected areas and global change. Participatory conservation in Latin America, Africa, Asia and Europe</title>
<pubDate>29 Apr 2009 16:20:56 GMT</pubDate>
<description>This book is a synthesis of papers on sustainable conservation in protected areas (PA). It presents a series of papers that provide comprehensive information on 13 PAs: 4 in Latin America, 5 in Africa, 3 in Asia and 1 in Switzerland. The authors note that participation in the protected areas under study was generally better in theory than in perceived practice. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Some of the key points noted by the author include:&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;ul&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;in Africa, economic costs and benefits are unequally distributed between the government and tourism on the one hand and local people on the other. &lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;in Asia and Europe, research indicates that there is an improvement in forest conditions and perceptible growth in the wildlife population. There has also been an enhancement of the livelihoods of most of the local inhabitants and creation of a positive attitude towards conservation among most local people. &lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;biodiversity conservation policies are intrinsically linked to ethnic issues in the Bolivian Amazon. The great social diversity that prevails in Bolivia is rooted in specific institutional pluralism according to categories, which makes implementation of participatory mechanisms difficult.&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;/ul&gt;
The authors note that the major challenge faced by PAs is to generate enough incentives and to deal with the fact that historical experience still undermines trust in the relationship between people and state PA management. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The authors recommend that:&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;ul&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;there is need for mutual development and the formation of trust between all actors, especially the government and the local level &lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;adopt alternative conservation pathways with new participatory conservation approaches instead of the fortress approach currently implemented by Mkomazi Game Reserve in Tanzania&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;acknowledgement of work done by local people as creators of biologically diverse habitats is required through by making payments&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;development of a common constitutional ground.&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/eldis-biodiversity/~4/2cyUtQD1k9I" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.eldis.org/go/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=43173</guid>
<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/eldis-biodiversity/~3/2cyUtQD1k9I/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=43173</link>
<author>T. Haller</author>
<category domain="theme">Biodiversity</category>
<category domain="theme">Natural resource management</category>
<category domain="theme">Approaches to participation</category>
<category domain="region">Africa South of Sahara</category>
<category domain="region">East Asia and Pacific</category>
<category domain="region">Latin America and Caribbean</category>
<feedburner:origLink>http://www.eldis.org/go/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=43173</feedburner:origLink></item>
<item>
<title>Annotated bibliography on socio-economic and ecological impacts of marine protected areas in Pacific Island countries</title>
<pubDate>29 Apr 2009 16:18:48 GMT</pubDate>
<description>This paper presents a collection of literature that reports on various forms of reef area management practiced in&amp;nbsp; the Pacific Islands. The collection provides an overview of impacts, influences and effectiveness of marine protected areas (MPAs), observed and reported in Pacific Island countries and territories. The literature presented includes peer-reviewed journals, book chapters, institutional technical papers and unpublished reports.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The bibliography highlights impacts on fisheries and livelihoods attributed to coral reef marine protected areas in Pacific Island Countries and territories. The authors assert that the region is characterised by challenges faced by conservation and livelihood projects such as: isolation, distance from markets or even government institutions, restricted human capacity, natural hazards and civil unrest. The authors further note that an important and recurring theme is that many interventions are not grounded in local reality nor do they respond to the priorities of local people. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Recommendations noted in the bibliography include:&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;ul&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;strengthen and adapt national and sub national policy and institutional frameworks in support of Integrated Coastal Management (ICM) based on community-driven adaptive management&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;strive for highly cost-effective and locally appropriate approaches. Local government, community or NGO staff can facilitate and initiate management at the earliest opportunity based on experiences elsewhere and community knowledge &lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;research needs to be more responsive to the needs of the managers, i.e., communities and their support agencies&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;avoid raising unrealistic expectations. Communities are getting involved because they want to better manage their resources for their own benefit.&amp;nbsp; Building unrealistic expectations erodes the vital empowerment and ownership communities achieve when they observe the connection between their actions and accrued benefits&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;encourage interdisciplinary and cross-sectoral approaches. A number of agencies have overlapping responsibilities which could interface with communities through a single community-based adaptive management approach, cutting costs and ensuring &amp;ldquo;holistic&amp;rdquo; and integrated approaches.&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/eldis-biodiversity/~4/x6dTtr03tE8" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.eldis.org/go/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=43172</guid>
<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/eldis-biodiversity/~3/x6dTtr03tE8/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=43172</link>
<author>P. Cohen</author>
<category domain="theme">Biodiversity</category>
<category domain="theme">natural resource management water</category>
<category domain="theme">Water</category>
<category domain="region">East Asia and Pacific</category>
<feedburner:origLink>http://www.eldis.org/go/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=43172</feedburner:origLink></item>
<item>
<title>Challenges for a business case for high-biodiversity REDD projects and schemes</title>
<pubDate>06 Apr 2009 11:03:09 GMT</pubDate>
<description>This report explores whether there is a business case for high-biodiversity REDD projects and schemes and how such a business case could be created or promoted. It was commissioned by the Secretariat of the CBD as part of its efforts to support Parties efforts to address reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation in developing countries. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;From the analysis, it is clear that significant potential exists to link the biodiversity conservation and climate change mitigation agendas with current and forthcoming REDD markets and schemes. However, the current business case seems often limited to niche markets and voluntary initiatives.The report however, discusses a range of approaches given below, which could be developed to create a business case for high-biodiversity REDD.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;ul&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;Voluntary markets do provide a strong commercial incentive to invest in and buy credits from projects with specific biodiversity and social benefit. This is because of the reputational and CSR benefits for corporate buyers that are associated with being perceived as promoting biodiversity conservation and sustainable development. Voluntary markets are however of relatively small size.&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;Minimum standards or safeguards could be integrated in an international REDD agreement to limit eligible activities at least to those that prevent negative biodiversity impacts.&amp;nbsp;This could be coupled with reporting and monitoring requirements, and voluntary national-level biodiversity quality standards.&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;Non-carbon benefits of forest conservation could be rewarded through broader payment for ecosystem service (PES) schemes.&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;Developed countries could adopt ambitious emission targets to create strong demand for carbon credits and at the same time allow the use of REDD credits towards meeting these targets.&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;Host countries need to acquire the capacity and create the governance framework to both implement national-level REDD policies and to enable and to promote sub-national and non-governmental REDD activities. This includes reducing corruption and inefficiencies in the forestry and land-use sectors and creating the institutional capacity to create effective incentives on the ground.&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;/ul&gt;
The report concludes that fundamentally, creating a strong business case for REDD will be the best and most certain way of creating a business case for high-biodiversity REDD.&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/eldis-biodiversity/~4/Cy4qCM1R1aI" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.eldis.org/go/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=42806</guid>
<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/eldis-biodiversity/~3/Cy4qCM1R1aI/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=42806</link>
<author>J. Ebeling</author>
<category domain="theme">REDD</category>
<category domain="theme">Biodiversity</category>
<category domain="theme">Forestry</category>
<category domain="theme">Agriculture and food</category>
<feedburner:origLink>http://www.eldis.org/go/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=42806</feedburner:origLink></item>
<item>
<title>The last stand of the orangutan – state of emergency: illegal logging, fire and palm oil in Indonesia’s national parks</title>
<pubDate>10 Mar 2009 15:33:04 GMT</pubDate>
<description>&lt;p&gt;Orangutans survive only in the dwindling tropical rainforests of Borneo and northern Sumatra, being dependent on the forest for food and nesting sites. This document describes how orangutan populations are seriously affected when their forest is destroyed or logged, not least because they are often killed for meat or to protect newly planted crops. The authors have has used the latest satellite imagery and data from the Government of Indonesia to assess changes in the forests in one part of south-east Asia. The results indicate that illegal logging, fires and plantations of crops such as palm oil are now intruding extensively into Indonesia&amp;rsquo;s national parks which, for example, are the last safe-holds of the orangutan.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The report shows how in the past five years more than 90 per cent of over 40 parks have now been impacted putting at risk national and regional attempts to meet the 2010 biodiversity target. The driving forces are not impoverished farmers, but what appears to be well-organised companies with heavy machinery and strong international links to the global markets. The report describes the Indonesian government&amp;rsquo;s new initiative focusing on new and specially trained ranger units to win back the national parks. It is starting to show some promising results with illegal logging halted in two parks in 2006. But the authorities need more assistance. National parks represent a common heritage and their protection and enforcement is essential in international conservation. It is recommended that Indonesia and countries involved in processes such as FLEG consider the following actions: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;ul&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;substantially strengthening the Indonesian initiative of ranger units to ensure the necessary para-military skills and equipment for securing national parks, including evaluation of the combined joint operations conducted in recent years between the Ministry of Forestry, police and Joint Chiefs of Staff of Navy and Army&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;rapid deployment of reconnaissance units to collaborate with the relevant law enforcement and forest rangers, to secure information from the individual parks &lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;removal of illegal plantations, mining and agricultural development inside the national parks &lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;further strengthening international programmes of law enforcement against illegal logging and activities, including support from Interpol.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/eldis-biodiversity/~4/SWMeb5YJtms" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.eldis.org/go/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=42434</guid>
<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/eldis-biodiversity/~3/SWMeb5YJtms/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=42434</link>
<author>C. Nellemann</author>
<category domain="theme">Biodiversity</category>
<category domain="theme">Norway</category>
<category domain="theme">conservation</category>
<category domain="region">East Asia and Pacific</category>
<category domain="country">Indonesia</category>
<category domain="ISO 2 character country code">ID</category>
<feedburner:origLink>http://www.eldis.org/go/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=42434</feedburner:origLink></item>
<item>
<title>The governance of nature and the nature of governance: policy that works for biodiversity and livelihoods</title>
<pubDate>08 Mar 2009 16:33:36 GMT</pubDate>
<description>This report is an output of IIED&amp;rsquo;s collaborative research project &amp;ldquo;Policy that works for biodiversity and poverty reduction&amp;rdquo; and is based on a literature review and three country case studies (India, Peru and Tanzania). It makes the connection between external policy, institutional and economic instruments and processes and the performance of community based initiatives for biodiversity protection and poverty reduction. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The study notes that ecosystem degradation is accelerating, despite the rapid growth in national parks and protected areas worldwide. It suggests that this is due to current governance at the local, national and international level because:&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;ul&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;many biodiversity decisions - notably around protected areas - have excluded local biodiversity managers and conflicted with their needs&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;community-led conservation remains small-scale, isolated and is poorly integrated within the formal conservation sector&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;biodiversity is economically &amp;ldquo;invisible&amp;rdquo; thus effectively unowned, unpriced and/or unmarketed&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;biodiversity institutions have weak political clout compared to those for trade and development, which are often in conflict with biodiversity goals. &lt;/li&gt;
&lt;/ul&gt;
The report argues that to improve livelihoods and protect biodiversity, governance systems should achieve the following:&amp;nbsp; &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;ul&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;indigenous and local communities should have the right to decide over access to genetic resources that they customarily use (e.g. traditional crop varieties) &lt;br /&gt;&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;support action that brings together those who control biodiversity policy and marginalised groups and thus move policy debates forward&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;ensure active engagement of indigenous representatives from biodiversity rich areas in CBD decision-making processes &lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;link global biodiversity decisions with local priorities via multi-stakeholder fora&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;revise conservation policies to promote coherence with indigenous and human rights frameworks both nationally and internationally.&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;/ul&gt;
The final part of the report presents some practical approaches and methodologies for empowering marginalised communities and improving governance regimes from local to national level. These include:&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;ul&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;local organisations joining forces to establish regional federations that represent larger numbers of people and thus have more clout &lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;direct action such as non-violent resistance &lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;establishment of learning groups on natural resource governance that range from the household level to larger inter-community workshops to share the results of community analysis and build a collective vision.&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/eldis-biodiversity/~4/VO3T--6uN8E" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.eldis.org/go/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=42386</guid>
<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/eldis-biodiversity/~3/VO3T--6uN8E/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=42386</link>
<author>K. Swiderska</author>
<category domain="theme">Environmental governance</category>
<category domain="theme">Livelihoods</category>
<category domain="theme">Natural resource management</category>
<category domain="theme">Biodiversity</category>
<category domain="theme">Decentralisation &amp; Local Governance</category>
<category domain="theme">Rural poverty</category>
<category domain="region">Africa South of Sahara</category>
<category domain="region">Latin America and Caribbean</category>
<category domain="region">South Asia</category>
<category domain="country">India</category>
<category domain="ISO 2 character country code">IN</category>
<category domain="country">Peru</category>
<category domain="ISO 2 character country code">PE</category>
<category domain="country">Tanzania</category>
<category domain="ISO 2 character country code">TZ</category>
<feedburner:origLink>http://www.eldis.org/go/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=42386</feedburner:origLink></item>
<item>
<title>Decentralisation  and  biodiversity management: opportunities to improve UNDP-GEF projects</title>
<pubDate>06 Feb 2009 06:23:58 GMT</pubDate>
<description>Both decentralisation and biodiversity management approaches suggest that biodiversity conservation initiatives could benefit from decentralised processes. Yet in practice UNDP&amp;rsquo;s Global Environment Facility (GEF) funded biodiversity projects have not explicitly applied decentralised governance for development (DGD) approaches. Studies also indicate that decentralisation efforts have not resulted in sustainable biodiversity outcomes. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;This paper reviews why decentralisation and biodiversity management should be mutually reinforcing, the reasons why this has not materialised, future opportunities, and suggests some changes in UNDP-GEF funded biodiversity projects to take advantage of the opportunities.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The paper suggests that biodiversity and decentralisation are interrelated and the reasons are quite obvious. Decentralisation advocates believe decentralisation leads to improved participation, which in turn leads to efficiency and equity. Biodiversity management practitioners also emphasise the need for local participation as a means of increasing management effectiveness and equity.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The author says while there is currently little cooperation between UNDP&amp;rsquo;s GEF-funded biodiversity team and its DGD team, the momentum is now shifting in that direction because:&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;ul&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;the GEF and the biodiversity community recognise the importance of framing biodiversity conservation in the context of governance frameworks&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;UNDP-GEF recognizes decentralization as an issue to be addressed in its biodiversity portfolio&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;the Poverty Environment Partnership has mounted a robust justification as to why ecosystems should be at the heart of DGD efforts to alleviate extreme poverty&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;/ul&gt;
GEF biodiversity projects ultimately aim to alter human choices and practices that destroy biodiversity values. They therefore need to address the sources of power (political, fiscal and administrative) driving those choices and practices. By locating the decision-making power closer to the users of the biological resources &amp;ndash; and the victims of biological resource loss the chances of getting biodiversity positive decisions increase. This is due to the general principle that those most likely to suffer from the misuse of biological resources are those with the greatest incentive to use resource rights to prevent biodiversity loss&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/eldis-biodiversity/~4/ZIPYKG_yUVs" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.eldis.org/go/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=41899</guid>
<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/eldis-biodiversity/~3/ZIPYKG_yUVs/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=41899</link>
<author>T. Clairs</author>
<category domain="theme">Assessing governance</category>
<category domain="theme">Biodiversity</category>
<category domain="theme">Decentralisation</category>
<feedburner:origLink>http://www.eldis.org/go/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=41899</feedburner:origLink></item>
<item>
<title>MDG on reducing biodiversity loss and the CBD‘s 2010 target</title>
<pubDate>04 Feb 2009 15:11:16 GMT</pubDate>
<description>This report is a literature review to assess the current state of Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) and the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) 2010 target. The authors explore the potential for aligning the achievements under the two platforms. This is done in order to support mutually supportive implementation of the two work programmes in preparation for the 2010 Year of Biological Diversity. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The report finds that: &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;ul&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;there is no clear reference to environmental issues outside of MDG-7&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;emphasis on environmental issues is given to water availability and sanitation issues, particularly regarding health development goals&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;countries are better placed to monitor progress and evaluate the results of local action on issues such as conservation of species and ecosystems rather than assessing impacts of action on cross cutting areas. This includes issues such as access and benefit sharing, impacts of climate change and variability and social impacts of conservation.&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;/ul&gt;
It is recommended that in order to improve progress and link the 2010 and 2015 targets and goals, it is important to:&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;ul&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;use the programme of work under the CBD as an interim indicator of progress towards biodiversity related targets of the MDGs&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;establish an inter-agency task force comprising representatives of MEA secretariats and development agencies to provide guidance for countries to link environmental management plans with development plans&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;indicate clearly to countries that the indicators suggested by the MDGs are result based and that there is a need to develop pressure, response and process indicators for national actions &lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;encourage a better understanding of result based indicators for achieving 2010 targets at the national level &lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;develop additional indicators related to environment and biodiversity spanning all the MDGs as well as socio-economic components&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;link the indicators of the MDGs and 2010 targets through local actions.&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/eldis-biodiversity/~4/T6YwHO6DuTg" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.eldis.org/go/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=41878</guid>
<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/eldis-biodiversity/~3/T6YwHO6DuTg/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=41878</link>
<author>B. Pisupati</author>
<category domain="theme">MDGs biodiversity                                                                                </category>
<category domain="theme">MDGs meeting the MDGs                                                                            </category>
<category domain="theme">Biodiversity</category>
<category domain="theme">multilateral environmental agreements cbd</category>
<feedburner:origLink>http://www.eldis.org/go/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=41878</feedburner:origLink></item>
<item>
<title>The economics of ecosystems and biodiversity. An interim report</title>
<pubDate>20 Oct 2008 15:35:33 GMT</pubDate>
<description>This document aims to promote a better understanding of the true economic value of ecosystem services and to offer economic tools that take proper account of this value. The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity (TEEB) is split in two phases and this interim report summarises the results of Phase I. It demonstrates the huge significance of ecosystems and biodiversity and the threats to human welfare if no action is taken to reverse current damage and losses. Phase II will expand on this and show how to use this knowledge to design the right tools and policies. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;It is highlighted that nature provides human society with a diversity of benefits such as food, fibres, clean water, carbon capture and many more. Though well-being is totally dependent upon the continued flow of these &amp;ldquo;ecosystem services&amp;rdquo;, they are predominantly public goods with no markets and no prices, so they are rarely detected by the current economic compass. As a result, biodiversity is declining, ecosystems are being continuously degraded and we, in turn, are suffering the consequences. However, society&amp;rsquo;s defective economic compass can be repaired with appropriate economics applied to the right information. This will allow existing policies to be improved, new policies to be formed, and new markets to be created, all of which is needed to enhance human well-being and restore the planet&amp;rsquo;s health. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Key points include that:&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;ul&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;subsidies exist across the globe and across the economy. They affect everyone and many impact the health of the planet&amp;rsquo;s ecosystems. Harmful subsidies must be reformed to halt biodiversity loss and achieve appropriate stewardship of the planet&amp;rsquo;s resources &lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;payments for ecosystem services (PES) can create demand for a necessary market force to correct an existing imbalance &lt;br /&gt;&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;new markets are already forming which support and reward biodiversity and ecosystem services. Some of them have the potential to scale up; but to be successful, markets need appropriate institutional infrastructure, incentives, financing and governance &amp;ndash; in short, investment &lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;it is very important that the development of ecosystem/biodiversity accounting in physical and monetary terms is promoted as a key early priority of the ongoing System of Integrated Environmental and Economic Accounting (SEEA) revision, building on the work of EEA and others. &lt;/li&gt;
&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/eldis-biodiversity/~4/Cb7LszQNm6M" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.eldis.org/go/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=40472</guid>
<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/eldis-biodiversity/~3/Cb7LszQNm6M/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=40472</link>
<author />
<category domain="theme">biodiversity vs development</category>
<category domain="theme">Natural resource management</category>
<category domain="theme">natural resource management water</category>
<category domain="theme">Agricultural biodiversity and natural resource management</category>
<category domain="theme">Finance policy</category>
<category domain="theme">Environmental policies and management                                                            </category>
<category domain="theme">Good Governance</category>
<feedburner:origLink>http://www.eldis.org/go/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=40472</feedburner:origLink></item>
<item>
<title>Guidelines for applying protected area management categories</title>
<pubDate>17 Oct 2008 12:28:20 GMT</pubDate>
<description>The IUCN protected area management categories are a global framework, recognised by the Convention on Biological Diversity, for categorising the variety of protected area management types. The following guidelines provide direction, descriptions, principles and advice in the application of the IUCN protected area management categories in particular biomes and management approaches.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The document is broken into different sections focusing on key discussions on IUCN protected area management, which are included below. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;ul&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;What does IUCN&amp;rsquo;s mean by &amp;ldquo;protected area&amp;rdquo; and what is the purpose behind the categories? Each category is described by its main objective, distinguishing features, role in the landscape or seascape, unique points and actions that are compatible or incompatible&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;Although categories are independent of who owns, controls, or has responsibility for management, governance is still very important. Governance types by government bodies, indigenous peoples, communities and private bodies are identified in order to help in understanding, planning for and recording protected areas.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;What processes are used for applying categories?The discussion looks at: choosing and agreeing the most suitable category for a given situation; assigning the category to meet national and international standards; and recording the protected area and category with the UNEP World Conservation Monitoring Centre&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;Protected areas embrace a huge range of biomes, ownership patterns and motivations. Specific cases are looked at in more detail where in the past there has been cause of confusion on the management objectives set and the subsequent categories that are then applied. Examples include: forests, sacred natural sites, freshwater areas, etc.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;How do Ramsar and the World Heritage conventions relate to the IUCN categories?&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;Effectiveness of categories - options are examined as to ways of assessing protected areas that are failing to meet their objective in their category more effective. &lt;/li&gt;
&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/eldis-biodiversity/~4/Zn1Dh6IfYA4" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.eldis.org/go/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=40430</guid>
<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/eldis-biodiversity/~3/Zn1Dh6IfYA4/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=40430</link>
<author>N. Dudley (ed)</author>
<category domain="theme">Legal frameworks &amp; institutions</category>
<category domain="theme">biodiversity protected areas</category>
<category domain="theme">natural resource management forests</category>
<category domain="theme">natural resource management marine</category>
<feedburner:origLink>http://www.eldis.org/go/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=40430</feedburner:origLink></item>
<item>
<title>Transition to sustainability: towards a humane and diverse world</title>
<pubDate>08 Sep 2008 20:04:30 GMT</pubDate>
<description>In a changing world, this paper asks the question: &amp;quot;how does one devise strategies for society that will allow a peaceful, equitable, fulfilled human future: a humane future for a diverse earth?&amp;quot; It considers what the environmental movement can do to help make this happen.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The authors call for a transition to sustainability by identifying global trends, which include: inequality has increased over the past decade; there are shortfalls in sustainable human wellbeing; and the era of cheap hydrocarbons is coming to an end. A shift to a low-carbon economy is essential but ideas about how to achieve sustainability are fragmented.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;There is no magic bullet, but solutions recommended by the authors include: &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;ul&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;create an economy that can fit on a single planet: the way people think about growth and prosperity must be changed to achieve more with less &lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;rejuvenate the global environmental movement: the movement must help link together communities and organisations working out practical solutions to sustainability challenges, and ways to live with more happiness and lower energy and material consumption &lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;build an institutional architecture to bring about change: transition to sustainability depends on the collaborative and coherent actions of political and business leaders, governments (from local to national), and an effective international environmental regime. &lt;/li&gt;
&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/eldis-biodiversity/~4/SqcyJburTEQ" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.eldis.org/go/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=39517</guid>
<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/eldis-biodiversity/~3/SqcyJburTEQ/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=39517</link>
<author>W., M. Adams</author>
<category domain="theme">Environmental governance</category>
<category domain="theme">Mitigation</category>
<category domain="theme">biodiversity protected areas</category>
<category domain="theme">Climate Change Adaptation</category>
<feedburner:origLink>http://www.eldis.org/go/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=39517</feedburner:origLink></item>
<item>
<title>Gorillas in the midst: assessing the peace and conflict impacts of international gorilla conservation programme (IGCP) activities</title>
<pubDate>25 Aug 2008 22:08:07 GMT</pubDate>
<description>&lt;p&gt;Conservation work in conflict zones and across international borders has impacts on more than just wildlife populations and their habitats. It can also have a profound effect on the peace and conflict dynamics in a region. This report details how while the International Gorilla Conservation Programme (IGCP) in the Virunga-Bwindi region&amp;nbsp;in Rwanda implements activities with the primary objective of conserving mountain gorilla populations and habitat, anecdotal evidence suggests that these activities have also improved communication and dialogue among different authorities in the region. This has thereby fostered relationships and cooperation that are fundamental to peacebuilding. Conversely, decades of experience have shown that conservation interventions can cause tensions and contribute to conflict. This is especially portentous in conflict zones, where any external intervention can unintentionally fuel tensions and conflict by sending the &amp;lsquo;wrong&amp;rsquo; message or entrenching perceived inequities.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;This document provides a&amp;nbsp;systematic understanding of how IGCP conservation and development activities affect peace and conflict dynamics in the Great Lakes region. The emergent and adaptive research process outlined here resulted in three case studies on the links between conservation, peace and conflict, as well as lessons on the methodology itself. The authors find that the peace impacts were mostly associated with the fostering of communication and cooperation at different levels, which provide a basis for trust-building and construction of shared identities around conservation issues. The conflict impacts were related to the potential for inadvertently emphasizing politically sensitive differences among groups, trade-offs between peacebuilding at different levels or between conservation and peace/conflict interests, and perceived inequities. Additional points raised include: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;ul&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;the conservation actors interviewed all agreed that joint or mixed&amp;nbsp; patrols were useful and effective, particularly for catching poachers, and should be continued as part of the regional approach to gorilla conservation &lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;replacing mixed patrols with coordinated patrols, some of the peacebuilding mechanisms at the field-level have been sacrificed in favour of peacebuilding considerations at a higher, state-sanctioned level &lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;in addition to considering the peace/conflict impacts of adjusting the modalities of transboundary surveillance patrols, one must also look at the limitations of this activity &lt;br /&gt;&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/eldis-biodiversity/~4/3o8PW-v63c8" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.eldis.org/go/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=39288</guid>
<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/eldis-biodiversity/~3/3o8PW-v63c8/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=39288</link>
<author>A, Hammill</author>
<category domain="theme">Capacity building</category>
<category domain="theme">approaches to conflict prevention</category>
<category domain="theme">biodiversity protected areas</category>
<category domain="theme">biodiversity vs development</category>
<category domain="region">Africa South of Sahara</category>
<category domain="country">Rwanda</category>
<category domain="ISO 2 character country code">RW</category>
<feedburner:origLink>http://www.eldis.org/go/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=39288</feedburner:origLink></item>
<item>
<title>OECD Environmental Outlook to 2030: a summary</title>
<pubDate>08 Aug 2008 16:03:01 GMT</pubDate>
<description>The OECD Environmental Outlook to 2030 provides analyses of economic and environmental trends to 2030, and simulations of policy actions to address the key challenges. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;This publication highlights a mix of policies that can address the main challenges that we face, including climate change, biodiversity loss, water scarcity and the health impacts of pollution, in a cost-effective way. This edition reflects developments in both OECD countries and Brazil, Russia, India, Indonesia, China, South Africa (BRIICS), and discusses how they might better co-operate on global and local environmental problem-solving. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;OECD presents simulations of policy actions to address the key challenges according to a traffic light system where the red light issues need to be addressed urgently and the green light issues are well managed or have shown significant improvement. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The following actions are prioritised by OECD in order to tackle key environmental problems and promote sustainable development: &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;ul&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;use a mix of complementary policies to tackle the most challenging and complex environmental problems, with a strong emphasis on market-based instruments, such as taxes and tradable permits, in order to reduce the costs of action&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;apart from just the environmental ministries, environmental concerns need to be integrated into all relevant ministries including finance, economy and trade, and reflected in all production and consumption decisions &lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;business and industries need to play a lead role, but governments must provide clear and consistent long-term policy frameworks to encourage eco-innovation and to safeguard environmental and social goals &lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;improve partnerships between OECD and non-OECD countries to address global environmental challenges. Brazil, Russia, India, Indonesia, China and South Africa (BRIICS) in particular are key partners given their growing influence in the world economy and increasing share of global environmental pressures &lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;further environmental co-operation between OECD and non-OECD countries can help spread knowledge and technological best practices &lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;strengthen international environmental governance to better tackle transboundary and global environmental challenges &lt;/li&gt;
&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/eldis-biodiversity/~4/ri8DeOLtyyA" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.eldis.org/go/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=39015</guid>
<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/eldis-biodiversity/~3/ri8DeOLtyyA/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=39015</link>
<author />
<category domain="theme">Environmental governance</category>
<category domain="theme">Environment &amp; globalisation</category>
<category domain="theme">Governance</category>
<category domain="theme">Mitigation</category>
<category domain="theme">biodiversity protected areas</category>
<category domain="theme">water supply</category>
<category domain="theme">Business and the environment</category>
<category domain="theme">environment and trade negotiations</category>
<feedburner:origLink>http://www.eldis.org/go/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=39015</feedburner:origLink></item>
<item>
<title>Identification and gap analysis of key biodiversity areas. Targets for comprehensive protected area systems</title>
<pubDate>05 Aug 2008 12:28:07 GMT</pubDate>
<description>Key Biodiversity Areas (KBAs) represent discrete sites that are globally vulnerable, irreplaceable, and commonly, the last remaining strongholds for many threatened and geographically concentrated species. This document is based on the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity who have committed to assess how well protected areas conserve biodiversity, and where the highest priorities are for expanding and reinforcing existing protected areas. This manual provides practical guidance to national governments on how to slow the rate of biodiversity loss within KBAs by 2010.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Progress has been made in a number of areas:&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;ul&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;more than 7,500 Important Bird Areas have now been documented worldwide in 167 countries and territories, including new inventories for Asia and the Tropical Andes&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;identification of Important Plant Areas has expanded to Africa and is being planned in the Caribbean, Pacific and central and south east Asia&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;the Alliance for Zero Extinction sites, which hold the last populations of critically endangered and endangered species and form a very important subset of KBAs, have been catalogued globally for terrestrial vertebrates and conifers. &lt;/li&gt;
&lt;/ul&gt;
The authors note the following recommendations to further enhance KBAs:&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;ul&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;beyond identification, documentation and setting priorities among KBAs for urgent conservation action, there is a need to bring the global conservation community together in recognising the role of KBAs and to increase financial resources for KBA conservation&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;conservation practitioners at the international and national levels should make it a priority to help embed the KBA approach in national and regional gap analysis and conservation planning &lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;the most urgent priority is to build nationally led processes to recognise, advocate for, safeguard and monitor KBAs, and to build constituency for them. It is not enough merely to identify the sites; concrete action must be taken on the ground &lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;over and above conservation planning, the KBAs approach and process is important in guiding decision-makers on which sites should be proposed for development purposes &lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;the links between KBA identification and conservation, and livelihoods and poverty alleviation should be identified &lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;equally important are initiatives for monitoring biodiversity at the national and local-scales. Without monitoring, the success (or failure) of conservation interventions cannot be determined and realigned as needed. As KBAs are quantitative targets for conservation at the site scale, they can serve as a baseline for monitoring the state of biodiversity over time. &lt;/li&gt;
&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/eldis-biodiversity/~4/1hj7kBLxfow" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.eldis.org/go/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=38947</guid>
<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/eldis-biodiversity/~3/1hj7kBLxfow/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=38947</link>
<author>P., F. Langhammer</author>
<category domain="theme">Environment manuals</category>
<category domain="theme">biodiversity protected areas</category>
<category domain="theme">Agricultural biodiversity and natural resource management</category>
<category domain="theme">Livelihoods agricultural assets</category>
<category domain="theme">Participation Manuals</category>
<category domain="theme">Research methods</category>
<category domain="theme">Rural poverty</category>
<feedburner:origLink>http://www.eldis.org/go/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=38947</feedburner:origLink></item>
<item>
<title>The environment and poverty times</title>
<pubDate>04 Aug 2008 16:36:09 GMT</pubDate>
<description>The paper features a collection of short articles that focus on the complex links between environment and poverty reduction. The articles discuss how natural resources can contribute to economic growth that also benefits the poor. Focusing at a global level, it presents opportunities that can be created for people to move beyond subsistence levels through entrepreneurship, investments and enabling policies at the national and international levels. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Some of the articles featured highlight the following issues:&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;ul&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;economic priorities for Africa  focusing on the environmental agenda &lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;the impact and effectiveness of the Fiji Locally-Managed Marine Areas Network (FLMMA)&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;the right to access land and natural resources&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;sustainable energy enterprises &lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;environmentally sustainable mining for pro-poor growth&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;the use of urine and composted faeces for agricultural production&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/eldis-biodiversity/~4/fTizAGXPjZU" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.eldis.org/go/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=38937</guid>
<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/eldis-biodiversity/~3/fTizAGXPjZU/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=38937</link>
<author />
<category domain="theme">Aid effectiveness aid partnerships</category>
<category domain="theme">CR &amp; Small and medium enterprises</category>
<category domain="theme">Agriculture and food security</category>
<category domain="theme">Biodiversity</category>
<category domain="theme">Climate Change Adaptation</category>
<category domain="theme">Natural resource management</category>
<category domain="theme">Business and the environment</category>
<category domain="theme">Agricultural biodiversity and natural resource management</category>
<category domain="theme">Fisheries                                                                                        </category>
<category domain="theme">Rural poverty</category>
<feedburner:origLink>http://www.eldis.org/go/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=38937</feedburner:origLink></item>
<item>
<title>Effect of climate change on biodiversity in Lebanon: a preliminary review</title>
<pubDate>28 Jul 2008 11:47:34 GMT</pubDate>
<description>&lt;p&gt;Lebanon does not currently have baseline data on which to formulate climate adaptation and mitigation measures. This paper aims to prompt dialogue on the anticipated impact of climate change on the country, acting as a preliminary literature review and consulting experts to identify key species in Lebanon which may be impacted by it. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Each section of the report focuses different flora and fauna as well as the environments they inhabit and points out key impacts of climate change. In addition, the experts consulted suggest a number of species to be used for monitoring purposes. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The author calls on policy-makers, civil society, academia and the private sector to address the following issues:&amp;nbsp;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;ul&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;Lack of political will to drive policies and regulations encouraging reduction of carbon emissions and the deployment of adaptation and mitigation measures&amp;nbsp;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;NGOs and CSOs need to act as a watchdog over government and private sector activities and be active in promoting environmental awareness&amp;nbsp;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;Further research into the effects of climate change on Lebanon and the development of a model which can be used across the region&amp;nbsp;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;Private sector engagement with promoting new adaptation and mitigation technologies &lt;br /&gt;&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/eldis-biodiversity/~4/QZqSVPLyf-o" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.eldis.org/go/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=38824</guid>
<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/eldis-biodiversity/~3/QZqSVPLyf-o/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=38824</link>
<author>N. Farajalla</author>
<category domain="theme">NGOs and advocacy</category>
<category domain="theme">Mitigation</category>
<category domain="theme">Biodiversity</category>
<category domain="theme">Biodiversity</category>
<category domain="theme">Climate Change Adaptation</category>
<category domain="theme">Business and the environment</category>
<category domain="region">Middle East and North Africa</category>
<category domain="country">Lebanon</category>
<category domain="ISO 2 character country code">LB</category>
<feedburner:origLink>http://www.eldis.org/go/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=38824</feedburner:origLink></item>
<item>
<title>Depopulating the Tibetan grasslands: national policies and perspectives for the future of Tibetan herders in Qinghai Province, China</title>
<pubDate>22 Jul 2008 12:18:38 GMT</pubDate>
<description>&lt;p&gt;Tibetan grasslands constitute one of the most important grazing ecosystems in the world and encompass the source areas of many major Asian rivers. While a variety of government policies have been applied in recent years to protect the ecology and biodiversity of China&amp;rsquo;s grasslands, there is growing concern that national and global economic considerations have overshadowed emerging conservation agendas. This article critically reviews several key policies affecting pastoralists, with special attention given to the Sanjiangyuan region of Qinghai Province. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The document finds that since 2000, when the Western Development Strategy began, China and the world have come to recognize the global importance of the Tibetan plateau  region, both as a &amp;ldquo;water tower&amp;rdquo; and as a geographic region with a unique natural and cultural heritage. In practice, however, emphasis has been primarily on conservation matters, including the establishment in 2003 of the second  largest nature reserve in the world. In many instances, the socio-cultural impact has been dramatic, demanding much of local people including change/loss of livelihoods and breakdown of community ties.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Specific impacts noted include:&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;ul&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;the  resettlement of villages has occurred as a result of the &amp;ldquo;Ecological Migration&amp;rdquo; policy, a dramatic attempt to protect	the ecology and biodiversity of the headwaters of the Yellow, Yangtze, and Mekong rivers&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;a fairly rapid transition from a rural &amp;ldquo;nomadic&amp;rdquo; lifestyle toward the increased sedentarization has taken place following the &amp;ldquo;Four way scheme&amp;rdquo; to alleviate poverty in rural Qinghai. This has led to a decrease in seasonal mobility and flexibility within livestock management practices, essential components of&amp;nbsp; Tibetan nomadic pastoralism for centuries&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;families have been asked to move off the grassland and to adopt new livelihoods in farming or to live in new towns, as part of the Western Development Strategy &lt;br /&gt;&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;the full application  in 2007 of the long-standing 9-year compulsory education law requires  all children between the ages of 7 and 11 to begin primary education, and complete 9 years of education.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;/ul&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Despite some benefits of these policies, the author argues that  the speed and apparent resolve with which such sociocultural and development transitions are being introduced in grassland areas raise the important question whether there is any other way by which so-called &amp;ldquo;sustainable development&amp;rdquo; (and biodiversity conservation) can come effectively to the Tibetan grasslands before all alternative doors are closed.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The article proposes a contrasting and more people-centered approach to conservation and development, drawing on nearly 10 years&amp;rsquo; experience of active collaboration with local communities, NGOs, and government authorities in the headwaters of the Yangtze River. Citing the success of the Yangtze River Headwaters Sustainable Development Project - a collaborative development project of Plateau Perspectives, the Upper Yangtze Organization, and the Government of Zhiduo County - it argues that a model for combining conservation and development through genuine community participation  could usefully be applied more widely in China&amp;rsquo;s grasslands, and possibly more generally throughout western China. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/eldis-biodiversity/~4/P2gqedlohU0" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.eldis.org/go/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=38681</guid>
<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/eldis-biodiversity/~3/P2gqedlohU0/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=38681</link>
<author>M. Foggin</author>
<category domain="theme">Environment &amp; globalisation</category>
<category domain="theme">biodiversity protected areas</category>
<category domain="theme">biodiversity vs development</category>
<category domain="theme">natural resource management water</category>
<category domain="theme">water governance</category>
<category domain="theme">Water management and irrigation                                                                 </category>
<category domain="theme">pastoralism development policy</category>
<category domain="theme">pastoralism diversification</category>
<category domain="theme">Participation in development</category>
<category domain="theme">Pastoralism mobility</category>
<category domain="theme">Pastoralism representation</category>
<category domain="theme">Pastoralism resource access</category>
<category domain="country">China</category>
<category domain="ISO 2 character country code">CN</category>
<feedburner:origLink>http://www.eldis.org/go/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=38681</feedburner:origLink></item>
<item>
<title>Promoting value chains of neglected and underutilized species for pro-poor growth and biodiversity conservation: guidelines and good practices</title>
<pubDate>11 Jul 2008 17:03:10 GMT</pubDate>
<description>&lt;p&gt;Use of neglected and underutilised species (NUS) can play an important role in improving food security, conserving biodiversity and generating income and employment. Value chain development (VCD) can be a useful tool for realising these prospects, by linking supply capacities to market opportunities. This publication, commissioned by the Global Facilitation Unit for Underutilized Species (GFU), presents guidelines and good practices for value chain development of neglected and underutilised species.&amp;nbsp; &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Specifically, the report: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;ul&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;provides recommendations on how to gear VCD of NUS to pro-poor growth&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;elaborates on challenges and opportunities in marketing of NUS&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;highlights success factors enhancing the utilisation of the potential of NUS&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;indicates factors hampering VCD of NUS and thus putting the objectives, the promotion of biodiversity and pro-poor growth at risk. &lt;/li&gt;
&lt;/ul&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The guidelines draw upon lessons learnt and good practices described in eight case studies implemented by the GFU and its partners, other literature on NUS and VCD, and the experience of the author in horticultural marketing and VCD. The case studies assess approaches and results of VCD for various NUS in Africa, Asia, Europe and South America. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The case studies highlight&amp;nbsp;the narrow the gap&amp;nbsp;between success (e.g. income generation, biodiversity conservation) and failure (e.g. market distortion, crowding-out of species), and hence the importance of sound and professional VCD facilitation. While providing&amp;nbsp;detailed guidelines, the author emphasises that NUS-VCD is not about just solving problems, but about choosing the right approaches able to unlock the&amp;nbsp;potential of NUS, which&amp;nbsp;remains still largely untapped. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/eldis-biodiversity/~4/_gR2Yuut_Qg" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.eldis.org/go/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=38438</guid>
<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/eldis-biodiversity/~3/_gR2Yuut_Qg/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=38438</link>
<author>M. Will</author>
<category domain="theme">Rural development                                                                                </category>
<category domain="theme">Biodiversity</category>
<category domain="theme">Agricultural biodiversity and natural resource management</category>
<category domain="theme">Agricultural markets and food prices</category>
<category domain="theme">Livelihoods natural resource management</category>
<category domain="theme">Environmental policies and management                                                            </category>
<category domain="theme">Environmental protection natural resource management</category>
<category domain="theme">Market oriented production and trade                                                             </category>
<category domain="theme">Agriculture</category>
<category domain="region">Africa South of Sahara</category>
<category domain="region">Europe</category>
<category domain="region">Latin America and Caribbean</category>
<category domain="region">South Asia</category>
<category domain="country">Ghana</category>
<category domain="ISO 2 character country code">GH</category>
<category domain="country">India</category>
<category domain="ISO 2 character country code">IN</category>
<category domain="country">Italy</category>
<category domain="ISO 2 character country code">IT</category>
<category domain="country">Kenya</category>
<category domain="ISO 2 character country code">KE</category>
<category domain="country">Peru</category>
<category domain="ISO 2 character country code">PE</category>
<category domain="country">Turkey</category>
<category domain="ISO 2 character country code">TR</category>
<category domain="country">Turkey</category>
<category domain="ISO 2 character country code">TR</category>
<feedburner:origLink>http://www.eldis.org/go/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=38438</feedburner:origLink></item>
<item>
<title>People, protected areas and global change: participatory conservation in Latin America, Africa, Asia and Europe</title>
<pubDate>11 Jul 2008 15:35:55 GMT</pubDate>
<description>This document compares findings from in-depth research on protected area (PA) management in Latin America Africa, Asia and Europe. It describes how PAs have been managed over the last 50-100 years and considers the ecological, social and economic benefits brought by enhanced participation. The case studies presented in the book are fromBolivia, Argentina, Peru, Tanzania, Madagascar, Cameroon, Ethiopia, Switzerland, Indonesia, Nepal, and Vietnam. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;These individual studies look at the problems people face and at environmental issues from a variety of angles, including governance and institutions, different actors&amp;rsquo; interests and strategies, livelihoods and natural resources, and economic and political contexts. The authors highlight lessons learnt, best practices, and potentials for mitigation of negative impacts with respect to conservation of landscapes and biodiversity. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;It is argued that relations between PAs and local people are difficult because perspecitves on nature, natural resources and conservation are closely interlinked with restrictions and competition in land and resource use, as well as other rights. The case studies highlight that the understanding of participation also varies greatly in all cases, as does the role of development.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The basic lessons learnt from the literature and case studies are summarised as follows:&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;ul&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;although most of the PAs studied are participatory in their formal structure, this does not translate into economic benefits for local people&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;power issues and issues of ideology are used strategically by all actors in order to structure governance and the underlying institutions for their own gain&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;for local actors political gains may be an incentive to strategically subscribe to conservation goals, especially if they have ownership of the decision-making process&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/eldis-biodiversity/~4/H7ipVTrFryU" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.eldis.org/go/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=38428</guid>
<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/eldis-biodiversity/~3/H7ipVTrFryU/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=38428</link>
<author>M. Galvin (ed)</author>
<category domain="theme">Institution building</category>
<category domain="theme">biodiversity protected areas</category>
<category domain="theme">Natural resource management</category>
<category domain="theme">Approaches to participation</category>
<category domain="theme">Participation in development</category>
<category domain="region">Africa South of Sahara</category>
<category domain="region">East Asia and Pacific</category>
<category domain="region">Europe</category>
<category domain="region">Latin America and Caribbean</category>
<category domain="country">Argentina</category>
<category domain="ISO 2 character country code">AR</category>
<category domain="country">Bolivia</category>
<category domain="ISO 2 character country code">BO</category>
<category domain="country">Cameroon</category>
<category domain="ISO 2 character country code">CM</category>
<category domain="country">Ethiopia</category>
<category domain="ISO 2 character country code">ET</category>
<category domain="country">Indonesia</category>
<category domain="ISO 2 character country code">ID</category>
<category domain="country">Madagascar</category>
<category domain="ISO 2 character country code">MG</category>
<category domain="country">Nepal</category>
<category domain="ISO 2 character country code">NP</category>
<category domain="country">Peru</category>
<category domain="ISO 2 character country code">PE</category>
<category domain="country">Switzerland</category>
<category domain="ISO 2 character country code">CH</category>
<category domain="country">Tanzania</category>
<category domain="ISO 2 character country code">TZ</category>
<category domain="country">Vietnam</category>
<category domain="ISO 2 character country code">VN</category>
<feedburner:origLink>http://www.eldis.org/go/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=38428</feedburner:origLink></item>
<item>
<title>Food security and climate change: the answer is biodiversity</title>
<pubDate>08 Jul 2008 16:47:10 GMT</pubDate>
<description>&lt;p&gt;Climate change will profoundly affect agriculture and food security&amp;nbsp;worldwide and will particularly impact smallholder farmers in poor countries. Based on a short review of recent scientific literature, this document argues that the most effective strategy to adapt agriculture to climate change is to increase biodiversity. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Key points include: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;ul&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;a mix of different crops and varieties in one field is a proven and highly reliable farming method to increase resilience to erratic weather changes, as well as reducing the probability of pests and diseases &lt;br /&gt;&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;one of the best proven ways to increase stress tolerance in single varieties are modern breeding technologies that do not entail genetic engineering, such as Marker Assisted Selection, which facilitates the selection of conventional crosses with traits associated with multiple genes &lt;/li&gt;
&lt;/ul&gt;
&lt;p&gt;In contrast, the document argues that there is no evidence that genetically engineered (GE) plants can ever play any role to increase food security in a changing climate. It stresses that GE plants: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;ul&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;will provide no security against extreme weather changes. In a best case scenario, they may be resistant to a single stress, such as heat or drought, but not to the expected rapid and radical weather changes&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;will lack any sophisticated regulation of the inserted gene and thus cannot respond to changing challenges&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;because of their higher price, will most likely be planted in monocultures, which have the highest risk of failing in changeable and extreme weather. &lt;/li&gt;
&lt;/ul&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The authors emphasise that the same conclusion is reflected in the recent IAASTD report, which considered GE crops to be irrelevant to achieving the Millennium Development Goals and to eradicating hunger. They also note that, by reducing agriculture&amp;rsquo;s greenhouse gas emissions and by using farming techniques that increase soil carbon, bio-diverse farming&amp;nbsp;can also contribute to mitigating climate change. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The document concludes by recommending that policy makers follow the IAASTD&amp;rsquo;s recommendations and invest more in agricultural R&amp;amp;D that is geared towards modern, effective, bio-diverse farming. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/eldis-biodiversity/~4/EjpntdiJFJE" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.eldis.org/go/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=38348</guid>
<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/eldis-biodiversity/~3/EjpntdiJFJE/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=38348</link>
<author>J. Cotter</author>
<category domain="theme">Agriculture and food security</category>
<category domain="theme">Biodiversity</category>
<category domain="theme">Biodiversity</category>
<category domain="theme">climate change adaptation and vulnerability</category>
<category domain="theme">climate change adaptation policy</category>
<category domain="theme">Soil and land management                                                                         </category>
<category domain="theme">Livelihoods natural resource management</category>
<category domain="theme">Biotechnology and GMOs                                                                           </category>
<category domain="theme">Environmental policies and management                                                            </category>
<feedburner:origLink>http://www.eldis.org/go/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=38348</feedburner:origLink></item>
<item>
<title>Environment and development decision making in Africa 2006-2008</title>
<pubDate>04 Jul 2008 17:29:55 GMT</pubDate>
<description>&lt;p&gt;The African Ministerial Conference on the Environment (AMCEN) is the primary ministerial level forum for environment and development issues in Africa. It has helped launch various environmental initiatives at the regional level, and these have greatly influenced environmental policy in Africa. This institutional history report looks at AMCEN in the broader context of decision making for environment and development in Africa over the period 2006&amp;ndash;2008.&amp;nbsp; &lt;br /&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The report focuses on how Africa&amp;rsquo;s intergovernmental bodies and Africa&amp;rsquo;s development partners are supporting sustainable development in Africa. It provides a historical overview of AMCEN, including its many milestone decisions and programmmes, as well as an overview of NEPAD. It also provides an overview of key meetings, decisions and declarations on environment and development as they relate to the key AMCEN priorities of: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;ul&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;Africa&amp;rsquo;s development needs &lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;biodiversity and wildlife management &lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;climate change &lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;chemicals management &lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;desertification, food security and land &lt;/li&gt;
&lt;/ul&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The report ends with an overview of the International Institute for Sustainable Development's (IISD) African Regional Coverage Project which aims to give African meetings and activities a higher exposure to the international community, reversing the information flow and giving African policy-makers a voice in their own priority setting.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/eldis-biodiversity/~4/xpDj4wQJqfc" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.eldis.org/go/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=38300</guid>
<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/eldis-biodiversity/~3/xpDj4wQJqfc/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=38300</link>
<author>R. Sherman</author>
<category domain="theme">Environmental governance</category>
<category domain="theme">Global standards &amp; norms</category>
<category domain="theme">Mitigation</category>
<category domain="theme">Biodiversity</category>
<category domain="theme">Climate Change Adaptation</category>
<category domain="theme">natural resource management forests</category>
<category domain="theme">Soil and land management                                                                         </category>
<category domain="theme">Research to policy</category>
<category domain="region">Africa South of Sahara</category>
<feedburner:origLink>http://www.eldis.org/go/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=38300</feedburner:origLink></item>
<item>
<title>Protection, politics and protest: understanding resistance to conservation</title>
<pubDate>04 Jul 2008 17:21:27 GMT</pubDate>
<description>This paper presents a framework to understand how conservation is resisted, particularly in protected areas and national parks.&amp;nbsp;Informed largely by James Scott&amp;rsquo;s concept of &amp;lsquo;everyday resistance&amp;rsquo;, the paper is based on theories of subaltern politics and a review of thirty-four published case studies. By showing the variety of responses to this resistance, the paper aims to make conservation practitioners more aware of the different forms local resistance can take. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The author stresses that, in recent years, international conservation organisations have become increasingly powerful in influencing policy in protected areas, particularly in the global South, bringing a set of ideas that often contrasts to that of local populations. This has coincided with a global growth in the amount of land classified as protected areas. The paper argues that the concept of everyday resistance, although problematic, is still useful for understanding conflicts around protected areas and conservation projects. It provides a way of explaining the relationship between conservation authorities and local populations; why locals are dissatisfied with protected areas, how they react to this, and what determines the nature of these actions. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Because resistance is specific to the political, social and cultural context in which it takes place, this paper does not recommend specific steps for developing new approaches to conservation. However, it encourages practitioners to move away from labelling all infringements of conservation regulation as encroachment, and to recognise and address this vibrant everyday politics to produce policy that is better both for biodiversity and for those who live close to protected areas.&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/eldis-biodiversity/~4/qQenfupBiHs" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.eldis.org/go/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=38297</guid>
<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/eldis-biodiversity/~3/qQenfupBiHs/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=38297</link>
<author>G. Holmes</author>
<category domain="theme">New wars</category>
<category domain="theme">approaches to conflict prevention</category>
<category domain="theme">biodiversity protected areas</category>
<category domain="theme">Participation in development</category>
<category domain="theme">Research to policy</category>
<category domain="theme">Case studies</category>
<feedburner:origLink>http://www.eldis.org/go/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=38297</feedburner:origLink></item>
<item>
<title>Biodiversity conservation in Southeast Asian timber concessions: a critical evaluation of policy mechanisms and guidelines.</title>
<pubDate>04 Jul 2008 17:15:50 GMT</pubDate>
<description>This paper assesses the tools and guidelines that have been developed to promote sustainable forest management (SFM) and the progress that has been made in Southeast Asia toward better logging practices. It specifically focuses on practices relevant to biodiversity issues. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;It is argued that tropical deforestation is leading to a loss of economically productive timber concessions and areas with important environmental or socio-cultural values. To counteract this threat in Southeast Asia, SFM practices are becoming increasingly important. Various regional and national mechanisms now inform governments and the timber industry about methods to reduce the impact of production forestry on wildlife and the forest environment. However, so many guidelines have been produced that it has become difficult to judge which ones are most relevant. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Key concluding points include:&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;ul&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;despite several decades of attempts to improve forest management in Southeast Asia, the implementation of SFM in a significant part of the region&amp;rsquo;s production forests still has a long way to go&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;to reduce further forest loss, there is a need to accelerate the implementation of good forest management practices &lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;the timber industry needs to recognise that taking on a role as wildlife manager in forest concessions might not require a major change in operations and might not be as onerous as initially perceived. Adhering to SFM guidelines should further improve the conditions for forest wildlife &lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;despite continued deforestation in the region, the rate of forest loss will be reduced. SFM will have to play a major role in the remaining forests to ensure that they provide economic revenues from timber, in addition to other environmental services. &lt;/li&gt;
&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/eldis-biodiversity/~4/WP-KAiJ0NWY" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.eldis.org/go/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=38294</guid>
<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/eldis-biodiversity/~3/WP-KAiJ0NWY/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=38294</link>
<author>R. Dennis</author>
<category domain="theme">Biodiversity</category>
<category domain="theme">forestry assessment</category>
<category domain="theme">Labelling and Certification Forest Certification</category>
<category domain="theme">Forest policies and management                                                                   </category>
<category domain="theme">environment and natural resources</category>
<category domain="theme">environmental standards and regulation</category>
<category domain="region">East Asia and Pacific</category>
<category domain="region">South Asia</category>
<feedburner:origLink>http://www.eldis.org/go/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=38294</feedburner:origLink></item>
<item>
<title>Local governance institutions for sustainable natural resource management in Mali, Burkina Faso and Niger</title>
<pubDate>04 Jul 2008 16:06:56 GMT</pubDate>
<description>&lt;p&gt;This paper reflects on experiences from research and interventions in the Sahel on management of renewable natural resources - soils, water, forests, and biodiversity - for the purpose of food and income generation.&amp;nbsp;It focuses&amp;nbsp;on local governance institutions in relation to natural resource entitlements, use and decision-making on management in Mali, Burkina Faso and Niger. &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The study explores the range of existing local governance institutions that is best managed at this level&amp;nbsp;for&amp;nbsp;each&amp;nbsp;resource type, prevailing local institutions for governing natural resources and trends. Particular attention is paid to the influence of customary institutions, project interventions, and democratic decentralisation. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;It is argued that development agencies can play a role in strengthening local governance institutions for sustainable natural resource management by: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;ul&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;holding governments to account for the policies it has signed up to as part of agreements around sector and budget support &lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;contributing to a more conducive policy context for decentralised management of natural resources and local governance institutions, by supporting the governments of the three countries in finalising the legislation that is being planned, developing the accompanying decrees and procedures, and supporting implementation and monitoring the effects, such as on women and marginal groups &lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;encouraging policy alignment and harmonisation, for example through the linking of decentralisation policy with natural resource management, environmental protection and land administration &lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;improving the quality of policy implementation through occasional support to pilot activities to promote the testing of new approaches on institutional solutions to natural resource-related problems in different contexts &lt;/li&gt;
&lt;/ul&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The paper concludes that effective local governance institutions for natural resource management contribute to sustainability, local economic development, and conflict prevention. The need for such institutions is increasing, given the growing pressure on, and competition over, land and natural resources. The authors argue that policies in support of natural resource management benefit from pooling knowledge and research, joint strategy development and division of labour amongst development partners. Ultimately, they argue, such policies will be judged on the extent to which these strengthen local capacities to manage and use natural resources in a sustainably way and enhance justice in natural resource governance.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/eldis-biodiversity/~4/mq1av5WBLaY" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.eldis.org/go/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=38277</guid>
<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/eldis-biodiversity/~3/mq1av5WBLaY/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=38277</link>
<author>T. Hilhorst</author>
<category domain="theme">Local institutions</category>
<category domain="theme">climate change</category>
<category domain="theme">Livelihoods</category>
<category domain="theme">Climate change adaptation</category>
<category domain="theme">Natural resource management</category>
<category domain="theme">biodiversity vs development</category>
<category domain="theme">natural resource management forests</category>
<category domain="theme">natural resource management water</category>
<category domain="theme">Livelihoods natural resource management</category>
<category domain="region">Africa South of Sahara</category>
<category domain="country">Burkina Faso</category>
<category domain="ISO 2 character country code">BF</category>
<category domain="country">Mali</category>
<category domain="ISO 2 character country code">ML</category>
<category domain="country">Niger</category>
<category domain="ISO 2 character country code">NE</category>
<feedburner:origLink>http://www.eldis.org/go/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=38277</feedburner:origLink></item>
<item>
<title>Links between ecosystem services and poverty alleviation: situation analysis for arid and semi-arid lands in southern Africa</title>
<pubDate>03 Jul 2008 17:58:55 GMT</pubDate>
<description>&lt;p&gt;Humans have always depended upon natural ecosystems to supply a range of services useful for their survival and well-being. However, with widespread urbanisation, modernisation, and globalisation, along with the primacy of capitalist economic models, the obvious reliance of humans on ecosystems has become diluted for many, and difficult to maintain for others. This report presents the findings of a situation analysis, covering the arid and semi-arid lands of southern Africa. The authors discuss evidence of the links between ecosystem services and human well-being, and especially the opportunities for poverty alleviation through the provision and management of ecosystem services. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Focusing specifically on Botswana, Mozambique, Namibia, South Africa, Swaziland and Zimbabwe the document highlights how across all these selected countries, a broad gradient of decreasing aridity is evident at a sub-continental scale from the west coasts of Namibia and South Africa to the east coast of Mozambique. A summary list is established of all ecosystem services and their categorisation as provisioning, supporting, regulating or cultural. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Areas considered in this study include: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;ul&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;provisioning services &lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;regulating services &lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;cultural services &lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;drivers of ecosystem change &lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;trends in ecosystem services &lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;management interventions &lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;capacity gaps &lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;communication &amp;amp; outreach strategies &lt;/li&gt;
&lt;/ul&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The authors conclude that investments in managing and securing ecosystem services alone will not eradicate poverty. It needs to be part, but a significant part, of broader poverty alleviation initiatives. They also note that there is inadequate consideration of poverty alleviation issues by ecosystem management agencies, and there is practically no consideration of ecosystem resources and impacts by social welfare or economic development agencies (other than tourism projects). A number of other conclusions and recommendations are outlined.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/eldis-biodiversity/~4/G4N1s-tj9fM" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.eldis.org/go/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=38263</guid>
<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/eldis-biodiversity/~3/G4N1s-tj9fM/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=38263</link>
<author>C. Shackleton</author>
<category domain="theme">biodiversity protected areas</category>
<category domain="theme">biodiversity vs development</category>
<category domain="theme">natural resource management CBNRM</category>
<category domain="theme">Agricultural biodiversity and natural resource management</category>
<category domain="theme">Rural poverty</category>
<category domain="country">Botswana</category>
<category domain="ISO 2 character country code">BW</category>
<category domain="country">Mozambique</category>
<category domain="ISO 2 character country code">MZ</category>
<category domain="country">South Africa</category>
<category domain="ISO 2 character country code">ZA</category>
<category domain="country">Swaziland</category>
<category domain="ISO 2 character country code">SZ</category>
<feedburner:origLink>http://www.eldis.org/go/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=38263</feedburner:origLink></item>
<item>
<title>Moving beyond forestry laws in Sahelian countries</title>
<pubDate>18 Jun 2008 10:53:54 GMT</pubDate>
<description>&lt;p&gt;Sahelian rural populations&amp;rsquo; needs are sourced from on-farm indigenous tree species. However, access, use and management of indigenous tree species within their territories are restricted by forestry laws. This has built suspicion and discontent between foresters and natural resource users. Natural resource users argue that they own the trees on their farms; in contrast, the state claims to own protected indigenous trees on farms as stipulated in the forestry laws. These mismatches have served to increase deforestation despite stringent penalties and use of permits and licenses. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;This brief argues that there is a need to move beyond these forestry laws to find new sustainable solutions. It is asserted that to deal with the mismatches between foresters and natural resource users, Sahelian governments should work with rural communities and other stakeholders to amend their forestry laws to: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;ul&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;facilitate negotiation support among stakeholders &lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;operationalise decentralisation and power transfer initiatives for management of agroforests &lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;recognise and facilitate formulation and use of local by-laws to control access, use and tree management &lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;use permits and licenses to regulate access and use of indigenous trees only in state controlled &amp;ldquo;classified&amp;rdquo; forests &lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;provide extension services to natural resources users&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;promote agroforestry as a business &lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;review land and tree tenure laws &lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;enhance collaborative work among Sahelian governments, development partners and research institutions&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;/ul&gt;
&lt;p&gt;It is noted that, in countries where natural resource users and by-laws have been recognised and integrated in conventional law, there is improved access, use and management of indigenous tree species. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/eldis-biodiversity/~4/--uWtz3p2o4" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.eldis.org/go/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=37895</guid>
<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/eldis-biodiversity/~3/--uWtz3p2o4/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=37895</link>
<author>T. Yatich</author>
<category domain="theme">Legal and judicial reform</category>
<category domain="theme">biodiversity protected areas</category>
<category domain="theme">natural resource management forests</category>
<category domain="theme">Livelihoods natural resource management</category>
<category domain="region">Africa South of Sahara</category>
<feedburner:origLink>http://www.eldis.org/go/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=37895</feedburner:origLink></item>
<item>
<title>Trends in sustainable development</title>
<pubDate>17 Jun 2008 14:25:57 GMT</pubDate>
<description>This report highlights key developments and recent sustainability trends in agriculture, rural development, land, desertification and drought, five of the six themes being considered by the Commission on Sustainable Development (CSD) at its 16th and 17th sessions (2008-2009). The report notes progress in a number of areas while, at the same time, acknowledging that in other areas significant work is still needed to advance implementation of intergovernmentally agreed goals and targets.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;In particular, the report finds that efforts to reduce poverty and improve food security in developing countries are hampered by declining support for strong agricultural growth. It argues that strong agricultural growth is four times more effective than growth in other sectors in benefiting the poorest half of the population. However, while many developing countries have posted gains in agricultural production, distribution and exports, people living in areas of high inequality and in isolation from the broader economy typically benefit little from them.&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt;Key trends highlighted in the report include:&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;ul&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;public spending on agriculture has fallen in all regions except Asia over the past generation, with the drop in Latin America the most dramatic&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;foreign assistance for agriculture is at low levels. In real terms, agriculture accounted for just 4 per cent of bilateral assistance in 2003, down from 16 per cent in 1980&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;more regions have become net food importers since the mid-1990s, including East Asia, Oceania and sub-Saharan Africa&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;markets for value-added exports from developing countries are limited by high tariffs and low brand recognition in developed countries. Many developing country producers are unable to meet strict standards in developed nations&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;developing regions are likely to stay mostly rural until 2020. South and Central Asia, and sub-Saharan Africa will remain more than 50 per cent rural until 2030&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;non-farm income represents an increasingly important share of rural income in developing countries&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;two billion people live in drylands, areas that have the world&amp;rsquo;s lowest per capita GDP and highest infant mortality rates. These populations are especially vulnerable to further land degradation.&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;droughts can be predictable, making it possible to respond with regional early warning systems. In Africa, droughts tend to result in high mortality rates, particularly in the sub-Saharan region, due to the low level of preparedness. In some developing countries, drought wiped out more than 5 per cent of the previous year&amp;rsquo;s GDP.&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/eldis-biodiversity/~4/08--d4Qh8uQ" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.eldis.org/go/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=37867</guid>
<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/eldis-biodiversity/~3/08--d4Qh8uQ/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=37867</link>
<author />
<category domain="theme">Role of agriculture in development</category>
<category domain="theme">Rural development                                                                                </category>
<category domain="theme">Biodiversity</category>
<category domain="theme">Natural resource management</category>
<category domain="theme">Soil and land management                                                                         </category>
<category domain="theme">Environmental policies and management                                                            </category>
<category domain="theme">Environmental protection natural resource management</category>
<category domain="theme">Land tenure</category>
<category domain="theme">Rural poverty</category>
<feedburner:origLink>http://www.eldis.org/go/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=37867</feedburner:origLink></item>
<item>
<title>Conservation and human rights</title>
<pubDate>17 Jun 2008 14:14:59 GMT</pubDate>
<description>This paper presents a collection of articles exploring the key issues surrounding the relationship between human rights and conservation. It looks at what human rights are and what do they have to do with conservation. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The editors argue that despite historic separation between the two, attention to linking conservation and human rights has recently been increasing. This trend poses new challenges for conservation organisations called to recognise and address some new direct and indirect responsibilities. Yet, as conservation protects resources critical to fulfill rights to life, health, food, water, and security, this trend also opens new doors for conservation organisations to be recognised as performing invaluable roles in the realisation of those rights, and in overall support to human societies. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Key points that arise throughout all the articles include: &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;ul&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;it is now evident that conservation has too often undermined human rights, most clearly through protected area-related displacement and oppressive enforcement measures. This phenomenon, common in the past, continues today in subtle and less subtle ways&amp;nbsp;&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;conservation and human rights can also work in mutual support. Some mechanisms, practices, policies and principles guiding conduct appear successful in responding to the challenge of their integration&amp;nbsp;&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;human rights instruments and rights-based codes of conduct can be leveraged to protect people from potential and/or realised violations arising from conservation practice&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;natural resource management can (and should) be incorporated as a key factor in rights-based approaches to human development&amp;nbsp;&lt;/li&gt;
    &lt;li&gt;the link between conservation and human rights is embedded in larger historical, political, cultural and socio-economic contexts that shape and determine its meaning.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;/ul&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/eldis-biodiversity/~4/nKNlsd1jJGI" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.eldis.org/go/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=37862</guid>
<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/eldis-biodiversity/~3/nKNlsd1jJGI/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=37862</link>
<author />
<category domain="theme">Human rights</category>
<category domain="theme">biodiversity protected areas</category>
<category domain="theme">biodiversity vs development</category>
<category domain="theme">Natural resource management</category>
<category domain="theme">Human rights</category>
<feedburner:origLink>http://www.eldis.org/go/display&amp;type=Document&amp;id=37862</feedburner:origLink></item>
</channel>
</rss>
