Policies and Practices of Nature Conservation in Africa: Ideological Challenges, Bottlenecks and Strategic Vision and Options for Protected Areas Sustainable Management

Ntiranyibagira Elysée; Umuziranenge Gloriose

doi:doi:10.11648/j.ijsdr.20200604.12

| Peer-Reviewed

Policies and Practices of Nature Conservation in Africa: Ideological Challenges, Bottlenecks and Strategic Vision and Options for Protected Areas Sustainable Management

Ntiranyibagira Elysée, Umuziranenge Gloriose

Published in International Journal of Sustainable Development Research (Volume 6, Issue 4)

Received: 21 July 2020 Accepted: 3 August 2020 Published: 25 December 2020

Views: Downloads:

Download PDF

Share This Article

Twitter
Linked In
Facebook

Abstract

Africa is the continent of nature conservation per excellence, the testing ground for conservation policies and the symbol of degradation of protected areas worldwide. Though the internalization of international conservation policies and standards has had positive impacts on the extension of protected areas networks, these ones are undergoing increased pressure that considerably threaten biodiversity. Such evolutions call for a revision of the management systems on the basis of preliminary in-depth and rigorous analysis of conservation policies and practices. The study aimed to: (1) explore and synthesize the state of art on conservation policies and practices, (2) identify and analyze the gaps existing between management standards and field practices and (3) detect challenges and bottlenecks and define innovative strategic options for efficient and sustainable management. The research relies on the interpretative synthesis and analysis of the hudge literature available on the nature conservation. The results showed that the dominant model of inhabited protected areas and social exclusion broke the historical harmony between populations and natural resources, disrupted traditional ways of life and generated devastating and continuous social conflicts. They revealed that the lack of management tools, the limits of eco-tourism, the inefficiency of participatory programs and the financial gaps lead to increased anthropic pressures and degradation that have transformed most of protected areas into open agro-pastoral parks. More specifically, the lack of management goals, categories and plans for most of protected areas and the absence of appropriate and regular assessments generate visual navigations and improvisations in management systems that result into glaring discrepancies between theoretical management categories and field practices that have globally failed to maintain original situations or to induce progress. Finally, the poor performance of the management systems results from conflicts of ideologies, interests and agendas between actors having strongly imbalanced means, positions and powers. Such conflicts come from the primacy of powerful external actors, the central role of national governments and the democratic deficits in the management mechanisms, the preeminence of ecological interests over socio-economic benefits, the selective international funding, the emerging privatization of conservation and the marginalization of local communities. To address these ideological and practical challenges, prior and deep assessments of management systems are needed for strategic declassifications, reclassifications and classifications of protected areas before the promotion of rebalanced powers between actors in favor of local communities, administrative and financial autonomies, community based joint shareholdings, double universal mechanisms for compensatory financing and domestic patriotic tourisms.

Published in	International Journal of Sustainable Development Research (Volume 6, Issue 4)
DOI	10.11648/j.ijsdr.20200604.12
Page(s)	55-72
Creative Commons	This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright	Copyright © The Author(s), 2020. Published by Science Publishing Group

Keywords

Conservation Policies, Conservation Practices, Ideological Challenges, Community Conservation, Sustainable Compensation, Management Autonomy, Africa

References

[1]	Colchester M. (2003). Nature sauvage, nature sauvée? Peuples autochtones, aires protégées et conservation de la biodiversité. Mouvement mondial pour les forêts tropicales, (WRM) et Fonds mondial pour la nature (WWF), 154p.
[2]	Giraut F., Guyot S. et Houssay-Holzschuch M. (2004). Les aires protégées dans les recompositions territoriales africaines. L'information géographique, Armand Colin, p. 340-368. .
[3]	Kabore A. (2010). Brousse des uns, aire protégée des autres. Histoire du peuplement, perceptions de la nature et politique des aires protégées dans le Gourma burkinabè: l’exemple de la Réserve partielle de faune de Pama. Thèse de Doctorat. Institut de Hautes Etudes Internationales (Genève) et du Développement pour l’obtention du grade de Docteur en études du développement, 397p.
[4]	Kasisi R. (2012). Les perspectives de la biodiversité en Afrique subsaharienne: repenser collectivement le modèle de gestion. Vertigo-la revue électronique en sciences de l’environnement, vol. 12, n° 2, [En Ligne]; URL: http://vertigo.revues.org/12263; DOI: 10.4000/vertigo.12263.
[5]	WWF/BAD (2012). Rapport sur l’Empreinte Ecologique de l’Afrique, 72p, www.protectedplanet.net consulté le 21/12/2016.
[6]	MEA (2005). Rapport de synthèse de l’Evaluation des Ecosystèmes pour le Millénaire. Millenium Ecosystem Assessment, 59p.
[7]	Dudley N., Stolton S., Belokurov A. and al. (2010). Natural solutions: Protected areas helping people cope with climate change. Gland (Switzerland), Washington DC and New York (USA): IUCN-WCPA, TNC, UNDP, WCS, The World Bank, WWF, 130p.
[8]	Fonds pour l’Environnement Mondial (2010). Approche-Programme pour la préservation de la biodiversité en Afrique de l’Ouest et en Afrique centrale, 32p.
[9]	McCarty J.P. (2001). Ecological consequences of recent climate change. Conservation Biology, 15: 320–331.
[10]	Welch D. (2005). What should protected area managers do in the face of climate change? The George Wright forum, 22: 75-93.
[11]	Hopkins J. J., Allison H. M., Walmsley C. A. and al. (2007). Conserving Biodiversity in a Changing Climate: guidance on building capacity to adapt, Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, London, 32p.
[12]	Rodary E. (2001). Les espaces naturels: l’aménagement par la participation? Mise en réseau et territorialisation des politiques de conservation de la faune en Zambie et au Zimbabwe. Thèse de Doctorat, Université d’Orléans, France, 531p.
[13]	Rodary E., Castellanet C. et Rossi G. (dir.) (2003). Conservation de la nature et développement. L’intégration impossible ? Paris, GRET, Karthala, 308p.
[14]	Triplet P. (2009). Manuel de Gestion des Aires Protégées d’Afrique Francophone, 1250p.
[15]	Dumoulin D. K. et Rodary E. (2005). Les ONG, au centre du secteur mondial de la conservation de la biodiversité. In Aubertin C. (éd.): Représenter la nature ? ONG et biodiversité, Paris, IRD Éditions: pp 59-98.
[16]	Deguignet M., Jufe-Bignoli D., Harrison J. et al. (2014). Liste des Nations Unies des Aires Protégées 2014. UNEP-WCMC: Cambridge, UK, 44p.
[17]	Ndemanou R. (2012). La problématique de gestion des aires protégées en Afrique Centrale: le cas du Parc National de la Lopé au Gabon, Yaoundé, Réseau ECOFAC, 34p.
[18]	Rwanyiziri G. (2009). Géopolitique de l'environnement au Rwanda. Pour une gouvernance participative des espaces protégés. Geography, Université de Pau et des Pays de l'Adour (France). Thèse de Doctorat, 477p. HAL Id: tel-00449865 https://tel.archives-ouvertes.fr/tel-00449865.
[19]	Aubertin C. et Rodary E. (2008). Aires protégées, espaces durables ? IRD, 276p.
[20]	Ntiranyibagira E. (2017). Dynamiques d’occupation du sol, tendances évolutives globales et facteurs d’evolution des aires protégées. Etude diachronique du Parc national périurbain de la Rusizi (Burundi) de 1984 a 2015. These de Doctorat Unique en Sciences de l’Environnement, Université Cheikh Anta Diop de Dakar (Senegal), 340p.
[21]	Convention on Biological Diversity (2011). Protected Areas: Progress in the implementation of the Program of Work and achievement of Aichi Biodiversity Target 11. UNEP/CBD/COP/11/26.
[22]	Montpetit S. (2013). Les aires protégées transfrontalières: au-delà de la conservation de la biodiversité. Essai pour l’obtention du grade de Maîtrise en Ecologie internationale, Université de Sherbrooke, 101p.
[23]	Neumann R. P. (1998). Imposing Wilderness: struggles over livelihood and nature preservation in Africa, Los Angeles and Berkeley: University of California Press, 268 pp.
[24]	Descola P. (2008). A qui appartient la nature ? Texte paru dans laviedesidees.fr, 11p.
[25]	Binot A. (2010). La Conservation de la Nature en Afrique Centrale. Entre Théories et Pratiques. Des Espaces Protégés à Géométrie Variable. Thèse de Doctorat, Université Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne, 444p.
[26]	Williams M. (2000). Dark ages and dark areas: global deforestation in the deep past. Journal of Historical Geography, 26: 28-46.
[27]	Raven P. H., Berg L. R. and Hassenzahl D. M. (2008). Environment, 6^th Edition, Wiley. Edition De Boeck Université pour la traduction et l’adaptation française, 687p.
[28]	Barima S. S. Y. (2009). Dynamique, fragmentation et diversité végétale des paysages forestiers en milieux de transition forêt-savane dans le Département de Tanda (Côte d’Ivoire). Thèse de Doctorat, Université Libre de Bruxelles, 196p.
[29]	Bamba I. (2010). Anthropisation et dynamique spatio-temporelle de paysages forestiers en République Démocratique du Congo. Thèse de Doctorat, Université Libre de Bruxelles, 205p.
[30]	Bogaert J., Barima Y. S. S., Iyongo W. M. L. and. (2011). Forest fragmentation: causes, ecological impacts and implications for landscape management. In Landscape Ecology in Forest Management and Conservation: Challenges and Solutions for Global Change, Li C, Lafortezza R, Chen J, (eds). HEP-Springer: New York, 273-296.
[31]	Calas B. (2003). Quel est le véritable patrimoine des parcs animaliers est-africains ? In Patrimoine et développement dans les pays tropicaux, Pessac: DYMSET (Espaces Tropicaux, 18: 333-342.
[32]	Rossi G. (2000). Ingérence écologique. Environnement et développement rural du Nord au Sud. CNRS Editions Coll. Espaces et Milieux, Paris, 248p.
[33]	De Fries R., Krithi K. K. and Pareeth S. (2010). Interactions between protected areas and their surroundings in human-dominated tropical landscapes; Biological Conservation, December 2010, 143 (12): 2870-2880.
[34]	Veyret Y. (2012). Dictionnaire de l’Environnement, Paris, Armand Colin, 403p.
[35]	Ntiranyibagira E., Naramabuye, F. X., Uwilingiyimana, T., Muhirwa, F. Kibogo, A., Umuziranenge, G., Kayumba I. and Nsengumuremyi, C. (2019). Design, Characterization and Geospatial Analysis of Physical and Socio-economic Indicators of Anthropogenic Pressures on Protected Areas in Africa. International Journal of Environment and Climate Change, 9 (1): 44-57, 2019; Article no. IJECC. 2019.004 DOI: 10.9734/IJECC/2019/v9i130096, ISSN: 2231–4784 (Online).
[36]	Ramade F. (1981). Ecologie des ressources naturelles. Paris, Masson, 322p.
[37]	IUCN (1999). Parks for biodiversity: policy guidance based on experience in ACP countries. Prepared by the World Commission on Protected Areas (WCPA) of IUCN. Brussels and UICN, Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, U. K, 124p.
[38]	Pèlerin E., Mansion A. et Lavigne Delville P. (2011). Afrique des Grands Lacs: droit à la terre, droit à la paix. Des clés pour comprendre et agir sur la sécurisation foncière rurale, Coll. Études et Travaux, série en ligne n° 30, Coéditions CCFD–Terre Solidaire / GRET, www.gret.org, 127 p.
[39]	Rwanyiziri G. (2002). Populations et aires protégées en Afrique de l'Est (Burundi, Kenya, Ouganda, Rwanda, Tanzanie). Mémoire présenté à l’Université Michel de Montaigne-Bordeaux III en vue de l’obtention de DEA en Géographie, 129p.
[40]	Huxley J. (1961). The conservation of wildlife and natural habitats in Central and East Africa, UNESCO, Paris, 131p.
[41]	Myers R., Mittermeier R. A., Mittermeier C. G., Da Fonseca G. A. B. and Kent J. (2000). Biodiversity hotspots for conservation priorities. Nature, vol. 403: 853-858.
[42]	Harroy J. P. (1949). Afrique, terre qui meurt. La dégradation des sols africains sous l’influence de la colonisation. Bruxelles: Editions Marcel Hayez, 557p.
[43]	Mengue-Medou C. (2002). Les aires protégées en Afrique: perspectives pour leur conservation. Vertigo [en ligne, la revue électronique en sciences de l’environnement]. 2002, vol. 3, n° 1, avril 2002, 19p, Disponible sur http://vertigo.revues.org/index4126.html
[44]	Rossi G. (2002). Ecologie du Nord, paysans du Sud: environnement et développement rural. Paris, CNRS Ed, 324p.
[45]	Turnbull C. (1987) Les Iks: survivre par cruauté. Nord Ouganda. Paris: Plon /Terre humaine, 389p.
[46]	Constantin F. (1994). L'homme et la nature: une gestion à réinventer? In Politique africaine. Paris, Karthala, n° 53, 3-10
[47]	Péron X. (1995). L’occidentalisation des Maasaï du Kenya: privatisation foncière et destruction sociale chez les Maasaï du Kenya. Paris: L’Harmattan, 324p.
[48]	Cochet H. (2001). Crises et révolutions agricoles au Burundi. Editions Karthala/INAPG, Paris, 468p.
[49]	Sournia G. (1996). Les aires protégées d'Afrique francophone (Afrique centrale et occidentale). Hier, aujourd'hui, demain. Espaces à protéger ou espaces à partager ? Thèse de doctorat, Bordeaux, Université de Bordeaux III, 302p.
[50]	Raffin J. P. (2005). De la protection de la nature à la gouvernance de la biodiversité. Ecologie et Politique, 97-109.
[51]	IUCN, (1992). Protected areas of the World: a review of national systems. Volume 3: Afrotropical. Prepared par World Conservation Monitoring Centre. UICN, Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, U. K, 360p.
[52]	UICN, PNUE et WWF (1980). Stratégie Mondiale de la Conservation. La conservation des ressources vivantes pour le développement durable, Gland, UICN, 64p.
[53]	TEEB (2010) L’Économie des écosystèmes et de la biodiversité: intégration de l’économie de la nature. Une synthèse de l’approche, des conclusions et des recommandations de la TEEB, www.unep.org/pdf/TEEB_FR.pdf.
[54]	Nicholls H. (2004). The Conservation Business, PLoS Biology, Vol. 2 (9): 1256-1259.
[55]	Adams M. A., Aveling R., Brockington D. and al. (2004). Biodiversity Conservation and the Eradication of Poverty. Science, 306 (5699): 1146-9.
[56]	Dumoulin D. K. (2005). Les politiques de conservation de la nature en Amérique latine: au cœur de l’internationalisation et de la convergence des ordres politiques, IUED-NCCR North-South (Genève) et CREDAL (Paris), REVISTA DE LA CEPAL • Numéro Spécial: 71-85.
[57]	Hannah L. (1992). African people, African parks: an evaluation of development initiatives as a means of improving protected conservation in Africa. USAID, Washington, D.C., 76p.
[58]	Nelson A. and Chomitz K. (2009). Protected Area Effectiveness in Reducing Tropical Deforestation: A global analysis of the impact of protection status. Independent Evaluation Group, Evaluation Brief 7. The World Bank, Washington, D.C, 42p.
[59]	Manuel B. et Doumenge C. (2008). Entre marginalisation et démagogie: quelle place reste-t-il pour les communautés locales dans les aires protégées ? Les Cahiers d’Outre-Mer [En ligne], 244 \| 2008, mis en ligne le 01 octobre 2011, consulté le 01 décembre 2012. URL: http://com.revues.org/5476; DOI: 10.4000/com.5476, p 459-488.
[60]	Hulme D. and Murphree M. W. (ed.) (2001). African wildlife and livelihoods: the promise and performance of community conservation. James Currey, Oxford, UK, pp 336.
[61]	Guéneau S. et Franck J. (2004). Conservation de la biodiversité forestière tropicale en Afrique centrale: dépassionner les débats. Institut du développement durable et des relations internationales. Idées pour le débat n° 14/2005 \| Ressources naturelles, 11p.
[62]	Olson, D. M. and Dinerstein E. (2002). The Global 200: priority ecoregions for global conservation. Annals of the Missouri Botanical Garden, 89: 199-224.
[63]	Wes S., Brooks T. M., Da Fonseca G. A. B. and al. (2002). Hotspots and the conservation of evolutionary history. Proc Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 99 (4): 2067-2071. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.251680798
[64]	Brooks T. M., Mittermeier R. A., Da Fonseca G. A. B. and al. (2006). Global biodiversity conservation priorities, Science, 313: 58-61.
[65]	Vives, M. (2001). Les aires protégées: un arc à plusieurs cordes, Canopée n° 20, juin 2001
[66]	Doumenge C., Palla F., Scholte P., Hiol F. et Larzillière A. (2015). Aires protégées d’Afrique centrale – État 2015. OFAC, Kinshasa, République Démocratique du Congo et Yaoundé, Cameroun, 256 p.
[67]	Ferraro P. J. and Kiss A. (2002). Getting what you paid for: direct payment an alternative investment for conserving biodiversity, Science n° 268, November 29, 2002.
[68]	Brown K. (2003). Three challenges for a real people-centred conservation, Global Ecology and Biogeography, 12: 89-92
[69]	Ferraro P. and Simpson D. (2003). Protecting forest and biodiversity: Are investments in eco-friendly production activities the best way to protect endangered ecosystems and enhance rural livelihoods? Paper presented at the international conference on Rural Livelihoods, Forests and Biodiversity, 5 (2): 167-181.
[70]	Emerton L., Bishop J. and Thomas L. (2006). Sustainable Financing of Protected Areas. A global review of challenges and options. Best Practice Protected Area Guidelines Series No. 13. IUCN: Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge UK, 109p.
[71]	Smith J. (2013). Gestion et financement des aires protégées pour leur adaptation au changement climatique: Une analyse rapide des possibilités. UNEP-WCMC rapport technique, 61p.
[72]	Carret J-C. et Loyer D. (non daté): Comment financer durablement le réseau d’aires protégées terrestres à Madagascar ? Apport de l’analyse économique. Banque Mondiale, Agence Française de Développement, 12p.
[73]	Landreau B. (2012). Guide pour l’élaboration des Plans d’Affaires simplifiés pour les Aires Protégées. Fédération Internationale du Banc d’Arquin (FIBA). Agence Française pour le Développement (AFD), Fonds Français pour l’Environnement Mondial, 61p.
[74]	Depraz S (2008). Géographie des espaces naturels protégés. Genèse, principes et enjeux territoriaux. Paris: Armand Colin, 320p.
[75]	Convention sur la Diversité Biologique (1992). Convention sur la diversité biologique. Rio de Janeiro, ONU, 32p.
[76]	UICN (1994). Lignes directrices pour les catégories de gestion des aires protégées. Commission des parcs nationaux et des aires protégées de l’Union mondiale pour la nature, avec l’assistance du Centre mondial de la surveillance continue de la conservation. 102 p.
[77]	Granier L. (2009). Participation des populations locales à la gestion des aires protégées et contribution à la lutte contre la pauvreté: de nouvelles solutions juridiques, http://www.ecocy.net/fr/journal.php?actu=29 consulté le 15/03/2015, 3p.
[78]	Convention sur la Diversité Biologique (2004). Programme de Travail sur les Aires Protégées. Montréal: Secrétariat de la Convention sur la diversité biologique, 34p.
[79]	Héritier S. (2007). Les parcs nationaux entre conservation durable et développement local. Géocarrefour [En ligne], Vol. 82/4 \| 2007, mis en ligne le 06 juin 2008, consulté le 10 octobre 2012. URL: http://geocarrefour.revues.org/2992, 6p.
[80]	Dudley N. (2008). Lignes directrices pour l’application des catégories de gestion aux aires protégées. UICN, Gland, Suisse, 116p.
[81]	Mahamadou S. M. et Boureima A. (2015). Indicateurs de mesure de la pression anthropique sur les ressources naturelles: exemple de la périphérie du Parc « W » dans la commune rurale de Tamou au Niger. Vertigo-la revue électronique en sciences de l’environnement, vol. 14, n° 1, http://vertigo.revues.org/14754.
[82]	Tardif G. (1999). Mesures à privilégier en bordure des aires protégées au Québec pour contribuer à l'atteinte de leurs objectifs. Gouvernement du Québec, Ministère des Ressources naturelles, Rapport d’Expertise, 113p.
[83]	Hugh S. (2000). Aires Protégées. Avantages sans frontières. La CMAP en action, UICN/CMAP, rue Mauverney 28, CH-1196 Gland, Suisse. 19p.
[84]	Borrini-Feyerabend G., Dudley N., Jaeger T. and al. (2013). Governance of Protected Areas: From understanding to action. Best Practice Protected Area Guidelines, Series 20, Gland, Switzerland: IUCN, xvi, 124p.
[85]	UICN (2004). Déclaration de Bangkok sur la gouvernance des ressources naturelles pour la conservation et le développement durable. Bangkok, 4p.
[86]	Nouidemona J. D (2004). La problématique des activités humaines dans les aires classées: Cas du Parc National du Delta du Saloum (Sénégal). Mémoire de DEA. Université Cheikh Anta Diop de Dakar, Institut des Sciences de l’Environnement, 95p.
[87]	Mackinnon J. K., Mackinnon G. C et Thorsell J. (1990). Aménagement et gestion des aires protégées tropicales, UICN, Suisse, 307p.
[88]	Chiffaut A. (2006). Guide méthodologique des plans de gestion de réserves naturelles. MEED/ATEN, Cahier technique N° 79: 72p.
[89]	Bioret F., Esteve R. et Sturbois A. (2009). Dictionnaire de la protection de la nature. Collection «Espaces et territoires», Presses Universitaires de Rennes, 537 p.
[90]	Benkara E. (2014). Tableau de bord et Réserves naturelles. Mise en place d’une démarche pour évaluer l’efficacité de la gestion du patrimoine naturel de la Réserve Naturelle de la baie de Saint-Brieuc (France). Rapport final-version du 27. 02. 2014. Vivarmor Nature, Agence des Aires Marines Protégées, 135p.
[91]	Hocking M. and Phillips A. (1999). How well are we doing? Some thoughts on the effectiveness of protected areas. Parks, 9 (2): 5-14.
[92]	Hockings M., Stolton S., Leverington F. and al. (2006). Evaluating Effectiveness: A Framework for Assessing Management Effectiveness of Protected Areas, Second Edition. N°14. UICN, Gland, Suisse. xiv + 105p.
[93]	UICN-PACO (2012). Acteurs et gouvernance des aires protégées d’Afrique de l’Ouest: quelle contribution à la conservation ? Ouagadougou, BF: UICN/PACO, 171p.
[94]	OECD (1993). Core set of indicators for environmental performance reviews. OCDE, Paris, http://www.virtualcentre.org/en/dec/toolbox/Refer/gd93179.pdf, dernière visite du site effectuée le 15 février 2016.
[95]	Requier-Desjardins M. (2012). Enjeux et modes d’intégration de la dimension socio-économique dans la surveillance environnementale. CIHEAM-IAMM, France, UMR MOISA / CSFD, Options méditerranéenes, 14p.
[96]	Hartley A., Nelson A., Mayaux P. and al. (2007). The Assessment of African Protected Areas. EUR 22780. A characterization of biodiversity value, ecosystems and threats, to inform the effective allocation of conservation funding. EN, Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, 80p.
[97]	Ntiranyibagira E. (2019). Conceptual and Analytic Model for Advanced Evaluation of Protected Areas’ Global Evolutionary Trends: The Protected Areas' Trends Assessment and Adaptive Management on the Basis of Long-Term Conservation Objectives or PA-TAMCO Analytic Model. American Journal of Environmental Science and Engineering. Vol. 3, No. 1, 2019, pp. 8-16. doi: 10.11648/j.ajese.20190301.12.
[98]	Niang C. I. (1990). Des crises écologiques en Occident au défi énergétique en Afrique. In Revue Internationale des Sciences Sociales, n° 124.
[99]	FAO (2012). Situation des forêts du monde. Dixième Edition, 66p.
[100]	Ghimire K. B. and Pimbert M. P. (1997) Social change and conservation. Earthscan, Genève, 352p.
[101]	Chape S., Blyth S., Fish L., Fox P. and Spalding M. (compilers) (2003). 2003 United Nations List of Protected Areas. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, UK and UNEP-WCMC, Cambridge, UK. ix + 44p.
[102]	Carrere R. and Bravo E. (2004). Protected areas: Protected against whom? Oilwatch & WRM, janvier 2004.
[103]	Hughes R. H. et Hughes J. S. (1992). Répertoire des zones humides d’Afrique. UICN, Gland, Suisse et Cambridge, Royaume Uni / PNUE, Nairobi, Kenya / CMSC, Royaume Uni. xx + 808 pp.
[104]	Weigel F. Y., Féral F. et Cazalet B. (2007). Les aires marines protégées d’Afrique de l’Ouest. Gouvernance et politiques publiques. Presses Universitaires de Perpignan, 232p.
[105]	UICN-PAPACO (2012). Renforcer la conservation des aires protégées d’Afrique. Synthèse de la rencontre de WEOTENGA. Burkina-Faso, 25-27 octobre 2011, 58p.
[106]	Locke H. and Dearden P. (2005). Rethinking protected area categories and the new paradigm. Environmental Conservation, 32 (1): 1-10.
[107]	Mac Chapin (2004). A challenge to conservationists. World Watch, vision for a sustainable world. WORLD WATCH magazine, 17-31.
[108]	Balmford A., Bruner A., Cooper P. and al. (2002). Economic reasons for conserving wild nature, Science, 297, 950-953, DOI: 10.1126/science.1073947.
[109]	Wilson K. E., McBride M. F., Bode M. and Possingham H. P. (2006). Prioritizing global conservation efforts. Nature, vol. 440 (7082): 337-340.
[110]	Honloukou A. (2014). Pauvreté, communauté et État. Comprendre les enjeux stratégiques pour une meilleure gestion des aires protégées au Bénin, 78p.
[111]	Katembo Vikanza P. (2011). Aires protégées, espaces disputés et développement au nord-est de la R. D. Congo. Thèse de Doctorat, Université Catholique de Louvain, 373p.
[112]	Western D. and Wright M. (editors) (1994). Natural connections: perspectives in community-based conservation. First Edition, Island Press, Washington D.C, 600 pp.
[113]	Oates J. F. (1999). Myth and reality in the rain forest: how conservation strategies are failing in West Africa. University of California Press, Berkely, CA, xxviii, 310 pp.
[114]	Terborgh J., Van Schai C., Davenport L. C. and al. (editors) (2002). Making parks work: strategies for preserving tropical nature. Island Press, Washington D.C, 511p.
[115]	Kanyamibwa S. (1998). Impact of war on conservation: Rwandan environment and wildlife in agony. Biodiversity and Conservation, 7: 1399-1406.
[116]	Bonnin M. (2008). Les corridors écologiques: vers un troisième temps du droit de la conservation de la nature? Paris, L’Harmattan, 276p.
[117]	UICN (2014). Nouvelles des Aires Protégées en Afrique n° 74.
[118]	Sambou B. (2004). Evaluation de l’état, de la dynamique et des tendances évolutives de la flore et de la végétation ligneuses dans les domaines soudanien et sub-guinéen au Sénégal. Thèse de Doctorat d’Etat en Sciences Naturelles. Université Cheikh Anta Diop de Dakar (Sénégal), 209p.
[119]	Dudley N. and Stolton S. (1999). Threats to forest protected areas: a survey of 10 countries. A research report from IUCN for the World Bank Alliance for Forest Conservation and Sustainable Use, 47p.
[120]	Umuziranenge G. (2019). Parks’ Governance and Management in Rwanda: Opportunities and Challenges of the Community Participation for a Sustainable Conservation - Case Study of Nyungwe National Park, International Journal of Environmental Protection and Policy. Vol. 7, No. 2, 2019, pp. 61-71. doi: 10.11648/j.ijepp.20190702.13.
[121]	Webber A, Hill C, Reynolds V. 2007. Assessing the failure of a community-based human-wildlife conflict mitigation project in Budongo Forest Reserve, Uganda. Oryx 41: 177-84.
[122]	Wanyingi, n. J. (2016). Determinants of human–elephant conflicts in shimba hills ecosystem, Kenya (doctoral dissertation).
[123]	Ogunjobi, J. A., Halidu, S. K., Odebiyi, B. R., & Fxentirimam, I. J. (2018). Crop raiding pattern of the African elephant (Loxodonta africana) in farms around Kamuku National Park, Nigeria. African Journal of Agriculture Technology and Environment Vol, 7 (2), 174-187.
[124]	Wood A., Stedman-Edwards P. and Mang J. editors (2000). The Root Causes of Biodiversity Loss. World Wildlife Fund and Earthscan Publications Ltd. London, UK. Conservation Ecology, 5 (1): 12. [Online]. URL: http://www.consecol.org/vol5/iss1/art12/.
[125]	Binot A. et Joiris D. V. (2007). Règles d’accès et gestion des ressources pour les acteurs des périphéries d’aires protégées. VertigO - la revue électronique en sciences de l'environnement [En ligne], Hors-série 4 \| novembre 2007, mis en ligne le 11 novembre 2007, consulté le 21 avril 2016. URL: http://vertigo.revues.org/759; DOI: 10.4000/vertigo.759.
[126]	Laslaz L. (2010). Parcs nationaux de montagne et construction territoriale des processus participatifs. Revue de géographie alpine/Journal of Alpine Research Vol. 98, 19p.
[127]	Borrini-Feyerabend G., Farvar M. T., Nguinguiri J. C. et al. (2000). La gestion participative des ressources naturelles. Organisation, négociation et apprentissage par l’action. GTZ et IUCN, Kasparek Verlag, Heidelberg, 108p.
[128]	Ribot J. C. and Peluso N. L. (2003). A Theory of Access. Wiley, Rural Sociology, 68 (2): 153-181.
[129]	Nelson J. and Hossack L. (2001). Indigenous Peoples and Protected Areas in Africa: From Principle to Practice. Forest Peoples Program, 40p.
[130]	Compagnon D. et Constantin F. (eds.)(2000). Administrer l’environnement en Afrique, Paris/Nairobi: Karthala/IFRA, 497p.
[131]	Bonnin M. et Rodary E. (2012). L’influence des services écosystémiques sur les aires protégées: premiers éléments de réflexion. Programme Serena, Document de travail n° 2012-02, 17p.
[132]	Agrawal A. and Gibson C. C. (1999). Enchantment and Disenchantment: The Role of Community in Natural Resource Conservation. World Development, 27 (4): 629-649.
[133]	UICN-PACO (2011). Parcs et réserves du Burundi: évaluation de l`efficacité de gestion des aires protégées. UICN/PACO, Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso, 107p.
[134]	Soulé M. E. and Terborgh J. (1999). Conserving nature at regional and continental scales? A scientific program for North America. Bioscience, 49 (10): 809-817.
[135]	Koontz A. (2008). The Conservation Marketing Equation. A manual for conservation and development professionals, Enterprise Works/VITA, USAID, 44p.
[136]	WCMC (1992). Tropical managed areas assessment. Assessment the conservation status of the world’s tropical forest: a contribution to the FAO Forest Resources Assessment 1990. WCMC, Cambridge, U. K, 428p.
[137]	James A. N (1999). Institutional constraints on protected area funding. Parks, 9 (2): 15-26.
[138]	Dubois G., Bastin L., Martinez Lopez J. and al. (2015). The Digital Observatory for Protected Areas (DOPA) Explorer 1.0. Report EUR 27162 EN, European Commission, Joint Research Centre, Institute for Environment and Sustainability, 60p. http://publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/bitstream/JRC95295/lb-na-27162-en-n%20.pdf.
[139]	Convention sur la Diversité Biologique (2010). Perspectives mondiales de la diversité biologique. Troisième Edition, Montréal, 94p.
[140]	Agence Française de Développement (2014). Les aires protégées au service du développement durable, 8p.

Cite This Article

Plain Text BibTeX RIS

APA Style

Ntiranyibagira Elysée, Umuziranenge Gloriose. (2020). Policies and Practices of Nature Conservation in Africa: Ideological Challenges, Bottlenecks and Strategic Vision and Options for Protected Areas Sustainable Management. International Journal of Sustainable Development Research, 6(4), 55-72. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijsdr.20200604.12

Copy | Download

ACS Style

Ntiranyibagira Elysée; Umuziranenge Gloriose. Policies and Practices of Nature Conservation in Africa: Ideological Challenges, Bottlenecks and Strategic Vision and Options for Protected Areas Sustainable Management. Int. J. Sustain. Dev. Res. 2020, 6(4), 55-72. doi: 10.11648/j.ijsdr.20200604.12

Copy | Download

AMA Style

Ntiranyibagira Elysée, Umuziranenge Gloriose. Policies and Practices of Nature Conservation in Africa: Ideological Challenges, Bottlenecks and Strategic Vision and Options for Protected Areas Sustainable Management. Int J Sustain Dev Res. 2020;6(4):55-72. doi: 10.11648/j.ijsdr.20200604.12

Copy | Download

@article{10.11648/j.ijsdr.20200604.12,
  author = {Ntiranyibagira Elysée and Umuziranenge Gloriose},
  title = {Policies and Practices of Nature Conservation in Africa: Ideological Challenges, Bottlenecks and Strategic Vision and Options for Protected Areas Sustainable Management},
  journal = {International Journal of Sustainable Development Research},
  volume = {6},
  number = {4},
  pages = {55-72},
  doi = {10.11648/j.ijsdr.20200604.12},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijsdr.20200604.12},
  eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.ijsdr.20200604.12},
  abstract = {Africa is the continent of nature conservation per excellence, the testing ground for conservation policies and the symbol of degradation of protected areas worldwide. Though the internalization of international conservation policies and standards has had positive impacts on the extension of protected areas networks, these ones are undergoing increased pressure that considerably threaten biodiversity. Such evolutions call for a revision of the management systems on the basis of preliminary in-depth and rigorous analysis of conservation policies and practices. The study aimed to: (1) explore and synthesize the state of art on conservation policies and practices, (2) identify and analyze the gaps existing between management standards and field practices and (3) detect challenges and bottlenecks and define innovative strategic options for efficient and sustainable management. The research relies on the interpretative synthesis and analysis of the hudge literature available on the nature conservation. The results showed that the dominant model of inhabited protected areas and social exclusion broke the historical harmony between populations and natural resources, disrupted traditional ways of life and generated devastating and continuous social conflicts. They revealed that the lack of management tools, the limits of eco-tourism, the inefficiency of participatory programs and the financial gaps lead to increased anthropic pressures and degradation that have transformed most of protected areas into open agro-pastoral parks. More specifically, the lack of management goals, categories and plans for most of protected areas and the absence of appropriate and regular assessments generate visual navigations and improvisations in management systems that result into glaring discrepancies between theoretical management categories and field practices that have globally failed to maintain original situations or to induce progress. Finally, the poor performance of the management systems results from conflicts of ideologies, interests and agendas between actors having strongly imbalanced means, positions and powers. Such conflicts come from the primacy of powerful external actors, the central role of national governments and the democratic deficits in the management mechanisms, the preeminence of ecological interests over socio-economic benefits, the selective international funding, the emerging privatization of conservation and the marginalization of local communities. To address these ideological and practical challenges, prior and deep assessments of management systems are needed for strategic declassifications, reclassifications and classifications of protected areas before the promotion of rebalanced powers between actors in favor of local communities, administrative and financial autonomies, community based joint shareholdings, double universal mechanisms for compensatory financing and domestic patriotic tourisms.},
 year = {2020}
}

Copy | Download

TY  - JOUR
T1  - Policies and Practices of Nature Conservation in Africa: Ideological Challenges, Bottlenecks and Strategic Vision and Options for Protected Areas Sustainable Management
AU  - Ntiranyibagira Elysée
AU  - Umuziranenge Gloriose
Y1  - 2020/12/25
PY  - 2020
N1  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijsdr.20200604.12
DO  - 10.11648/j.ijsdr.20200604.12
T2  - International Journal of Sustainable Development Research
JF  - International Journal of Sustainable Development Research
JO  - International Journal of Sustainable Development Research
SP  - 55
EP  - 72
PB  - Science Publishing Group
SN  - 2575-1832
UR  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijsdr.20200604.12
AB  - Africa is the continent of nature conservation per excellence, the testing ground for conservation policies and the symbol of degradation of protected areas worldwide. Though the internalization of international conservation policies and standards has had positive impacts on the extension of protected areas networks, these ones are undergoing increased pressure that considerably threaten biodiversity. Such evolutions call for a revision of the management systems on the basis of preliminary in-depth and rigorous analysis of conservation policies and practices. The study aimed to: (1) explore and synthesize the state of art on conservation policies and practices, (2) identify and analyze the gaps existing between management standards and field practices and (3) detect challenges and bottlenecks and define innovative strategic options for efficient and sustainable management. The research relies on the interpretative synthesis and analysis of the hudge literature available on the nature conservation. The results showed that the dominant model of inhabited protected areas and social exclusion broke the historical harmony between populations and natural resources, disrupted traditional ways of life and generated devastating and continuous social conflicts. They revealed that the lack of management tools, the limits of eco-tourism, the inefficiency of participatory programs and the financial gaps lead to increased anthropic pressures and degradation that have transformed most of protected areas into open agro-pastoral parks. More specifically, the lack of management goals, categories and plans for most of protected areas and the absence of appropriate and regular assessments generate visual navigations and improvisations in management systems that result into glaring discrepancies between theoretical management categories and field practices that have globally failed to maintain original situations or to induce progress. Finally, the poor performance of the management systems results from conflicts of ideologies, interests and agendas between actors having strongly imbalanced means, positions and powers. Such conflicts come from the primacy of powerful external actors, the central role of national governments and the democratic deficits in the management mechanisms, the preeminence of ecological interests over socio-economic benefits, the selective international funding, the emerging privatization of conservation and the marginalization of local communities. To address these ideological and practical challenges, prior and deep assessments of management systems are needed for strategic declassifications, reclassifications and classifications of protected areas before the promotion of rebalanced powers between actors in favor of local communities, administrative and financial autonomies, community based joint shareholdings, double universal mechanisms for compensatory financing and domestic patriotic tourisms.
VL  - 6
IS  - 4
ER  -

Copy | Download

Author Information

Ntiranyibagira Elysée

Department of Environmental Sciences and Technologies, Faculty of Agriculture and Bio-Engineering, University of Burundi, Bujumbura, Burundi
Umuziranenge Gloriose

Department of Environment and Natural Resources Management, Faculty of Development Studies, Protestant Institute of Arts and Social Sciences, Huye, Rwanda

Download PDF

Sections

Plain Text BibTeX RIS

APA Style

Ntiranyibagira Elysée, Umuziranenge Gloriose. (2020). Policies and Practices of Nature Conservation in Africa: Ideological Challenges, Bottlenecks and Strategic Vision and Options for Protected Areas Sustainable Management. International Journal of Sustainable Development Research, 6(4), 55-72. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijsdr.20200604.12

Copy | Download

ACS Style

Ntiranyibagira Elysée; Umuziranenge Gloriose. Policies and Practices of Nature Conservation in Africa: Ideological Challenges, Bottlenecks and Strategic Vision and Options for Protected Areas Sustainable Management. Int. J. Sustain. Dev. Res. 2020, 6(4), 55-72. doi: 10.11648/j.ijsdr.20200604.12

Copy | Download

AMA Style

Ntiranyibagira Elysée, Umuziranenge Gloriose. Policies and Practices of Nature Conservation in Africa: Ideological Challenges, Bottlenecks and Strategic Vision and Options for Protected Areas Sustainable Management. Int J Sustain Dev Res. 2020;6(4):55-72. doi: 10.11648/j.ijsdr.20200604.12

Copy | Download

@article{10.11648/j.ijsdr.20200604.12,
  author = {Ntiranyibagira Elysée and Umuziranenge Gloriose},
  title = {Policies and Practices of Nature Conservation in Africa: Ideological Challenges, Bottlenecks and Strategic Vision and Options for Protected Areas Sustainable Management},
  journal = {International Journal of Sustainable Development Research},
  volume = {6},
  number = {4},
  pages = {55-72},
  doi = {10.11648/j.ijsdr.20200604.12},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijsdr.20200604.12},
  eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.ijsdr.20200604.12},
  abstract = {Africa is the continent of nature conservation per excellence, the testing ground for conservation policies and the symbol of degradation of protected areas worldwide. Though the internalization of international conservation policies and standards has had positive impacts on the extension of protected areas networks, these ones are undergoing increased pressure that considerably threaten biodiversity. Such evolutions call for a revision of the management systems on the basis of preliminary in-depth and rigorous analysis of conservation policies and practices. The study aimed to: (1) explore and synthesize the state of art on conservation policies and practices, (2) identify and analyze the gaps existing between management standards and field practices and (3) detect challenges and bottlenecks and define innovative strategic options for efficient and sustainable management. The research relies on the interpretative synthesis and analysis of the hudge literature available on the nature conservation. The results showed that the dominant model of inhabited protected areas and social exclusion broke the historical harmony between populations and natural resources, disrupted traditional ways of life and generated devastating and continuous social conflicts. They revealed that the lack of management tools, the limits of eco-tourism, the inefficiency of participatory programs and the financial gaps lead to increased anthropic pressures and degradation that have transformed most of protected areas into open agro-pastoral parks. More specifically, the lack of management goals, categories and plans for most of protected areas and the absence of appropriate and regular assessments generate visual navigations and improvisations in management systems that result into glaring discrepancies between theoretical management categories and field practices that have globally failed to maintain original situations or to induce progress. Finally, the poor performance of the management systems results from conflicts of ideologies, interests and agendas between actors having strongly imbalanced means, positions and powers. Such conflicts come from the primacy of powerful external actors, the central role of national governments and the democratic deficits in the management mechanisms, the preeminence of ecological interests over socio-economic benefits, the selective international funding, the emerging privatization of conservation and the marginalization of local communities. To address these ideological and practical challenges, prior and deep assessments of management systems are needed for strategic declassifications, reclassifications and classifications of protected areas before the promotion of rebalanced powers between actors in favor of local communities, administrative and financial autonomies, community based joint shareholdings, double universal mechanisms for compensatory financing and domestic patriotic tourisms.},
 year = {2020}
}

Copy | Download

TY  - JOUR
T1  - Policies and Practices of Nature Conservation in Africa: Ideological Challenges, Bottlenecks and Strategic Vision and Options for Protected Areas Sustainable Management
AU  - Ntiranyibagira Elysée
AU  - Umuziranenge Gloriose
Y1  - 2020/12/25
PY  - 2020
N1  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijsdr.20200604.12
DO  - 10.11648/j.ijsdr.20200604.12
T2  - International Journal of Sustainable Development Research
JF  - International Journal of Sustainable Development Research
JO  - International Journal of Sustainable Development Research
SP  - 55
EP  - 72
PB  - Science Publishing Group
SN  - 2575-1832
UR  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijsdr.20200604.12
AB  - Africa is the continent of nature conservation per excellence, the testing ground for conservation policies and the symbol of degradation of protected areas worldwide. Though the internalization of international conservation policies and standards has had positive impacts on the extension of protected areas networks, these ones are undergoing increased pressure that considerably threaten biodiversity. Such evolutions call for a revision of the management systems on the basis of preliminary in-depth and rigorous analysis of conservation policies and practices. The study aimed to: (1) explore and synthesize the state of art on conservation policies and practices, (2) identify and analyze the gaps existing between management standards and field practices and (3) detect challenges and bottlenecks and define innovative strategic options for efficient and sustainable management. The research relies on the interpretative synthesis and analysis of the hudge literature available on the nature conservation. The results showed that the dominant model of inhabited protected areas and social exclusion broke the historical harmony between populations and natural resources, disrupted traditional ways of life and generated devastating and continuous social conflicts. They revealed that the lack of management tools, the limits of eco-tourism, the inefficiency of participatory programs and the financial gaps lead to increased anthropic pressures and degradation that have transformed most of protected areas into open agro-pastoral parks. More specifically, the lack of management goals, categories and plans for most of protected areas and the absence of appropriate and regular assessments generate visual navigations and improvisations in management systems that result into glaring discrepancies between theoretical management categories and field practices that have globally failed to maintain original situations or to induce progress. Finally, the poor performance of the management systems results from conflicts of ideologies, interests and agendas between actors having strongly imbalanced means, positions and powers. Such conflicts come from the primacy of powerful external actors, the central role of national governments and the democratic deficits in the management mechanisms, the preeminence of ecological interests over socio-economic benefits, the selective international funding, the emerging privatization of conservation and the marginalization of local communities. To address these ideological and practical challenges, prior and deep assessments of management systems are needed for strategic declassifications, reclassifications and classifications of protected areas before the promotion of rebalanced powers between actors in favor of local communities, administrative and financial autonomies, community based joint shareholdings, double universal mechanisms for compensatory financing and domestic patriotic tourisms.
VL  - 6
IS  - 4
ER  -

Copy | Download