REVIEW ARTICLE BIOSPHERE LANDSCAPES: PRINCIPLES AND LOCAL PRACTICES CHALLENGING SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT IN AFRICA 1 Tekalign Tafese Gebretsadik (Ph.D. student), Department of Natural Resource Management, College of __Agriculture & Natural Resource, Wolkite University, Ethiopia 2 Aden Abdurahman Shekur (Ph.D. student), Department of Natural Resource Management, College of Agriculture & Natural Resource, Dilla Universities, Ethiopia

*Correspondence: [email protected] ; Tekalign Tafese; P.O.Box: 07, Wolkite University, Wolkite, Ethiopia; Tele: +251943206455

Abstract: participation, and delivery. The aim of this article is A biosphere reserve is a unique kind of protected to review the existing empirical literature about the area that differs from national parks and other consistency of principles of BR with local practice kinds of protected natural areas having three very and challenging factors associated with successful different, but equal, aims: conservation, scientific management of BLs in Africa. The review collects research and monitoring; and sustainable relevant and recent articles published globally and development. MAB was launched in 1971 and the African context and used reports of UNESCO MAB BR network in 1976. Currently, WNBR had grown program and AfriMAB to see the current status of to include 686 BR in 122 countries, including 20 the program globally and African context. trans-boundary sites. AfriMAB regional network, contains 79 BR recognized as part of the WNBR, Key words: UNESCO, Biosphere Reserve, across 28 countries. Pre-Seville (1976 to 1995) and Landscape, Sustainable Development, Africa post-Seville (1996 to 2018) phases of BR, there exists both success and less success stories globally 1.0 Introduction and in African. The first phase lays its philosophy World's biological treasures threatened to an on strict environmental protection, i.e. strict BR to extent no previous generation has experienced serve science while the second delimited along (Philip J. and Michael S., 1995). As of Plato “what sustainable resource use principle, therefore, can now remains compared with whatever then existed is be defined as Biosphere landscape management. like the skeleton of a sick man, all the fat and soft The notion of converting the concept’s implications earth having wasted away, and only the bare into reality at international, national and local framework of the land being left” (Philip J. and scales raises a number of challenges arise from Michael S., 1995). Looking back on 100 years, three main functional factors leads to failure and or enormous change has observed in relationship with success of biosphere landscape i.e., BR designation,

29 the earth and human; like high population increase, ecological and environmental sciences (Ishwaran et development of world economy, need for natural al., 2008). The principles behind the development resources increased exponentially, and converted and management of biosphere reserves have evolved land from natural ecosystems to managed landscapes rapidly over the years and continue to develop as at a rate unprecedented in history. These altered lessons are learned from past experiences, and every natural ecosystem on the planet, and in the innovative policies and strategies are explored process, countless species became extinct and many (Philip J. and Michael S., 1995). others are now threatened. If it continues to The global growth in the number and area of indifferently transform the biosphere, the layers of BRs, as well as the concept’s further evolution crust, water, and atmosphere that support life on the toward the implementation of the SDGs are already earth, and if it continues to disrupt the ecological fundamentally positive developments (Susanne S. interactions and flows in our oceans, deserts, forests, and Tim, 2017). New reserves are designated every mountains, fields, and lakes, it threaten very year by the International coordinating Council for the existence by disrupting the fragile relationships that programme, established by UNESCO in the early maintain our life support system (Philip J. and 1970s; a body with a rotating elected membership of Michael S., 1995). 34 UNESCO Member States. The Man and the Biosphere reserves are areas comprising Biosphere Programme is an intergovernmental terrestrial, marine and coastal ecosystems designed scientific programme that aims to improve relations to deal with one of the most important questions the between people and their natural environment world facing; to reconcile conservation of (Maureen G. and Merle M., 2013 and C. Starger biodiversity and biological resources with human 2016, and UNESCO, 2018 b). The biosphere reserve activity through the sustainable use of natural principle, as promoted by UNESCO’s Man and the resources. One of their objectives is to give rise to Biosphere programme, combines biodiversity innovative sustainable development practices conservation with a strong cultural focus. It is (UNESCO, 1996, 2003, and Ana F. et al., 2018). The therefore considered a promising approach to Biosphere Reserve Program emerged to play a mitigate the loss of biodiversity and to foster prominent role in efforts to integrate biological sustainable land use while putting the needs of local diversity conservation and sustainable development. people and ethnic minorities at its core. This is The biosphere reserve concept originated as a tool for particularly appropriate in culturally diverse international cooperation, addressing issues and countries (Renée M., 2015). problems at the interface between nature The BR network was launched in 1976 conservation, interdisciplinary research and (UNESCO, 2008). BR is an international designation monitoring and educational prerogatives in the granted by UNESCO’s MAB Programme (Ishwaran,

30 et al., 2008), and Presently, (a as of 2018) had grown integration of their ecological, social and economic to include 686 BR in 122 countries, including 20 potentials, and set up a framework of genuine trans-boundary sites distributed across regional sustainability governance (Susanne S. and Tim, networks of BR (UNESCO, 2018). International 2017). Yet, BRs still need to build (more) trust Coordinating Council of the Man and the Biosphere through real relationships with communities and Programme also had withdrawn 40 BR sites from other relevant stakeholders (Stoll S., and O’Riordan WNBR during the (MAB ICC) meeting in Paris, T. 2018). France (UNESCO, 2018). The notion of converting the concept’s Adopting the framework of the UNESCO implications into reality at international, national and MAB programme, the regional network of African local scales raises a number of challenges (Ishwaran Man and Biosphere (AfriMAB) was created in 1996 et al., 2008). The implementations of UNESCO’s and institutionalized in 2010 during its first General Man and the Biosphere (MAB) Programme have Assembly, with the aim of building and never been officially documented and much strengthening the capacity MAB National undervalued framework in (Pool R., Committees and BR Mangers to promote BR as 2013). In the two phases of BR, pre (from 1976 to privileged tools of experimentation in conservation 1995) and post Seville strategy (1996 to present) of environment and sustainable development there exists both success and less success stories (AfriMAB, 2017). The AfriMAB network was globally and in African context (C.Van et al., 2017). established with no legal status but has statutes and Problems are also argued in the use of the internal rules (AfriMAB, 2017). Under UNESCO’s word “reserve,” which appears to convey the Man and the Biosphere Programme (MAB), there are message of an area where people are excluded which 79 BR recognized as part of the World Network of in negative connotation for inhabitants in South BR in regional network of Africa as of 2018. These African BR while a more positive-sounding BRs are distributed across 28 countries (UNESCO, alternative exists in Austria, where BRs are called 2018). Biosphere Regions (Stanvliet 2014, and Stoll and The endeavor of sustainable development O’Riordan 2018). In addition, there is a generalized requires BR to move further towards embracing lack of information about how biosphere reserves are more integrated and effective forms of sustainable being managed and governed, and at what point their livelihoods for their inhabitants. This means placing goals are being achieved, which limits a better people at the heart of BR policy and management, understanding of the factors influencing biosphere and enabling to become pioneers and ambassadors reserve management effectiveness (Ana et al., 2018). for realizing effective sustainable development. BR Therefore, this paper tries to review the historical and related institutions have to work towards true development of BR, the general principles and frame

31 works related to its practical implementation and Reports of BR showing progress in different time challenges to assure sustainable BLs in African frame are presented in table and figure format. context, taking in to account some published articles. General Objective 2.0 Biosphere Landscape To review existing empirical literature about In the 1960s UNESCO, as the UN agency the consistency of principles of BR with local with responsibility for science, developed a new practice and challenging factors for successful programme dealing with human biosphere management BLs in Africa interactions, the Man and the Biosphere (MAB) Specific objectives programme. It was a ground breaking programme, - To review how principles of BLs are seeking to use convening power in consistent with local practices in Africa? education, natural and social sciences, culture and - To review factors challenging successful communication to forge a new way of understanding management of BLs in Africa the natural world and the role of people in it. MAB Materials and methods blended new science direction with an innovative site For this article we collected relevant articles based approach, the Biosphere Reserve, (Peter, 2016, published globally and African context. The reviews and UNESCO, 2008). MAB was launched in 1971 collected in this special issue seek precisely to after the 1968 conference on the rational use and elucidate what is known about challenges of conservation of the resources of the biosphere’ implementing biosphere landscape under UNESCO (Batisse, 1986), as a progression from the MAB program and the degree of confidence International Biological Program (IBP; Di Castro, associated with available knowledge. We also used 1976), while this conference is referred to as the reports of UNESCO MAB program and AfriMAB to ‘Biosphere Conference’ (UNESCO, 1993 cited in see the current status of the program globally and Kaera L. et al., 2013 ). African context. The review distilled knowledge MAB was formally endorsed by U.N. from more than 100 research articles, and Member States at the U.N. Conference on the collectively the interventions assess cover more than Environment (the first "Earth Summit") in 1972. The 686 biosphere reserves of the world. For the review original aim of MAB was to establish protected areas analysis articles published in the last 10 years are representing the main ecosystems of the planet in considered to show the current picture of the which genetic resources could be protected and program. But reports and general information and research and monitoring could be carried out. These definitions are used from their early inception of protected areas were to be called "biosphere idea. We properly acknowledge for all relevant reserves" in reference to the MAB program's name materials used as a reference through citation. (Batisse 2019, UNESCO, 2008 and 2017). The BR

32 as a concept and a tool of UNESCO has an origin in conservation, and only secondarily with research and the protected areas domain but has now evolved into sustainable development. By design, there is no an international designation that allows context- single model for running BR, but there are two specific conservation and development relationships common underlying principles: the management to be developed in land and seascapes where more system of a BR needs to be open, not closed to than 80% of the designated area lies outside of community concerns; and it needs to be adaptable to legally protected core zones (Ishwaran et al., 2008). changes in local circumstances. BRs are meant to be Biosphere reserve is an international designation places where communities can work in concert with granted by UNESCO’s MAB Programme, seen as a the area's land-managing agencies, local successor to the International Biological Programme governments, schools, and other institutions to (IBP). IBP was non-governmental endeavor of design responses to external political, economic, and international research program that come to an end social pressures that affect the ecological and cultural in 1974 had focus on scientific issues having limited values of the area (UNESCO, 2008). abilities and insufficient emphasis on areas at the The word "biosphere" refers to the three regions interface where neighboring ecosystems met of the Earth capable of being occupied by living (Ishwaran, 2012). The concept expanded into the organisms (UNESCO, 2008). This includes as development dimension and noted at the First described below in Fig.1. International Congress on Biosphere Reserves in 1. The surface of the Earth (land, oceans, lakes, Minsk, Belarus in 1983, and which matured at the rivers, and other waters); Second International Congress on Biosphere 2. Close-lying subsurface areas occupied by plants Reserves in Seville, Spain in 1995 (Ishwaran et al., and animals (including microorganisms), 2008). 3. The low-altitude atmosphere where birds, A BR is a unique kind of protected area that insects, other flying animals, and plants can live. differs from a national park, wilderness area, national If you imagine a cross section of the Earth in forest, or wildlife refuge in having three very space, a side view of the planet as if it were cut in different, but equal, aims: conservation of genetic half from top to bottom, the biosphere would be a resources, species, and ecosystems; scientific very thin slice of the total picture; no more than the research and monitoring; and promoting sustainable "skin" of the Earth along with the area just above development in communities of the surrounding and below it. The word "biosphere" therefore region (UNESCO, 2008). All three of these aims are conveys a special quality of rarity and value, and of equally important in a biosphere reserve while life's inherent fragility. This, then, is the basic national parks and other kinds of protected natural concept behind the name "Man and the Biosphere"; areas usually are primarily concerned with the life supporting areas of Earth are valuable and

33 fragile, and need to be treated with care by human beings (UNESCO, 2008).

In the phases of BR program, these functions need to be implemented within a defined landscape and delimited according to interconnected zonation system along a progression from preservation to The concept of BR originated as a tool for sustainable resource use (Mehring and Susanne international cooperation, addressing issues and 2010, Pool 2013 and GIZ, 2016). Given that strict problems at the interface between nature environmental protection and development are not conservation, interdisciplinary research and usually mutually exclusive; BRs have a generalized monitoring and educational prerogatives in the spatial zonation of acceptable land uses relative to ecological and environmental sciences (Ishwaran et proximity to conservation areas. Different land uses al., 2008). Hence, inevitably the origin and the fall into zones of permissible access and enforced evolution of the concept has enjoyed an interactive controls (Kaera L. et al., 2013). relationship between MAB’s interdisciplinary A terrestrial BR consists of core, buffer and research, training and educational agenda and the transition zones as described in fig.2 above. The nature conservation and related socio-economic natural and an inner core area is an undisturbed and development interests of the global environmental legally protected ecosystem (strictly protected and conservation communities (Ishwaran et al., areas), buffer zones surrounds the core area, and is 2008). The network is a key component in MAB’s managed to accommodate a greater variety of objective of achieving sustainable balance between resource use strategies, and research and educational the sometimes conflicting goals of conserving activities (delimited for management purposes on biological diversity and promoting economic sustainable land use) and an outer transition zone is development, and maintaining associated cultural the outermost part of the BR (an area of active values. BRs are sites where these objectives are cooperation between reserve management and the tested, refined, demonstrated and implemented local people, wherein activities including (UNESCO, 2008). settlements, cropping, forestry, recreation and other economic uses continue in harmony with people and

34 conservation goals). The functions support the notion Asia and the Pacific. From the World Network of BR of sustainable development as it is widely used today program BR, USA takes major share of withdrawal (Mehring and Susanne S., 2010, and Pool R., 2013). history (45percent of BR), 17.5percent from Current Status of Biosphere Reserves of the World: Australia and 10percent from each of Austria, Post and Pre-Seville Period Bulgaria and UK ((Martin et al., 2010, UNESCO, The essence of the BR concept is about the 2018 and www..org). All have been voluntary combination of three complementary functions: removals by member states themselves, recognizing conservation of biological and cultural diversity (of divergence between the status of the BR and the landscapes, ecosystems, species and genetic ideals of the BR concept (Kaera L. et al., 2013). variation), sustainable development in terms of The first phase of BR from 1976 to 1995, lays its cooperation with local populations (fostering philosophy on Western form of conservation economic development which is ecologically and focusing conventional ecological learning (Reed and culturally sustainable), and logistical support Massie, 2013). During the first phase of BR (research, monitoring, education and training designation, Europe and North America; i.e. through participation) (UNESCO, 1996, and Western, Eastern and Central Europe, USA and Mehring and Susanne S., 2010). The Man and the Canada, comprised more than 50percent of the total Biosphere Program (MAB) was launched in 1971 number of sites in the World Network (Ishwaran et and BR network in 1976 (UNESCO, 2008, and al., 2008). However, the post-Seville period (second Ishwaran et al., 2008). As of 2018, BR has grown to phase) marks the first time that the total number of include 686 BR in 122 countries, including 20 trans- biosphere reserves in Africa, Arab States, Latin boundary sites distributed across regional networks America and the Caribbean and Asia and the Pacific of BR as described in fig. 3 below (UNESCO, 2018). together exceeded the number in Europe and North Failure to fulfill the criteria set in Statutory America as described in fig 3 below (Ishwaran et al., Framework, that allow individual BRs to meet the 2008). basic conservation, development and logistic roles The second phase, i.e. from 1996 to present, expected of a site of excellence may eventually lead where the need and interest of local people become to a site’s UNESCO ‘BR’ status being revoked more important in determining the locations of and (Martin et al., 2010, and Kaera et al., 2013). implementing research programs associated with International Coordinating Council of the Man and BRs. This approach has its root on 1987 World the Biosphere Programme withdrawn 40 BR sites Commission on Environment and Development from world network of BR program, 82.5percent of (Brundtland Commission) and ongoing international sites from regional network of Europe and North discussions that focus the existence of people as part America while 17.5percent from regional network of of conservation solution (UNESCO, 1996).

35 reserves in different countries. To improve collaboration and partnerships WNBR has well- coordinated with each other through thematic network such as the World Network of Island and Coastal BR and five regional networks to set-up of trans-boundary BRs; twin arrangements between two sites in different countries; and establish sub- regional, regional and thematic networks. These are regional networks of Africa, Arab States, Asia and the Pacific, Europe and North America, and Latin America and the Caribbean, and s as described below in table 1. This networking has great role for better Since the second phase of BR (1996) networking and communication among BR implementation of the program focus on managers, researchers and other stakeholders (C. incorporating mutually nonexclusive concepts of Starger 2016 and www.unesco.org ). ecological and social learning. Since then, the idea of In the two phases of implementations success who should learn and about what was being learned and failure to achieve the criteria, objective and shaped the purpose and philosophy and further principles set by UNESCO MAB program is complicated the criteria for site selection and altered observed across the regions of World Network of the ability to assess effectiveness of biosphere BR. The review indicate that top countries having the reserve as exemplary of conservation and sustainable highest number of nominated successful BRs are development (Reed and Massie, 2013). Canada and Germany (8 sites), Vietnam (5 sites), Principal UNESCO Regions and Achievement in the Mexico, Spain and South Africa (4 sites each). Six two phase commonly nominated less successful BRs were BR is nominated by national governments spread across five countries (Australia, Chile, Kenya, and remains under the sovereign jurisdiction of the the US and Thailand) (C.Van et al., 2017). Thirty states where they are located. Their status is sites (10 post-Seville and 20 pre-Seville BRs) across internationally recognized (www.unesco.org ). WNBR were nominated as less successful, as an Building on activities at the site and national levels, example Australia (7 sites) and Germany (4 sites) are the encouragement of collaborative activities, at the countries having the largest number of less bilateral, sub-regional and regional levels is a crucial successful BRs (C.Van et al., 2017). link in contributing to the development of the Post-Seville generation had the highest WNBRs, and in promoting the exchange of proportion (59percent) in the list of the successful information and experience between biosphere

36 sites, while a significant percentage (41percent) of the zonation of the nominated area (Ishwaran et al., successful sites belonged to the pre-Seville 2008). generation. There is perhaps no better set of internationally networked areas where conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity and its relationships to broader regional sustainable development perspectives could be studied and tested and the gained experience and knowledge shared amongst all nations of the world (Ishwaran et al., 2008). Large numbers of sites from the first and The contemporary concept of incorporating second generation are not fully compatible with the mutually nonexclusive concepts of ecological and Seville vision. social learning officially introduced a new function It is at this level of matching scientific and to BR: sustainable development involving the technical analysis of the periodic review and conservation of cultural diversity and livelihood. implementing the recommendations of the review for Even though the classical ecologist viewed the the whole BR that practice lags significantly behind approach as destructive or degrading of biodiversity, thinking and conceptualization can be seen in the the function of BR in the phase was recognized and case of the Amboseli Biosphere Reserve in Kenya affirmed the importance of understanding and (Ishwaran et al., 2008). Pre-Seville BRs were learning about human environmental interaction selected according to their relevance in regard to (UNESCO, 1996). biological conservation and potential research The post-Seville period marked the time interests. Thus, most of these sites had already been when biosphere reserves were not considered merely declared national parks or equivalent areas where as protected areas and additional zones, but seen as research activities and management facilities could ecosystems and landscapes where sustainable be used or enhanced (Mehring and Susanne S., development, characterized by a context-specific 2010). In this era BR were characterized by two relationship between biodiversity conservation and primary functions: conservation of biodiversity and socio-economic growth, came to be viewed as the support of related scientific research (Ishwaran, et essence of the governance and management of the al., 2008). As such ecological learning dominated designated area (Ishwaran et al., 2008). Most of post- during this period and considered as BR served Seville sites, 98percent of the designated sites had science (G.Reed and M. Massie, 2013). More than described all three zones in the nominations 40percent of first generation of sites did not describe submitted by the states and included in the World Network. Among the post-Seville sites, about

37 11percent of the total area constitutes the legally with communities and other relevant stakeholders protected core zone; 32percent of the total area (Stoll and O’Riordan 2018). Under UNESCO’s Man comprises the buffer zone and 57percent make up the and the Biosphere Programme (MAB), there are 79 transition zone (Ishwaran et al., 2008). biosphere reserves recognized as part of the World Biosphere Landscapes in Africa Network of Biosphere Reserves in Africa as of 2018 Africa is home to a rich and diverse animal, as described below in table 1. These are distributed plant, and marine biodiversity that provide critical across 28 countries (South Africa 10 sites, Kenya 6 ecosystem services, driving the continent’s economy sites, Ethiopia, Madagascar, Senegal, and Tanzania, and serving as buffers to climate change. However, 5 sites each, and Morocco, and Guinea 4 sites each the continent is experiencing a dramatic loss of constitute more than 50percent) recognized as part of biodiversity (The World Bank Group, 2019). It is the World Network of Biosphere Reserves in Africa. estimated that by 2100, climate change alone could Biosphere reserves in Sub-Saharan Africa are cause the loss of over half of African bird and organized in the AfriMAB regional network. While mammal species, as well as trigger a 20 – 30percent Biosphere reserves in Northern African countries decline in lake productivity (the plant and animal life belong to ArabMAB, UNESCO's regional MAB produced by a lake), and a significant loss of plant network i.e., Algeria, Egypt, Morocco, Sudan, species. Even more immediate are the ongoing Tunisia and Mauritania totally having 22 BR sites threats to African biodiversity from natural habitat (Algeria registered 8 sites and each of Morocco and loss and degradation (especially from agricultural Tunisia registered 4 sites, Sudan 3 sites and Egypt 2 expansion), direct overexploitation of wildlife and sites) belong to ArabMAB, UNESCO's regional fishery species (including from illegal hunting and MAB network for Arab countries, (UNESCO, 2018 trade), and the spread of certain non-native invasive and www.unesco.org ). species (Wachira et al., 2001 and Nakileza et al., Democratic Rep. of Congo is the first African 2017). This loss of biodiversity affects livelihoods, country to be recognized as part of the World water supply, food insecurity, and lessens resilience Network of Biosphere Reserves, by registering two to extreme events, particularly for people living in sites (Yangambi and Luki BR) in 1976. Tunisia, rural areas who are often the poorest (The World Mortious, Nigeria, Mauritius, Cote D'ivoire, Congo, Bank Group, 2019 and Nakileza et al., 2017). Central African Republic joined the world network The global growth in the number and area of of BR in 1977 and Kenya in 1978 (UNESCO, 2018) BRs, as well as the concept’s further evolution as described above in fig. 4. toward the implementation of the SDGs are already Ethiopia, Zimbabwe, Sao-Tome and fundamentally positive developments. Yet, BRs still Principe, Malawi, Guinea Bissau and Togo joined need to build (more) trust through real relationships world network of BR only in post-Seville period

38 (after 1996), registered a total of thirteen sites and strategy; the management system of a biosphere DR.Congo, Congo, CAR, Coted'-Ivoire, Gabon, reserve needs to be open, not closed to community Rwanda, Nigeria, Mauritius, Mali and Cameroon concerns; and it needs to be adaptable to changes in registered only during pre-Seville BRs with a total of local circumstances. Biosphere reserves are meant to seventeen sites while other African countries be places where communities can work in concert registered in both periods. with the area's land-managing agencies, local governments, schools, and other institutions to design responses to external political, economic, and social pressures that affect the ecological and cultural values of the area (UNESCO, 2008). The Lima Declaration and Action Plan, serve as the roadmap that can focus the MAB Programme on achieving sustainable development (Starger 2016). The post-Seville vision as the hallmark of the biosphere reserve appeals essential link between conservation and development promoted by many Out of 10 BR in S. Africa 9 of them were policy and decision-makers. This vision seems to joined the network in the post-Seville while 5 of the have also been more attractive to countries in many BR in Kenya registered in pre –Seville and 1 in post- parts of the developing world, particularly since Seville period (UNESCO, 2018) as described above 1992, as the ecosystem approach to management of in fig. 4. biodiversity and biological resources received endorsement from the Conference of Parties of the Convention on Biological Diversity (Ishwaran et al., 2008). UNESCO, 2018c described are eight recommended standard framework as essential steps towards successful BR management which are not Principles and Implementation Challenges in Africa mutually exclusive, but rather complementary. These Principles and Framework of Biosphere reserve. are participatory platform, policy integration, Each biosphere reserve has its own system of partnership and networking, periodic review, governance to ensure that it meets its functions and strengthen administration, legal recognition, objectives. By design, there is no single model for promoting existing framework, and strategic running biosphere reserves, but there are two dissemination of the framework. Often it is found common underlying principles in post Seville

39 useful to set up a committee or board that coordinates three main functional factors leads to promoting and all biosphere reserve's activities. Usually a hindering of BLs i.e., BR designation, participation, coordinator is named as the contact person for all and delivery. matters dealing with the biosphere reserve Periodic reviews of Biosphere Reserves in Africa. (UNESCO, 2008). The periodic review is an important event in Implementation Challenges. the life of a biosphere reserve (Martin et al., 2010). Developing a sustainable BLs is an enormous Periodic reviews are required to understand whether challenge in the face of the ever increasing demands the structure of zones within the BR; i.e., its design on the earth’s natural resource (Huntley et al., 1992). is sufficient to meet BR objectives. Additionally, in Diversity of factors potentially influences the keeping with the Statutory Framework of 1995, capacity of BLs to achieve their goals. BLs is not reviewers have also drawn attention to whether islands (Ana et al., 2018) they are influenced by the management and governance systems are adequate intertwined effects of social and ecological for assuring that biodiversity conservation and contextual factors at different spatial and temporal sustainable development objectives are addressed scales. They are dependent on a set of inputs to be (Reed and Egunyu 2013). Periodic review occurs managed and governed, which are also associated ones every ten years of the functioning, zoning, scale with a diversity of scales and actors. The varied and the implications for the populations in the strategies used to manage and govern social– reserve. It also makes it possible to evaluate the ecological systems in BLs are also important, evolution of the various functions of the reserve, be because they trigger social and ecological changes, it conservation, research, education or sustainable and not only in a positive way (Ana F. et al., 2018). development. Failure to do periodic review processes If BRs want to become an accepted local may result withdrawal from WNBR (Martin et al., partner, all relevant stakeholders and the local people 2010). should have the opportunity for their voices to be The review indicate that more than 370 heard. Engaging communities in the governance and periodic review reports were received by the management of BRs is a complex one that involves Secretariat and examined by the MAB International many hurdles. Factors beyond the control of the BLs co-coordinating Council in World Network of communities and their management, such as Biosphere Reserves (WNBR) (UNESCO, 2018). As structural poverty, corruption, and weak governance, of UNESCO, 2018 report, out of 35 Pre-Seville sites may overrule even the best-designed programs, with designated in AfriMAB regional network 48.5, 42.9, degradation and destruction of biodiversity as the and 8.6percent reviewed two times, one time, and final output of these failures (Stoll S., and O’Riordan never been reviewed as described respectively. T., 2018). Generally, C. Van et al., 2017, identified Among AfriMAB regional network, BR never been

40 reviewed belongs to Central Republic of Africa (two The post-Seville period marked the time sites), and Rwanda (one site) as described below in when biosphere reserves were not considered merely fig.5. as protected areas and additional zones, but seen as Out of 44 Post-Seville sites designated in ecosystems and landscapes where sustainable AfriMAB regional network, 6.8, 22.7, and development, characterized by a context-specific 70.5percent of BR sites reviewed 2 times, one time relationship between biodiversity conservation and and never been reviewed respectively. Most of Post- socio-economic growth, came to be viewed as the Seville, due to their early registration (less than ten essence of the governance and management of the years) they were not goes through review process designated area. The realization of this vision, (Fig.5). The review of UNESCO, 2018 report particularly at the local level, continues to be indicate that one BR in each of Niger, Benin and challenged by complexities in zonation and land Burkna-Faso, goes through joint and national review tenure, inadequate science, research, education and process. monitoring and inappropriate governance and coordination mechanisms for moderating stakeholder interests throughout the biosphere reserve (Ishwaran et al., 2008). Although on paper BRs seem to offer innovative thinking toward socially inclusive environmental management and are designed to be laboratories of research and education, they are experiencing different degrees of effectiveness in Local Practice of Biosphere reserve. realizing their prescriptive functions with regard to

Local practice refers to the entire range of addressing SDGs (Stoll S. and O’Riordan T. 2018). actions and activities that facilitate the expression BRs face a number of challenges, both familiar and and implementation of the biosphere reserve new (Stoll and O’Riordan 2018). Biosphere reserves concepts developed at international level to be have been initiated by the UNESCO to expand the executed at specific BR level (Ishwaran et al., 2008). idea of nature conservation to a network of model The zonation of core areas or other restrictions in the regions for sustainability they have not been in the use of natural resources may conflict with local focus of sustainability transitions research (Armin, property rights, commercial interests, or local 2018). people’s perceptions of the main problems in the Tesfu et al., (2018) reported that 75percent region (Stoll and Riordan 2018). user activities are illegal in Yayu BR of Ethiopia. Levrel and Bouamrane (2008) also indicated that due

41 to clearly defined use rights in West African BR, They can be seen as priority areas and large-scale illegal exploitation of natural resources in core areas laboratories for observation of the effects of global results biodiversity erosion. Tesfu et al., (2018) change on ecosystems (e.g., significant warming and indicate that extraction of products from Yayu BR in increased nitrogen deposition). Ethiopia; 65percent fuel wood removal and charcoal Reports by Andrew et al., 2017 indicate that production, 60percent bush meat hunting, 45percent high unemployment, poverty, lack of opportunity, livestock grazing, 40percent logging for local use, lack of sectorial communication is major factor 35percent fodder collection, 30percent of challenging Reserve in South uncontrolled land conversion to their farming Africa. Levrel and Bouamrane (2008) also indicate activities and 25percent of settlement on BR territory that local communities have few viable livelihood were undertaken illegally. Ayele 2011, and Matthias options and scarce fertile land around West African 2015 report also indicates that the same trend of BR BR leads to threat biodiversity. Report by Alfsen and utilization in parts of Kaffa Coffee Forest BR, Benjamin (2002) in South Africa indicate that the Ethiopia which results forest fragmentation. greatest enemy of the environment is human poverty. Population Pressure and Economic Dependency. Equally, one of the greatest causes of human poverty In both emerging and developed countries, is environmental degradation. The interdependencies world’s population represents one of the greatest are not limited to poverty. To control nature is to challenges to ensuring basic human welfare and the control people; hence armed conflict, migration, and functioning of viable ecosystems (Lotze C. et al., disease are at times all intimately tied to ecological 2008 and Stoll and O’Riordan 2018). The resources, their scarcity, and relationships with accelerating loss of biological diversity in many people. Economic development needs, particularly in world regions is one of the key results of developing countries like ecotourism, green energy, unsustainable human-nature interactions (Lotze et branding and product certification and alternative al., 2008). C. Van et al., 2017 indicated that lack of income activities in BR appear a significant finance and skilled human resource was considered limitation in practice (Van et al., 2017). the important contributor to biosphere failure in both The pressure on agricultural land in the wake developed and developing countries. Whereas the of the sharp increase in meat and dairy-product poor people who inhabit them have only limited consumption and the concomitant demand for huge access to basic services, are deprived of meaningful swathes of terrain devoted to massive feed participation in decision-making, and face extreme cultivation (especially of soya and maize) constitute vulnerability to natural disasters, urban areas are also a major problem that is detrimental to the loci of concentrations of knowledge, innovation, and implementation of BRs worldwide. The productive resources that could be used for UBRs. consequences of the accompanying dramatic

42 increase in the intensification of agriculture have not S. Africa. The Western Cape is the only province that spared BRs, and the land-grab plague now affects has promulgated a Biosphere Reserve Act (in 2011) BRs and other protected areas on every continent (Stanvliet 2014). It is a regulatory act to support the (Stoll and O’Riordan 2018). establishment, management and funding of Institutional and logistic problems. biosphere reserves in the province (Pool R., 2013). The management framework developed with Identifying appropriate authorities and institutions strong local and regional integration based on the that can influence governance and management combination of top-down and bottom-up regimes also challenges implementation of the participation and consultation process leads to program. More than 80percent of post-Seville sites success stories in BR. This framework integrated designated area is not under any protected areas different interests of conservation, agriculture, legislation. The protected area manager has no forestry, economy, research and environmental jurisdiction beyond the core, in buffer and transition education (C.V. Cuong et al., 2017). zones (Ishwaran, et al., 2008). Similar reports is also Strong government and stakeholders' observed by C. V. Cuong, et al., 2017; indicating that commitment ensures the long-term finances and the operation and management effectiveness of BR resources that lead successful implementation (C.V. in Vietnam is hindered by the predominant practice Cuong, et al., 2017). Most BR in Africa depends on of sectorial and top-down control, and relatively external funding; there for fails to meet its goal with weak legal status of BR within the national low and unsustainable funding (AfrimMAB, 2017). framework. Inadequate institutional framework and low Political Participation and Cooperation. will is also other problem to facilitate effective Local participation and cooperation with implementation of BR in South Africa (Pool 2013 stakeholders can create a synergy for sustainable and Andrew et al., 2017). Reports of Pool 2013 management (L. Schultz et al., 2010 and L. Durand indicate that the dedicated funding support for BLs and L. Bernardo 2011). Successful BR management from South Africa’s national government is still very requires more experimentation with participatory limited and almost impossible. Inadequate capacity methods and a more systematic reflection of success to implement MAB programme can also cause on and failure factors (Stoll and O’Riordan 2018). implementation of BR. There is a lack of clarity in Strong stakeholder engagement supported terms of who must do what at which level, causing formulation of good participatory governance in BR planning inertia and poor decision making (Andrew helps to ensure successful implementation of BR et al., 2017). program (C.V. Cuong, et al., 2017), whereas, lack of The review also indicates that the legal cooperation (lack of participation) and standing of biosphere reserves remains a challenge in communication are the most important constraints

43 blocking the way to successful implementation of unwanted development (Stanvliet 2014). The review activities for sustainable development (Mehring and indicates that problems are argued in the use of the Susanne 2010, and Weldemariam et al., 2016). word “reserve,” which appears to convey the The various official plans emphasize that message of an area where people are excluded which participatory and good management approaches, in negative connotation for inhabitants in South allowing multiple stakeholders to be an integral part African BR while a more positive-sounding of BRs, manifest themselves in effective partnerships alternative exists in Austria, where BRs are called through cooperation across all governmental levels, Biosphere Regions (Stoll and O’Riordan 2018). the private sector, mass media, civil society According to Tesfu et al., (2018) most farmers Yayu organizations, indigenous and local communities, as BR in Ethiopian had limited skills for biodiversity well as research, monitoring, and education centers management and conservation. Ayele, 2011 also (Stoll and O’Riordan, 2018). Weak involvement of reported that local communities have very stakeholders’ resources augmented with poor insignificant knowledge about the concept of BR in awareness and visibility activities as a tool for parts of Kaffa Coffee Forest Biosphere Reserve, development at policy and decision makers and Ethiopia. conflicting interest from various sector poses Opportunities for Sustainable Function of problem on successful management of BR Biosphere Landscape (AfrimMAB, 2017). BRs are a coordinated global network of Report by Pool 2013 indicate that the earlier protected areas designed to ensure the conservation establishment of the BR was very much a top-down of global biological diversity. These protected approach and oral communication with a strong landscapes, under the auspices of UNESCO and its element of spatial planning and development and Man and the Biosphere (MAB) Program, are based later BR designation with community-driven on the premise that it is possible to achieve a initiative and to pro-actively conserve and promote sustainable balance between the conservation of indigenous people with rich history in S.Africa. biological diversity, economic and social Awareness and Communication. development, and the maintenance of associated The benefits of implementing the MAB cultural values. BL is also centers of cooperative framework through BR must be made very clear research, education, and environmental monitoring (Pool 2013). Despite stern efforts by a group of BR (Batisse 1982, MAB 1987, US-MAB 1994 cited in practitioners, the concept it still not well known and (Nyhus and Adams, 1995, and Stoll and O’Riordan sufficiently supported in S. Africa. In South Africa, 2018)). WNBR of the MAB Programme consists of however, BR is often wrongfully perceived as a a dynamic and interactive network of sites. It works conservation instrument with which to block to foster the harmonious integration of people and

44 nature for sustainable development through management tool with which to integrate people and participatory dialogue, knowledge sharing, poverty the environment in a manner that supports the reduction, human well-being improvements, respect country’s natural and cultural conservation and for cultural values, and by improving society’s sustainable development objectives while improving ability to cope with climate change. It promotes human well-being (Pool, 2013). North-South and South-South collaboration and The MAB Programme has been seen as a represents a unique tool for international cooperation vehicle for implementing provincial policies as well through the exchange of experiences and know-how, as a strategic partner in support of provincial agendas capacity-building and the promotion of best such as sustainable development, climate change practices. adaptation, environmental education and training in The BRs have huge potential as landscapes S. Africa. One of the added values of the BR concept where socio-ecological land management can be lies in its international designation and its practiced towards a more sustainable future for all international affiliation by UNESCO stamp of (Pool, 2013). Biosphere reserves may offer a unique approval (Pool, 2013). The BR concept is very much opportunity to understand pathways for more in line with modern thinking of landscape sustainable social–ecological systems. Their management because it seeks to balance ecological ambitious goals match the huge challenges we requirements with the economic needs of people currently face, including halting biodiversity loss and living in these particular areas. For this reason it is ending poverty (Ana et al., 2018). potentially one of the greatest instruments to promote According to Mehring and Susanne (2010), collaboration across administrative and political BRs with the typical zonation of core, buffer, and boundaries, especially in sub-Saharan Africa, while transition zone generally seem to be an appropriate demonstrating a practical implementation of instrument in terms of natural (forest) resource sustainable development (Pool, 2013). conservation. Biosphere Reserves that the MAB BR fosters collaborative thinking about the Programme could play a more prominent role in future management of a defined space. They promote government strategies related to poverty alleviation, decentralization of decision-making whilst environmental sustainability, social upliftment, promoting collaboration and co-management transformation and economic development. The practices between all stakeholders (Pool, 2013). It is local level in areas adjacent to BR, it is desirable to argued that BR creates a platform of to share have some economic growth from which local knowledge and ecologically sound practice with in people directly profit (Susanne and Tim O’R., 2017). the world network of biosphere reserve that act as Within the South African context the biosphere model regions or “real world laboratories” and reserve concept should be realized as a valuable land therefore play an important role in the gathering of

45 knowledge about the complex processes of culture, interdisciplinary research, monitoring and sustainability transitions (Armin, 2018). evaluation. These sites are laboratories of harmonious The focuses and principle of managing interaction between people and nature, allowing for biosphere reserve in two phases of implementation advances in the sciences and in traditional vary with concept and philosophical arrangement. knowledge. They facilitate the sharing of knowledge, Pre-Seville BRs lays its philosophy on Western form promote the interaction between science and society of conservation focusing conventional ecological and help bring concrete improvements to the lives of learning. Given that strict environmental protection local populations (Stoll and O’Riordan 2018, and and development are not usually mutually exclusive; UNESCO, 2018 b). The program employs science to therefor it can be said strict BR considered to serve harmonize relationships between people and their science while in the second phases (post Seville) of environments to achieve the goal of improving BR program, these functions need to be implemented human livelihoods while safeguarding natural within a defined landscape and delimited according ecosystems. Biosphere reserves encourage research to interconnected zonation system along a into biodiversity loss, climate change, environmental progression from preservation to sustainable monitoring, and sustainable development. This work resource use; in such case it could be defined as develops solutions relevant to local cultures and Biosphere landscape. Therefore, the terminology environments (Stoll and O’Riordan 2018). (Biosphere Reserve Vs. Biosphere Landscape) has to 4.0 Conclusions be an arguing concept with their nature of It is a well-known fact that the future of our comprehensive thoughts arose in the two phases of world as we know it is in jeopardy. If carefully biosphere program implementation. executed, the biosphere reserve concept does have a The finding indicate that three main future with socio-ecological land-management functional factors leads to failure and or success of strategies and biosphere reserves could indeed live biosphere landscape i.e., BR designation, up to their reputation as ‘special places for people participation, and delivery. These challenges and nature. The future of the MAB Programme in specifically arise from local level practice of weak Africa could be more secure if it recognizes that it stakeholder participation and collaboration, addresses the focus areas of national government, governance and institutional arrangement, namely climate change mitigation and adaptation, population pressure and economic structure, finance and social development including poverty alleviation and resources, management, and awareness and and job creation with the realm of multi stakeholder communication are the most influential factors for participation, focus on endogenous knowledge and failure of the biosphere reserves in Africa. Keeping with the Statutory Framework of 1995 periodic

46 review occurs ones every 10 year, to evaluate the Sustainability, 3608; doi:10.3390/su10103608 various functions of the reserve, be it conservation, Andrew Lyon, Philippa Hunter-Jones, and Gary research, education or sustainable development and Warnaby (2017) Are we any Closer to Sustainable Development? Listening to as well as attention to whether management and active stakeholder discourses of tourism governance systems are adequate for assuring that development in the Waterberg Biosphere Reserve, South Africa, Tourism Management biodiversity conservation and sustainable 61, Pp. 234 to 247 development objectives. Globally, until 2018 more Armin Kratzer, (2018), Biosphere reserves as a model region of sustainability transitions? than 370 periodic review reports were received by Insights in to the peripheral mountain area WNBR. Out of pre-Seville sites designated in the Grosses Walsertal (Australia), Applied Geography 90, pp. 321 – 330 regional network of AfriMAB 48.5, 42.9, and Ayele Kebede Gebreyes (2011), Delimiting the 8.6percent of sites two times, one times and never Interface between Garden Coffee Expansion and Forest Coffee Conservation and its been reviewed respectively. While post-Seville sites Implication for Protected Area Management: of it 70.5, 22.7, and 6.8percent of sites never been The Case of Kafa Coffee Biosphere Reserve A Thesis Submitted to the Master of Science reviewed, one time and two times respectively. CR. Programme, University of Klagenfurt In Africa and Rwanda are countries having pre-Seville Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Science in sites never been reviewed. Management of Protected Areas (MPA, For successful implementation of the BLs University Of Klagenfurt Brian Huntley, Exequiel Ezcurra, Eduardo R. concept needs to be clearly understood and applied Fuentes, Koichi Fujii, and Peter J. Grubb through landscape zoning. Designated reserves then (1992) A Sustainable Biosphere: The Global Imperative the International Sustainable need a management system with inclusive good Biosphere Initiative, Ecological Society of governance, strong participation and collaboration, America, Vol. 73, No.1, Pp.7-14 Christine Alfsen-Norodom and Benjamin D. Lane adequate finance and human resource allocation and (2002) Global Knowledge Networking for stable and responsible management and site Specific Strategies: The International Conference on Biodiversity and Society, implementation. Environmental Science & Policy 5, Pp. 3–8 Chu Van Cuong, Peter Dart, Marc Hockings, (2017), Biosphere reserves: Attributes for 5.0 References success, Journal of Environmental AfriMAB, (2017), Holding at International Institute Management 188, 9 - 17 for Tropical Agriculture, 5TH Session of the Chu Van Cuong, Peter Dart, Nigel Dudley, and Marc General Assembly of the African Network on Hockings (2017) Factors influencing Man and the Biosphere (Afrimab), (Iita), successful implementation of Biosphere Ibadan, Nigeria Reserves in Vietnam: Challenges, Ana F. Ferreira, Heike Zimmermann, Rui Santos and opportunities and lessons learnt, Henrik von Wehrden, (2018), A Social– Environmental Science and Policy 67, pp., Ecological Systems Framework as a Tool for 16–26 Understanding the Effectiveness of Craig Starger (2016) Biosphere Reserves as Living Biosphere Reserve Management, Laboratories for Sustainable Development,

47 Future earth Blog, Research, Innovation and Ltd. World Development Vol. 39, No. 4, Pp. Sustainability 662 -671 Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Marion Mehring_ and Susanne Stoll-Kleemann Zusammenarbeit (GIZ) GmbH (2016): (2010), Principle and practice of the buffer Biosphere Reserves Inspiring Action for zone in biosphere reserves: from global to Agenda 2030, Bonn and Eschborn, Germany local –general perspective from managers Feyera Senbeta, Tadesse Woldemariam Gole, versus local perspective from villagers in Manfred Denich, and Ensermu Kellbessa Central Sulawesi, Indonesia, Springer- 2013, Diversity of Useful Plants in the Coffee Verlag, Berlin Heidelberg, Pp. 413 – 430 Forests of Ethiopia, Ethnobotany Research & Martin F. Price, Jung Jin Park and Meriem Applications Vol11/i1547-3465-049-069 Bouamrane (2010) Reporting Progress on Harold Levrel and Meriem Bouamrane (2008) Internationally Designated Sites: The Instrumental Learning and Sustainability Periodic Review of Biosphere Reserves, Indicators: Outputs from Constriction Environmental Science & Policy, Vol.13,5, Experiments in West African Biosphere pp. 4 9 – 5 5 7 Reserves, Ecology and Society 13 (1), 28 Maureen G. Reed and Felicitas Egunyu (2013), Hermann Lotze-Campen, Fritz Reusswig, and Management effectiveness in UNESCO Susanne Stoll-Kleemann (2008) Socio- Biosphere Reserves: Learning from Ecological Monitoring of Biodiversity Canadian periodic reviews, e n v i r o n m e n Change – Building upon the World Network t a l s c i e n c e and p o l i c y 2 5, Pp. 1 0 7 – of Biosphere Reserves GAIA 17/S1, Pp. 1 1 7 107–115 Maureen G. Reed and Merle M. Massie, (2013), Ishwaran, N., Persic, A. and Tri, N.H. (2008) Embracing Ecological Learning and Social ‘Concept and practice: the case of UNESCO Learning: UNESCO Biosphere Reserve as biosphere reserves’, Int. J. Environment and Exemplars of Changing Conservation Sustainable Development, Vol. 7, No. 2, Practice, Conservation and Society 11(4): pp.118–131. 391 – 405 Kaera L. Coetzer, Edward T. F. Witkowski and Mersha Yilma, Mapping and Cataloguing Barend F. N. Erasmus, (2013), Reviewing Community Resources in Ethiopia, MELCA- Biosphere Reserves globally: effective Ethiopia conservation action or bureaucratic label? Michel Batisse (1985), Action Plan for Biosphere Biological Reviews, 000–000, Cambridge Reserve, Environmental Conservation, 12 Philosophical Society (1), pp. 27 – 27 Katherine Cunningham 2017, The Benefits of Nakileza Bob Roga, Wilem Ferguson, Festus Integrating Biodiversity Conservation and Bagoora (2017) Transboundary Climate Change Adaptation in Global Conservation Areas in African Mountains: Development, A Global Knowledge Portal Opportunities and Challenges for Addressing for Climate and Development Practitioners, Global Change, Earth Sciences, Vol. 6, No. Blog post 6, pp. 117-126, doi: Leticia Durand and Luis Bernardo Vázquez (2011) 10.11648/j.earth.20170606.13 Biodiversity Conservation Discourses. A Natarajan Ishwaran, (2012), Science in Case Study on Scientists and Government intergovernmental environmental relations: Authorities in Sierra de Huautla Biosphere 40 years of UNESCO’s Man and the Reserve, Mexico, Elsevier, Land Use Policy Biosphere (MAB) Programme and its future, 28, 76–82 Environmental Development 1, Pp 91–101. Lisen Schultz, Andreas Duit and Carl Folke (2010) Peter Bridgewater (2016), The Man and Biosphere Participation Adaptive Co-management, and programme of UNESCO: rambunctious child Management Performance in the World of the sixties, but was the promise fulfilled? Network of Biosphere Reserves, Elsevier Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 19:1–6,

48 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2015.08.0 The World Bank Group, (2019) This is What it’s All 09 About: Protecting Biodiversity in Africa Philip J. Nyhus and Michael S. Adams (1995), UNESCO (1996), Biosphere Reserves: The Seville BIOSPHERE RESERVES of the World Strategy and The Statutory Framework of the Principles and Practice, Department of World Network, UNESCO, Paris Botany and Institute for Environmental UNESCO (2008) Draft Report from the U.S. Studies, University of Wisconsin participants at the Third World Congress of Pool-Stanvliet R. (2013), A history of the UNESCO Biosphere Reserves, What are biosphere Man and the Biosphere Programme in South reserves all about? Madrid, Spain Africa, South African Journal of Science UNESCO (2017), A New Road Map for the Man and 109(9/10), Art. #a0035, the Biosphere (MAB) Program and its World http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/sajs.2013/a0035 Network of Biosphere Reserves MAB Renée Moreaux (2015) Potential of further Strategy (2015 – 2025), Lima Action Plan UNESCO-Biosphere Reserves in Ethiopia, (2016 – 2025), Lima Declaration, ISBN 978- Terrains / Fieldworks 92-3-10020-6-9, Paris, France Ruida Stanvliet (2014) The UNESCO MAB UNESCO (2018), World Network of Biosphere Program in South Africa: New Criteria for Reserves in Africa, Africa: 79 biosphere Future Designation Based on Empirical reserves in 28 countries Ecological Sciences Studies of Existing Biosphere Reserves, for Sustainable Development, Paris, France Inaugural dissertation CapeNature, UNESCO (2018)b, Twenty-four new sites join Stellenbosch, South Africa UNESCO’s World Network of Biosphere Schöller, Matthias (2015) Biodiversity of Beetles Reserves, Mount Huangshan Biosphere (Coleoptera) in Areas under Participatory Reserve, China Forest Management in Kafa Biosphere UNESCO (2018)c, A Standard Framework for Reserve, Ethiopia, Conference on Biosphere Reserve Management Informed International Research on Food Security, by Sustainability Science, Jakarta, Indonesia Natural Resource Management and Rural UNESCO, (1996) Biosphere reserves: The Seville Development organized by the Humboldt- Strategy and the statutory framework of the Universität zu Berlin and the Leibniz Centre World Network, UNESCO, Paris, France for Agricultural Landscape Research UNESCO, (2003), Editor: Cathy Lee, and Samantha (ZALF)Tropentag, Berlin, Germany Wauchope; The Importance of Sacred Stoll-Kleemann S., and O’Riordan T. (2018) Natural Sites for Biodiversity Conservation, Biosphere Reserves in the Anthropocene. In: International Workshop on the Importance of Dominick A. DellaSala, and Michael I. Sacred Natural Sites for Biodiversity Goldstein (eds.) The Encyclopedia of the Conservation Kunming and Xishuangbanna Anthropocene, vol. 3, p. 347-353. Oxford: Biosphere Reserve, People’s Republic of Elsevier. China; Educational, Susanne Stoll-Kleemann and Tim O’Riordan, (2017) Scientific and Cultural Organization The Challenges of the Anthropocene for (UNESCO), Paris, France Biosphere Reserves, PARKS Vol. 23, pp. 89 Wachira K., Muluka B., & Wepundi M. (2001) Mt – 100 Elgon Conflict: A Rapid Assessment of the Understanding of Socio-Economic, Tesfu Fekensa, Weldemariam Tesfahunegny and Governance and Security Factors, Amani Asersie Mekonnen, (2018) Impact of human Papers. UNDP/OCHA. activities on biosphere reserve: A case study Weldemariam Tesfahunegny, Tesfu Fekensa, from Yayu Biosphere Reserve, Southwest Getachew Mulualem (2016) Avifauna Ethiopia, International Journal of Diversity in Kafa Biosphere Reserve: Biodiversity and Conservation, Vol. 10(7), Knowledge and Perception of Villagers in pp. 319-326 Southwest Ethiopia, Ecology and

49 Evolutionary Biology. Vol. 1, No. 2, pp. 7- (20019), Conflicts between biodiversity 13.doi: 10.11648/j.eeb.20160102.11 conservation and development in a biosphere Worku M (2017) Lake Tana as Biosphere Reserve: reserve, British Ecological Society, Journal Review, J Tourism Hospit 6: 310. doi: of Applied Ecology, 46, 527–535, Blackwell 10.4172/2167-0269.1000310 Publishing Ltd Zhijun Ma, Bo Li, Wenjun Li, Nianyong Han, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Networ Jiakuan Chenand and rew R. Watkinson, k_of_Biosphere_Reserves_in_Africa

50