Evaluation of participatory processes of Natura 2000 management planning

  • Eszter Kovács Szent István University, Institute of Nature Conservation and Landscape Management; Environmental Social Science Research Group (ESSRG)
  • Gabriella Kiss Corvinus University of Budapest
  • Eszter Kelemen Szent István University, Institute of Nature Conservation and Landscape Management; Environmental Social Science Research Group (ESSRG)
  • Veronika Fabók Szent István University, Environmental Sciences Doctoral School; Environmental Social Science Research Group (ESSRG)
  • Ágnes Kalóczkai Institute of Ecology and Botany, Centre for Ecological Research, Hungarian Academy of Sciences; Szent István University, Environmental Sciences Doctoral School; Environmental Social Science Research Group (ESSRG)
  • Barbara Mihók Institute of Ecology and Botany, Centre for Ecological Research, Hungarian Academy of Sciences; Akciókutatók a Fenntarthatóságért Egyesület (AKUT)
  • György Pataki Corvinus University of Budapest; Environmental Social Science Research Group (ESSRG)
  • Bálint Balázs Szent István University, Institute of Nature Conservation and Landscape Management; Environmental Social Science Research Group (ESSRG)
  • Györgyi Bela Szent István University, Institute of Nature Conservation and Landscape Management; Environmental Social Science Research Group (ESSRG)
  • Boldizsár Megyesi Institute for Sociology, Centre for Social Sciences, Hungarian Academy of Sciences
  • Katalin Margóczi Department of Ecology, University of Szeged; Akciókutatók a Fenntarthatóságért Egyesület (AKUT)
DOI: https://doi.org/10.20332/tvk-jnatconserv.2016.22.112
Keywords: participatory planning, Natura 2000 network, management plans

Abstract

The institutionalisation of public participation is still in its infancy in Hungary. Nevertheless, stakeholder involvement in the preparation of Natura 2000 management plans has become widespread. Valuation of these processes can be useful for planners, teams managing participatory processes and conservation decision-makers as well. In this paper 23 participatory planning processes are evaluated based on criteria derived from the international literature on participation and tailored to participatory management planning of Natura 2000 sites. Our analysis shows that the examined processes only partly meet the required criteria and about the conservation outcome of the processes no sufficient information is available. The strength of the examined processes is the skilled and independent participatory team with social science background. Our findings also show that a supporting policy is crucial for the success of management planning and related participatory processes as well.

References

Allen, C. R., Fontaine, J. J., Pope, K. L. & Garmestani, A. S. (2011): Adaptive management for a turbulent future. – J. Environ. Manage. 92: 1339–1345. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2010.11.019

Arnstein, A. (1969): A ladder of citizenship participation. – J. Am. I. Planners 26: 216–233. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01944366908977225

Bagnoli, P., Goeschl, T. & Kovács, E. (2008): People and Biodiversity Policies, Impacts, Issues and Strategies for Policy Action. – OECD Publishing, Paris. 249 p.

Cent, J., Grodzińska-Jurczak, M. & Pietrzyk-Kaszyńska, A. (2014): Emerging multilevel environmental governance – A case of public participation in Poland. – J. Nat. Conserv. 22: 93–102. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jnc.2013.09.005

Díez, M. A., Etxano, I. & Garmendia, E. (2015): Evaluating Participatory Processes in Conservation Policy and Governance: Lessons from a Natura 2000 pilot case study. – Environ. Pol. Governance 25: 125–138. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/eet.1667

European Commission (2014): Establishing conservation measures for Natura 2000 Sites, A review of the provisions of Article 6.1 and their practical implementation in different Member States. – European Comission, 40 p.

Evely, A. C., Pinard, M., Reed, M. S. & Fazey, I. (2011): High levels of participation in conservation projects enhance learning, Conserv. Lett. 4:116–126. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1755-263X.2010.00152.x

Fabók, V., Kovács, E. & Kalóczkai, Á. (2015): Érintettek percepcióinak feltárása egy védett ragadozómadarakkal kapcsolatos konfliktusban a Jászság SPA részvételi tervezési folyamata során. – Természetvédelmi Közlem. 21: 64–75.

Grodzińska-Jurczak, M. & Cent, J. (2011): Enlargement of nature conservation areas - Problems with Natura 2000 implementation in Poland? – Environ Manage 47: 11–27. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00267-010-9583-2

Hansen, H. P., von Essen, E. & Sriskandarajah, N. (2016): Citizens, Values and Experts: Stakeholders: The Inveigling Factor of Participatory Democracy. – In: Hansen, H. P., Nielsen, B. S., Sriskandarajah, N. & Gunnarsson, E. (szerk.): Commons, Sustainability, Democratization Action Research and the Basic Renewal of Society. Routledge, New York, pp. 113–138.

Hiedanpää, J. (2002): European-wide conservation versus local well-being: The reception of the Natura 2000 Reserve Network in Kavia, SW-Finland. – Landscape Urban Plann. 61: 113–123. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0169-2046(02)00106-8

Kettunen, M., Green, S., McConville, A., Menadue, H., Newman, S., Poláková, J., Torkler, P. & Underwood, E. (2014a): Financing Natura 2000 Guidance Handbook. Part II – Analysis of Natura 2000 management measures eligible for financing in 2014-2020 – a publication commissioned by the European Commission DG Environment, Publication Office of the European Union, Luxembourg, 148 p.

Kettunen, M., Torkler, P., Rayment, M. (2014b): Financing Natura 2000 Guidance Handbook. Part I – EU funding opportunities in 2014-2020 – a publication commissioned by the European Commission DG Environment, Publication Office of the European Union, Luxembourg, 84 p.

Kiss, G. (2012): Milyen a jó részvétel? Társadalmi részvételi folyamatok értékelése környezeti ügyekben. – Társadalomkutatás 30(4): 370–385. http://dx.doi.org/10.1556/Tarskut.30.2012.4.5

Kovács, E., Fabók, V., Kalóczkai, Á. & Hansen, H. P. (2016): Towards understanding and resolving the conflict related to the Eastern Imperial Eagle (Aquila heliaca) conservation with participatory management planning. – Land Use Pol. 54: 158–168. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2016.02.011

Lawrence, A. (2008): Experiences with participatory conservation in post-socialist Europe. – Int. J. Biodiversity Science and Management 4: 179–186.

Madden, F. & McQuinn, B. (2014): Conservation’s blind spot: The case for conflict transformation in wildlife conservation. – Biol. Conserv. 178: 97–106. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2014.07.015

Malatinszky, Á., Ádám, Sz., Saláta-Falusi, E. Saláta, D. & Penksza, K. (2013): Planning management adapted to climate change effects in terrestrial wetlands and grasslands. – Int. J. Global Warming 5(3): 311–325. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10584-012-0689-9

Mihók, B., Kiss, G., Kovács, E., Margóczi, K., Fabók, V., Kalóczkai , Á. (2016): Ki mondja meg, mi a fontos? - Részvétel és természetvédelem, Természetvédelmi Közlem. 22: 131–154.

Mihók, B., Pataki, Gy., Kovács, E., Bartha D., Csányi, S., Erős, T., Margóczi, K., Standovár T., Szemethy, L., Török, K., Török, P., Báldi, A. et al. (2014): A magyarországi természetvédelem legfontosabb 50 kutatási kérdése a következő 5 évben. – Természetvédelmi Közlem. 20: 1–23.

Molnár, Zs., Kis, J., Vadász, Cs., Papp, L., Sándor, I., Béres, S., Sinka, G. & Varga, A. (2016): Common and conflicting objectives and practices of herders and conservation managers: the need for a conservation herder. – Ecosyst. Health Sustainability 2(4): Paper e01215. 16 p. (http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ehs2.1215/full, letöltés: 2016. április) http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ehs2.1215

Niedziałkowski, K., Blicharska, M., Mikusinski, G. & Jedrzejewska, B. (2014): Why is it difficult to enlarge a protected area? Ecosystem services perspective on the conflict around the extension of the Białowieza National Park in Poland. – Land Use Pol. 38: 314–329. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2013.12.002

O’Rourke, E. (2014): The reintroduction of the white-tailed sea eagle to Ireland: People and wildlife. – Land Use Pol. 38: 129–137. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2013.10.020

Patton, M. Q. (2002): Qualitative Research and Evaluation Methods. 3rd Edition. – Sage, London. 663 p.

Pellizzoni, L. (2003): ‘Uncertainty and Participatory Democracy’. – Environ. Value. 12(2): 195–224. http://dx.doi.org/10.3197/096327103129341298

Rauschmayer, F., Berghöfer, A., Omann, I. & Zikos. D. (2009): Examining processes or/and outcomes? Evaluation concepts in European governance of natural resources. – Environ. Pol. Governance 19: 159–173. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/eet.506

Reed, M. S. (2008): Stakeholder participation for environmental management: A literature review. – Biol. Conserv. 141: 2417–2431. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2008.07.014

Reed, M. S., Evely, A. C., Cundill, G., Fazey, I., Laing, A., Newig, J., Parrish, B., Prell, C., Raymond, C. & Stringer, L. C. (2010): What is Social Learning? – Ecol. Soc. 15: 1. http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol15/iss4/resp1/

Rodela, R. & Udovč, A. (2008): Participation in nature protection: Does it benefit the local community? A Triglav National park case study. – Int. J. Biodiv. Sci. Manage. 4: 209–218. http://dx.doi.org/10.3843/Biodiv.4.4:4

Rowe, G. & Frewer, L. J. (2000): Public participation methods: a framework for evaluation. – Sci. Tech. Human Value. 25: 3–29. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/016224390002500101

Švajda, J. (2008): Participatory conservation in a post-communist context: The Tatra National Park and Biosphere Reserve, Slovakia. – Int. J. Biodiv. Sci. Manage. 4: 200–208. http://dx.doi.org/10.3843/Biodiv.4.4:3

Vidékfejlesztési Minisztérium (2013): Útmutató a Natura 2000 fenntartási tervek készítéséhez. – Vidékfejesztési Minsiztérium, Természetmegőrzési Főosztály, Budapest, kézirat, 29 p.

Young, J. C., Jordan, A., Searle, K. R., Butler, A., Chapman, D. S., Simmons, P. & Watt, A. D. (2013): Does stakeholder involvement really benefit biodiversity conservation? – Biol. Conserv. 158: 359–370. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2012.08.018

Published
2016-12-31
Issue
Vol. 22 (2016): Volume 22
Section
Social Sciences in Conservation