Review of Experience with Ecological Networks, Corridors and Buffer Zones

Secretariat CBD Technical Series No. of the Convention on Also available Biological Diversity

Issue 1: Assessment and Management of Alien Species that Threaten Ecosystems, Habitats and Species

Issue 2: Review of The Efficiency and Efficacy of Existing Legal Instruments Applicable to Invasive Alien Species

Issue 3: Assessment, Conservation and Sustainable Use of Forest Biodiversity REVIEW OF EXPERIENCE WITH Issue 4: The Value of Forest Ecosystems ECOLOGICAL NETWORKS, CORRIDORS AND BUFFER ZONES Issue 5: Impacts of Human-Caused Fires on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Functioning, and Their Causes in Tropical, Temperate and Boreal Forest Biomes

Issue 6: Sustainable Management of Non-Timber Forest Resources

Issue 7: Review of the Status and Trends of, and Major Threats to, Forest Biological Diversity 23 Issue 8: Status and trends of, and threats to, mountain biodiversity, marine, coastal and inland water ecosystems

Issue 9: Facilitating Conservation and Sustainable Use of Biodiversity

Issue 10: Interlinkages between Biological Diversity and Climate Change

Issue 11: Status and Trends of Biodiversity of Inland Water Ecosystems

Issue 12: Solutions for Sustainable Mariculture

Issue 13: Technical Advice on the Establishment and Management of a National System of Marine and Coastal Protected Areas

Issue 14: Integrated Marine And Coastal Area Management (Imcam) Approaches For Implementing The Convention On Biological Diversity

Issue 15: Biodiversity Issues For Consideration In The Planning, Establishment And Management Of Protected Area Sites And Networks

Issue 16: The Impact of Trade Liberalization on Agricultural Biodiversity

Issue 17: Working Together for Biodiversity: Regional and International Initiatives Contributing to Achieving and Measuring Progress Towards the 2010 Target

Issue 18: Towards Effective Protected Areas Systems

CCBD23-Cover_20060306.inddBD23-Cover_20060306.indd 1 33/6/06/6/06 99:59:15:59:15 PPMM CBD Technical Series No. 23

REVIEW OF EXPERIENCE WITH ECOLOGICAL NETWORKS, CORRIDORS AND BUFFER ZONES

Graham Bennett and Kalemani Jo Mulongoy

March 2006

CCBD23_Interior_20060516.inddBD23_Interior_20060516.indd i 55/16/06/16/06 3:50:163:50:16 PMPM Review of Experience with Ecological Networks, Corridors and Buffer Zones

Published by the Secretariat of the Convention Citation on Biological Diversity. ISBN: 92-9225-042-6 Graham Bennett and Kalemani Jo Mulongoy (2006). Review of Experience with Ecological Copyright © 2006, Secretariat of the Convention Networks, Corridors and Buffer Zones. Secretariat on Biological Diversity of the Convention on Biological Diversity, Montreal, Technical Series No. 23, 100 pages The designations employed and the presentation of material in this publication do not imply the For further information, please contact expression of any opinion whatsoever on the Secretariat of the Convention part of the Secretariat of the Convention on on Biological Diversity Biological Diversity concerning the legal status World Trade Centre of any country, territory, city or area or of its 413 St. Jacques Street, Suite 800 authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its Montreal, Quebec, Canada H2Y 1N9 frontiers or boundaries. Phone: 1(514) 288 2220 Fax: 1 (514) 288 6588 The views reported in this publication do not E-mail: [email protected] necessarily represent those of the Convention on Website: http://www.biodiv.org Biological Diversity nor those of the reviewers. The Secretariat gratefully acknowledges the This publication may be reproduced for educa- ﬁnancial assistance of the Government of tional or non-proﬁt purposes without special Netherlands for the publication of this volume. permission from the copyright holders, provided acknowledgement of the source is made. The Typesetting: Zack Taylor Design Secretariat of the Convention would appreciate receiving a copy of any publications that use this document as a source.

CCBD23_Interior_20060516.inddBD23_Interior_20060516.indd iiii 55/16/06/16/06 3:50:193:50:19 PMPM Review of Experience with Ecological Networks, Corridors and Buffer Zones

FOREWORD

The unprecedented increase in the human use cal design and physical planning that facilitates of natural resources over the last century has interaction with other types of land use. adversely affected ecosystems, leading to their A large number of ecological networks have fragmentation and loss of biological diversity. been developed around the world. However, a Protected areas that remain as isolated units, thorough and systematic compilation of infor- surrounded by a radically altered habitat, almost mation on ecological networks and their contri- always face serious viability problems over the bution to conservation and the sustainable use long term. of biological diversity and sustainable develop- The importance of strengthening ecological ment was, until now, not available. Against this coherence and resilience as necessary condi- background, the Secretariat of the Convention tions for both biodiversity conservation and on Biological Diversity has undertaken this ini- sustainable development has been echoed in tiative. This review document contains detailed conservation and development fora for some information on the development and implemen- time. One of the actions identifi ed by the Plan tation of ecological networks in each of the fi ve of Implementation of the World Summit on UN regions. The examples and case studies pro- Sustainable Development as necessary to achieve vide a wealth of information on ecological net- the 2010 biodiversity target is to “promote the works. The study also focuses on lessons learned development of national and regional ecological and on the suitability of ecological networks for networks and corridors”. The CBD programme biodiversity conservation, sustainable use and of work on protected areas emphasizes the poverty alleviation, and on their contribution to importance of establishing protected areas in a the 2010 target. mosaic of land and water habitats to facilitate I hope this review will provide a better maintenance of ecological processes. Goal 1.2 of understanding of ecological networks and as- the programme of work specifi cally calls for in- sist protected-area managers and policy-makers tegrating protected areas into broader land- and in governments, NGOs and communities to seascapes and sectors to maintain the structural develop ecological networks when planning and and functional viability of ecosystems. Specifi c implementing protected areas and to achieve the activities of the programme of work refer to twin objectives of biodiversity conservation and “linking habitats”, such as buffer zones around sustainable development. protected areas (where human use is allowed to I thank the authors for undertaking such an the extent that it does not undermine the integ- exhaustive review and presenting the informa- rity of protected areas), biological corridors and tion clearly and succinctly. I am also grateful to ecological stepping stones. the Government of Netherlands for providing The concept of the ecological network fi nancial resources. becomes important here. Ecological networks provide an operational model for conserving Dr. Ahmed Djoghlaf biological diversity while reconciling the confl ict- Executive Secretary ing demand of natural resource use. Ecological Convention on Biological Diversity networks connect ecosystems and populations of species that are threatened by fragmented habitats, facilitating genetic exchange between different populations and thus increasing the chances of survival of threatened species. The ecological network concept also provides a tool for ecologi-

iii

CCBD23_Interior_20060516.inddBD23_Interior_20060516.indd iiiiii 55/16/06/16/06 3:50:203:50:20 PMPM Review of Experience with Ecological Networks, Corridors and Buffer Zones

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The preparation of this review benefi ted consider- National University and Julie McGuiness of ably from contributions, information and com- the Wilderness Society Australia. Chary García ments from a wide range of experts. The authors are Mora of TRAGSA provided the material on especially grateful to the following collaborators: which the Guadiamar River Corridor case study Marina Cracco of IUCN’s Regional Offi ce for was based. David Johns and Reed Noss of the South America provided information on ecologi- Wildlands Project collated information on cur- cal networks in South America, including drafts rent Wildlands projects and corresponded on of the case studies on Bremen–Barbas–Cestillal several issues. The example of the Bow Valley (together with Luis Miguel and Miguel Renjifo) corridor was based on work by Danah Duke of and the Atlantic Forest Corridor (together with the Miistakis Institute for the Rockies, who also Marcelo Mores). Marina also commented on commented on an earlier draft. Prof. Douglas J. a draft of the chapter on Latin America and Levey of the Department of Zoology, University the Caribbean. Rob Glastra of the Netherlands of Florida, supplied a paper on an experimental Committee for IUCN assisted with the informa- corridor study of which he was co-author. tion on which the example of the Vilcabamba– Prof. Kwi-Gon Kim of the Department of Amboró Conservation Corridor was based. Landscape Architecture, Seoul National University, General information on ecological networks in provided information on recent developments Africa and drafts of the case studies on the Kazungula relating to ecological networks in South Korea. Aya Heartlands Project and the Wildlife Conservation Inoue of the Ecosystem Conservation Society–Japan Lease Programme were provided by Prof. Hillary summarized the Arakawa River Ecological Network Masundireh of the Department of Biological project and government actions relating to ecologi- Sciences, University of Botswana, and Chair of cal networks in Japan. Information on the establish- IUCN’s Commission on Ecosystem Management. ment of corridors in Yunnan Province was provided The example of elephant corridors in Uganda was by Bram Busstra of the Forest Conservation and mostly drawn from a presentation by Atukunda Community Development Project. Wim Bergmans Muhimbura of Environment Consultants Ltd. of the Netherlands Committee of IUCN collated Information on TRIDOM was provided by Paul the information on which the case study on the Scholte of the Netherlands Committee for IUCN Terai Arc Landscape was based. and Allard Blom of WWF–US. Information on WWF’s worldwide ecore- Prof. Kalev Sepp and Mart Külvik, both gion programmes was provided by Rolf Hogan of the Estonian Institute of Environmental at WWF Headquarters and Holly Strand, Allard Protection, assisted in preparing the case study Blom and Anita van Breda at WWF–US. on the Estonian Green Network. Alexei Andreev Finally, we thank the Governments of of the Biotica Ecological Society provided in- Australia, Argentina, Germany, the Netherlands, formation on the National Ecological Network the European Commission, and the UNESCO- of Moldova. Yuri Darman (WWF Russia, Far Man and Biosphere Programme, IUCN-the Eastern Branch) and Alexander Shestakov and World Conservation Union, Conservation Vladimir Krever (both of WWF Russia) cooper- International, and other individuals who re- ated in the preparation of the examples on the sponded to the notifi cation from the Secretariat Central European Forest-Steppe Ecoregion and of the Convention on Biological Diversity and the Far East Ecoregion. provided comments on the draft. Information on the Wild Country initiative and the Gondwana Link project was provided Graham Bennett by Brendan Mackay of the School of Resources, Jo Mulongoy Environment and Society of the Australian

CCBD23_Interior_20060516.inddBD23_Interior_20060516.indd iviv 55/16/06/16/06 3:50:213:50:21 PMPM Review of Experience with Ecological Networks, Corridors and Buffer Zones

CONTENTS

FOREWORD ...... iii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ...... iv CONTENTS ...... 1

1. INTRODUCTION ...... 3 SUBJECT AND SCOPE OF THE REVIEW ...... 3 Ecological Networks ...... 4 Corridors ...... 6 Buffer Zones ...... 7 Other Issues ...... 8 The Ecosystem Approach ...... 8 Protected Areas and Ecological Networks ...... 10 STRUCTURE OF THE REVIEW ...... 10

2. CENTRAL AND EASTERN EUROPE ...... 13 OVERVIEW OF THE PROGRAMMES ...... 13 CONCLUSIONS ...... 25

3. WESTERN EUROPE AND OTHER COUNTRIES ...... 27 OVERVIEW OF THE PROGRAMMES ...... 28 Western Europe ...... 28 North America ...... 33 Australia ...... 36 Other International Programmes ...... 37 CONCLUSIONS ...... 43

4. ASIA AND THE PACIFIC ...... 45 OVERVIEW OF THE PROGRAMMES ...... 45 CONCLUSIONS ...... 56

5. LATIN AMERICA AND THE CARIBBEAN ...... 57 OVERVIEW OF THE PROGRAMMES ...... 57 CONCLUSIONS ...... 69

6. AFRICA ...... 71 OVERVIEW OF THE PROGRAMMES ...... 71 CONCLUSIONS ...... 79

CCBD23_Interior_20060516.inddBD23_Interior_20060516.indd Sec1:5Sec1:5 55/16/06/16/06 3:50:223:50:22 PMPM Review of Experience with Ecological Networks, Corridors and Buffer Zones

7. MEETING THE CHALLENGE ...... 81 MAIN CHARACTERISTICS OF THE PROGRAMMES ...... 82 Shared Body of Conservation Goals ...... 82 Wide Variation in Terminology ...... 82 Wide Variation in Scale ...... 83 Ecological Networks Initiated by Both Governments and NGOs ...... 83 BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION ...... 83 Focus on Conditions Necessary for Long-Term Conservation ...... 84 The Key Biodiversity-Conservation Challenges for Ecological Networks ...... 84 The Potential Added Value of Ecological Networks ...... 85 Lessons To Date ...... 86 SUSTAINABLE USE ...... 88 All Programmes Promote Sustainable Use ...... 88 Instruments and Methodologies to Promote Sustainable Use ...... 89 THE KEY SUSTAINABLE-USE CHALLENGES ...... 90 Management Resources and Integrative Approach ...... 90 Need for Political Stability ...... 90 Involving Stakeholders ...... 91 POVERTY ALLEVIATION ...... 91 Poverty Alleviation Challenges and Responses ...... 91 Short-Term Versus Long-Term Priorities ...... 92 MEETING THE 2010 TARGET ...... 92

REFERENCES ...... 94

AUTHORS ...... 97

CCBD23_Interior_20060516.inddBD23_Interior_20060516.indd Sec1:6Sec1:6 55/16/06/16/06 3:50:233:50:23 PMPM Review of Experience with Ecological Networks, Corridors and Buffer Zones

1. INTRODUCTION

At their meeting in Kuala Lumpur in February Each goal is elaborated into a specifi c target 2004, the Seventh Conference of the Parties to to be used as a tangible indicator of the achieve- the Convention on Biological Diversity adopted ment of that goal. A series of suggested activities through decision VII/28 a detailed programme of of the Parties and supporting activities of the work on protected areas. The overall purpose of Executive Secretary are then listed as steps to be the programme of work is “to support the estab- taken in moving towards the target. lishment and maintenance by 2010 for terrestrial Decision VII/28 also established a follow-up and by 2012 for marine areas of comprehensive, mechanism in order to support and review the effectively managed and ecologically representa- implementation of the programme of work, tive national and regional systems of protected namely an Open-Ended Working Group on areas that collectively, inter alia, through a global Protected Areas. One of the tasks of the Working network, contribute to achieving the three objec- Group is to contribute to the further develop- tives of the Convention and the 2010 target to ment of tool kits for the identifi cation, designa- signifi cantly reduce the current rate of biodi- tion, management, monitoring and evaluation versity loss at the global, regional, national and of national and regional systems of protected sub-national levels and contribute to poverty areas, including ecological networks, ecological reduction and the pursuit of sustainable devel- corridors and buffer zones. In order to develop opment”. these tool kits in relation to goals 1.2 and 1.3, the The fi rst of the four substantive programme CBD Secretariat identifi ed a need for a review of elements in the programme of work concerns experience in developing ecological networks, direct actions for planning, selecting, establish- corridors and buffer zones. This document con- ing, strengthening and managing protected-area stitutes that review. systems and sites — in other words, what protected areas need to conserve, where and how. SUBJECT AND SCOPE OF THE REVIEW Five specifi c goals are established: 1.1 To establish and strengthen national The requirements for the review were, fi rst, to and regional systems of protected areas prepare case studies illustrating experience in integrated into a global network as a each of the fi ve UN regions on the development contribution to globally agreed goals. of ecological networks, corridors and buffer zones 1.2 To integrate protected areas into broad- and, second, to draw conclusions on their suit- er land- and seascapes and sectors so ability for biodiversity conservation, sustainable as to maintain ecological structure and use and poverty alleviation, as appropriate, and function. their contribution to the 2010 biodiversity target. 1.3 To establish and strengthen regional The scope of the review is therefore exceptionally networks, transboundary protected broad: not only is it global in its coverage, it also areas and collaboration between neigh- covers a wide range of conservation measures bouring protected areas across national that range from a single ecoduct to interconti- boundaries. nental, interconnected networks of protected 1.4 To substantially improve site-based areas. Of the thousands of programmes and protected area planning and manage- projects that fall within the scope of the review, ment. only a small proportion can be assessed in detail. 1.5 To prevent and mitigate the negative The conclusions are therefore based on both the impacts of key threats to protected ar- experiences illustrated by the case studies and eas. relevant literature.

CCBD23_Interior_20060516.inddBD23_Interior_20060516.indd Sec1:7Sec1:7 55/16/06/16/06 3:50:243:50:24 PMPM Review of Experience with Ecological Networks, Corridors and Buffer Zones

However, before discussing global experi- Although the way in which the model is ence, it is necessary to clarify the concepts that elaborated and applied refl ects certain conceptu- are the subject of the review: that is, ecological al and methodological variants and is subject to networks, corridors and buffer zones. local and regional circumstances, the approaches that are usually classifi ed as ecological networks Ecological Networks share two generic goals, namely (1) maintaining the functioning of ecosystems as a means of fa- The ecological network is a model that has devel- cilitating the conservation of species and habitats oped over the past 30 years with the broad aim and (2) promoting the sustainable use of natural of maintaining the integrity of environmental resources in order to reduce the impacts of hu- processes. In Central and Eastern Europe, sev- man activities on biodiversity and/or to increase eral national ecological-network programmes the biodiversity value of managed landscapes were developed in the 1980s inspired by the (Bennett and Wit, 2001). polarized-landscape theory of the Russian ge- In achieving these goals, a number of ele- ographer Boris Rodoman. Based on this theory, ments can be discerned which together charac- the “eco-stabilizing” approach proposed that the terize all ecological networks. These are: landscape should be zoned in such a way that • a focus on conserving biodiversity at the intensively used areas are balanced by natural landscape, ecosystem or regional scale zones that function as a coherent, self-regulat- • an emphasis on maintaining or strength- ing whole. The resulting programmes not only ening ecological coherence, primarily developed the fi rst ecological networks but also through providing for connectivity integrated biodiversity conservation into broad • ensuring that critical areas are buffered environmental management plans, approximat- from the effects of potentially damaging ing what would now be described as national external activities sustainable development strategies. • restoring degraded ecosystems where In most other regions the ecological- network appropriate model evolved out of developments in ecological • promoting the sustainable use of natu- theory, primarily MacArthur and Wilson’s equi- ral resources in areas of importance to librium theory of island biogeography and meta- biodiversity conservation population theory. The most important insight that followed from these theories was that habitat Ecological networks also share a common un- fragmentation increases the vulnerability of spe- derstanding of how this model should be applied cies populations by reducing the area of habitat on the ground, namely through the allocation of available to local populations and limiting op- specifi c functions to different areas depending on portunities for dispersal, migration and genetic their ecological value and their natural-resource exchange. Interest therefore grew in developing potential (Bennett, 2004). These functions are conservation approaches that promoted ecologi- refl ected in a coherent system of areal compo- cal coherence at the landscape scale. During the nents: 1990s, local regional and national programmes • core areas, where the conservation of that aimed to integrate protected areas into biodiversity takes primary importance, more extensive linked networks were developed even if the area is not legally protected in many countries in Western Europe, North • corridors, which serve to maintain vi- America, Latin America, Australia and Asia. tal ecological or environmental connections by maintaining physical (though

CCBD23_Interior_20060516.inddBD23_Interior_20060516.indd Sec1:8Sec1:8 55/16/06/16/06 3:50:253:50:25 PMPM Review of Experience with Ecological Networks, Corridors and Buffer Zones

Figure 1.1. Diagrammatic representation of the spatial conﬁ guration of an ecological network

not necessarily linear) linkages between One feature of ecological-network programmes the core areas that can lead to some confusion is the variation • buffer zones, which protect the net- in terminology. The term “ecological network” work from potentially damaging exter- gained favour in Europe in the early 1990s and has nal inﬂ uences and which are essentially been used in the most important international transitional areas characterized by com- mechanisms in recent years, including IUCN’s patible land uses World Conservation Congresses, the World • sustainable-use areas, where oppor- Summit on Sustainable Development’s Plan of tunities are exploited within the land- Implementation and the CBD Conferences of scape mozaic for the sustainable use of the Parties, including the programme of work on natural resources together with mainte- protected areas. In regional and national settings, nance of most ecosystem services however, different terms are used to describe the model. These include “territorial system of eco- A diagrammatic representation of this spatial ar- logical stability”, “reserve network”, “bioregional rangement is shown in Figure 1.1. planning”, “ecoregion-based conservation”,

CCBD23_Interior_20060516.inddBD23_Interior_20060516.indd Sec1:9Sec1:9 55/16/06/16/06 3:50:263:50:26 PMPM Review of Experience with Ecological Networks, Corridors and Buffer Zones

“connectivity conservation areas” and various three broad kinds of landscape corridor can be language-specifi c variants, but also “corridor”. As distinguished: a result, it is not always obvious from the title of a programme or project whether the approach • a linear corridor (such as a hedgerow, refl ects the ecological-network model. forest strip or river) Further information on the origins of the • “stepping stones”, that is, an array of approaches and the conceptual, methodological small patches of habitat that individuals and terminological variations is provided in the use during movement for shelter, feed- regional case studies. ing and resting • various forms of interlinked landscape Corridors matrices that allow individuals to survive during movement between habitat Corridors — in the sense of functional linkages patches between sites — are essentially devices to maintain or restore a degree of coherence in frag- Corridors have been the subject of growing mented ecosystems. In principle, linking isolated interest for about 20 years and are increasingly patches of habitat can help increase the viability being included in biodiversity conservation pro- of local species populations in several ways: grammes around the world. Their practical con- • by allowing individual animals access to servation value has nevertheless been the subject a larger area of habitat — for example, of fi erce debate (see, for example, Dawson, 1994; to forage, to facilitate the dispersal of Rosenberg et al., 1997; Beier and Noss, 1998). juveniles or to encourage the recoloni- Bienen (2002) draws attention to conservation zation of “empty” habitat patches corridors and the spread of infectious disease. • by facilitating seasonal migration Fortunately, a better understanding of the poten- • by permitting genetic exchange with tial value of corridors in particular situations is other local populations of the same now developing as a result of the growing body species (although this generally requires of data generated by carefully designed experi- only very occasional contact) ments and project experience (see, for example, • by offering opportunities for individu- Tewksbury et al., 2002; Bennett, 2004). als to move away from a habitat that is As is the case with ecological networks, degrading or from an area that is under however, the terminology used to describe cor- threat (which may become increasingly ridors requires some clarifi cation. The term “cor- important if climate change proves to ridor” is used to describe many different kinds have a serious impact on ecosystems) of measures, including landscape linkages (both • by securing the integrity of physical linear and non-linear), recreational routes (also environmental processes that are vital known as greenways) and entire ecological net- to the requirements of certain species works. Other terms are therefore becoming more (such as periodic fl ooding) prominent in the conservation literature, such as “linkage” in relation to corridors and “perme- Corridors vary enormously in scale: from a tun- ability” to indicate the general principle of main- nel to allow amphibians to pass under a road taining or enhancing ecological coherence across to intercontinental fl yways for migrating birds. a landscape. “Connectivity” is also widely used as They also take many different forms. In general, a general term. In this review, the term “corridor” will be retained in most instances to connote a

CCBD23_Interior_20060516.inddBD23_Interior_20060516.indd Sec1:10Sec1:10 55/16/06/16/06 3:50:273:50:27 PMPM Review of Experience with Ecological Networks, Corridors and Buffer Zones

Figure 1.2. The Biosphere Reserve zoning system (UNESCO).

UNESCO

human-managed connection since it is used by the protection of the core area, and a “transition the Conference of Parties. The term “linkage” is area” where appropriate economic activities are used to signify a naturally existing connection permitted and where sustainable resource man- that is the focus of conservation action. agement practices can be developed, which today are often called “sustainable-use areas” or “zones Buffer Zones of cooperation” (see Figure 1.2.). But although the concept of a buffer zone may In contrast to ecological networks and corridors, be straightforward, its design and its functioning the concept of a buffer zone is generally far less in practice raise many challenges. Adequately controversial. The prime purpose of a buffer zone understanding the interaction between human is to insulate areas where biodiversity conserva- activities and species populations and the result- tion is the primary objective from potentially ing dynamics is a complex issue; determining damaging external inﬂ uences, and particularly appropriate land uses is therefore far from easy. from those caused by inappropriate forms of land Buffer zones may perform a corridor function use. In principle, this function therefore permits or in themselves harbour valuable biodiversity, a range of sustainable human activities. such as species populations that are dependent The concept of a buffer zone was ﬁ rst pro- on certain traditional forms of agriculture. posed in the 1930s, but it rose to prominence as Decisions to restrict human activities in buffer a conservation instrument in the 1970s when zones will also impose costs on the landowners it became an integral part of the management and users, raising the question of compensation. approach in UNESCO’s Man and Biosphere Land-use management is therefore a critical fac- Programme (UNESCO, 1974; 1995). In fact, tor in the degree to which buffer zones can in UNESCO introduced the Biosphere Reserve practice prove to be effective as a conservation concept with a two-tier hierarchy for buffering instrument. Biosphere Reserves has shown that protected areas: a “buffer zone” where land use the buffer zone may be designated less for its de- is restricted to activities that are compatible with fensive “ buffering” function and more as a less

CCBD23_Interior_20060516.inddBD23_Interior_20060516.indd Sec1:11Sec1:11 55/16/06/16/06 3:50:283:50:28 PMPM Review of Experience with Ecological Networks, Corridors and Buffer Zones

strictly protected type of area which can link up under pressure from human activities such as oil protected core areas and thus ensure connectivity and gas exploitation, fi shing and coastal devel- within a large transition area. This is particularly opment. At the oceanic scale, the homogeneous relevant in cultural landscapes, in which the buf- nature of the marine environment is clearly less fer zone may have a defi ned conservation func- suited to the structural principles of the ecologi- tion of its own (UNESCO, 2005) cal network than terrestrial landscapes. However, there are several specifi c kinds of marine systems Other Issues that offer comparable challenges to terrestrial ecosystems: The Breadth of the Review • marine linkages (such as sea straits As the foregoing discussion on ecological net- that are used by certain species during works, corridors and buffer zones suggests, the migration, for dispersal or to move be- task of identifying programmes and projects that tween spawning and feeding grounds) fall within the scope of this review is confronted • sea-river linkages (that is, ecosys- with a substantial grey area. Due to information tems that are formed by the interaction shortcomings, it is not always readily apparent between a river and the sea, such as whether the conservation model that is applied those used by migratory fi sh) by specifi c initiatives can be regarded as an eco- • coastal systems (where land and sea logical network. This particularly applies to many constitute an interacting system, such of the large-scale “ecoregion” programmes which as where turtles and seals depend on have not yet progressed to the stage of preparing littoral shallows or the presence of a a plan that specifi es how biodiversity conserva- coastline) tion and sustainable use will be achieved on the • location-specifi c marine breeding ground. For example, many of these initiatives grounds adopt a management approach that is closer to the Biosphere Reserve model than that of the Nevertheless, because of the special factors that ecological network — that is to say, the sites that affect marine conservation, this review is limited are the subject of conservation action are rela- to terrestrial, freshwater and coastal ecosystems. tively large, integral areas within which zoning distinguishes between biodiversity conservation, The Ecosystem Approach buffer zones and sustainable forms of land use; no explicit measures are taken to enhance con- A conservation model that is closely related to the nectivity between sites. However, in the interests ecological network is the ecosystem approach. of presenting as complete a review as possible, The ecosystem approach can be regarded as both ecoregion initiatives and Biosphere Reserves a strategy for the management of land, water are included among the programmes that are and living resources that promotes biodiversity covered by the review since to a signifi cant extent conservation and sustainable use in an equitable their management approach overlaps that of the way. At the heart of the approach is the aware- ecological-network model. ness that, without the effective management of Although the network model was originally ecosystems, there can be no economic develop- developed for application in terrrestrial ecosys- ment that generates sustainable human and so- tems, interest has grown in recent years in con- cial welfare; equally, without the full engagement sidering to what extent the same principles might of diverse sectors in the economy and society usefully be applied to marine ecosystems that are in the management of ecosystems, there can be

CCBD23_Interior_20060516.inddBD23_Interior_20060516.indd Sec1:12Sec1:12 55/16/06/16/06 3:50:293:50:29 PMPM Review of Experience with Ecological Networks, Corridors and Buffer Zones

no effective biodiversity conservation. In that taining ecosystem functions in the long term and sense, the ecosystem approach is a framework for securing the sustainable use of land. The way in holistic decision-making and action. In 2000 the which the two models have evolved has never- Conference of the Parties identiﬁ ed the ecosys- theless resulted in certain differences in emphasis tem approach as the primary framework for the and application. Ecological networks emerged in implementation of the Convention on Biological the main as national or regional responses to the Diversity and recommended the application of challenges of biodiversity conservation and sus- its principles. tainable development, in many cases with little The ecosystem approach is the application knowledge of comparable approaches elsewhere. of 12 principles and ﬁ ve points of operational As a result, ecological networks display a variety guidance (see box). These show a high level of of methodological approaches and management correspondence with the characteristics of the philosophies. But despite this diversity they have ecological-network model: both focus on main- arrived — often independently — at a common

The Ecosystem Approach Principles 1. The objectives of management of land, water and living resources are a matter of societal choice. 2. Management should be decentralized to the lowest appropriate level. 3. Ecosystem managers should consider the effects (actual or potential) of their activities on adjacent and other ecosystems. 4. Recognizing potential gains from management, there is usually a need to understand and manage the ecosystem in an economic context. Any such ecosystem-management programme should: a) Reduce those market distortions that adversely affect biological diversity; b) Align incentives to promote biodiversity conservation and sustainable use; c) Internalize costs and benefi ts in the given ecosystem to the extent feasible. 5. Conservation of ecosystem structure and functioning, in order to maintain ecosystem services, should be a priority target of the ecosystem approach. 6. Ecosystems must be managed within the limits of their functioning. 7. The ecosystem approach should be undertaken at the appropriate spatial and temporal scales. 8. Recognizing the varying temporal scales and lag-effects that characterize ecosystem processes, objectives for ecosystem management should be set for the long term. 9. Management must recognize that change is inevitable. 10. The ecosystem approach should seek the appropriate balance between, and integration of, conservation and use of biological diversity. 11. The ecosystem approach should consider all forms of relevant information, including scientifi c and indigenous and local knowledge, innovations and practices. 12. The ecosystem approach should involve all relevant sectors of society and scientifi c disciplines.

Points of operational guidance 1. Focus on the relationships and processes within ecosystems. 2. Enhance beneﬁ t-sharing. 3. Use adaptive management practices. 4. Carry out management actions at the scale appropriate for the issue being addressed, with decentraliza- tion to the lowest level, as appropriate. 5. Ensure intersectoral cooperation.

Taken from Smith and Maltby (2003).

CCBD23_Interior_20060516.inddBD23_Interior_20060516.indd Sec1:13Sec1:13 55/16/06/16/06 3:50:313:50:31 PMPM Review of Experience with Ecological Networks, Corridors and Buffer Zones

model of how the two objectives can best be function as ecological networks. For example, achieved. By contrast, the ecosystem approach the Australian Great Barrier Reef Marine Park, was developed in the 1990s through a broad- a protected area that falls predominantly in based, globally organized process. It therefore IUCN’s Category VI and which is of continental operates through generally applicable principles scale, functions as a very large ecological network which allow scope for elaboration to take ac- between more secure Category Ia and Category count of local and regional circumstances. It also II protected areas within the reef system. Other gives greater emphasis to the application of com- interconnected protected areas, such as parts of mon management principles. A series of case the Rocky Mountains in the USA and Canada studies that have been carried out in recent years (Glacier National Park—Waterton National Park illustrate how this process operates in practice and Banff National Park—Jasper National Park) (see Smith and Maltby, 2003; Shepherd, 2004). and the Kruger National Park of South Africa, These examples demonstrate that in practice the also form large ecological networks. Conversely, application of the ecosystem approach leads to because ecological networks can minimise frag- a wide range of solutions on the ground which mentation, retain opportunities for the movement in many cases arrive at a form of management of wildlife and promote nature-friendly land use, that is comparable to an ecological network. This they also have a role in supporting the long-term has also been found with the Biosphere Reserve viability of protected areas. concept, which has been proposed by UNESCO MAB as the “embodiment” of the ecosystem ap- STRUCTURE OF THE REVIEW proach (UNESCO, 2000). Some countries, such as Argentina, are now establishing new Biosphere The structure of the review of experience follows Reserves with the explicit purpose of implement- the UN regional classifi cation. That is to say, it is ing the ecosystem approach. organized around fi ve regions: • Asia and the Pacifi c Protected Areas and Ecological Networks • Africa • Central and Eastern Europe In practice, land tenure and management in • Latin America and the Caribbean ecological networks vary widely. Some of this • Western Europe and Others Group land may include protected areas which com- monly form all or a large part of the core areas. The order in which the regions are discussed Moreover, protected areas themselves vary widely refl ects the chronology of the development and with regard to type, objectives and human use (see application of the ecological-network model. box). Clearly, for governments and communal or Thus, the fi rst region covered by the review is private entities, legally established protected areas Central and Eastern Europe, where the ecological are the most secure form of tenure available for network was originally conceived. ensuring management longevity of the respec- The experience of each region is presented tive areas. Protected areas are typically managed through an introduction on the development of to achieve conservation outcomes, but there may ecological networks, an overview of the known be variation in the amount of management for programmes (including brief descriptions of two other parts of ecological networks. Protected areas to fi ve examples), the presentation of two case can therefore play a special role in maintaining studies, and a concluding section that highlights the ecological integrity of ecological networks. the main characteristics of the programmes. Indeed, some protected areas may themselves The examples and the case studies have been

CCBD23_Interior_20060516.inddBD23_Interior_20060516.indd Sec1:14Sec1:14 55/16/06/16/06 3:50:323:50:32 PMPM Review of Experience with Ecological Networks, Corridors and Buffer Zones

IUCN Categories of Protected Areas

CATEGORY Ia Strict Nature Reserve: protected area managed mainly for science.

Deﬁ nition Area of land and/or sea possessing some outstanding or representative ecosystems, geo- logical or physiological features and/or species, available primarily for scientiﬁ c research and/or environmental monitoring.

CATEGORY Ib Wilderness Area: protected area managed mainly for wilderness protection.

Defi nition Large area of unmodifi ed or slightly modifi ed land, and/or sea, retaining its natural character and infl uence, without permanent or signifi cant habitation, which is protected and managed so as to preserve its natural condition.

CATEGORY II National Park: protected area managed mainly for ecosystem protection and recreation.

Deﬁ nition Natural area of land and/or sea, designated to: (a) protect the ecological integrity of one or more ecosystems for present and future generations (b) exclude exploitation or occupation inimical to the purposes of designation of the area (c) provide a foundation for spiritual, scientiﬁ c, educational, recreational and visitor opportunities, all of which must be environmentally and culturally compatible.

CATEGORY III Natural Monument: protected area managed mainly for conservation of speciﬁ c natural features.

Defi nition Area containing one, or more, specifi c natural or natural/cultural feature which is of outstanding or unique value because of its inherent rarity, representative or aesthetic qualities or cultural signifi cance.

CATEGORY IV Habitat/Species Management Area: protected area managed mainly for conservation through management intervention.

Deﬁ nition Area of land and/or sea subject to active intervention for management purposes so as to ensure the maintenance of habitats and/or to meet the requirements of speciﬁ c species.

CATEGORY V Protected Landscape/Seascape: protected area managed mainly for landscape/seascape conservation and recreation.

Deﬁ nition Area of land, with coast and sea as appropriate, where the interaction of people and nature over time has produced an area of distinct character with signiﬁ cant aesthetic, ecological and/or cultural value, and often with high biological diversity. Safeguarding the integrity of this traditional interaction is vital to the protection, maintenance and evolution of such an area.

CATEGORY VI Managed Resource Protected Area: protected area managed mainly for the sustainable use of natural ecosystems.

Defi nition Area containing predominantly unmodifi ed natural systems, managed to ensure long term protection and maintenance of biological diversity, while providing at the same time a sustainable fl ow of natural products and services to meet community needs.

CCBD23_Interior_20060516.inddBD23_Interior_20060516.indd Sec1:15Sec1:15 55/16/06/16/06 3:50:333:50:33 PMPM Review of Experience with Ecological Networks, Corridors and Buffer Zones

selected to cover as wide a range of programmes as possible. They therefore illustrate comprehensive ecological-network programmes at the one extreme through to individual corridors and buffer zones at the other. But they also vary with respect to geographical scale, implementing phase, whether a government or an NGO was the initiating organization and also the degree of success in achieving their objectives. In order to simplify the presentation of speciﬁ c types of programme, agreements under the Bonn Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals are grouped together under Western countries (where the majority are located). Flyway agreements are discussed under Asia and the Paciﬁ c, since a substantial proportion is found in that region. All information presented is based, as far as possible, on original sources.

CCBD23_Interior_20060516.inddBD23_Interior_20060516.indd Sec1:16Sec1:16 55/16/06/16/06 3:50:333:50:33 PMPM Review of Experience with Ecological Networks, Corridors and Buffer Zones

2. CENTRAL AND EASTERN EUROPE

Programmes to develop and establish ecological in Central and Eastern Europe to revive their networks were pioneered in Central and Eastern ecological-network programmes or develop Europe in the 1980s (Külvick, 2002). The fi rst new national schemes. However, in line with initiative to establish what is now recognized the pan-European approach, in most cases the as an ecological network was the Estonian current programmes feature a greater focus on Network of Ecologically Compensating Areas. biodiversity conservation than on integrated This programme, which originated as a concept environmental planning. in the mid-1970s and was elaborated into a national proposal in 1983, was based to a large OVERVIEW OF THE PROGRAMMES extent on the polarized-landscape theory of the Russian geographer Boris Rodoman (Rodoman, Ecological networks in Central and Eastern 1974). At around the same time several other Europe are being developed in three main ways: countries in the region developed proposals that through the collaborative framework of the Pan- were also based on the landscape-stabilization European Biological and Landscape Diversity approach, most notably Lithuania and former Strategy, through national or (in Russia) regional Czechoslovakia. All these programmes were char- government programmes and through various acterized by an integrated approach to land-use NGO projects. zoning and environmental management within a The Pan-European Ecological Network is strong national development-planning system. the most ambitious international ecological-net- The programmes continued to be elaborated work programme. In 1995 52 Eurasian countries throughout the 1980s. However, the revolution- endorsed the Pan-European Biological and ary political changes that overtook Central and Landscape Diversity Strategy. The agreement op- Eastern Europe at the end of the decade had sig- erates to a large extent as a coordinating frame- nifi cant impacts on the government institutions work within which national actions are being and administrative systems of all the countries taken to conserve biological and landscape diver- in the region. The changes were accompanied sity in the period to 2015. However, the Strategy by a period of economic decline and restructur- included a range of ambitious actions that went ing, with the result that the further development beyond existing international agreements and and implementation of the ecological-network national policies. The most signifi cant of these programmes was subordinated to more pressing was the establishment of the Pan-European political priorities. Ecological Network (see box). An impulse that reinvigorated the work With regard to government-driven pro- on ecological networks in the region arrived in grammes, national ecological networks are un- 1995 with the adoption of the Pan-European der development in 11 countries in Central and Biological and Landscape Diversity Strategy. Eastern Europe, as follows: This international agreement includes the com- • Czech Republic: Territorial System of mitment to establish a Pan-European Ecological Ecological Stability Network. Although the model underlying the • Belarus: National Ecological Network Pan-European Ecological Network owes more • Estonia: Green Network (see case study to the principles of landscape ecology than 1) to the theory of landscape stabilization, the • Hungary: National Ecological Network programme to develop and implement an eco- • Latvia: Ecological Network logical network from the Atlantic to the Pacifi c • Lithuania: Ecological Network (see provided enough impetus to persuade countries box)

CCBD23_Interior_20060516.inddBD23_Interior_20060516.indd Sec1:17Sec1:17 55/16/06/16/06 3:50:343:50:34 PMPM Review of Experience with Ecological Networks, Corridors and Buffer Zones

Eurasia: The Pan-European Ecological Network in Central and Eastern Europe The aim of the Pan-European Ecological Network is to ensure: • the conservation of the characteristic ecosystems and the natural habitats and landscapes of European importance across their traditional ranges; • the sustainable use of semi-natural habitats and cultural landscapes of European importance; • the maintenance of viable populations of species of European importance across their traditional ranges; • the maintenance of the environmental processes on which these ecosystems, habitats, species and landscapes depend. These objectives are to be achieved through the establishment of an ecological network that will be built up from three functionally complementary components: core areas that provide the optimum achievable quantity and quality of environmental space, corridors to ensure appropriate interconnectivity between the core areas, and buffer zones to protect the core areas and corridors from potentially damaging external infl uences. Many Eurasian countries, particularly in Central and Eastern Europe, were already developing national ecological network programmes when the Strategy was fi nalized, and many others have initiated comparable programmes since 1995. However, in order to strengthen the international coordination of these programmes, a supranational programme was initiated in 1999 with the aim of confi guring the main lines of the network for Central and Eastern Europe. The resulting map, prepared by the European Centre for Nature Conservation (European Centre for Nature Conservation, 2002), indicates core areas of pan-European importance and broad areas within which associated corridors or stepping stones could be located.

CCBD23_Interior_20060516.inddBD23_Interior_20060516.indd Sec1:18Sec1:18 55/16/06/16/06 3:50:353:50:35 PMPM Review of Experience with Ecological Networks, Corridors and Buffer Zones

Lithuania: The Ecological Network The ﬁ rst proposal for an ecological network in Lithuania was developed in the early 1980s as the Nature Frame (Sepp and Kaasik, 2002). During the period up to 1993 the concept was elaborated at the national level and then for all 44 districts. The Nature Frame follows Central European practice in providing a broad planning framework for land management. In environmental terms the approach aims to integrate the management of three systems: watersheds, biodiversity and landscape linkages (both ecological and physical). About 60 percent of Lithuanian territory falls within the Nature Frame, which has legal status through the Environmental Protection Act (1992) and the Protected Areas Act (1993). Substantial adaptations have been made in recent years to ensure closer correspondence with the approach adopted by the Pan-European Ecological Network and also to facilitate implemention of the EU’s representative system of protected areas, Natura 2000, and the Bern Convention. For example, the European importance of species populations, habitats and corridors was added as a design criterion, analyses of indicator species, species communities and habitats were given greater emphasis in determining the conﬁ guration of the network, and a clear functional distinction is now made between core areas, buffer zones, restoration areas, corridors and stepping stones. Accordingly, the term “ecological network” is usually used to describe the current programme. An IUCN project has tested implementation of the ecological network through a pilot project in the Klaipe˙da district on the Baltic coast; 35 percent of the district falls within the network.

Institute of Geography/IUCN — The World Conservation Union

• Moldova: National Ecological Network In addition, in Russia a large number of regional (see case study 2) ecological networks are being developed (with • Romania: National Network the main responsible organizations in brackets): • Russian Federation: Ruseconet • Heart of Russia — Central Russian • Slovakia: Territorial System of Ecological Plain (Ministry of Natural Resources Stability of the Russian Federation, Biodiversity • Ukraine: National Ecological Network. Conservation Center, WWF Russia)

CCBD23_Interior_20060516.inddBD23_Interior_20060516.indd Sec1:19Sec1:19 55/16/06/16/06 3:50:363:50:36 PMPM Review of Experience with Ecological Networks, Corridors and Buffer Zones

• Natural Ecological Frame of Moscow • System of Protected Natural Areas of the Oblast (Biodiversity Conservation Republic of Bashkortostan (Ministry of Center) Natural Resources of the Republic of • Natural Complex of Moscow City Bashkortostan, the Volga-Ural ECONET (Department of Nature Use and Assistance Centre, WWF Russia) Environmental Protection of Moscow • Landscape and Ecological Network of City Government, Institute of the Orenbourg Oblast (the Steppe Institute General Plan of the Moscow City) of the Ural Branch of the Russian • System of Reserved Natural Lands Academy of Sciences) of Ryazan Oblast (Biodiversity • Ecological Network of the Lower Volga Conservation Center, Esenin Ryazan Region (Biodiversity Conservation State Pedagogical University) Center) • Natural Ecological Frame of Ryazan • Caucasus Econet (WWF Russia) City (Biodiversity Conservation Center, • Ecological Network of Altai-Sayan Esenin Ryazan State Pedagogical Ecoregion (WWF Russia) University) • Ecological Network of Baikal Lake Basin • System of Protected Natural Areas (Institute of Geography of the Siberian of Bryansk, Kaluga and Orel Oblasts Branch of the Russian Academy of (WWF Russia, Orel State University, Sciences) Kovyl Centre) • Ecological Network of Goloustnaya • Ecological Network of Orel Oblast (Orel River Basin (Administration of Irkutsk Oblast Branch of the Federal Supervisory Oblast, Baikalo-Lensky State Natural Natural Resources Management Service, Reserve) Orel State University, Kovyl Centre, • Ecological Network of Khilok River WWF Russia Basin (Institute of Natural Resources • Ecological Network of the Volga-Viatka of the Siberian Branch of the Russian Region (Biodiversity Conservation Academy of Sciences) Center) • Sacred Earth Network — the Republican • Ecological Network of the Nizhniy System of Specially Protected Natural Novgorod Oblast (Federal Supervisory Areas (Ministry of Nature Conservation Natural Resources Management of the Republic of Sakha-Yakutia, WWF Service, Inspection in Povolzhie Federal Russia) District, Nizhniy Novgorod Branch of • Ecological Network of the Russian Far the Russian Bird Conservation Union) East (WWF Russia) — see box • Ecological Network of Chuvash Republic (Ministry of Nature Use of Of the NGO projects that involve the develop- Chuvash Republic, Prisursky State ment of ecological networks, WWF is most active Nature Reserve, the Institute of through its ecoregion conservation programme. Urbanistic) Ecoregion programmes that were underway at • Volga-Ural Econet (the Volga-Ural the time of writing include the following terres- ECONET Assistance Centre) trial and coastal regions: • Ecological Network of the Southern • European-Mediterranean montane mixed Ural (WWF Russia, the Volga-Ural forests (the Alps, the Carpathians and ECONET Assistance Centre) the Dinaric Alps)

CCBD23_Interior_20060516.inddBD23_Interior_20060516.indd Sec1:20Sec1:20 55/16/06/16/06 3:50:373:50:37 PMPM Review of Experience with Ecological Networks, Corridors and Buffer Zones

Russia: The Central European Forest-Steppe Ecoregion Following the preparation of its Global 200 Programme, which identifi ed 233 priority ecoregions, WWF initiated a large number of projects with the aim of conserving biodiversity in these regions. The approach to be applied to this task is known as “Ecoregion-Based Conservation” (ERBC) and corresponds in many respects to the ecological-network model and the ecosystem approach, though with a major emphasis on process management. ERBC aims to achieve four fundamental conservation goals: • representation of all distinct natural communities • maintenance of ecological and evolutionary processes • maintenance of viable populations of species • resiliency in the face of large-scale periodic disturbances and long-term change An example of ERBC is the forest-steppe ecosystem in Central European Russia, which is part of the East- European broadleaf forest and forest-steppe ecoregion. Covering 90,000 square kilometres at the confl uence of the Volga, Dnepr and Don river basins, the area is primarily broadleaved forest with some southern taiga and a small area of steppe. A large proportion of the region is devoted to agriculture. The WWF project began in 1998 and includes an inventory of the region’s natural potential, fi eld veri- fi cation studies, ecological-network planning, model projects and developing proposals for new legislation. This resulted in the adoption of the regional Law on a System of Protected Nature Areas in 2002, which laid down the framework for allocating competences and also for planning, establishing, managing and protecting ecological networks.

Worldwide Fund for Nature

CCBD23_Interior_20060516.inddBD23_Interior_20060516.indd Sec1:21Sec1:21 55/16/06/16/06 3:50:383:50:38 PMPM Review of Experience with Ecological Networks, Corridors and Buffer Zones

Russia: Ecological Network of the Russian Far East Located on Russia’s Paciﬁ c rim, the Ecological Network of the Russian Far East covers over 1.3 million square kilometres. The striking variation in landscapes and microclimates has produced a high level of biological diversity in the region’s prairies, mixed broadleaf forests, moraines, alpine tundra, intricate coastline and over 60,000 lakes. These temperate forests are among the richest in the world, and endemism is exceptionally high. WWF initiated a biodiversity conservation project for the region in 1998, applying its Ecoregion-Based Conservation approach. Cooperating with experts and representatives from the Far East Academy of Sciences, government research institutes, the provincial administrations, environmental NGOs and international con- sultancies, biodiversity and socio-economic assessments were prepared. A biodiversity vision was then drawn up to establish qualitative long-term conservation objectives for the region in collaboration with the main stakeholders. Based on this work, a Conservation Action Plan was prepared in 2003 with measures organized around three action tracks: conserving biodiversity, strengthening institutions and management procedures, and creating a sustainable economy in the region. The ﬁ nalization and implementation of the plan is supervised by the Ecoregional Council for Sustainable Nature Use, with participation by representatives of federal and provincial governments, scientists and NGOs. Although it was unrealistic to secure unanimous agreement on all the recommendations in the Conservation Action Plan, most of the recommendations enjoyed broad endorsement from the stakeholders. A provisional ecological network has been developed and is currently under consideration by the Council. The network is to be established primarily to conserve biodiversity and promote sustainable development in the forest and wetland areas. It is projected to be fully implemented by 2020, with the main areas being under protection or appropriate management by 2010.

Worldwide Fund for Nature

CCBD23_Interior_20060516.inddBD23_Interior_20060516.indd Sec1:22Sec1:22 55/16/06/16/06 3:50:393:50:39 PMPM Review of Experience with Ecological Networks, Corridors and Buffer Zones

• Caucasus-Anatolian Hyrcanian temper- the disruptions caused by the revolutionary ate forests changes of the early 1990s, plans for implement- • Mediterranean forests, woodlands and ing the network at county level throughout scrub (southwest Iberia and the north- Estonia are now vitually complete. west Morocco lowlands, the Baetic-Atlas In comparison with Europe as a whole, mountains and the Italian Peninsula) biodiversity in Estonia is still rich. For example, • East-European broadleaf forest and 71 different forest types and almost 700 species forest-steppe of meadow fl ora have been identifi ed. Moreover, • the Russian Far East (temperate forests many species that are threatened at the continen- and rivers and streams) tal or global scale are still relatively abundant. • Altai Sayan montane forests These include the wolf, the lynx, the otter, the beaver, the black stork, the corncrake, the lesser- In addition, WWF is carrying out two large- spotted eagle and the crane. The main reasons scale non-ecoregion programmes in Central and for the high level of habitat and species diversity Eastern Europe: are the long-standing traditional forms of land- • woodlands and the Danube River delta use combined with the multiple environmental • the middle-Asian montane steppe gradients that characterize the region, such as the long, relatively undisturbed coastline, the high Examples of WWF ecoregion projects that in- soil differentiation, the varied topography and volve the development of an ecological network the diverse water regimes. include the Central European forest-steppe During the period under Soviet rule from ecoregion (see box), the Ecological Network of 1940 to 1991, Estonia remained relatively under- the Russian Far East (see box) and the Southern developed in economic terms. This low level of Ural Mountains (Shestakov and Krever, 2003). economic development combined with the low IUCN has also promoted and supported population density allowed an extensive system the development of ecological networks in of protected areas to be built up and maintained. Central and Eastern Europe. The IUCN Offi ce However, important changes in the organization for Central Europe took the initiative to develop of agricultural practices were effected which a common regional approach (Liro, 1998) and resulted in the replacement of much of the tra- to prepare proposals for national ecological ditional small-scale rural mozaic with large fi elds networks in Poland (Liro et al., 1995) and the and extensive forests. In addition, a large number Ukraine (Vakarenko, 1999). of wetlands were drained for conversion to agri- Finally, it can be noted that UNESCO’s Man cultural land, although many of these areas were and Biosphere Programme includes 88 biosphere later abandoned. reserves in Central and Eastern Europe, includ- The origins of the fi rst proposal to develop an ing four transboundary reserves. Estonian ecological network date back to the 1970s (Sepp and Kaasik, 2002). In 1983 this proposal CASE STUDY 1 was fi nalized as a plan to establish a “Network of ESTONIA: THE GREEN NETWORK Ecologically Compensating Areas”, a national scheme that aimed to achieve far broader goals Estonia must be credited as the fi rst country to than biodiversity conservation. Indeed, in mod- develop the ecological network concept and to ern terminology this plan would be described as elaborate the model into a comprehensive plan a national sustainable development strategy. Nine and implementation programme. Today, despite strategic objectives were explicitly identifi ed:

CCBD23_Interior_20060516.inddBD23_Interior_20060516.indd Sec1:23Sec1:23 55/16/06/16/06 3:50:403:50:40 PMPM Review of Experience with Ecological Networks, Corridors and Buffer Zones

• providing refuges for wildlife climate, soils, hydrology, forests and land uses. • facilitating the migration of species Simultaneously, a methodology for applying the • buffering undesirable impacts approach at the local level was developed, us- • efﬁ ciently ordering human settlements ing districts in northwestern and northeastern • providing opportunities for recreation Estonia, the Tallinn region, Hiiumaa and the • reducing pollution Saaremma islands, with the intention of using • promoting the conservation of energy the results in the development-planning process. and materials However, the independence of Estonia in • promoting recycling 1991 and the initiation of political and institutional reforms marked the start of a long period In Estonia’s vision, the ecological-network con- of severe economic difﬁ culties, particularly in cept is regarded as a means to integrate land use the public sector. One of the results of this tran- with landscape functions in a model that can be sitional phase was that agriculture came under incorporated into regional and national plan- severe economic pressure, and this in turn is ning processes. From its inception, therefore, the threatening many valuable semi-natural habitats Estonian ecological network has been developed that have been managed through traditional as a spatial-planning tool for the purpose of bal- agricultural practices. Forest habitats are also ancing and integrating land uses. coming under increasing pressure: almost half of With the broad framework established, the Estonia’s forests are now privately owned but ef- approach was elaborated using data on geology,

Figure 2.1. The Estonian Green Network

Estonian Ministry of Environment

CCBD23_Interior_20060516.inddBD23_Interior_20060516.indd Sec1:24Sec1:24 55/16/06/16/06 3:50:423:50:42 PMPM Review of Experience with Ecological Networks, Corridors and Buffer Zones

fective regulatory regimes to promote sustainable tion: the 1995 Sustainable Development Act, the forms of forestry management are still lacking. 1994 Protection of Natural Features Act and the A new implementing framework for the 1995 Planning and Building Act, which required Network of Ecologically Compensating Areas all 15 counties to prepare a map of the ecological was established through the reform of Estonian network for their territory. In addition, the net- political institions and legislation. Through these work has been the subject of policy papers such reforms, the network has been incorporated into as the National Environmental Strategy (which new spatial planning and environmental legisla- includes an indicative map), the Environmental

Figure 2.2. Part of the Green Network as delineated in Järva County

CCBD23_Interior_20060516.inddBD23_Interior_20060516.indd Sec1:25Sec1:25 55/16/06/16/06 3:50:433:50:43 PMPM Review of Experience with Ecological Networks, Corridors and Buffer Zones

Action Plan and Estonia — Vision 2010. The Identifying and delineating the network’s na- National Agri-Environmental Programme fur- tional-scale core areas was carried out mainly ther provides for the development of ecological on the basis of the size of the natural areas and networks at the local level as a way of support- their conservation value. Of these core areas, 12 ing extensive farming practices. Since 1995, the are considered to be of international importance, development of the Pan-European Ecological each covering at least 100 square kilometres. Network — with the active participation of Other core areas are at least 15 square kilometres Estonia — has further stimulated the process, as in extent. has an IUCN project to support the further elab- Under the national legislation, each county is oration, integration and implementation of the required to prepare a map of the Green Network ecological networks in the three Baltic countries. at a scale of 1:50,000 as a framework for defi n- These infl uences have led to the development of ing the conditions that are necessary to ensure a revised concept that focuses primarily on bio- sustainable development in the region. The pro- diversity conservation: the Green Network. cess through which this is achieved involves local As currently delineated, the Estonian Green public hearings. In Järva County, for example, the Network covers about 50 percent of the country’s map delineates four levels of core area — varying territory and is structured to achieve a variety of from one or two kilometres to up to 50 kilome- objectives: tres across — and interconnecting corridors. • to shape the spatial structure of natural These corridors are confi gured on the basis of areas in order to meet ecological, envi- data indicating the needs of species for dispersal ronmental, economic and social goals and migration and the existence of natural link- • to establish a fully functioning network ages, including stepping stones in the landscape. of protected areas that are an integral Account is also taken of the 1995 Protection of part of a complete system with natural Marine and Freshwater Coasts, Shores and Banks areas Act, which provides for corridors and buffer • to protect valuable natural habitats and zones in relation to surface water. to preserve the migration routes of wild The network that is delineated in each county animals and valuable landscapes plan lays down the conditions that will apply to • to mitigate human impacts on biodi- the regulation of land use in the development- versity and promote sustainable devel- planning process. This is particularly concerned opment with reducing confl icts between different land-use • to promote biodiversity-friendly man- demands within the network, with the appropri- agement, lifestyles and recreation by ate intensity of land uses and with how serious ensuring access to natural areas confl icts of interest — such as between a road • to promote biodiversity conservation and a wildlife linkage — should be resolved in a outside protected areas structural way. The specifi c measures adopted in • to use spatial planning as a means to the fi nal plan for Järva County were approved by minimize confl icts between different the national government in 2003, with the result sectors that the plan now has the force of law. • to guide human settlement and land use • to maintain the natural environment’s self-regulatory capacity • to promote international cooperation

CCBD23_Interior_20060516.inddBD23_Interior_20060516.indd Sec1:26Sec1:26 55/16/06/16/06 3:50:443:50:44 PMPM Review of Experience with Ecological Networks, Corridors and Buffer Zones

CASE STUDY 2 conservation on publicly owned sites, had to be MOLDOVA: THE NATIONAL reframed in order to support conservation across ECOLOGICAL NETWORK the wider landscape and in combination with other land uses. Moldova has a well-established system of pro- As applied in Moldova, the ecological- tected areas. However, these sites have historically network model is understood to consist of “a to- been identifi ed on the basis of national conserva- tality of natural habitats that are interconnected tion priorities. It was only with the ratifi cation of physically and functionally through populations the Ramsar Convention in 1999 that for the fi rst of species and ecosystems, natural and historic time international criteria were formally applied landscapes, and natural and cultural monuments in delineating and managing valuable habitats. which inherently belong to landscapes”. In func- At the same time, Moldova’s endorsement of tional terms, the network is intended the achieve the Pan-European Biological and Landscape the following objectives: Diversity Strategy in 1995 brought with it the • maintaining ecosystems, habitats, spe- commitment to contribute to the establishment cies and landscapes at the national, of the Pan-European Ecological Network. regional and global scale; Prior to these developments, however, some • maintaining and restoring the integrity scientifi c work had already been carried out that of, and the connections between, core was closely related to the ecological-network ap- areas; proach. On the one hand, the “biocoenotic-oases” • protecting and enhancing natural model had been developed in the late 1980s with resources within ecological systems; the aim of optimizing the conservation value • improving the stability of agricultural of a matrix of natural habitats and agricultural ecosystems, including, where appropri- land. More or less simultaneously, an approach ate, their restoration; comparable to the polarized-landscape model was • stabilizing the effects of climate change; developed — the “ecological framework” — and • maintaining and improving the recrea- elaborated in the 1991 Territorial Complex Scheme tional value of national ecosystems; for Nature Protection. Building on this work, the • stimulating tourism, especially eco- development of a national ecological network that tourism; would also form the Moldavian part of the Pan- • encouraging public involvement in European Ecological Network was undertaken by nature conservation; the BIOTICA Ecological Society with the support • developing a system of biological moni- of the National Ecological Fund of the Republic toring. of Moldova (Andreev et al., 2001). Established in 1993, the BIOTICA Ecological Society is an NGO In line with the approach adopted by the Pan- dedicated to advancing biodiversity conservation European Ecological Network, the Moldavian and environmental law and policy. network comprises core areas, biological cor- Developing the proposal for the National ridors, restoration areas and buffer zones. These Ecological Network involved two main challeng- elements were identifi ed and delineated with es. In the fi rst place, data on species, habitats and reference to 12 natural zones, mainly steppe and land use had to be reassessed and expanded in forest-steppe habitats. An interesting feature of order to be able to apply the ecological-network the network proposal is that the use of geneti- model. In addition the legislative framework, cally modifi ed organisms is prohibited in a three which had always been structured to secure kilometre-wide zone surrounding the network.

CCBD23_Interior_20060516.inddBD23_Interior_20060516.indd Sec1:27Sec1:27 55/16/06/16/06 3:50:453:50:45 PMPM Review of Experience with Ecological Networks, Corridors and Buffer Zones

Figure 2.3. The Moldavian National Ecological Network

BIOTICA Ecological Society

CCBD23_Interior_20060516.inddBD23_Interior_20060516.indd Sec1:28Sec1:28 55/16/06/16/06 3:50:473:50:47 PMPM Review of Experience with Ecological Networks, Corridors and Buffer Zones

The design of the Moldavian National CONCLUSIONS Ecological Network has currently progressed to the stage of a strategic proposal. Elaborating this As the region where the development of ecologi- broad framework into a detailed, implementable cal networks was pioneered, the experience of proposal requires an array of further actions, Central and Eastern Europe in elaborating the including the following: model into detailed proposals and implementa- • developing an operational checklist of tion programmes is instructive. The most strik- threatened ecosystems ing aspect of this experience is the long period • elaborating the ecological network at that has elapsed between the original proposals the scale of natural zones and also at the and implementation on the ground, which even local level in the most advanced country — Estonia — will • updating the national Red List take many more years. However, as the examples • developing a scientifi c methodology for show, there are good reasons why the implemen- weighing species richness and diversity tation process has proven to be so protracted. • developing methodological guidelines Of course, as pioneers of ecological- for environmentally appropriate land network programmes, countries such as Estonia, use Lithuania and Czechoslovakia could not draw on • identifying critically degraded areas experience elsewhere as a guide to how to trans- that require urgent conservation action late a model of environmental management into • adopting policy instruments for desig- reality: no blueprints were available as reference nating restoration areas. material, scarce resources had to be allocated, novel scientifi c and methodological issues had A special challenge concerns the reform of to be resolved, other stakeholders had to be con- Moldova’s legislation in order to establish a legal, vinced of the approach, pilot projects had to be policy and administrative framework and set of carried out and an implementation programme instruments that are suited to the particular char- had to be devised. acteristics of the ecological-network approach to A further complication followed from the biodiversity conservation and sustainable use. characteristics of the particular ecological- The most important needs are: network model that was developed in Central • extending regulations for designating and Eastern Europe. The key feature of the and managing land in the interests of landscape-stabilization concept is its integrated biodiversity conservation and the sus- approach to environmental management. To a tainable use of private land large extent this model strives to achieve what • introducing a broader range of instru- subsequently became known as sustainable ments to promote appropriate forms of development. It therefore requires far broader, land use and management complex and structural measures than those that • introducing the possibility of compul- focus primarily on the conservation and sustain- sory purchase of land for conservation able use of priority habitats. purposes. It is also important to note that all the early A bill to introduce the most important amend- ecological-network initiatives were developed ments to the existing legislation is currently through government programmes. Moreover, before the Moldavian parliament. given the prevailing dominance of planned econ- omies and powerful state institutions during the period when the networks were fi rst developed,

CCBD23_Interior_20060516.inddBD23_Interior_20060516.indd Sec1:29Sec1:29 55/16/06/16/06 3:50:473:50:47 PMPM Review of Experience with Ecological Networks, Corridors and Buffer Zones

their implementation inferred the adoption of a programmes has yet been fully implemented. wide range of legislative and planning measures. Nevertheless, it is signiﬁ cant that progress in Such processes are necessarily time-consuming. developing ecological networks in Central and However, this process was disrupted by the Eastern Europe is continuing, notably in the revolutionary political changes that took place Baltic countries. Most important, in addition to across the entire region at the end of the 1980s. the networks that were under development in the Not only did the changes lead to a radically dif- 1980s, several new programmes have been initi- ferent institutional and economic architecture in ated by governments within the framework of the most countries in the region, they were accom- Pan-European Ecological Network. Moreover, in panied by economic decline and a drastic fall in Russia WWF has launched a series of regional the resources available to the public sector. Under ecoregion-conservation projects that use the these circumstances, the continued development ecological-network model as a strategic frame- of ecological networks was given a low priority. work for conservation action. The fact that an It was only after the agreement in 1995 to de- NGO is now an important driver in establishing velop and establish the Pan-European Ecological ecological networks in the region is a signiﬁ cant Network that the existing programmes were development, although it is clear that the task of revived, albeit with a greater focus on biodiver- managing the associated stakeholder processes is sity conservation at the expense of the broader proving to be a major challenge in each project. sustainable-development framework. However, to this day resources and weakened government institutions remain severely limiting factors. Interestingly, whereas one international agreement — the Pan-European Biological and Landscape Diversity Strategy — stimulated the further development of ecological networks in Central and Eastern Europe, another — the EU’s representative system of protected areas known as Natura 2000 — obliged those countries in the region that applied for membership in the EU to focus their limited biodiversity-conservation resources on adapting their protected-area systems to comply with the new requirements. Although Natura 2000 marks without doubt the most important advance in protecting valuable sites and species populations in Europe, it has also obliged EU member states and candidate countries, given their scarce resources, to direct their policies and a substantial proportion of their biodiversity-conservation funds to ensuring its implementation rather than developing broader, more integrated approaches to biodiversity conservation and environmental management. These many obstacles have combined to ensure that none of the early ecological-network

CCBD23_Interior_20060516.inddBD23_Interior_20060516.indd Sec1:30Sec1:30 55/16/06/16/06 3:50:483:50:48 PMPM Review of Experience with Ecological Networks, Corridors and Buffer Zones

3. WESTERN EUROPE AND OTHER COUNTRIES

In contrast to Central and Eastern Europe, the Diamond and others proposed general rules for the stimulus that led to the ecological-network mod- conﬁ guration of nature reserves (Diamond, 1975). el in Western countries came primarily from de- In simple terms, these rules stated that nature velopments in ecological theory. In 1967 Robert reserves should be as large as possible, as round H. MacArthur and Edward O. Wilson published as possible (in order to reduce damaging edge ef- their equilibrium theory of island biogeography fects), as close as possible to each other, and as far (MacArthur and Wilson, 1967). MacArthur and as possible connected with each other. The impact Wilson concluded that the number of species of these rules was increased when the principles that can be found on an island is determined were included in IUCN’s World Conservation by the balance between the rate at which new Strategy (IUCN, 1980; see Figure 3.1). species colonize the island and the rate at which species become extinct. Thus, islands closer to Figure 3.1. Jared Diamond’s rules the mainland will harbour greater numbers of species than remote islands because they are for the design of nature reserves more accessible and therefore subject to higher rates of immigration. Further, larger islands contain larger populations of species than smaller islands, and these populations are therefore less vulnerable to extinction. Equilibrium theory therefore predicts that, other things being equal, larger islands that are closer to the mainland will contain more species. The signiﬁ cance of island biogeography for biodiversity conservation was augmented in the early 1970s with the introduction of the concept of metapopulations (see, for example, Gilpin and Hanski, 1991). According to this concept, species do not exist as stable, homogenous populations, but rather are dynamic entities that are distrib- uted unevenly across landscapes in habitats of varying quality. Local populations are vulnerable to extinction, but as long as individuals from other local populations can recolonize the empty habitat, the metapopulation can continue to survive. These insights led in turn to the inference that habitat fragmentation increases the vulnerability of species populations by reducing the area of habitat available to local populations and limiting opportunities for dispersal, migration and genetic exchange. The realization that island biogeography and the concept of metapopulations offered important lessons for biodiversity conservation was given practical form in the mid-1970s when Jared

CCBD23_Interior_20060516.inddBD23_Interior_20060516.indd Sec1:31Sec1:31 55/16/06/16/06 3:50:493:50:49 PMPM Review of Experience with Ecological Networks, Corridors and Buffer Zones

Following these developments, interest grew in network programmes have been initiated by and Western countries in developing conservation are being managed by NGOs. These programmes approaches that promoted ecological coherence aim to achieve their objectives primarily through at the landscape scale. In Western Europe, the broad stakeholder processes and private action, concept of wildlife corridors was introduced into relying to an important extent on citizen support. regional planning in Denmark, and in 1990 the Australian experience lies more or less between Dutch government adopted a plan for a national these two extremes, with both regional govern- ecological network. From 1995 the agreement to ment measures and NGO programmes. establish the Pan-European Ecological Network stimulated many new national programmes. In OVERVIEW OF THE PROGRAMMES the US, various independent proposals to establish linkages between protected areas were pub- Western Europe lished in the 1980s, and in 1991 the Wildlands Project was launched with the goal of securing an In Western Europe six countries have initiated interconnected system of protected areas across nationwide ecological-network programmes: North America that can ensure the survival of all • Netherlands (see box) native species in the context of fully functioning • Denmark: through county-level plans ecosystems. In Australia, the value of maintaining although implementation has been corridors in fragmented habitats became quite patchy, and recently through an initia- widely recognized in the 1980s, such as in the tive for a national Nature Network by the 1989 code of practice that regulated logging in Danish Society for Nature Conservation Victoria. More recently the broad-based, nation- • Switzerland: the National Ecological wide WildCountry Project has been launched. Network The result is that, as in Central and Eastern • Germany: through state-level ecologi- Europe, ecological-network programmes can cal networks under the Federal Nature be found in a substantial proportion of Western Conservation Act 2002, and expert rec- countries. ommendations for the implementation Although virtually all the ecological- of ecological networks (Burkhardt et al. network programmes in Western countries are 2003; 2004) framed within biodiversity conservation objec- • Italy: the National Ecological Network tives rather than broader environmental man- (although the network is currently in a agement strategies, there is a sharp distinction preliminary phase, research being lim- between Western Europe and North America ited to vertebrate species — see box) with regard to the context within which the networks are being developed. Thus, virtually There are, however, a larger number of regional all the programmes in Western Europe are being programmes. These include the following: developed and implemented primarily through • United Kingdom: the Forest Habitat government policy processes. Only a small Network in Scotland and the Cheshire number — primarily WWF’s ecoregion projects ECOnetwork — are driven by NGOs, although even these ini- • Belgium: the Flemish and Walloon tiatives aim to achieve a signiﬁ cant part of their Ecological Networks objectives through policy measures. In North • Germany: ecological networks in America, by contrast, the approach is almost Schles wig-Holstein, Rhineland-Palatinate the exact opposite: virtually all the ecological- and Bavaria

CCBD23_Interior_20060516.inddBD23_Interior_20060516.indd Sec1:32Sec1:32 55/16/06/16/06 3:50:503:50:50 PMPM Review of Experience with Ecological Networks, Corridors and Buffer Zones

The Netherlands: The National Ecological Network The Dutch government decided in 1990, following a multi-year research programme, to develop a National Ecological Network that could provide the long-term basis for ecological sustainability throughout the country. Given the scale of the initiative, establishing the network is a long-term enterprise, with full implementation scheduled for 2018. The National Ecological Network as originally adopted in 1990 was an “oversized” indicative map of core areas, nature development areas and corridors. It is the task of the 12 provinces to delineate the precise boundaries of the network. This will be done using 132 habitat and landscape types for which minimum aggregate total areas have been fi xed at the national level. The fi nal network is intended to cover about 730,000 hectares, or 17.5 percent of the Dutch countryside. The realization of the ecological network requires cooperation between a wide range of stakeholders: national, provincial and local governments, protected- area managers, water authorities, farmers, foresters, other land owners and business. Three forms of land management are being applied in order to create the Ministry of Agriculture, Nature and Food Quality ecological network: protected areas of national or international importance, privately owned areas managed for nature conservation purposes (often agricultural land) and nature development areas. In addition to government regulations and local development plans, fi nancial instruments such as subsidies and payments through voluntary agreements with land owners play an important role in securing implemention. An example of how the ecological network is being implemented is the restoration of a corridor known as the Renkumse Poort. The aim of the Renkumse Poort project is to restore three ecological linkages that connect the raised wooded area known as the Veluwe in the central part of the Netherlands with the Rhine River to the south. Restoring the linkages will increase the habitat available to local populations of wild boar, red deer, small mammals, reptiles and amphibians. However, several obstacles will need to be overcome, such as two motorways and a railway. An industrial complex in the Renkum brook valley has already been demolished and the site is being restored to natural wet grassland.

The Renkum brook valley before restoration After restoration

Dutch Ministry of Agriculture, Nature and Food Quality/Pandion Arnhem

CCBD23_Interior_20060516.inddBD23_Interior_20060516.indd Sec1:33Sec1:33 55/16/06/16/06 3:50:513:50:51 PMPM Review of Experience with Ecological Networks, Corridors and Buffer Zones

Italy: Ren, The National Ecological Network In 1999 the Italian Ministry of Environment and Territorial Protection approved a document outling the general guidelines for the National Ecological Network (REN), the deﬁ nition of its structure and its main objectives. The Ministry contracted the Department of Animal and Human Biology of La Sapienza University to carry out the ﬁ rst phase of a programme to develop the network. This programme was started in 2000 and has three main aims: • to outline the distribution patterns of all 431 Italian vertebrate species • to determine whether the protected-area system corresponds with these distribution patterns • to determine which actions would improve the effectiveness of the protected-area system and the conservation of these species Data on species distribution and habitat suitability were combined to produce a map that shows the degree of suitability for increasing numbers of vertebrate species. This map is intended to form the basis for the design of the ecological network. In general, it is concluded that mountain areas, especially the Alps and the Appenines, will be most suitable as core areas for all vertebrate species.

Italian Ministry of Environment/University of Rome “La Sapienza”/Institute of Applied Ecology

CCBD23_Interior_20060516.inddBD23_Interior_20060516.indd Sec1:34Sec1:34 55/16/06/16/06 3:50:563:50:56 PMPM Review of Experience with Ecological Networks, Corridors and Buffer Zones

• Italy: the planeco Project in the Central ponds or small woods), are essential for the mi- Appenines gration, dispersal and genetic exchange of wild • France/Spain: the Cantabric-Pyrenees- species. As is clear from the text, the decision to Alps Great Mountain Corridor, an take such measures lies at the discretion of each initiative of the Spanish Territory and country. Where the achievement or maintenance Landscape Foundation of “favourable conservation status” is only pos- • Spain: RENPA, the Andalusian ecologi- sible by improving connectivity, this can be re- cal network (see case study 4) garded as a binding obligation. Additional legal references to coherence and/or networks can At the international level in Europe, three be found in the Preamble, Articles 1, 2, 3, 4(4) ecological networks are under development: the and 6(4) and in Annex III Stage 2 of the Habitat Pan-European Ecological Network (see Central Directive. In the Birds Directive, the Preamble and Eastern Europe for more information), the and Article 4(3) require a “coherent whole” of Transnational Ecological Network (TEN, a coop- the network of protected sites. In practice, al- erative project between regional governments in though the sites designated under the Birds and the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, Germany Habitats Directives form a sturdy basis for an and Denmark that is focusing on wetlands and EU-wide ecological network, few corridors have aquatic ecosystems) and the Green Belt (intended been established as a formal part of Natura 2000. to stretch along the entire border region of the Discussions on the implementation of Article 10 former Iron Curtain — see box). are, however, underway with a view to using cor- It can also be noted that the principle of con- ridors as a means of strengthening the conserva- nectivity is included in the EU’s most important tion status of Natura 2000 sites. biodiversity conservation legislation, the 1979 With regard to related initiatives, WWF is Birds Directive and the 1992 Habitats Directive. carrying out the following terrestrial ecoregion These directives provide for the establishment projects in Western Europe: of a representative system of legally protected • the Alps areas throughout the EU known as Natura • the Dinaric Alps (Croatia/Bosnia- 2000. Natura 2000 now consists of about 20,000 Herzegovina/Serbia) sites covering approximately 17 percent of the • Mediterranean forests, woodlands and EU’s territory. The number of sites and their scrub (southwest Iberia and the north- total area is still increasing. Although Natura westen Morocco Lowlands, the Baetic- 2000 was conceived as a system of protected Atlas Mountains, the Italian Peninsula areas, the value of connectivity is recognized in and the South Thyrrenian Sea) the Habitats Directive. Article 10 provides that “Member States shall endeavour, where they A large-scale non-ecoregion project is also un- consider it necessary … with a view to improving derway in the Fenno-Scandian Alpine tundra the ecological coherence of the Natura 2000 net- and taiga of northern Europe. work, to encourage the management of features of the landscape which are of major importance for wild fauna and ﬂ ora. Such features are those which, by virtue of their linear and continuous structure (such as rivers with their banks or the traditional systems for marking ﬁ eld boundaries) or their function as stepping stones (such as

CCBD23_Interior_20060516.inddBD23_Interior_20060516.indd Sec1:35Sec1:35 55/16/06/16/06 3:50:573:50:57 PMPM Review of Experience with Ecological Networks, Corridors and Buffer Zones

The Former Iron Curtain: The Green Belt The aim of the Green Belt programme is to maintain and enhance the biodiversity value of the relatively undisturbed strip of land that bordered the former Iron Curtain. This strip runs in two sections divided by the Baltic Sea from the border between Norway and Russia at the northern tip of Europe to the coasts of the Adriatic Sea and the Black Sea in the south. Launched in 2004 by the German Federal Agency for Nature Conservation (BfN) and IUCN, the corridor is to be created through joint projects along the Green Belt with the support of the respective countries and other partners. The structure of the corridor will differ depending on the circumstances in each region. In some areas the Green Belt will be a continuous strip of land constituting part of existing or new protected areas; in other areas it will be established by linking transfrontier protected areas and protecting other priority transfrontier habitats. Examples of how the Green Belt can be conﬁ gured have been developed for the northern section along the Finnish-Russian border and for part of the former border between West and East Germany. A conference of the Green Belt countries, held in September 2004, adopted a work programme with three components: • direct actions for the establishment of the Green Belt • participation and the institutional structure of the Green Belt • enabling activities

IUCN — The World Conservation Union/German Federal Agency for Nature Conservation/Finnish Association for Nature Conservation/BirdLife Finland/WWF Finland/Greenpeace Finland/Finnish Nature League

CCBD23_Interior_20060516.inddBD23_Interior_20060516.indd Sec1:36Sec1:36 55/16/06/16/06 3:50:583:50:58 PMPM Review of Experience with Ecological Networks, Corridors and Buffer Zones

North America Plains, the Chihuahuan Desert and the Great Basin; In North America the principal ecological- • Sky Islands Wildlands Network Design, network driver is the Wildlands Project. Launched covering parts of Arizona and New in 1991, the initiative aims to protect and restore Mexico (in collaboration with Naturalia, the natural heritage of North America through a Mexican NGO, work is underway to the establishment of a connected system of extend the network into Sonora and “wildlands”, that is “reserve networks” compris- Chihuahua as the Northern Sierra ing core areas, corridors and buffer zones (Noss, Madre Wildlands Network Design 1992). This is to be achieved through: — see below); • conserving a representative system of • Southern Appalachian Conservation native ecosystems; Plan; • maintaining viable populations of all • Oregon Coast Range Conservation Plan, native species in their natural habitats; completed in the early 1990s and covering • maintaining ecological and evolution- a relatively small area. ary processes; • ensuring adequate resilience of ecosys- Several more Wildlands initiatives are working to tems and species. prepare a plan: • Yellowstone to Yukon Conservation The Wildlands Project operates by promoting the Initiative (Y2Y), extending along 3,200 ecological-network concept, advancing method- kilometres of the northern Rocky ologies and providing support to regional and Mountains from Wyoming to the Arctic local initiatives. This support comprises scientiﬁ c Circle and initiated in collaboration research, conservation-planning methodologies with the Canadian Parks and Wilderness and promoting partnerships with grassroots and Society (although the project has since national conservation organizations, government become an independent entity) — see agencies, indigenous peoples, private landowners, also Tabor and Locke (2004) naturalists, scientists and conservationists (see, • Northern Sierra Madre Wildlands for example, Soulé and Terborough, 1999). The Network Design, a project launched in following Wildlands projects have progressed to collaboration with the Mexican NGO the preparation of a complete plan: Naturalia • Heart of the West Wildlands Network • Grand Canyon, an initiative still in an Design, located in the Rocky Mountains early phase and developed in collaboration with • Colorado Plateau, again an initiative several other NGOs, including the that is in an early phase Wild Utah Project and the Biodiversity • Northern Appalachians Wildlands Conservation Alliance; Network Design, an initiative launched • Southern Rockies Wildlands Network by a coalition of US and Canadian part- Design, developed in cooperation with ners covering the New England states, the Southern Rockies Ecosystem Project the Adirondack Mountains of New York, and the Denver Zoo (see box); Nova Scotia, parts of Newfoundland, • New Mexico Highlands Wildlands Ontario and Quebec. Network Design, located at the juncture of the Rocky Mountains, the Great

CCBD23_Interior_20060516.inddBD23_Interior_20060516.indd Sec1:37Sec1:37 55/16/06/16/06 3:51:003:51:00 PMPM Review of Experience with Ecological Networks, Corridors and Buffer Zones

• Oceans of Grass Wildlands Network, connectivity planning and implemen- focusing on the plains of Alberta, tation and is located within the Y2Y Saskatchewan, Montana, Wyoming and region. North and South Dakota • Southeastern Wildlands Project (Florida). • Florida Conservation 2000, an initative • Bioreserve Network (Southern Appal- that has been taken over and revised by achians): a plan has been prepared the Florida Nature Conservancy and (which is also the South Appalachian the state of Florida Biosphere Reserve, SAMAB). • Regional Reserve Network (British The work of the Wildlands Project focuses Columbia): plans have been prepared primarily on North America’s “megalinkages”, by the NGO Round River Conservation the continental-scale linkages that run north- Studies for the Great Bear Rainforest south and east-west. Within each megalink- and the coastal forest and mountains (in age, initiatives are taken to develop a cluster of collaboration with the Transboundary ecological networks. For example, in the Spine Watershed Alliance, the Nature of the Continent megalinkage running north to Conservancy of Alaska and the Nature south from Alaska through the Rocky Mountains Conservancy of Canada). to Central America, six contiguous networks are under development: Yellowstone to Yukon, With regard to WWF initiatives, the following Heart of the West, the Southern Rockies, the terrestrial ecoregion projects are being carried New Mexico Highlands, the Sky Islands and the out in North America: Northern Sierra Madre. • the Northern High Plains In addition to the work by the Wildlands • the South Florida ecosystem Project, several other regional ecological-net- • the Klamath-Siskiyou coniferous work initiatives are underway in North America. forests These include the following: • southeastern rivers and streams • Conception Coast Project (California): the initiative covers a relatively small A further 10 to 15 NGO ecological-network region and is still in an early phase. initiatives in the US have failed to progress be- • Southern California Coastal Sage Scrub yond the original proposal for lack of funding, a Natural Community Conservation Plan problem that has become exacerbated for many (California): the initiative again covers a US NGOs in recent years. relatively small region with an emphasis on strengthening connectivity. • Klamath-Siskiyou Bioregional Con- servation Plan (California and Oregon): the proposal covers a relatively small region and the descriptive phase has been completed. • Ecosystem Recovery Project (Minnesota): this initiative is still in an early phase. • Corridors of Life (Montana): carried out by the NGO American Wildlands, the initiative is primarily focusing on

CCBD23_Interior_20060516.inddBD23_Interior_20060516.indd Sec1:38Sec1:38 55/16/06/16/06 3:51:013:51:01 PMPM Review of Experience with Ecological Networks, Corridors and Buffer Zones

The United States: The Southern Rockies Wildlands Network The Southern Rockies Wildlands Network is one of a series of six contiguous ecological networks that the Wildlands Project is developing along the Rocky Mountains. From alpine tundra to ponderosa pine forests and sagebrush grasslands, over 500 vertebrate species ﬁ nd their home in the Southern Rockies. A rich variety of plants and invertebrate species can also be found within its borders. Over 270 butterﬂ y species and 5,200 moth species make the Southern Rockies the second leading hotspot in North America for the insect order Lepidoptera. One of the biggest threats to the region’s biodiversity is the exceptionally high population growth rate and the accompanying residential development. Scattered, low-density development is fragmenting habitat, particularly in many mountain valleys and foothill forests. A proposal for an ecological network has been prepared based on the principal design elements of large core areas, functional connectivity, keystone species and processes, ecological restoration, ecosystem representation, conserving special elements and focal species planning. The preparatory work was carried out by the Southern Rockies Ecosystem Project in collaboration with the Denver Zoo, with assistance from the Wildlands Project and support from 23 environmental organizations and private foundations. The Southern Rockies Wildlands Network encompasses federal, state and private land and is built up primarily from core wild areas, compatible-use areas and linkages. Establishing the network will require a mix of actions: government policy, private partnerships, public support and cooperation with tribes and pueblos. The current proposal includes an indicative programme of actions, but securing the necessary commitment from the wide range of stakeholders will clearly be a major challenge (Miller et al., 2003).

The Wildlands Project/Southern Rockies Ecosystem Project/Denver Zoo

CCBD23_Interior_20060516.inddBD23_Interior_20060516.indd Sec1:39Sec1:39 55/16/06/16/06 3:51:023:51:02 PMPM Review of Experience with Ecological Networks, Corridors and Buffer Zones

Canada: The Bow Valley Wolf Corridor The Rocky Mountains are North America’s last remaining intact mountain ecoregion. However, local extinctions and endangered species are causing serious and increasing concern. Among the most striking of the species under threat is the wolf. In the central Canadian Rockies, the rugged nature of the terrain forces wolves to conﬁ ne their movements to low-lying valley bottoms. Rivers and passes therefore function as natural linkages. This can clearly be seen in the Bow River Valley in Alberta’s Banff National Park, a linkage that offers the highest-quality habitat for wolves in the central Canadian Rockies and permits the movement of wolf packs between Canada and the US. In recent years, increasing development has severely disrupted the opportunities for wolves to move through the valley. The Cascade Corridor, one of three routes around the town of Banff that are available to wolves, offers the greatest potential for movement. Wolves made little use of the route before 1997 because of the moderate-to- high level of human intrusion in the linkage, which included a hotel, ski access road, buffalo paddock, barns, horse corrals, an airport and a military training facility. Because of the regional importance of the linkage in facilitating the movement of wolves, however, Parks Canada agreed to take action to reduce the intensity of human activities. As a result, in 1997 the buffalo paddock and several barns and horse corrals were removed, and the airstrip was closed to all air trafﬁ c except emergency landings. The actions also reduced associated recreational activities and vehicle use in the linkage. Following these actions, monitoring showed that the relative movement of wolves through the Cascade Corridor increased sevenfold in the period 1997–1999 compared with the period 1993–1997, an increase substantially greater than had been hypothesized. Moreover, not only was the intensity of movement through the Cascade Corridor far greater, the improved connectivity seemed to allow the Cascade wolf pack to expand its range: the home range of the pack increased in extent to include four more valleys, expanding from 607 to 1,847 square kilometres (Duke et al., 2001; Duke, 2001).

Danah Duke

Australia only a few owners, which in most cases is public land (Bennett and Lowe, 2002). To date it has Programmes designed to retain and promote proved more difﬁ cult to expand these initiatives landscape connectivity in Australia date back from local projects to regional-scale networks to the 1980s (several examples are described in in the heavily cleared agricultural environments Bennett, 1998). In the main, these programmes where biodiversity remains primarily as relicts were directed at repairing the disruption caused and fragments. In 2000, however, a nationwide to speciﬁ c habitats or local species populations by initiative, WildCountry (see case study 3), was fragmentation of tracts of land that have single or launched by the Wilderness Society Australia in

CCBD23_Interior_20060516.inddBD23_Interior_20060516.indd Sec1:40Sec1:40 55/16/06/16/06 3:51:063:51:06 PMPM Review of Experience with Ecological Networks, Corridors and Buffer Zones

partnership with government authorities, NGOs, status, including their habitats. Four agreements business and private landowners. The aim of the concerning the conservation of terrestrial or proposal is to halt the continuing degradation of coastal species and birds have been adopted to the continent’s biotic diversity through a science- date (which are grouped together here since a based vision that integrates existing conservation substantial proportion of the range states are programmes into a coherent, interconnected sys- Western countries): tem of core areas and promotes the appropriate • European bats (48 European range management of other land and aquatic systems. states) The general approach and methodology that is • seals in the Wadden Sea (three range being applied by the Wilderness Society is based states) largely on that developed by the Wildlands Project • African-Eurasian migratory waterbirds in North America. (117 range states in Africa, Europe, An example of a large-scale ecological Canada, Central Asia and the Middle network that is being built on existing pro- East) tected areas is the Australian Alps and the Great • albatrosses and petrels (25 range states Escarpment of Eastern Australia corridor system. in the Southern Hemisphere, including In 1996 a South East Forests National Park for European, African, Asian and South Southeastern New South Wales was established American countries) on public land. The decision also designated a conservation corridor that interconnects pro- In addition, memoranda of understanding have tected areas for over 150 km along the Great been concluded with the respective range states Escarpment. An initiative has been taken to ex- with the aim of conserving the following species: tend the corridor to over 600 km. The potential • the Siberian crane (12 range states, pri- outcome is an continuous conservation corridor marily in Asia) along the Great Escarpment from the Victorian • the slender-billed curlew (30 range border to central New South Wales (Pulsford et states in Southern and Eastern Europe, al., 2004). Northern Africa and the Middle East) Finally, a bioregional-planning project has • marine turtles of the Atlantic coast of been launched in the Fitzgerald River National Africa (26 range states along the Atlantic Park in Western Australia (Watson, 2005), and coast of Africa WWF is carrying out an ecoregion project in the • marine turtles of the Indian Ocean and southwestern forests and scrub region. Southeast Asia (41 range states around the Indian Ocean and Southeast Asia Other International Programmes and adjacent seas) • the middle-European population of the Actions to protect the transboundary link- great bustard (17 range states in Central ages used by migratory species is the special and Eastern Europe) focus of the Convention on the Conservation of • the Bukhara deer (four range states in Migratory Species of Wild Animals (the Bonn Central Asia) Convention). Under the Convention, a series • the aquatic warbler (14 range states in of agreements and memoranda of understand- Europe and Africa) ing have been adopted by range states with the aim of conserving threatened migratory species UNESCO’s Man and Biosphere programme or those with an unfavourable conservation has designated 155 sites in Western and other

CCBD23_Interior_20060516.inddBD23_Interior_20060516.indd Sec1:41Sec1:41 55/16/06/16/06 3:51:073:51:07 PMPM Review of Experience with Ecological Networks, Corridors and Buffer Zones

countries as biosphere reserves, including one logging). Maintaining connectivity will transboundary reserve. facilitate the continuation of natural disturbance events and permit escape CASE STUDY 3 from human-induced disturbances. AUSTRALIA: WILDCOUNTRY • Climate change. Although the regional impact of climate change is diffi cult to Australia is home to a remarkably diverse and predict, it seems likely that climatically unique natural heritage. However, over the past driven biome changes cannot be accom- two centuries more native species have been modated by small or isolated protected lost here than in any other country. Today over areas. This infers the need for large, 1,500 species are threatened with extinction, and contiguous areas that allow movement Australia has the greatest number of threatened and fl ows at the regional scale. reptile and amphibian species. Despite this de- • Hydroecology. The scarcity of water cline, the country remains one of the world’s over much of Australia makes it a criti- richest centres of biodiversity. For example, more cal natural resource. The interruption endemic animal species can be found in Australia of catchment processes can therefore than in any other country. have catastrophic effects on regional In response to these challenges, WildCountry and continental ecological phenomena. is using landscape ecology to improve under- • Coastal-zone fl uxes. The concentration standing of the large-scale ecological connec- of human populations along Australia’s tions that still remain in place across huge areas coastline, combined with the sensitiv- of the continent and which will form the basis of ity of many coastal systems such as the conservation approach. Seven categories of estuaries and coral reefs, is imposing ecological phenomena have been identifi ed that considerable pressure on ecological and require landscape connectivity and are crucial behavioural processes. to biodiversity conservation (Soulé et al., 2004; • Spatially dependent evolutionary proc- Mackey et al., 2005): esses. These processes can require the • Highly interactive species. A priority is movement of organisms over long dis- to maintain the dispersal and migration tances. Examples include new genetic of these species, such as water birds, variants that evolve through range ex- pollinators and animal dispersers of pansion and, in the longer term, specia- seeds and fungal spores. tion. • Long-distance biological movement. For example, 30 to 60 percent of Australian These considerations have led WildCountry to woodland and open-forest birds are shape a conservation approach that aims to in- non-residents, and their persistence tegrate the needs of nature with the demands of in a region may depend on seasonal human use by strengthening ecological processes migration or episodic movement that is and environmental fl ows. The programme’s focus related to highly irregular precipitation is therefore on maintaining and restoring eco- patterns. logical connections in the landscape. Specifi cally, • Local and regional disturbance events. the management approach will apply the follow- Disturbance may be a natural process ing principles: (such as foraging by feral carnivores) or caused by human activities (such as

CCBD23_Interior_20060516.inddBD23_Interior_20060516.indd Sec1:42Sec1:42 55/16/06/16/06 3:51:083:51:08 PMPM Review of Experience with Ecological Networks, Corridors and Buffer Zones

• networks of core areas will build upon Figure 3.2. The fi ve WildCountry the criteria of comprehensiveness, ad- projects equacy and representativeness • biodiversity conservation assessment and planning should aim for the maintenance and restoration of large-scale ecological and evolutionary processes over the entire landscape • the network should be buffered from sources of disturbance and incorporate where appropriate complementary land uses and management • degraded landscapes must be restored, particularly in the intensive land-use areas • long-term ecological connectivity will be WildCountry facilitated, which will remain an ongoing research and development challenge. feeding areas, offering critical nectar and pollen The WildCountry programme is currently work- during the dry late-summer and early-autumn ing in fi ve regions: northern Australia, Cape York period. However, the farmed areas form barriers Peninsula, the Gondwana Link, the Western to this movement with the result that population Wilderness and western Victoria. The Gondwana levels of many species have dropped across the Link is a good example of the approach. entire “wheatbelt”. Southwestern Australia is regarded as one of the Five NGOs — the Australian Bush Heritage world’s top 25 biodiversity hotspots. However, as Fund, the Fitzgerald Biosphere Group, the Friends a result of agricultural expansion two thirds of of the Fitzgerald River National Park, Greening the vegetation has been cleared, leaving less than Australia and the Wilderness Society — are co- 10 percent of the original bushland. The removal operating within the WildCountry framework to of deep-rooted vegetation has left the resulting partially restore this vital pattern of movement agricultural land very fragile; moreover, over 30 into and across south-coast plant communities. percent of the agricultural land is threatened by By doing so, resilience to climate change will also salinity. It is now widely recognized that 30 to 40 be improved, since current predictions are for a percent of this area needs to be covered by peren- warming of the southwest region over the next nial woody vegetation if it is to remain stable. 50 years with a signifi cant decline in winter rain- The fi ve largest areas of high biodiversity fall. To achieve this goal, it is proposed to remove value in the region are along the south coast, areas least suited to agriculture from production where about six million hectares of public land (which are already economically marginal or were saved from the spread of agriculture in the unviable) and to develop and demonstrate the early 1980s. Together, these areas form the last potential for other land-use options that have remaining link between the wet forests in the commercial value, such as sandalwood growing, continent’s southwestern tip through to the dry dry-country forestry (that is, bush poles and inland. This connection provided a vital oppor- brush fencing) and bush foods. One of the fi rst tunity for fauna species to move between seasonal actions is a cooperative project with the state

CCBD23_Interior_20060516.inddBD23_Interior_20060516.indd Sec1:43Sec1:43 55/16/06/16/06 3:51:093:51:09 PMPM Review of Experience with Ecological Networks, Corridors and Buffer Zones

Figure 3.3. The Gondwana Link proposal

WildCountry/Australian Bush Heritage Fund/Fitzgerald Biosphere Group/Friends of the Fitzgerald River National Park/Greening Australia/Wilderness Society

government to secure the Walpole Wilderness occurred along the Guadiamar River and the spill Area — over 200,000 hectares of forest where the threatened the nearby Doñana marshes — world Gondwana Link corridor meets the wetter forest famous as a World Heritage Site, a Ramsar Site, areas. a Biosphere Reserve and an Important Bird Area. Fortunately the national park was not directly affected, but the aquatic fauna of the Guadiamar CASE STUDY 4 River were almost totally exterminated and SPAIN: THE GUADIAMAR sludge deposits of up to three metres thick were GREEN CORRIDOR left along 40 kilometres of the watercourse. Soon after the disaster, the regional gov- On 25 April 1998 the retaining dam of the lagoon ernment of Andalusia approved a proposal to containing tailings from the Aznalcóllar pyrite mitigate the impacts and restore the river ecosys- mine in Andalusia failed, releasing about six mil- tem. A year later, in June 1999, the Strategy for lion cubic metres of toxic sludge into the Agrio the Guadiamar Green Corridor was established and Guadiamar River Basin. Signiﬁ cant ﬂ ooding at a specially organized international seminar

CCBD23_Interior_20060516.inddBD23_Interior_20060516.indd Sec1:44Sec1:44 55/16/06/16/06 3:51:103:51:10 PMPM Review of Experience with Ecological Networks, Corridors and Buffer Zones

(Secretaría General Técnica, 2000). Interestingly, Figure 3.4. Schematic the goal of the strategy was not only to remedy representation of the main linkages in the damage caused by the spill but also to restore the Guadiamar river basin the Guadiamar River as an ecological connection between the Sierra Morena mountains and ecosystems along the Atlantic coast. The Guadiamar Green Corridor will also form part of the Andalusian ecological network (RENPA), which is currently under development and aims to build the areas designated as EU Natura 2000 sites into an interconnected network (Vázquez, 2003). The Guadiamar River is one of the few rivers in Andalusia that still retains its natural Mediterranean regime of high winter and low summer ﬂ ows. Serious fragmentation of the Guadiamar basin dates back many decades. However, the process has accelerated in recent years, primarily as a result of the increasing predominance of arable farming at the expense of old olive groves. An important consequence of this process was that the former intricate land-use matrix became transformed into a far simpler and homogeneous landscape. In addition, industrial and housing developments have caused serious fragmentation in the central and lower parts of the river basin. Recreating the regional ecological function of the river basin requires both direct restoration of the areas directly affected by the spill Andalusian Ministry of Environment and actions to increase connectivity at local and regional scales. Five speciﬁ c measures are being undertaken with the aim of achieving these objectives (Arenas Cabello, 2003; see also Figure 2. Restoring streams. The linking role 3.5): of the smaller rivers is especially impor- 1. Improving connectivity. The priority tant in the central area of the basin. In is to reconnect the northern part of the addition, priority will be given to the Green Corridor and the Sierra Morena headwaters of the Guadiamar River mountains. Monitoring studies of small and the two western tributaries, the mammals show relatively limited move- Alcarayón and the Agrio. Attention is ment in this area. Restoration works are also being given to the Tinto River to the directed mainly at reforestation and the west because of its important ecological replacement of eucalyptus stands with relationship with the Guadiamar River. indigenous tree species.

CCBD23_Interior_20060516.inddBD23_Interior_20060516.indd Sec1:45Sec1:45 55/16/06/16/06 3:51:113:51:11 PMPM Review of Experience with Ecological Networks, Corridors and Buffer Zones

3. Restoring drovers’ roads. An ex- 4. Improving connectivity across tensive network of of drovers’ roads has the transport infrastructure. existed in Spain for centuries, enabling Several roads and railways have created livestock to be moved seasonally both barriers to the movement of species, north–south and between low- and particularly the A49 motorway and the high-lying ground. These tracks have Seville-Huelva railway. The construc- come to provide an important semi- tion of ecoducts and other measures to natural corridor function, particularly increase their permeability to ecological with regard to the dispersal of herba- ﬂ ows is under consideration. ceous species.

Figure 3.5. The Green Corridor plan

Andalusian Ministry of Environment

CCBD23_Interior_20060516.inddBD23_Interior_20060516.indd Sec1:46Sec1:46 55/16/06/16/06 3:51:133:51:13 PMPM Review of Experience with Ecological Networks, Corridors and Buffer Zones

5. Restoring or creating “stepping government, the regional water authority and the stones”. Many areas of land that are administration of the Doñana National Park. under public ownership or protected Monitoring shows that important progress as part of the region’s cultural heritage has been made in restoring the Guadiamar eco- offer the potential to be developed as system, although the results achieved are very resting and feeding places. variable. Recovery of ﬁ sh and amphibians has been generally good. The otter has also recovered In order to support the formulation of effective well, being present along the entire length of the measures, a special research programme was river, as have some wetland bird populations in established as part of the action plan. This Green the northern part of the basin. Other mammals, Corridor Research Programme (PICOVER) is such as the badger, the genet and the mongoose, multidisciplinary in structure and aims to ap- have yet to return to the northern part of the ply the principles of the ecosystem approach basin in any numbers since they depend on the through its four main themes: remedying and recovery of vegetation. The wild cat remains lim- monitoring the contamination, the design of ited to the outer margins of the Green Corridor. the Green Corridor, ecosystem restoration and Moreover it is clear that, given the scale of the integrating natural and human systems (Arenas pollution disaster and the structural degradation et al., 2003). of the ecosystem over many years, full restoration The integration of natural and human of the basin’s ecology will require a long-term systems is an explicit element of the Green commitment and continuing action. Corridor strategy. This is not only of signiﬁ cance in relation to the need to promote new employ- CONCLUSIONS ment opportunities following the closure of the mines and the loss of 500 jobs, but also to The large number of ecological networks that assist in the overall restructuring of the region’s are being developed in Western countries share economy. Priority here is being given to develop- a number of common features and some striking ing sustainable forms of agriculture (which was differences. Most obvious is the primary focus seriously affected by the disaster) and promoting on biodiversity conservation rather than the recreational and tourist activities. Use is being broader goal of sustainable development which made of the funding made available through characterized the early ecological networks in the EU Agri-Environment Regulation and the Central and Eastern Europe. To be sure, securing Community Aid Scheme for Forestry Measures. biodiversity conservation through an ecological The administrative framework within network leads to a broad range of accompanying which the measures are being taken is provided measures which have the aim of reducing im- through the designation of the Green Corridor pacts on biodiversity, removing ecological bar- as a Protected Landscape under national leg- riers and promoting compatible forms of land islation. Much of the land directly affected by use. Nevertheless, it is biodiversity conservation the spill, amounting to about 5,000 hectares, that lies at the heart of virtually all ecological was also taken into public ownership. Funding networks in Western countries. for developing the Guadiamar Green Corridor However, other factors combine to lead to programme and implementing the various ac- markedly different approaches between Western tions is being provided by four main sources: the Europe on the one hand and North America national government, the Andalusian regional and Australia on the other. First, in contrast to Western Europe, large areas of wilderness still

CCBD23_Interior_20060516.inddBD23_Interior_20060516.indd Sec1:47Sec1:47 55/16/06/16/06 3:51:143:51:14 PMPM Review of Experience with Ecological Networks, Corridors and Buffer Zones

exist on both other continents. As a result, wil- North America and Australia is that the initiatives derness areas are a prime focus for ecological can de directed at the ecosystem or ecoregion networks in North America and Australia. In scale within a continental context rather than North America, the priority accorded to wilder- being limited to administrative boundaries. In ness areas is strengthened by concern to conserve practice this is invariably the case in both North the continent’s remaining populations of wide- America and Australia, whereas in Western ranging carnivores. In Western Europe, the most Europe the relatively small size of most countries valuable areas in terms of biodiversity are rela- often prevents the national and regional ecologi- tively small sites (which, in general, already enjoy cal-network programmes from extending man- a high level of protection) and semi-natural agement measures across entire ecosystems. The landscapes that have been formed over a period Pan-European Ecological Networks certainly of many centuries through extensive forms of aims to work in this way, but it is being imple- land use: grasslands, fi eld mozaics and coppices, mented through national government action and for example. Devising ways of maintaining the relies on voluntary cooperation. The EU’s Natura traditional forms of management in these areas 2000 scheme, although building an EU-wide is a major challenge in Europe. representative system of protected areas, has not Another striking distinction between yet provided for a signifi cant level of ecological Western Europe and the other two continents coherence. Interestingly enough, some countries is the organizational framework within which have tried to attain this coherence through the ecological networks are being developed. In Biosphere Reserve concept, with Natura 2000 Western Europe, the traditionally prominent sites designated as core areas within the larger- role of government in nature conservation and scale Biosphere Reserve. Examples include the spatial planning is refl ected in the fact that vir- Gran Cantabrica Biosphere Reserve, which cov- tually all ecological networks are policy driven. ers the mountain range in northern Spain, and Even where NGOs are taking a pro-active role also some existing and planned bioshere reserves in initiating ecological-network programmes, in Europe. they invariably aim to secure action in large part through new government policies. By contrast, in North America and Australia the most important initiatives are driven by NGOs that aim to achieve their goals through broad-based stakeholder processes. At the regional level, where the implementing projects are being undertaken, this includes collaboration with government authorities where possible in order to secure the necessary action in conservation policy and public land management. Nevertheless, it is clear that, to date, the realization of ecological networks in Western Europe has benefi ted where governments have embraced the model and have used legislative and other policy instruments to secure action on the ground. It should be noted, however, that one signifi - cant advantage of the NGO-driven processes in

CCBD23_Interior_20060516.inddBD23_Interior_20060516.indd Sec1:48Sec1:48 55/16/06/16/06 3:51:163:51:16 PMPM Review of Experience with Ecological Networks, Corridors and Buffer Zones

4. ASIA AND THE PACIFIC

The principles that underly ecological networks of foreign examples. The Countryside Green fi rst generated broad interest in Asia during Network Plan foresees the establishment of a the mid-1990s when developments in Western national ecological network with a special focus countries attracted the attention of biodiversity on conserving and restoring the ecosystems as- conservation experts in South Korea and Japan. sociated with South Korea’s fi ve major mountain In South Korea, the government published a ranges. Interestingly, it is proposed to extend the proposal for the nationwide Countryside Green concept to urban regions. Following the publi- Network Plan in 1995. In the same year the cation of the original concept, the Countryside Ecosystem Conservation Society – Japan organ- Green Network has been incorporated into the ized “The Ecological Network Symposium” in Revised Nature Conservation Act and the Basic Tokyo in order to present the model to a Japanese Guideline of Nature Conservation. Since then, audience, an initiative that led to the approach work has continued on a proposal to establish the being included in several areas of government Ecological Network of the Korean Penisula and policy from 1996. Inspired by developments in the Capital Region. A number of local projects Western countries, these programmes adopted a have also been carried out, particularly the es- comparable approach. tablishment of corridors and the construction of In recent years, international NGOs have ecoducts across major highways. also become active in the region, initiating an In Japan a growing number of initiatives to increasing number of ecological-network pro- develop ecological networks have been taken in grammes and corridors. WWF has launched a recent years at municipal, prefectural, regional large number of landscape-scale and ecoregion and national levels (see box). For example, in 1996 projects in cooperation with governments and the government decided that, as part of the Third international donors. Conservation International National Land-Use Plan, it would “make efforts is also active through programmes in Cambodia, to network ecosystems in order to conserve bio- China, Indonesia, Melanesia and the Philippines. logical diversity”, and in the Fifth Comprehensive A wide variety of corridors have also been devel- National Development Plan – Grand Design for oped in several Asian countries, for example to the 21st Century that was adopted in March 1998, help conserve fl agship species such as the Asian the commitment was made to develop a “na- elephant and the giant panda. tional-scale ecological network”. Further, the New National Biodiversity Strategy of 2002 included OVERVIEW OF THE PROGRAMMES the objective “to develop networks of fi ne quality ecosystems with protected areas as their cores”. South Korea’s Countryside Green Network Currently the Ministry of Land Use, Infrastructure Plan was fi rst proposed in a government report and Transport, the Ministry of Environment, the in 1995 (Ministry of Environment, 1995) and Ministry of Agriculture and the Forestry Agency subsequently included in the country’s National are cooperating in developing the national plan Biodiversity Strategy of 1997. The document for a Japanese ecological network. — a presentation of the ecological-network Other than South Korea and Japan, the main concept rather than a detailed plan — set out initiator of landscape-scale conservation pro- the principles to be applied in developing the grammes that incorporate ecological-network ecological network, including explicit reference principles is WWF through the organization’s to Jared Diamond’s indicative recommendations ecoregion programmes. A large number of ter- for the design of nature reserves, the Biosphere restrial programmes are underway in Asia and Reserve management approach and a range the Pacifi c, as follows:

CCBD23_Interior_20060516.inddBD23_Interior_20060516.indd Sec1:49Sec1:49 55/16/06/16/06 3:51:173:51:17 PMPM Review of Experience with Ecological Networks, Corridors and Buffer Zones

• Annamites range moist forests • Transﬂ y savannas (Forest of New • Eastern Himalayas Guinea) • Lower Mekong dry forests • Mekong River • Borneo lowland and montane forests • New Caledonian dry forests Although the WWF projects take on a variety • Western Ghats of forms, several explicitly apply the ecological- • Yangtze basin network model, such as the Terai Arc Landscape • southwestern Australian forests and in Nepal and India (see case study 6). Other scrub WWF landscape-scale projects outside the or- • Indus delta ganization’s ecoregion programme include the following:

Japan: The Arakawa River Ecological Network One example of an ecological network in Japan is the Arakawa River Ecological Network. The Arakawa River fl ows through lowlands in the Tokyo metropolitan area and the Saitama Prefecture. However, due to the pressure of human activities, including fl ood-control works, the stream fl ow has changed substantially from its natural state, and the river basin habitat has degraded. A regional restoration programme that was developed by the national government identifi ed key areas for conservation. This programme included the Arakawa River Biotope Project — with an area of 50 hectares, the largest nature restoration project ever carried out in Japan — and Mitsumata Numa Swamp Biotope Project. However, these projects only targeted a part of the river, with the result that the restored habitats continued to be adversely affected by degraded upstream sections of the river, for example through the reduced levels of aggradation. At the initiative of the Ecosystem Conservation Society – Japan, a comprehensive programme to restore the Arakawa River was developed together with a wide range of stakeholders. The Arakawa River Ecological Network Plan has the main objective of re-establishing ecological continuity between the upper and lower reaches of the river. This is to be secured through enhancing the natural fl ows of water, nutrients, sand and gravel, and also by restoring ecological connectivity. This will involve establishing corridors between woodlands and other upland habitats in the upper reaches of the river.

Ecosystem Conservation Society – Japan

CCBD23_Interior_20060516.inddBD23_Interior_20060516.indd Sec1:50Sec1:50 55/16/06/16/06 3:51:183:51:18 PMPM Review of Experience with Ecological Networks, Corridors and Buffer Zones

• the peninsular Malaysia lowland and In the same part of Sumatra, a four- montane forests year project managed by Fauna and Flora • the Kayah Karen/Tenasserim moist for- International is underway to conserve globally ests (Malaysia and Thailand) important biodiversity in the forests of northern • the Sumatran Islands lowland and Aceh by using internationally important Asian montane forests elephant populations as fl agships and indicators. • Nansei Shoto (Japan) Managed by a team of local staff, the project has • the Sunderbans mangroves (India) two main objectives: • the Tibetan plateau steppe • to conserve biologically rich forest ecosystems in northern Aceh, focusing Conservation International is also active in on the lowland forests that are impor- developing ecological networks in the region. tant wildlife linkages, especially for This NGO has established the Commonwealth elephants Scientific and Industrial Research Organization • to maintain linkages between the well- in order to focus scientific analysis on island bio- protected Gunung Leuser ecosystem diversity and ecological networks (“conservation and the northern Aceh forests corridors”), particularly on the island of New Guinea. In the northwest part of the Philippines, Elephant migration routes are the focus of several Conservation International has initiated the programmes. An important strategic framework Sierra Madre Biodiversity Corridor. The project’s for these initiatives is the Asian Elephant Action aim is to protect and manage the biological re- Plan that was drawn up by IUCN’s Species sources of the Sierra Madre mountain range by Survival Commission in 1990 (Santiapillai and developing the whole Sierra Madre mountain Jackson, 1990). For example, in Cambodia the range into an ecological network. Proposed Southern Cardamom mountain range is home measures include the strengthening of existing to one of the last seven remaining elephant cor- protected and community-based forest man- ridors in Southeast Asia. However, relatively large agement. A comparable initiative is being taken numbers of elephants and tigers have been killed by the Philippine Eagle Conservation Program in recent years and 100 to 300 hectares of tropical Foundation in association with other partners forest are being cleared each month. In response in the southern Philippines in order to establish to these threats, WildAid is developing the South the Eastern Mindanao Corridor. A prime goal West Elephant Corridor which combines ranger of the initiative is to conserve the habitat of the patrolling, community outreach and wildlife Philippine Eagle, the second-largest and rarest monitoring to stop wildlife poaching and illegal eagle in the world. logging along the migration route and also to On Sumatra, Conservation International is help develop income alternatives for surround- working with local communities and local gov- ing communities. ernment representatives to establish the Batang In 2003 WWF, the UN Development Gadis National Park as an integral part of the Programme and the government of Bhutan Northern Sumatra Conservation Corridor that agreed to protect and manage a “Green Corridor” Conservation International, other local organiza- through the Himalayan country in a US$ 1.8- tions, communities and governmental represen- million project. The corridor is intended to en- tatives are working to create with support from sure the long-term conservation of the country’s the Critical Ecosystem Partnership Fund. forest and mountain ecosystems that are home to the endangered Bengal tiger and other species

CCBD23_Interior_20060516.inddBD23_Interior_20060516.indd Sec1:51Sec1:51 55/16/06/16/06 3:51:193:51:19 PMPM Review of Experience with Ecological Networks, Corridors and Buffer Zones

that are threatened by overgrazing, poaching, panda, such as in the Qinling Mountains where illegal trading, deforestation and destructive WWF and the Shaaxi Forestry Department agricultural practices. It also aims to provide have initiated a collaborative project. The cor- ecologically friendly development opportunities ridor will comprise fi ve components: Houzhenzi through alternative energy sources, improved in Zhouzhi County, Dashuping in the Taibai health services and cottage industries, such as Bureau, Erlangba in Taibai County, Jiuchihe in cheese-making, honey production and non-tim- Yangxian County and Canziping in the Ningxi ber forest products (see also Sherpa et al., 2004). Bureau. The intention is to designate the linkages, In Vietnam, the government-supported improve the management of the existing forests, Central Truong Son Biodiversity Conservation reforest other areas, introduce fi re-prevention Initiative has been developed as a pilot proj- measures, construct ecoducts and promote ap- ect with the strategic goal to ensure effective propriate forms of economic development in the conservation across the Greater Truong Son local communities. Ecoregion — the ecological unit that covers Flyways constitute a specifi c type of linkage. most of northern and eastern Vietnam (Ministry Migratory birds depend on widely separated areas of Agriculture and Rural Development, 2004). for their survival. Measures designed to conserve The project has the objective of establishing an these networks of sites focus on the breeding integrated mosaic of complementary land-use grounds, overwintering areas and, for the spe- and development practices to protect, manage cies that migrate over longer distances, feeding and restore natural resources and biodiversity in and resting places en route. In most cases these the Truong Son region while also contributing to measures require international cooperation. institutional development, good governance and Globally, about 25 fl yway agreements have been raised standards of living for local communities. concluded (including the agreements under the The programme will be implemented in three Bonn Convention — see also Western Europe and phases: Other Countries). About half of these fl yways can be found in the Asia and Pacifi c region (see Table • 2003–2010: creating the foundations 4.1). Some of the agreements date from the fi rst for a sustainable landscape half of the twentieth century (Boere and Rubec, • 2011–2015: expanding the priority 2002). For example, in 1916 Canada and the landscapes United States signed a bilateral Convention on the • 2016–2020: making the connections Conservation of Migratory Birds. In Taiwan, the feasibility of establishing a The project includes the conservation of vital corridor in the central mountain region has been ecological linkages, such as the Green Corridor assessed (Kuo, 2002). Finally, it can be noted that area between Bach Ma National Park and Phong UNESCO’s Man and Biosphere Programme in- Dien Nature Reserve (which is the focus of cludes 94 Biosphere Reserves in 21 countries in a joint Vietnamese government/GEF/WWF/ the Asia and Pacifi c region. Netherlands Development Organization project) and a tiger corridor funded by the US National Fish and Wildlife Foundation. A large number of corridor projects are also underway in China (see case study 5). These include several corridors intended to reconnect the increasingly fragmented habitat of the giant

CCBD23_Interior_20060516.inddBD23_Interior_20060516.indd Sec1:52Sec1:52 55/16/06/16/06 3:51:213:51:21 PMPM Review of Experience with Ecological Networks, Corridors and Buffer Zones

CASE STUDY 5 recorded, equivalent to about 60 percent of the CHINA: CORRIDORS IN species diversity in China. Cultural diversity is YUNNAN PROVINCE also exceptionally high, with 26 ethnic groups. As a result of high population densities and Yunnan province lies in the south of China, a rapidly growing economy, this rich biodiversity bordering Myanmar, Laos and Vietnam. The re- is coming under increasing pressure. Yunnan gion is mountainous, which results in a range of provincial government has therefore designated climatic zones varying from temperate through a large number of new protected areas, the total subtropical to tropical. Biodiversity in the prov- number increasing from 92 to 168 between 1998 ince is exceptionally rich. For example, 1,638 and 2004. However, potential conﬂ icts between vertebrate species, over 10,000 insect species biodiversity conservation and local communi- and over 17,000 higher plant species have been ties have led to most of these areas being limited

Table 4.1. International ﬂ yway agreements

• Asian-Pacifi c Waterbird Conservation Strategy • Asia-Pacifi c Migratory Crane Action Plan and North-East Asian Crane Site Network • Central Asian-Indian Flyway Programme • East Asian-Australasian Shorebird Reserve Network • China-Australia Migratory Birds Agreement • Japan-Australia Migratory Birds Agreement • Japan-Russia Migratory Birds Agreement • Japan-USA Migratory Birds Agreement • Republic of Korea-Russia Migratory Birds Agreement • Democratic People’s Republic of Korea-Russia Migratory Birds Agreement • American-Pacifi c Flyway Programme • Convention Between the Government of the United States of America and the Government of Japan for the Protection of Migratory Birds and Birds in Danger of Extinction, and Their Environment • USA-Russia Migratory Birds Agreement • Convention between the United States of America and Great Britain (acting for Canada) for the Protection of Migratory Species • Convention between the United States of America and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics Concerning the Conservation of Migratory Birds and Their Environment • Convention Between the United States of America and the United Mexican States for the Protection of Migratory Birds and Game Animals • Convention between Canada and the United States on the Conservation of Migratory Birds • North American Waterfowl Management Plan • Migratory Birds Convention • Western Hemisphere Shorebird Reserve Network • Bonn Convention: Agreement on the Conservation of African-Eurasian Migratory Waterbirds (AEWA) • Bonn Convention: Agreement on the Conservation of Albatrosses and Petrels • Bonn Convention: Memorandum of Understanding concerning Conservation Measures for the Slender-Billed Curlew (Numensius tenuirostris) • Bonn Convention: Memorandum of Understanding concerning Conservation Measures for the Siberian Crane (Grus leucogeranus) • Bonn Convention: Memorandum of Understanding concerning Conservation Measures for the Aquatic Warbler (Acrocephalus paludicola) • Bonn Convention: Memorandum of Understanding on the Conservation and Management of the Middle- European Population of the Great Bustard (Otis tarda)

CCBD23_Interior_20060516.inddBD23_Interior_20060516.indd Sec1:53Sec1:53 55/16/06/16/06 3:51:223:51:22 PMPM Review of Experience with Ecological Networks, Corridors and Buffer Zones

to former state forests. Moreover, administra- Given the need to strengthen the conser- tive boundaries play an important role in the vation of Yunnan’s biodiversity, a project was conﬁ guration of the nature reserves since local launched in 1998 to formulate protected-area governments are responsible for proposing pro- management plans and promote sustainable tected areas. community development in the province’s tropical and subtropical forest zones. Funded

The East Asian–Australasian Shorebird Site Network Launched in 1996, the East Asian–Australasian Shorebird Site Network aims to secure the long-term conservation of migratory shorebirds in the East Asian–Australasian Flyway through the recognition and appropriate management of a network of internationally important sites. It is estimated that over 400 such sites exist in the fl yway. The fl yway is used by over 65 populations of migratory shorebirds, including 11 species of special conservation concern and two endangered species (the spoon-billed sandpiper and the spotted greenshank). The network, which is coordinated by Wetlands International–Oceania, currently includes 29 designated sites in nine countries: Russia, South Korea, Japan, China, the Philippines, Indonesia, Papua New Guinea, Australia and New Zealand. As a voluntary collaborative framework, some consideration was given to regional geo-political considerations in deciding how to defi ne national involvement along the eastern margin of the fl yway. The Action Plan for the Conservation of Migratory Shorebirds in Asia Pacifi c was agreed in 1999 and an international advisory group meets once a year to review implementation of the plan. Core funding is provided by the Australian Government.

East Asian–Australasian Shorebird Site Network

CCBD23_Interior_20060516.inddBD23_Interior_20060516.indd Sec1:54Sec1:54 55/16/06/16/06 3:51:233:51:23 PMPM Review of Experience with Ecological Networks, Corridors and Buffer Zones

Figure 4.1. The locations of the corridors linking the nature reserves in Yunnan province

Forest Conservation and Community Development Project

jointly by the Chinese and Dutch governments, importance, and in 1997 part of the protected the Forest Conservation and Community area was listed as a Biosphere Reserve. The re- Development Project focused on six nature serve comprises three separate sites that harbour reserves: Caiyanghe, Nuozhadu, Wuliangshan, 10 different grassland, scrub and forest vegeta- Tongbiguan, Gaoligongshan and Xiaoheishan tion types. About 5,000 species of vascular plants (Weimin and Busstra, 2004). and 200 animal species have been identiﬁ ed, The latter two protected areas lie in close including takin (Burdocas taxicolor), gibbons, proximity to each other in western Yunnan. the red panda and the clouded leopard. Because Gaoligongshan National Nature Reserve was es- Gaoligongshan extends across the boundary tablished in 1983; with an aggregate area of 4,000 between Nujiang prefecture and Baoshan city square kilometres it is the largest protected area it is managed jointly by two agencies, one in in Yunnan province. In 1992 WWF recognized each district. About 360,000 people live in the the reserve as a Grade A protected area of global Biosphere Reserve, including over 20 ethnic

CCBD23_Interior_20060516.inddBD23_Interior_20060516.indd Sec1:55Sec1:55 55/16/06/16/06 3:51:243:51:24 PMPM Review of Experience with Ecological Networks, Corridors and Buffer Zones

groups. Economic development is relatively low, all four sites. The proposal, which encompasses and the local communities therefore depend to 11,550 hectares, is currently under consideration an important extent on the natural resources of by the county government. Priority will be given the forest. in the fi rst instance to linking Guchengshan with Xiaoheishan Provincial Nature Reserve lies the Xiaoheishan and Yiwanshui sites as part of a just to the south of Gaoligongshan. The reserve current reforestation programme that is intended consists of four separate sites covering 16,000 to expand the mixed-forest habitat that charac- hectares and is characterized by tropical ever- terizes the nature reserve. A particular concern is green and temperate forest. Wild rice and tree the limited area of habitat currently available to ferns can be found in the reserve. An important the 30 mammal species in Xiaoheishan. ecological feature of Xiaoheishan is that it acts as a A further extension of the corridors to link linkage between Tongbiguan and Gaoligongshan Xiaoheishan Nature reserve with Tongbiguan reserves. The local population of almost 80,000 Nature Reserve is under consideration, and is very poor, and the economic potential of the Tongbiguan itself may be expanded. However, area is low: agriculture, livestock breeding and for such a corridor to be functionally viable, an non-timber forest products remain the most ecological restoration programme will fi rst have important sources of subsistence. to be carried out. An important obstacle to real- The management plans for Gaoligongshan izing these plans is that part of the forest in the and Xiaoheishan reserves recognize three cat- Tongbiguan area is community owned, which egories of area: a central core area with a high limits the scope for introducing new forms of level of protection, a surrounding “experimental management. Further research is also necessary zone” (equivalent to a buffer zone) and an outer in order to ensure that the projected corridors “adjacent area” (a transitional area that is also in- will meet the needs of local species populations. tended to have a buffering function). Moreover, because of the ecological relationship between CASE STUDY 6 the separate sites, the project is supporting the NEPAL: THE TERAI ARC LANDSCAPE development of corridors between and within the two nature reserves. Nepal is home to some of the world’s most strik- The corridor linking the central and south- ing landscapes and valuable biological diversity. ern parts of the Gaoligongshan nature reserve is Seven of the world’s 10 highest mountains are to intended to ensure continued movement of tem- be found in the country, including Mount Everest, perate and subtropical species between the two and the fi ve major geomorphological zones host sites. Gaoligongshan South was formally linked diverse vegetation communities. Dense tropical with the Guchengshan site in the Xiaoheishan monsoon Sal forests and exceptionally tall grass- nature reserve in 2001 when a corridor was lands predominate in the Terai zone, while in the designated by Tengchong County and Longyang Siwaliks, Chirpine forests characterize the west District as a county-level protected area. The and central regions up to about 1,600 metres, be- main purpose of the corridor is to maintain a ing replaced by Schima-Castanopsis forests up to continuum of the vertically diverse habitats that 2,000 metres. In the east, broadleaf hill forests are characterize Gaoligongshan and Xiaoheishan. found across the entire sub-tropical zone. The Within the Xiaoheishan Nature Reserve, temperate zone between 2,000 and 3,000 metres the Forest Conservation and Community is forested with evergreen oak in west Nepal and Development Project funded the preparation of Quercus semecarpifolia, Q. lamellosa and Q. glauca a corridor development plan that aims to link in central and east Nepal. At higher altitudes, the

CCBD23_Interior_20060516.inddBD23_Interior_20060516.indd Sec1:56Sec1:56 55/16/06/16/06 3:51:253:51:25 PMPM Review of Experience with Ecological Networks, Corridors and Buffer Zones

Figure 4.2. The Terai Arc Landscape

Worldwide Fund for Nature

oak gives way to forests with blue pine and, in the Bengal tiger, the snow leopard, the red panda east, rhododendron. Fir and birch take over up to and the blue sheep. Other fauna include 858 bird 4,000 metres, with rhododendrons at the tree line species, 127 reptile species, 51 amphibian species, in the west and central regions and sub-tropical 182 fi sh species and 643 butterfl y species. mixed conifer forests with a fi r upper treeline Nepal is also one of the least developed coun- zone in the east. Above the tree line a narrow tries in the world. With less than 20 percent of zone of juniper and rhododendron scrub can be the working population employed in industry or found, merging into alpine shrub and meadows trade and services, average income is only about at higher altitudes. In all, forest covers about 35 US$ 200 per annum. At the same time, Nepal’s percent of the country’s territory, but there are population of over 25 million is growing steadily. also extensive wetlands and river systems that Most Nepalese are Hindu, but there are substan- contribute up to 40 percent of the total fl ow of tial minorities of Buddhists and Muslims. These the River Ganges. religious groupings harbour considerable cultur- This remarkable landscape harbours a rich al diversity and about 20 languages are spoken in diversity of fl ora and fauna. More than 6,500 the country. Almost half of the population lives higher plant species have been identifi ed — 133 in the Terai zone, a belt of land along the foothills of which are endangered — and 157 mammal of the Himalayas about 35 kilometres wide that species, 28 of which are endangered, including the stretches across southern Nepal and into India, Indian rhinoceros, the Asian elephant, the royal Bhutan and Bangladesh. The relations between

CCBD23_Interior_20060516.inddBD23_Interior_20060516.indd Sec1:57Sec1:57 55/16/06/16/06 3:51:263:51:26 PMPM Review of Experience with Ecological Networks, Corridors and Buffer Zones

the Nepalese and Indian parts of the Terai are Department and the National Parks and Wildlife strong, and there is considerable transboundary Conservation Department, WWF, Resources employment. However, about 20 percent of the Himalaya and other NGOs, such as the Wildlife Nepalese Terai population has no safe drinking Conservation Society. water supplies and 80 percent has no access to Working within the framework of a long- health care. Nearly half the children in Nepal term sustainable-development and conservation are underweight and average life expectancy is vision for the region, the programme aims, with- relatively low at about 60 years for both men and in 10 years, to strengthen the existing protected women. areas, conserve the remaining forests, restore As a result of the exceptionally high human degraded forests, establish community forests, pressure, environmental impacts in the Terai re- introduce effective management practices in gion are causing serious problems. The vegetation the buffer zones, create corridors between criti- has become greatly degraded by deforestation cal protected areas and introduce appropriate and fuel-wood collection. About a third of all the management practices in buffer zones. The forests have been cleared, with losses continuing programme as a whole is formalized through at about four percent a year. Surface waters are agreements with the Nepalese government which polluted by untreated waste water, and irriga- establish a legal basis for the various activities, tion and hydro-electric projects are threatening and it is supported through funds provided by the ecological integrity of the river basins still WWF, with US$ 6 million being available for the further. Poaching, which in the current political fi rst 10-year phase. climate is diffi cult to control, is a major threat Four protected areas exist in the Nepalese to endangered species such as the rhinoceros, the part of the region — two as wildlife reserves and tiger and the elephant. two as national parks, one being a World Heritage It is in response to these pressures that site. However, it is clear that, with their restricted WWF initiated the Terai Arc Landscape pro- extent and the current human pressures, these gramme. The Terai Arc is included in WWF’s protected areas are inadequate in themselves 25 Focal Ecoregions as part of the Global 200 to secure the ecological integrity of the region, list. It is also a priority area of the Save the Tiger particularly in relation to the populations of Fund. Operational since 2001 as a merger of wide-ranging species. The Terai Arc Landscape two existing projects — the Bardiya Integrated has therefore focused on fi ve priority areas: three Conservation Project and the Western Terai Tiger, sites where serious barriers to ecological continu- Rhino and Elephant Conservation Complex ity exist, Mahadevpuri, Lamahi and Dovan, and — the initiative became a joint programme two corridors, Basanta and Bardia-Katarniaghat. of Nepal’s Department of National Parks and Additional corridors between seven pro- Wildlife Conservation, the Department of tected areas in the adjacent Indian Terai are un- Forests, WWF’s Nepal Programme, local com- der development, as are linkages with protected munities and NGOs. However, although built areas across the border with India, such as the on two existing conservation projects, the Terai three-kilometre Khata corridor across the low- Arc Landscape has established far broader goals. land savannah and grassland habitats between These were formulated on the basis of a Root the Royal Bardiya National Park in Nepal and Causes Analysis Workshop that identifi ed the Katarniyaghat Wildlife Reserve in India. This main causes of environmental degradation and linkage was identifi ed as a critical area for resto- loss of biodiversity in the Terai. Expertise and ration in 2000, and restoration work commenced local knowledge was provided by the Forestry in 2001. The corridor consists of areas of good

CCBD23_Interior_20060516.inddBD23_Interior_20060516.indd Sec1:58Sec1:58 55/16/06/16/06 3:51:273:51:27 PMPM Review of Experience with Ecological Networks, Corridors and Buffer Zones

forest, degraded forest and agriculture, and it is Four community forest coordination centres adjoined by 11 community forests. Around 300 were formed in Basanta, Katarnia, Lamahi and families live in the surrounding area. Nepal’s Dovan to promote the participation of local Department of National Parks and Wildlife people in the conservation activities and to assist Conservation estimates that about 40 breeding collaboration with the community forest-user tigers survive in the neighbouring Royal Bardia groups. These actions have contributed to the National Park. Recent monitoring and reports mobilization and institutional embedment of from local villagers have confi rmed that tigers the local communities. and elephants use the corridor, particularly dur- A total of 536 hectares of degraded land were ing the rainy season when the fl ooded tributaries restored in the fi rst year of the programme. In of the Karnali River waterlog the forests across addition, a management plan and a tourism plan the Nepal-India border. were drawn up for the Royal Bardiya National These projects are being supported by edu- Park, both of which have since been endorsed cation courses for 275 local livestock herders and by the Nepalese government. Cooperation with awareness-raising programmes that are being local communities enabled the District Forest developed by 39 newly established “ecoclubs”. To Offi ce to relocate over 10,000 families who had meet the increasing demand for tree seedlings, encroached onto forest areas in the Basanta cor- 13 multi-purpose tree nurseries have been estab- ridor (although such programmes inevitably lished that together have an annual production cause local tensions and require careful manage- capacity of 330,000 seedlings. In order to expand ment if they are to secure the cooperation of the distribution of the Nepalese rhinoceros pop- both the people who are to be relocated and the ulation, 64 animals were relocated from Royal population in the area to which they are moved). Chitwan National Park to the Royal Bardiya Support to the community-forest user groups in National Park and four to Royal Shuklaphanta the Khata corridor and the Lamahi bottleneck Wildlife Reserve. Illicit hunting is being discour- also enabled the construction of 17 livestock aged by 17 units that are stationed in the pro- pens that discourage uncontrolled cattle grazing tected areas, while three new anti-poaching units in the corridors. are discouraging poaching in the corridors — the Institutional measures that support the fi rst community-based anti-poaching initiatives Terai Arc programme include the adoption of in Nepal. a National Environment Policy and Action Plan The implementation of the Terai Arc (that includes ecological guidelines) and the programme is being secured through projects National Biodiversity Action Plan. In addition, that focus on sustainable community develop- the buffer-zone concept was incorporated into ment, awareness-raising and capacity-build- the National Parks and Wildlife Conservation ing. Support on the ground is being facilitated Act, and the Buffer-Zone Development Council through the establishment of a fi eld offi ce in the was established. The Council is entitled to receive Royal Bardiya National Park that plans, imple- 50 percent of national park revenues for fi nanc- ments and monitors all the fi eld activities in the ing buffer-zone development projects. As a result four protected areas. Starting in August 2002, all four protected areas are now buttressed by the Forestry Offi ce of Palpa District handed over buffer zones. Community forests also enjoy a fi ve community forests to local communities in formal status under Nepalese law. Dovan. In addition, 26 community forest user The challenges involved in securing sus- groups were registered at the district forestry of- tainable natural resource exploitation and fi ces along the corridors and in the bottlenecks. biodiversity conservation in a poor, culturally

CCBD23_Interior_20060516.inddBD23_Interior_20060516.indd Sec1:59Sec1:59 55/16/06/16/06 3:51:293:51:29 PMPM Review of Experience with Ecological Networks, Corridors and Buffer Zones

diverse and politically unstable country such as coming primarily from the NGO community Nepal are enormous. Given the lack of institu- in cooperation with international donors and tional capacity, progress in the coming years will research institutes. WWF and Conservation depend largely on external funding and on the International are particularly active in promot- ability to work closely with local communities ing the approach across the region. Also, in col- and demonstrate that sustainable development laboration with a range of international fi nancial and biodiversity conservation deliver tangible institutions, foreign donors, private foundations benefi ts in the short term while still offering a and the respective governments, they play an im- long-term perspective. In this respect, the Terai portant role in funding the early phases of many Arc Landscape programme has already shown of the initiatives. that it can achieve important results. The scope of many of these programmes is necessarily bounded by the need to achieve CONCLUSIONS results in regions with weak institutional mechanisms. Another notable feature of many of the Despite the high level of poverty and political initiatives, particularly in the poorer countries, and institutional problems in many Asian and is the incorporation of community-develop- Pacifi c countries, a relatively large number of ment objectives into the programmes with the ecological networks and corridors are under de- aim of providing sustainable economic oppor- velopment in the region. These range from local tunities that go hand in hand with biodiversity corridor projects to national ecological-network conservation. Programmes such as the Terai Arc programmes. Flagship species such as the Asian Landscape are providing valuable lessons in this elephant, the giant panda and the tiger are an im- respect. portant focus for many of the corridor projects. To date, however, the extensive application of the ecological-network model has not yet led to a structured region-wide exchange of information and experience as has occurred in Europe and in North America. Notably, despite the extensive application of the model, only two ecological-network programmes — in South Korea and Japan — are the product of national-government policy processes. Both of these schemes share several key characteristics: they are national in scope, their development is proving to involve a protracted process and implementation to date has been limited to a series of pilot and local projects. They nevertheless represent an important strategic development for the long-term direction in which biodiversity conservation policy in South Korea and Japan is heading. The most important driving force for establishing ecological networks and corridors in most Asian and Pacifi c countries is therefore

CCBD23_Interior_20060516.inddBD23_Interior_20060516.indd Sec1:60Sec1:60 55/16/06/16/06 3:51:303:51:30 PMPM Review of Experience with Ecological Networks, Corridors and Buffer Zones

5. LATIN AMERICA AND THE CARIBBEAN

The ecological-network model was introduced da Mata Atlántica in Brazil), conservation cor- to Latin America through the Mesoamerican ridor (corredor conservación, such as Patagonia Biological Corridor in the mid-1990s. The idea in Argentina and Chile) and biogeographical for the network was conceived by the US-based corridor (corredor biogeográfi co, such as Madidi– Caribbean Conservation Corporation and the Pilón Lajas–Manuripi–Tambopata–Candamo– Wildlife Conservation Society as a means to re- Bahuaja Sonene in Bolivia and Peru). establish a natural corridor in Central America Four key elements are shared by the initia- for the Florida panther under the name Paseo tives in the region that fall within the scope of Pantera (Path of the Panther). Funds to support this review: the development of the concept were provided • integrating protected areas into a by the US Agency for International Development broader management approach (USAID), and in 1997 the proposal was formally • promoting functional connectivity adopted by the heads of state of the eight coun- • a primary focus on biodiversity conser- tries, becoming the Mesoamerican Biological vation Corridor (see box). • using land-use planning as a means to In South America the fi rst large-scale realize the goals ecological network programme to be initiated was the Vilcabamba–Amboró Conservation On the basis of these defi ning characteristics, a Corridor (see box), which grew out of a 1998 recent inventory identifi ed a total of 82 ecologi- proposal to establish a transboundary Biosphere cal-network initiatives in South America (Cracco Reserve between Peru and Bolivia. Since then, a and Guerrero, 2004; see also Table 5.1). In rela- remarkably large number of ecological-network tion to specifi c countries, the highest number initiatives have been launched. US NGOs such of programmes are underway in Brazil and as Conservation International and the World Colombia. Resources Institute have been active in promoting The inventory also collected information on the approach and a wide range of international 68 of these programmes (see Table 5.2). Both gov- donors are working with national and local governments and NGOs are active in launching the ernments and other stakeholders to support the programmes.

OVERVIEW OF THE PROGRAMMES Table 5.1. Number of ecological- network and corridor initiatives in In the Latin American context, the relatively re- South American countries cent development of ecological networks has not yet led to a common understanding of the ap- COUNTRY NUMBER Argentina 7 proach. Different terms are also used to describe Bolivia 3 the various initiatives, although the generic Brazil 14 name “corridor” is preferred following the ex- Colombia 17 ample of the Mesoamerican Biological Corridor. Chile 3 Variations include biological corridor (corredor Ecuador 9 Paraguay 3 biológico, such as Bremen–Barbas in Colombia), Venezuela 8 ecological corridor (corredor ecológico, such as Transboundary 18 Llanganates–Sangay in Ecuador), biodiversity Total 82 corridor (corredor biodiversidad, such as Central Adapted from Cracco and Guerro, 2004

CCBD23_Interior_20060516.inddBD23_Interior_20060516.indd Sec1:61Sec1:61 55/16/06/16/06 3:51:313:51:31 PMPM Review of Experience with Ecological Networks, Corridors and Buffer Zones

Central America: The Mesoamerican Biological Corridor Although covering only one half percent of the world’s land surface, Mesoamerica is home to about seven percent of the planet’s terrestrial biodiversity. This biological wealth is the result not only of Mesoamerica’s particular environmental characteristics but also of its strategic position as a land bridge connecting the biotas of the two American continents. About 30 ecoregions have been identiﬁ ed, an exceptionally large number for such a small landmass. The plan for establishing the Mesoamerican Biological Corridor distinguishes four kinds of zones: core areas, buffer zones, corridors and multiple-use areas. Together these zones cover 208,000 square kilometres, or 27 percent of Mesoamerican territory. Within this area can be found 26 indigenous groups and all the major Maya sites, such as Tikal, Chichén Itza and Copán. More detailed ecological-network maps are being developed at the national level. The basis of the Corridor’s core areas are the region’s 368 protected areas, 18 of which are larger than 100,000 hectares. Together they protect nearly 11 percent of Mesoamerica’s land area. Building on this foundation, projects in the buffer zones, corridors and multiple-use areas encourage land users to test and adopt management practices that are both biodiversity-friendly and economically viable, using incentives such as environmental service payments. Many local projects are working to secure sustainable development and biodiversity conservation on the ground. For example, the 1,500-strong Small Farmers’ Association of Talamanca in Costa Rica is now producing 20 percent of the world’s organic cocoa. An evaluation of the Corridor by the World Resources Institute in 2001 was broadly positive (Miller et al., 2001) but identiﬁ ed a number of issues that the programme needs to address if it is to achieve its objectives, such as reconciling stakeholder interests and addressing property rights and land-tenure issues. The evaluation nevertheless concluded that the initiative had built a strong foundation through actively solliciting the support of a wide range of stakeholders and actors. Its involvement of local groups — farmers, organizations of indigenous peoples, municipalities and local companies — offers the main key to the initiative’s success (Inter-American Development Bank and World Bank, 2001).

CCAD/PNUD/GEF/SICA/GTZ/World Bank

CCBD23_Interior_20060516.inddBD23_Interior_20060516.indd Sec1:62Sec1:62 55/16/06/16/06 3:51:323:51:32 PMPM Review of Experience with Ecological Networks, Corridors and Buffer Zones

Peru and Bolivia: The Vilcabamba–Amboró Conservation Corridor The Vilcabamba–Amboro ecosystem extends from the Vilcabamba mountain range in south-central Peru southeast to Amboró National Park in central Bolivia. The ecosystem is located within the tropical Andes hotspot, and the vegetation follows a gradient from tropical moist forests through cloud-forest formations to alpine grassland and scrubland. Other vegetation types, such as the unique dry Polylepis forests, are found at higher elevations. Species diversity is exceptional, with more than 6,000 plant species and more than 3,500 vertebrates. For example, in the 17,000 square-kilometre Manu National Park, over a thousand species of birds have been identifi ed and in the Tambopata reserve approximately 1,200 species of butterfl y (Critical Ecosystem Partnership Fund, 2000). About 40 different ethnic groups can be found in the region, including some indigenous groups that reject the encroachment of modern civilization. Although population density is relatively low, human pressure is having a signifi cant impact on the biodiversity. Direct threats include oil and gas exploitation, gold mining, uncontrolled logging, dam construction, road construction and the associated colonization. The fact that many protected areas are underfunded only increases their vulnerability. In 1998, the Organization of American States funded a proposal that involved the creation of a transboundary Biosphere Reserve. The proposal incorporated corridors and buffer zones into its confi guration and complemented a similar idea that was being developed by Conservation International. These developments evolved into a more ambitious ecological network called the Vilcabamba–Amboró Conservation Corridor, which is built up around large protected-area complexes composed of protected areas, multiple-use areas and indigenous peoples’ reserves. The programme now encompasses 18 protected areas, which are the core areas of a developing ecological network. Three of the areas are also indigenous reserves, and a series of Inca and pre-Inca archaeological sites are located in the network, including the world-famous Machu Picchu. The next phase in the programme is the preparation of detailed action plans. The majority of the funding for developing the Vilcabamba–Amboró Conservation Corridor comes from a range of international donors. These include, in addition to Conservation International, WWF, USAID and the Critical Ecosystem Partnership Fund (a joint initiative of Conservation International, the Global Environment Facility, the government of Japan, the MacArthur Foundation and the World Bank).

Conservation International

CCBD23_Interior_20060516.inddBD23_Interior_20060516.indd Sec1:63Sec1:63 55/16/06/16/06 3:51:343:51:34 PMPM Review of Experience with Ecological Networks, Corridors and Buffer Zones

Guadeloupe: Archipel de la initiatives. Although biodiversity conservation Guadeloupe Biosphere Reserve was the original object of all these programmes, Situated on Guadeloupe Island in the Caribbean an increasing number of the newer initiatives, Sea, this Biosphere Reserve comprises two geo- such as Ecoaméricas, are following the example graphically separate sites: • Basse-Terre, a tropical humid for- of the Mesoamerican Biological Corridor and est located in the west of the island, embracing broader sustainable development which is uninhabited and home to objectives. over 300 species of trees and shrubs. WWF is also very active in Latin America • Grand-Cul-de-Sac Marin, a bay of and is currently developing the following terres- 15,000 hectares between Basse-Terre trial and coastal ecoregion programmes: and Grande-Terre which includes coral reefs, mud fl ats, a sea-grass bed • Chihuahuan deserts and springs and mangrove forests, freshwater (Mexico) swamps forests and marshes. The • Galapagos Islands lagoon provides a habitat for turtles, • Northern Andean montane forests giant sponges, soft corals, urchins (Colombia) and fi sh. The mangrove hosts many sedentary and migratory birds (peli- • southwestern Amazonian moist forest cans, terns, moorhens, ducks, herons (Brazil/Bolivia/Peru) and kingfi shers). Parts of the reserve • Atlantic forests (Argentina/Paraguay/ also comprise a Ramsar site. Brazil) The transition areas of the Biosphere Reserve • Valdivian temperate forests (Chile) include numerous small towns and villages • Amazon River and fl oodplain (Brazil/ with many tourist facilities. About 225,500 inhabitants live permanently in the reserve and Peru) each year about 20,000 tourists visit the marine • Choco-Darien (Colombia) part of the area. Threats to the reserve include • Llanos (Venezuela/Colombia) hurricanes, tourism, anchorage on coral reefs, • Pantanal (Brazil/Bolivia) deforestation and water pollution. Following designation as a Biosphere Reserve in 1992, a management plan was In addition, a non-ecoregion project to conserve adopted in 1998 with the objectives of main- the Guianan moist forests in Surinam is under- taining biodiversity and good water quality. The way. zonation into core areas, buffer zones and tran- UNESCO’s Man and Biosphere Programme sition zones is a good example of the Biosphere includes 75 biosphere reserves in the region, in- Reserve management approach. cluding two in French overseas territories: Atoll de Taiaro (currently under revision to become the Tuamotu Biosphere Reserve) and Archipel de la Guadeloupe (see box). For an example, see the discussion of the La Amistad Binational Biosphere Reserve in Costa Rica and Panama in Ramirez Umana (2004).

UNESCO

CCBD23_Interior_20060516.inddBD23_Interior_20060516.indd Sec1:64Sec1:64 55/16/06/16/06 3:51:363:51:36 PMPM Review of Experience with Ecological Networks, Corridors and Buffer Zones

Table 5.2. Ecological-network and corridor programmes in South American countries ARGENTINA ECUADOR Iniciativa Corredor de Humedales del Litoral Fluvial de Corredor Chocó–Andino la Argentina Corredor Ecológico Llanganates–Sangay Proyecto de Biodiversidad Costera Patagónica PARAGUAY Corredor de conservación del Cóndor Andino Corredores de conservación en la Reserva de Biósfera Corredor de Interconexión entre los Parques del Bosque Mbaracayú y áreas de infl uencia Nacionales, Parques Provinciales y Áreas Protegidas Corredores ecológicos y culturales en el valle central de en la Región Triprovincial la cuenca del Plata y valles interconexos Corredor Biológico de Humedales del Centro-Oeste VENEZUELA Argentino Corredor en el Caribe entre Curaçao, Bonaire, Aves y Corredor Ecorregional Norandino Patagónico Los Roques Diseño de una Estrategia Regional de Corredores de Corredor Biológico de la Sierra de Portuguesa Conservación en el Gran Chaco Argentino Biocorredor Ramal de Calderas BOLIVIA Corredor Canaima–Alto Orinoco (part of the Guyana Corredor Amboró–Madidi Shield proposal) Corredor Amboró–Tariquía Corredor Nacional Fulquena Corredor Chiquitano–Iténez–Mamoré Corredor Papero BRAZIL Corredor Caparo Corredor da Biodiversidade do Amapá Corredor Pueblos del Sur Corredor de Biodiversidad Central da Mata Atlántica TRANSBOUNDARY INITIATIVES Corredor Centro-Amazónico o Central da Amazonía Corredor Tariquía–Baritú o Corredor Regional de los (CCA) Yungas (Argentina/Bolivia) Corredor do Descobrimento Corredores Guaporé–Itenez (Bolivia/Brazil) Corredor Norte-Amazónico Corredor Vilcabamba–Amboró (Perú/Bolivia) Corredor Oeste-Amazónico Corredor Cóndor Kutukú (Perú/Ecuador) Corredor Sul-Amazónico Corredor Chocó–Manabí (Ecuador/Colombia Corredor Ecológico Cerrado–Pantanal Corredor verde de Misiones (Paraguay/Brazil/ Corredor da Serra do Mar o Corredor Sul da Mata Argentina) Atlántica Corredor Trinacional del bosque Atlántico del Alto Corredor do Ecótono Sul-Amazónico (Amazonía Paraná (Brazil/Argentina/Paraguay) Cerrado) Propuesta de Corredor Biológico para el Huemul Corredor Ecológico Araguaia–Bananal Hippocamelus bisulcus (Argentina/Chile) Corredor Ecológico do Cerrado Corredores de Conservación en la Patagonia Corredor Ecológico Jalapão–Mangabeiras (Argentina/Chile) Corredor JICA Corredor Chaqueño (Argentina/Bolivia/Paraguay) CHILE Corredor Nor-Andino o Andes del Norte (Venezuela/ Corredor Nevados de Chillán–Laguna de la Laja Colombia) Corredor entre la cordillera de los Andes y la Cordillera Andean Bear Biological Corridor (Venezuela/Colombia/ de la Costa Peru) Colombia Área de manejo coordinado o Corredor Altoandino o Corredor Biológico Guácharos–Puracé Humedales Altoandinos (Chile/Bolivia/Argentina) Corredor Biológico Bremen–Barbas Cielos de América (Argentina/Bolivia) Corredor Guantiva–La Rusia–Iguaque de Bosques Proyecto Cooperación entre Reservas de Biosfera Altoandinos de Roble o Iguaque–Guanentá o Costeras (Uruguay/Argentina/Brazil) Guantiva–Iguaque Corredor Biogeográfi co Madidi–Pilón Lajas–Manuripi– Corredor Transandino–Amazónico Tambopata–Candamo–Bahuaja Sonene (Bolivia/ Corredor Páramo de Bordoncillo–Cerro Patascoy– Perú) Laguna de la Cocha Corredor Ecológico (Perú/Brazil) Corredor Biológico de la Cordillera Central Corredor Marino de Conservación del Pacífi co Este Corredor Dagua–Calima–Paraguas Tropical Oriental (Colombia/Ecuador/Panama/ Corredor de Naya Costa Rica) Corredor Costero del manglar Proyecto Biopacífi co Iniciativa de Conservación Escudo Caura–Guyana/the Corredor Amazonía Colombiana Guiana Shield (Venezuela/Guyana/ Surinam/French Corredor Ecológico Abierto Guiana/Brazil/Colombia) Corredor Costero Urabá–Alto Sinú Corredor Ecológico de las Américas: Ecoaméricas Corredor Laguna de Fuquene y Laguna Palacio Adapted from Cracco and Guerro, 2004. Note: the inventory does not include initiatives in Central America such as the Mesoamerican Biological Corridor 61

CCBD23_Interior_20060516.inddBD23_Interior_20060516.indd Sec1:65Sec1:65 55/16/06/16/06 3:51:383:51:38 PMPM Review of Experience with Ecological Networks, Corridors and Buffer Zones

CASE STUDY 7 is restricted to their protection cannot guarantee CORRIDORS IN THE BARBAS– the long-term survival of the species. BREMEN–CESTILLAL REGION The subregion of the Central Andes Western Watershed covers over eight million hectares. The It has been claimed that the Tropical Andes is the Flora and Fauna Sanctuary Otún–Quimbaya, most biologically diverse ecoregion in the world. with an area of just 580 hectares, is the only re- However, this ecoregion is losing its biodiversity serve within the national protected-areas system as a result of habitat change and fragmentation that harbours sub-Andean forests in the moun- (Laurance and Bierregaard, 1997; Renjifo, 1999; tain chain (Arango et al., 2003). This sanctuary, Kattan and Murcia, 2003). With over 30 million together with its neighbouring local and regional people living in the Colombian Andes system, protected areas (Ucumarí and Campoalegre) pro- human activities are impacting more than 70 tects the only sub-Andean forest in the subregion. percent of the region’s natural ecosystems (Etter, An area where relatively large remnants of 1998; Etter and Van Wyngaarden, 2000). sub-Andean forests still exist is the Rio Barbas The Central mountain range is the most de- canyon and its surroundings. This canyon forested region in Colombia, with only 10 percent contains a 790-hectare block of forest, which of the original forest cover remaining. Of these historically was protected because of its steep remnants, less than three percent are protected. topography. Located one kilometre south of the Almost all of the fragments are to be found in the Rio Barbas canyon is the Bremen Forest Reserve, upper reaches of the mountain range (Arango et which was established in the early 1970s in or- al., 2003). Habitat loss and fragmentation in the der to protect the watersheds. Bremen contains mountains (and also the rest of the Colombian 336 hectares of native forests and 411 hectares Andes) is more widespread and serious in lower of exotic conifer plantations. Since the 1990s, and medium elevations (1,500–2,500 metres). the Quindío Regional Corporation (CRQ), the It is in these areas where biodiversity is richest reserve’s owner, began removing conifer planta- (Fjedsa and Krabbe, 1990; Renjifo et al., 1997). tions and restoring the native forest through nat- In the sub-Andes, with only seven percent of ural regeneration. In the near future this reserve the land area, 54 percent of the threatened bird will encompass 747 hectares of natural forest and species of the country are found (Renjifo et al., will be the only sub-Andean protected forest in 2002). In the past, these zones were entirely cov- the Quindío region. A second large forest rem- ered by different forest types. Today, pastures for nant is found along the Cestillal canyon towards livestock, coffee plantations, exotic tree planta- the northern section of the canyon, containing tions and urban areas are the dominant elements 296 hectares of forest. of the landscape. Nonetheless, the rural parts of Bremen, Barbas and Cestillal together cover the region still host a rich biodiversity, including 1,833 hectares. Although this area is small, the re- a large number of threatened species and those serve is the most important protected area in its with a restricted distribution range. altitudinal range of the Central Andes Western Important patches of forest habitat still exist Watershed, since only 0.38 percent of the original in some parts of the mountains. These remnants forest still exists in the sub-ecoregion at this alti- are of high priority for the conservation of tude in Barbas and Bremen (1,500–2,100 metres). threatened and endemic species, especially since Barbas–Bremen–Cestillal has high topographic the areas are the only remaining available habi- complexity, which creates a variety of microhabi- tat. However, because these forest remnants are tats with diverse species assemblages. highly fragmented, a conservation strategy that

CCBD23_Interior_20060516.inddBD23_Interior_20060516.indd Sec1:66Sec1:66 55/16/06/16/06 3:51:393:51:39 PMPM Review of Experience with Ecological Networks, Corridors and Buffer Zones

A biodiversity survey of the area covering 2001. Socio-economic studies concluded that ants, trees, shrubs and birds found 95 species local people have a high level of environmental of ants belonging to 36 genera. Of these, six are awareness and are keen to be involved in con- newly discovered species and two were registered servation efforts. The establishment of corridors for the ﬁ rst time in Colombia. The survey also would also contribute to the scenic value of the found 409 species of trees and shrubs. These landscape. include 22 species that at the national level are The goal of the project is to establish forests threatened, some being endemic to Colombia. It between the Bremen Natural Reserve, the Barbas is known that 199 species of birds — the best- river canyon and the Cestillal canyon in order to studied group — are found in the area. Of these, connect these areas, both physically and func- four species are threatened at the global level: tionally. The measures involved in establishing Penelope perspicax, Grallaria alleni, Chlorochrysa the corridors will include: nitidissima and Dacnis hartlaubi (Renjifo et al., • obtaining baseline data on existing bio- 2002). Four other species with restricted ranges logical and socio-economic conditions have populations in Barbas, 20 species of birds (completed) found in Barbas are not present in Bremen and • developing a communication strategy 16 species found in Bremen are not found in to strengthen the level of participation Barbas. by local communities in the project The Barbas and Bremen watersheds provide (ongoing since 2003) a good source of quality water for about 175,000 • economic analyses to determine the people in eight municipalities and also a large viability of economic and institutional number of businesses, coffee plantations and incentives that would help secure the two tourist theme parks. Because of its land- project’s objectives (ongoing since scapes, Quindío department is the second most 2003) important tourist destination in Colombia, after • concluding agreements to reduce the the Caribbean coast. intensity of agricultural systems on Recent studies have demonstrated that private land that could then function as Bremen has lost around 20 percent of its bird a corridor (ongoing since 2003) species due to its prolonged isolation from other • land acquisition areas of similar habitat (Renjifo 1999). In Barbas, • reforestation with native trees in order however, the majority of the species populations to attract fauna, and constructing fences that have disappeared from Bremen can still be in order to prevent forest damage by found. The establishment of a corridor recon- livestock (ongoing since 2003) necting the forest blocks could therefore facilitate • establishing landscape elements, such the recolonization of these species in Bremen. as hedgerows and windbreaks, that will The proposal to strengthen connectiv- improve connectivity (ongoing since ity in the region was initiated by the Instituto 2003) Humboldt as part of the larger GEF/Netherlands • establishing a fauna tunnel under the Embassy/Colombian government project main highway Conservation and Sustainable Use of Biodiversity • monitoring focal species and vegetation in the Colombian Andes. The ecological-network cover in relation to connectivity proposal was elaborated in 1999 in collaboration with local and regional environmental authori- Potential sites for corridors between Barbas, ties, and its implementation commenced in mid- Bremen and Cestillal have been identiﬁ ed on

CCBD23_Interior_20060516.inddBD23_Interior_20060516.indd Sec1:67Sec1:67 55/16/06/16/06 3:51:413:51:41 PMPM Review of Experience with Ecological Networks, Corridors and Buffer Zones

Figure 5.1. The location of Barbas–Bremen–Cestillal

Diana Patricia Ramírez

the basis of studies, aerial photographs and data establishment of larger corridors will require the from the land registry. One potential scenario is acquisition of land and taking valuable agricul- to establish fi ve corridors of about 100 metres tural land out of production. wide in order to connect Bremen and Barbas The primary actors in the project are pri- forests, with two other corridors of the same vate landowners, the municipal government of width connecting Barbas and Cestillal. Another Filandia, the regional autonomous corporations, scenario is to establish a single corridor 500 me- two logging companies and local communities. ters wide connecting Barbas and Bremen and a Other parties include neighbouring municipali- second corridor of the same width connecting ties that benefi t from the protection of the forests Barbas and Cestillal. The latter scenario offers within the project area (through measures that certain advantages because it would be easier to serve to protect the watershed, for example) establish and monitor and it would also have a and local environmental NGOs. All the main shorter boundary length, thereby reducing edge actors have responded positively to the project, effects. However, the fi nal result will be strongly in some cases becoming active and committed infl uenced by the results of negotiations with the supporters. One municipality is providing initial landowners (although 100 metres is regarded as fi nancing for land acquisition and the establish- the minimum acceptable width). ment of corridors. Bilateral agreements with The physical establishment of the corridors municipalities that support the project are a started in 2003 and is progressing well. The source of additional funds that can be directed majority of the actions can be undertaken with to the protection of the watershed. This refl ects the participation of local people. However, the the well-established tradition of collaboration

CCBD23_Interior_20060516.inddBD23_Interior_20060516.indd Sec1:68Sec1:68 55/16/06/16/06 3:51:423:51:42 PMPM Review of Experience with Ecological Networks, Corridors and Buffer Zones

Figure 5.2. The proposed locations of the corridors in Barbas–Bremen–Cestillal (delineated in yellow, green, red and blue)

Diana Patricia Ramírez

between municipalities and private landowners the world. At the same time the forest serves the in promoting measures such as reforestation crucial functions of regulating water run-off and programmes and hedgerows. thereby preventing soil erosion. A substantial part of the Atlantic Forest has CASE STUDY 8 been lost in recent times: between 1990 and 1995, BRAZIL: THE ATLANTIC FOREST for example, more than 500,000 hectares were CENTRAL CORRIDOR deforested, largely through housing development and the expansion of arable and livestock The Atlantic Forest biome originally extended farming, but also industrial activities. As a result across 1.3 million square kilometres — about much of the remaining area of Atlantic Forest is 15 percent of Brazilian territory — but today severely fragmented. less than 100,000 square kilometres remain. The It was in these circumstances that a ﬁ rst biome is divided into two main ecoregions: the proposal for the Atlantic Forest Central Corridor coastal Atlantic Forest and the interior Atlantic was developed by the Brazilian Ministry of Forest. Both run from sea level up to 1,800 Environment in 1998. The ecological network metres, which results in an exceptionally high is located on the Atlantic coast in the states of degree of biological and landscape diversity. Espiritu Santo and Bahia, extending for more Approximately 20,000 species of vascular plants than 1,200 kilometres from north to south and can be found — of which 6,000 are considered covering a total area of 86,000 square kilometres. endemic — and about 1,300 species of verte- This tract of land is biologically diverse: it is one brates (not including ﬁ sh), of which over 500 of the main centres of endemism in the Atlantic are endemic. This species richness places the Forest and supports several species threatened biome as the sixth most important hotspot in with extinction. A study in a private reserve

CCBD23_Interior_20060516.inddBD23_Interior_20060516.indd Sec1:69Sec1:69 55/16/06/16/06 3:51:433:51:43 PMPM Review of Experience with Ecological Networks, Corridors and Buffer Zones

Figure 5.3. The location of the Atlantic Forest

CCBD23_Interior_20060516.inddBD23_Interior_20060516.indd Sec1:70Sec1:70 55/16/06/16/06 3:51:443:51:44 PMPM Review of Experience with Ecological Networks, Corridors and Buffer Zones

near Ilheus, Bahia, found 454 tree species in just promote the restoration of ecosystems a single hectare of forest — the highest known in priority areas diversity of tree species in the world. • strengthening cooperative biodiversity Within the Atlantic Forest Central Corridor, conservation actions between public the total area under protection (including federal, agencies, the private sector and civil state, municipal, privately owned and indigenous society sites) represents just fi ve percent of its total area. • developing and promoting the adoption At the southern extreme of Bahia, one of the two of incentives that encourage sustainable most important blocks of the Corridor includes use in private and public economic sec- four national parks. However, protected-area tors management faces serious challenges. Human • promoting the integration of conserva- pressure on the sites is high and in most of the tion strategies and economic develop- surrounding areas land use is not sustainable. ment policies The most serious threats include hunting, forest fi res, uncontrolled tourism, illegal land occupa- The organizational structure of the project tion and palmetto cutting. Moreover, within the involves four main elements: a General protected areas about 95 percent of the land is Coordination Unit (which manages the rela- privately owned. A particular conservation chal- tions between the implementing agencies), the lenge in the states of Espiritu Santo and Bahia is Management Committees (which monitor and that the average size of the core areas is only 3,200 evaluate project implementation), the State hectares, which is too small to provide suffi cient Coordination Units (which provide operational habitat for many of the species populations. support to the implementing agencies and the In Espiritu Santo, for example, of the 372,862 Management Committees) and local parties hectares of native forest only 72,263 hectares are (including civil organizations, the private sector, formally protected (equivalent to three percent municipalities and other stakeholders). of the total area of the state forests). Implementation of the programme com- The general objective of the Atlantic Forest menced in 2002. The initial phase involves the Central Corridor is to improve the effective development of a management plan that speci- conservation of the Atlantic Forest’s biodiver- fi es the strategies, actions and resources for its sity. This is to be secured through establishing implementation. The most important provisions an ecological network in combination with a are: participatory socio-environmental management • developing a working proposal at the programme. Six specifi c types of measures are bioregional scale for the conservation under development: of the entire area of the ecological net- • formulating alternative strategies aimed work at maintaining and/or increasing forest • specifying processes and tools that en- ecosystem connectivity sure the sustainability of the areas to be • developing and implementing innova- conserved tive and replicable models for biodiver- • providing for the sustainable use sity conservation on private land of natural resources through socio- • developing technical, economic, legal economic development strategies and institutional tools to help secure outside the protected areas the integrity of the ecosystems and • indicating productive activities that are appropriate for biodiversity conserva-

CCBD23_Interior_20060516.inddBD23_Interior_20060516.indd Sec1:71Sec1:71 55/16/06/16/06 3:51:463:51:46 PMPM Review of Experience with Ecological Networks, Corridors and Buffer Zones

Figure 5.4. The proposed Burarama–Pacotuba–Cafundó corridor within the Atlantic Forest Corridor

tion and restoration, and also develop- • establishing priority areas for the estab- ing alternative forms of natural-resource lishment of corridors exploitation • developing an environmental, social, The development of the management plan was economic and institutional informa- carried out in several phases. These included: tion system that is integrated into a GIS, • preparatory phase: GIS and mapping together with management procedures work, database management, etc. that allow the periodic updating of the • evaluation phase: thematic analysis of data sectoral issues, assessment of the political, • establishing a monitoring system that administrative and socio-environmental generates the information necessary to structure, land-use trends and analysis devise appropriate management meas- of the negative impacts in relation to the ures individual corridors

CCBD23_Interior_20060516.inddBD23_Interior_20060516.indd Sec1:72Sec1:72 55/16/06/16/06 3:51:483:51:48 PMPM Review of Experience with Ecological Networks, Corridors and Buffer Zones

Table 5.3. Typology of existing ecological network approaches in South America

Sustainable- Biological Corridor Ecological Corridor Conservation Corridor Development Corridor Promotes genetic Reﬂ ects ecosystem vision Involvement of stake- Integration of political, exchange Physical and functional holders social and environ- Focus on conserving connectivity Incorporates sustainable mental aspects priority species Incorporates principles use Active involvement of Linear structure of landscape ecology Greater geographical political and eco- Linear connectivity Involves large-scale land scale nomic stakeholders Physical connection planning Provides for connectiv- Connectivity also aims between habitat frag- Strengthens ecological ity between both to produce economic ments processes protected and non- beneﬁ ts Facilitates movement of Incorporates sustainable protected areas at the Emphasis in sustainable species use and conservation regional scale production Involves large-scale land objectives Incorporates both Linkages take full account planning ecological and social of ecosystem, infra- objectives into cor- structure and broader ridor design policy objectives Adapted from Cracco and Guerro, 2004

• formulation of alternative strategies: CONCLUSIONS developing conservation scenarios for the network, involving landscape Although the ecological-network model was modelling, selecting and prioritizing introduced to Latin America just 10 years ago, conservation areas and developing the a remarkably large number of programmes are main elements of the action plan now underway. Indeed, at least one programme • fi nal proposal: developing the general is underway in every Latin America country. proposal for the implementation of the A recent review of ecological networks in corridor, including the social and insti- South America assessed the characteristics of tutional validation of the fi nal manage- the various programmes and developed a typol- ment plan ogy that distinguishes between four different approaches to the ecological-network model (which Specifi c management plans for three priority in Latin America is referred to as “corridor”): areas within the ecological network are currently “biological corridor”, “ecological corridor”, “con- being developed. The plans, which involve a servation corridor” and “sustainable-develop- more detailed analysis of ecosystem functioning, ment corridor” (see Table 5.3). Although it was will defi ne strategies for site management within clear that the typology refl ects a continuum of the broader framework of the programme’s approaches rather than four distinct models, the objectives. This project area lies within the Mata classifi cation illustrates some important features Atlantica Biosphere Reserve, established by the of how ecological networks are developing across Brazilian authorities under the UNESCO MAB the continent. Programme in 1992 and covering some 29.4 mil- To an important extent the typology also re- lion hectares. fl ects a temporal evolution of ecological-network thinking in South America. Most of the early

CCBD23_Interior_20060516.inddBD23_Interior_20060516.indd Sec1:73Sec1:73 55/16/06/16/06 3:51:503:51:50 PMPM Review of Experience with Ecological Networks, Corridors and Buffer Zones

networks focus predominantly on biodiversity sity in many areas, and ensuring that measures conservation at the landscape scale. However, as a directed at promoting sustainable development result of the realization that the involvement of a also provide economic benefi ts to local commu- wide range of stakeholders facilitates the achieve- nities in the short term. ment of biodiversity conservation objectives and promotes community support, more recent initiatives are building broader sustainable-development objectives into their development. The different approaches also refl ect the context of a particular initiative: whether, for example, it is to be established in a sparsely populated region, such as Vilcabamba–Amboró, or a more highly developed area, such as parts of Mesoamerica. In addition to differences between approaches, the typology highlights a number of interesting common features. Thus, apart from the obvious elements of ecosystem management, connectivity and building on existing protected areas, it is notable that even the “ecological corridors” and the “conservation corridors” take account of broader sustainable development objectives in their programmes. Moreover, the use of land-use planning as a key instrument to establish the ecological networks is a striking feature, particularly given the relatively weak institutional structures in many regions and the unusually large scale of many of the initiatives (although the expert and fi nancial support provided by international donors to many of the programmes is helping to strengthen institutional capacity). Most programmes are also actively promoting the involvement of stakeholders in their development and implementation. Major challenges nevertheless remain for these programmes. Most initiatives, being relatively recent, have not yet progressed to an advanced phase of implementation, although valuable experience has been gained through a wide range of local projects. Nevertheless, it is on the ground that the most serious obstacles will be met, such as the illegal exploitation of natural resources (which characterizes many regions in Latin America), property rights and land-tenure confl icts, the exceptionally high ethnic diver-

CCBD23_Interior_20060516.inddBD23_Interior_20060516.indd Sec1:74Sec1:74 55/16/06/16/06 3:51:513:51:51 PMPM Review of Experience with Ecological Networks, Corridors and Buffer Zones

6. AFRICA

Protected areas in much of Africa date back to Over the past twenty years African conser- the colonial period. For example, in southern vationists have started to question the effi cacy of and eastern Africa, the British occupied present- strict protected-area boundaries. This concern day South Africa, Lesotho, Swaziland, Botswana, comes from the fact that many species are mo- Zimbabwe, Zambia, Malawi, Tanzania and Kenya. bile and freely move into and out of protected Namibia was occupied by Germany but was later areas. In fact, some of the protected areas tend to annexed to South Africa before gaining national confi ne some wildlife species into areas smaller independence. Angola and Mozambique were than their preferred ranges. Intrusive human under Portuguese rule until they gained national activities, such as the erection of fences to sepa- independence in the mid-1970s. rate wildlife from livestock for reasons of disease The land tenure systems in most of these control, have also cut across the established mi- territories were such that prime productive land gration routes of some species. These and other was reserved for the settlers while native popula- factors have led to a growing realization of the tions were confi ned to densely populated, mar- need to extend conservation efforts into territo- ginal lands of very low productivity. Later, the ries outside protected areas and to allow linkages colonial governments — partly responding to between and within protected areas. international calls to set up special conservation A further impetus for the development of areas and partly to arrest the rapid depletion of ecological networks is the emergence over the wildlife caused by commercial hunting — began past 10 to 15 years of the concept of transbound- to set up national parks, game reserves and other ary natural-resources management (see, for ex- protected areas. In many cases, however, natives ample, Van der Linde et al., 2001). This arose in were seen as poachers, and game rangers were part from the challenge posed by the existence of trained to keep them out of these “protected a protected area in one country abutting a non- areas”. Native populations therefore felt doubly conservation area in the adjacent country, but expropriated — having lost both their tradi- also from a desire to link protected areas across tional agricultural lands and their rights and ac- territorial borders. cess to exploiting wildlife (Murphree, 1990). Not These landscape approaches, as opposed to surprisingly, very few protected areas have been site-specifi c management measures, are proving created in the post-independence era. to be important drivers in the growing interest in Thus, the sites that were formally protected the ecological-network model in Africa. for conservation reasons were those that were least habitable by the colonists, although that OVERVIEW OF THE PROGRAMMES does not mean that there was no human occupation of the areas: many of them were occupied The restoration or establishment of corridors by native populations who, in some cases, had to that allow large game species to move between be moved to make way for the protected areas. protected areas has a long history in Africa. However, population growth, with its concomi- For example, in 1926 the Kibale Forest Game tant demand for land coupled with advances in Corridor was established in Uganda (see box). agricultural techniques and improved disease However, human pressure on the land combined control, has led to steadily greater human pres- with poor management ensured that many of sure on the protected areas. As a result, many these corridors failed to maintain the conditions of the protected areas have increasingly become that were necessary to provide connectivity. islands of nature where the boundaries have be- Some protected areas remain linked with come more sharply defi ned. their surrounding landscapes. For example, the

CCBD23_Interior_20060516.inddBD23_Interior_20060516.indd Sec1:75Sec1:75 55/16/06/16/06 3:51:523:51:52 PMPM Review of Experience with Ecological Networks, Corridors and Buffer Zones

Uganda: Confl icts in Elephant Migration Corridors Biodiversity conservation in Uganda faces tremendous challenges: fi nancial resources are extremely limited, institutional capacity is low and human pressure on natural resources is high. In practice this often leads to local resistance to establishing new protected areas and to the encroachment of existing sites. For example, the Kibale Forest Game Corridor in the southwest of Uganda was established in 1926 to allow large game mammals to move between the Kibale Forest and the Queen Elizabeth National Park. However, the corridor was poorly managed and by 1990 had lost almost all its special biodiversity value due to encroachment by 40,000 settlers and the clearing of most of the natural forest and elephant grass for cultivation. Monitoring showed that in 1991 the corridor was no longer used by elephants, Uganda kob, waterbuck or buffalo. Moreover, the number of elephants in the Kibale Forest and the Queen Elizabeth National Park had declined from 3,000 in 1973 to 500 by 1989 and their migration patterns had also changed. To rectify this situation, the Ugandan government evicted 30,000 settlers from the corridor in 1992 and a year later designated the corridor and the Kibale Forest as a national park. Although the designation of such sites enhances their protection, the root causes of human–biodiversity confl icts often remain and continue to hinder conservation measures. For example, in three areas elsewhere in Uganda where there is a need to maintain or restore landscape linkages for elephants, proposals for new corridors have been rejected by the local communities due to the need of the expanding populations for access to land.

Environment Consultants Ltd.

CCBD23_Interior_20060516.inddBD23_Interior_20060516.indd Sec1:76Sec1:76 55/16/06/16/06 3:51:533:51:53 PMPM Review of Experience with Ecological Networks, Corridors and Buffer Zones

Sapo National Park, which was created in 1983, Africa and Zimbabwe. The proposed Kavango- was Liberia’s fi rst fully protected area. It covers Zambezi Transfrontier Conservation Area will an area of 107,300 hectares, consisting of lowland span parts of Angola, Botswana, Namibia, Zambia rainforest, swampy areas, dryland and riparian and Zimbabwe. The project, a collaborative effort forests, and it represents the foremost intact for- between Conservation International, wildlife est ecosystem in Liberia. The park nevertheless organizations, government agencies, NGOs and remains reasonably connected by forested cor- several donors, represents the largest contiguous ridors to several other forest areas to the north, wilderness, wetland and wildlife area in southwest and southeast, extending into Côte d’Ivoire. ern Africa. The initiative aims to restore wildlife Other programmes have focused on improv- migration routes and relieve unsustainable pres- ing the management of land around protected sures on habitats and communities. Although areas, with the aim of strengthening their bio- transboundary natural-resources management diversity value and also serving as buffer zones. is normally understood to bridge international These programmes include the Administrative boundaries, the approach is also apparent within Management Design for Game Management countries where the management of natural Areas in Zambia, Wildlife Management Areas in resources may transcend other jurisdictional Botswana and the Communal Areas Management boundaries, such as district or provincial bound- Programme for Indigenous Resources in aries where similar issues to national borders Zimbabwe. Essentially, these programmes aim to arise. mobilize and empower communities living close Most recently, WWF’s ecoregion pro- to protected areas by giving them access rights grammes are applying the ecological-network to wildlife and rights to controlled utilization model in a more consistent way to some large ar- of wildlife. The communities make decisions eas in Africa. The current terrestrial programmes on hunting quotas, setting up tourist facilities in Africa include the following: and joint-venture business enterprises with • East African coastal forests the private sector. Economic benefi ts from the • Madagascar dry/spiny forests wildlife resources are intended to go directly to • western Congo basin moist forests, the communities who decide themselves on how where fi ve projects are being carried out best to share the benefi ts. UNESCO’s Man and (see box) Biosphere Programme has applied this broader • Guinean moist forests management approach to 87 Biosphere Reserves • Miombo (Central and Eastern Miombo including two transboundary biospere reserves woodlands and Zambezian woodlands (the “W” region of Benin, Burkina Faso and and savannas) Niger, and the Senegal delta between Mauritania and Senegal) in 39 African countries, the fi rst WWF is also managing the following large-scale reserve dating from 1976. non-ecoregion programmes in Africa: Linking existing protected areas and extend- • Fynbos (South Africa) ing conservation management to surrounding • Rift Valley lakes areas through transboundary natural-resources • Niger river basin management has led to the establishment of a • northeast Congo basin moist forests/ number of transnational parks. Examples in- central Congo basin moist forests clude the Kgalagadi Transfontier Park between • Albertine Rift montane forests (Kenya) Botswana and South Africa and the Great Limpopo Transfrontier Park shared by Mozambique, South

CCBD23_Interior_20060516.inddBD23_Interior_20060516.indd Sec1:77Sec1:77 55/16/06/16/06 3:51:543:51:54 PMPM Review of Experience with Ecological Networks, Corridors and Buffer Zones

Cameroon–Gabon–Congo: The Tri-Dom Ecological Network The moist forests of the Congo basin are part of WWF’s Global 200 ecoregions (Kamdem Toham et al., 2001 and 2003). WWF is implementing fi ve projects in this region: TNS, TRIDOM, Gamba, Salonga and Lac Tumba-Lac Tele. TRIDOM is one of the most advanced projects. The interzone rainforest around the junction of Cameroon, Gabon and Congo harbours one of the largest tracts of primary tropical rainforest in Africa, with an area of 141,400 square kilometres. It is also host to biodiversity of global importance. This includes the world’s largest remaining populations of forest elephants, lowland gorillas, chimpanzees and forest buffalo. However, the rainforest is seriously threatened by human and economic activities, particularly hunting — a large and growing market exists for meat in the surrounding urban centres — and logging, which fragments the forest and increases the opportunities for hunting still further. The indigenous population comprises BaAka and BaKola pygmies. These peoples were formerly hunter- gatherers but are now becoming increasingly settled, both through their own choice and because of government policies. There are also a number of Bantu tribes with whom the pygmies have a complex, largely interdependent social relationship. Currently, almost 25 percent of the forest lies within several protected areas. However, in all three countries severe limitations in institutional capacity are impeding effective management. In the mid-1990s, these problems persuaded several conservation NGOs to launch an initiative to establish an ecological network across the region that can provide the framework for effective, long-term management. The discussions resulted in March 1999 in the adoption by the three governments of the Yaoundé Declaration, which established a framework for strengthening biodiversity conservation and the sustainable use of the forest’s resources through a broad stakeholder process. The focal points of the Global Environment Facility in the three countries have endorsed the project and a tri-lateral coordination unit is being established to facilitate cooperation. WWF and ECOFAC have been requested by the three governments to provide expert assistance in formulating and implementing the programme with fi nancing through the Global Environment Facility and bilateral donors. The Declaration’s objectives will be realized through an ecological network that is to be established over a period of 10 years. The plans provide for the establishment of a physical network of 40,000 square kilometres in extent together with a complementary management strategy that will apply to a total of 130,000 square kilometres. The immediate priority for action will be the areas that lie between the existing protected areas of Ngoïla-Mintom (Cameroon), Ivindo-Karangoua-Djoua (Congo) and the Djoua (Gabon) which have a rich fauna, a sparse human population and a relatively low potential for logging. These circumstances offer a good opportunity for establishing corridors between critical unprotected sites and the existing protected areas. A second priority concerns the forest access roads that are under construction, since their presence will result in intensifi ed hunting pressures. The creation of buffer zones and the strengthening of the land-use planning system will therefore take a prominent role in the network development strategy.

Worldwide Fund for Nature

CCBD23_Interior_20060516.inddBD23_Interior_20060516.indd Sec1:78Sec1:78 55/16/06/16/06 3:51:553:51:55 PMPM Review of Experience with Ecological Networks, Corridors and Buffer Zones

Figure 6.1. The Four Corners Transboundary Natural-Resources Management Area

African Wildlife Foundation

Other relevant initiatives include the Cape Floristic region in South Africa (Sandwith et al., 2004), the Maloti-Drakensberg Transfrontier Conservation and Development Project in Lesotho and South Africa (Zunckel et al., 2004) and the Albertine Rift Region in Uganda, Rwanda, Burundi, Tanzania, the Democratic Republic of Congo and Zambia (Plumptre, 2004).

CCBD23_Interior_20060516.inddBD23_Interior_20060516.indd Sec1:79Sec1:79 55/16/06/16/06 3:51:583:51:58 PMPM Review of Experience with Ecological Networks, Corridors and Buffer Zones

CASE STUDY 9 corridors linking Hwange National Park BOTSWANA, NAMIBIA, ZAMBIA AND in Zimbabwe with Chobe National Park ZIMBABWE: THE FOUR CORNERS in Botswana and Zambezi National Park TRANSBOUNDARY NATURAL- in Zimbabwe) RESOURCES MANAGEMENT • standardizing fi shery monitoring meth- AREA (THE KAZUNGULA ods HEARTLANDS PROJECT) • regulating commercial river activities in the riparian states The Four Corners Transboundary Natural- • encouraging all the traditional chiefs Resources Management Area stretches across within the Management Area to sign 220,000 square kilometres at the junction of a memorandum of understanding on Botswana, Namibia, Zambia and Zimbabwe. collaboration in the management of About half the area is formally protected: the natural resources Chobe National Park and Moremi Game Reserve • developing general land-use in Botswana, the Mudumo, Mamili and Bwabwata manage ment plans within parts of the National Parks in Namibia, Kafue, Mosi-oa-Tinya Management Area and Sioma Ngwezi in Zambia and the Hwange • promoting community/private-sector and Zambezi National Parks in Zimbabwe. joint-venture partnerships as conserva- Several protected forest sites in Botswana and tion business ventures Zimbabwe also fall within the Management Area. The land outside the protected areas is used for USAID provided fi nancial support for the the various forms of arable and animal husbandry, fi rst three-year phase of the projec, but funding but several projects aimed at enhancing commu- to continue the work is being provided by the nity-based natural-resources management with European Union. The current activities by the a primary focus on ecotourism are underway. African Wildlife Foundation are focusing on The Four Corners project started in 2000 a limited number of priority areas within the and is being implemented by the African Wildlife Management Area, known collectively as the Foundation with funding from the USAID Kazungula Heartlands. The main conservation Regional Offi ce for Southern Africa. Four objec- targets in these sites, which cover a total of 8,900 tives have been defi ned: square kilometres, are as follows: • to improve landscape management and • Systems: the management of specifi c sites • river systems • to develop or improve conservation • wildlife migration corridors, par- business ventures and partnerships ticularly for elephants • to support policy and the institutional • woodland/grassland mosaics environment in the Management Area • Communities: • to disseminate widely information on • wetlands the Management Area • representative woodlands: teak, mopane and acacia In order to achieve these objectives a number of • Species assemblages: activities have been planned, such as: • fl ood-plain and semi-aquatic ante- • the identifi cation and mapping of game lope (red lechwe, puku and water corridors where game species move buck) between protected areas (which include

CCBD23_Interior_20060516.inddBD23_Interior_20060516.indd Sec1:80Sec1:80 55/16/06/16/06 3:51:593:51:59 PMPM Review of Experience with Ecological Networks, Corridors and Buffer Zones

• predator/prey interactions: lions • a working group comprising directors with ungulates, livestock and people of wildlife from the Four Corners states • cheetahs had been established • birds of prey • giraffe/impala interactions with CASE STUDY 10 woodlands KENYA: THE WILDLIFE • Species: CONSERVATION LEASE PROGRAMME • native fi sh (bream, tigerfi sh) • declining or threatened species Nairobi Park is home to a wide range of mam- (tsessebe, rhino, wild dog, Chobe mals, including lions, zebra, wildebeest, im- bush buck, sitatunga, lion, leopard, pala, giraffe, various types of buck and antelope. cheetah, puku, sable and roan ante- During the dry season both zebra and wildebeest lopes) are concentrated in the park. With the onset of • medicinal plants, endemic plants the wet season, the animals migrate southwards to the wildebeest calving zones in Amboseli At the end of the initial phase of this project the National Park, a distance of about 200 kilome- following achievements had been secured: tres. These migrations are crucial to the survival • all chiefs in the Management Area had of the populations of zebra and wildebeest in the signed a memorandum of understand- park (Gichohi, 2002; see also Figure 6.2). ing to collaborate on natural-resource Twenty years ago, the area between Nairobi management Park in the north and Amboseli National Park in • three wildlife corridors had been identi- the south was not heavily used by humans. This fi ed, two of which had been mapped has now changed, however, and an increasing • an inventory of ecological monitoring proportion of the land is now farmed (see Figure systems had been developed 6.3). • standardized fi sheries monitoring Most of the land through which the zebra methods had been piloted and wildebeest travel is privately owned by • aquatic biodiversity surveys had been the Masaai, who are cattle farmers. However, conducted for the Upper Zambezi dur- as the zebra and the wildebeest migrate they ing low- and high-water periods are followed by predators — lions, cheetahs • a large carnivore-research programme and leopards — and it is not unusual for these had been established predators to kill Masaai livestock. The annual • Conservation International had award- migrations are therefore viewed very negatively ed a grant for research on the status of by the Masaai. The need to manage this confl ict elephant populations persuaded the Kenya Wild Service, the African • a general land-use management plan Wildlife Foundation and other partners to initi- had been developed for the Chobe ate the Wildlife Conservation Lease Programme. Enclave The programme covers an area of 2,500 • a process to develop an agreement be- square kilometres that extends from the Nairobi tween Zambia and Zimbabwe to regu- National Park through the migratory routes to late commercial river activities on the the wildebeest calving zones in the south. Its goal Zambezi had been initiated is to change the attitudes of the Masaai livestock • a survey of wattled cranes had been owners to the predators so that they accept undertaken in the Okavango delta that the migrating herds can continue to pass

CCBD23_Interior_20060516.inddBD23_Interior_20060516.indd Sec1:81Sec1:81 55/16/06/16/06 3:52:003:52:00 PMPM Review of Experience with Ecological Networks, Corridors and Buffer Zones

Figure 6.2. Wildlife and livestock movements in the Athi-Kapiti

Gichohi, 2002

through their lands. This is to be achieved pri- that was covered by the programme increased marily through fi nancial incentives. Landowners from 87 hectares in 2000 to over 8,400 hectares in who join the programme receive compensation 2004. The current annual payment to landown- for any livestock lost to predators. Participants ers who “give away” land for wildlife is equivalent also receive a fi xed annual payment whether or to US$ 10 per hectare. On average, participating not they lose livestock. In return the landowners landowners receive US $400 to 800 per year that are expected to permit the movement of wildlife is paid in three instalments. Cash compensation through their lands. for livestock lost to predators is about US$ 30 per The Wildlife Conservation Lease Programme animal. These payments are fi nanced through started in March 2000. Initially just two families funds that are raised by the project team from do- participated in the scheme, but by October 2004 nations. Partners that have donated funds to the 120 families had joined the project and many project include Friends of the Nairobi National more were on the waiting list. The area of land Park, the Wildlife Trust, the International Fund

CCBD23_Interior_20060516.inddBD23_Interior_20060516.indd Sec1:82Sec1:82 55/16/06/16/06 3:52:013:52:01 PMPM Review of Experience with Ecological Networks, Corridors and Buffer Zones

Figure 6.3. Land-use changes in Athi-Kapiti

Gichohi, 2002

for Animal Welfare and the Wildlife Foundation. CONCLUSIONS The project managers have also set up an endowment fund from which it hopes to continue to The challenge of maintaining landscape-scale fund the project. ecological processes in the face of human pres- The long-term feasibility of the programme sures was probably recognized in Africa before depends on the stability and sustainability of the any other continent. For many decades, however, endowment fund. However, Nairobi National it was associated solely with the conspicuous is- Park, which receives about 24,000 foreign visitors sue of long-distance movements by game species. each month, raises about US$ 720,000 per month This was not only an issue of importance to a very through the entry fee for these tourists of US$ limited group, the actions taken to conserve these 30. There is therefore considerable potential for species and to protect valuable areas also served raising funds, although according to an ofﬁ cial to exacerbate the divisions between settlers and from the Kenya Wildlife Service this income goes native populations — both economically and to the national treasury. geographically. In these circumstances, proposals to establish protected areas that prevent access to natural resources or to take conservation action on land that provides only a marginal livelihood

CCBD23_Interior_20060516.inddBD23_Interior_20060516.indd Sec1:83Sec1:83 55/16/06/16/06 3:52:023:52:02 PMPM Review of Experience with Ecological Networks, Corridors and Buffer Zones

to large numbers of natives inevitably came to be for illegal hunting. Dealing with these kinds of associated with colonial methods that disadvan- problems is a major task for large-scale conserva- taged local populations still further. tion programmes, especially those modelled on Perhaps more than on any other continent, ecological-network principles. the support of local comunities for landscape- scale conservation is a crucial issue in Africa, whereby the promise of sustainable livelihoods becomes the central challenge. In most African countries, especially in southern Africa, land in rural areas is either communally owned or state- owned, or both. The number of “benefi ciaries” from schemes such as wildlife corridors is usually so large that the individual benefi t is very small. There is also an increasing perception that governments and conservation agencies are focusing more on wild nature than on human needs. Setting aside land for corridors can therefore be perceived as a loss of land for agriculture. Given this historical legacy and the severe lack of resources, it is not surprising that relatively few ecological-network initiatives, corridors and buffer zones have been developed or that, where programmes exist, their implementation has been impeded by intractable problems. Thus, corridors for game species often confl ict with the subsistence needs of local populations, and transboundary conservation management programmes can be perceived as weakening the nation state and empowering communities across national or local government boundaries. This raises fundamental issues on the nature of borders. Should natural-resource management objectives determine where boundaries should be drawn? What is the status of national borders, which were imposed by colonists who have since relinquished power but are now promoting new boundaries in the form of protected areas and ecological networks? At the same time, large areas are confronted with the over-exploitation of timber which, in addition to its impacts on biodiversity, both reduces the natural resources available to local populations and increases access to the remaining areas of forest, thereby increasing opportunities

CCBD23_Interior_20060516.inddBD23_Interior_20060516.indd Sec1:84Sec1:84 55/16/06/16/06 3:52:033:52:03 PMPM Review of Experience with Ecological Networks, Corridors and Buffer Zones

7. MEETING THE CHALLENGE

If one overriding conclusion can be drawn from Convention agreements to conserve popula- this global review of experience, it is that pro- tions of migratory species. Bearing in mind that grammes that aim to conserve biodiversity at the ecological networks and corridors only began to landscape, ecosystem or ecoregion scale through generate broad interest in the mid-1990s, this is a interconnected and buffered systems of protected remarkable development. areas are moving into the mainstream of conser- In fact, the changes that we are witnessing vation practice. Moreover, based on the number are more fundamental than simply the scale and of such programmes that have been initiated the confi guration of the territories that are man- around the world in recent years, it would be fair aged for conservation purposes: they extend to to conclude that the increasingly broad applica- the management objectives, competences, tech- tion of the ecological network represents one of niques and skills that are applied, the perceptions the most signifi cant strategic developments in that underly the programmes, the involvement conservation planning over the past decade. A of local communities and the sources of funding. few simple fi gures are suffi cient to demonstrate Ecological networks are above all a manifestation the magnitude of the shift: this review, although of an array of new insights into how conserva- describing only a proportion of the initiatives tion needs can effectively be addressed. Indeed, that are currently underway, nevertheless traced when viewed in a broader context these changes about 200 ecological networks, corridors and amount to a paradigm shift in protected-areas comparable projects, plus 26 fl yways, 482 planning, as Phillips (2003) has elegantly dem- Biosphere Reserves in 102 countries and 11 Bonn onstrated (see Table 7.1; see also Crofts, 2004).

Table 7.1. The changing paradigm of protected areas

AS IT WAS AS IT IS BECOMING Protected Areas Were: Protected Areas Are: Objectives • Set aside for conservation • Run also with social and economic objectives • Established mainly for spectacular • Often set up for scientiﬁ c, economic and cultural wildlife and scenic protection reasons • Managed mainly for visitors and tourists • Managed with local people more in mind • Valued as wilderness • Valued for the cultural importance of “wilderness” • About protection • Also about restoration and rehabilitation Governance • Run by central government • Run by many partners Local people • Planned and managed against people • Run with, for, and in some cases by local people • Managed without regard to local • Managed to meet the needs of local people opinions Wider context • Developed separately • Planned as part of national, regional and inter- • Managed as “islands” national systems • Developed as “networks” (strictly protected areas, buffered and linked by green corridors) Perceptions • Viewed primarily as a national asset • Viewed also as a community asset • Viewed only as a national concern • Viewed also as an international concern Management • Managed reactively within short • Managed adaptively with long-term perspective techniques timescale • Managed with political considerations • Managed in a technocratic way Finance • Paid for by taxpayer • Paid for by many sources Management • Managed by scientists and natural • Managed by multi-skilled individuals skills resource experts • Drawing on local knowledge • Expert led taken from Phillips, 2003

CCBD23_Interior_20060516.inddBD23_Interior_20060516.indd Sec1:85Sec1:85 55/16/06/16/06 3:52:043:52:04 PMPM Review of Experience with Ecological Networks, Corridors and Buffer Zones

MAIN CHARACTERISTICS and multilateral ﬂ yway agreements preceded the OF THE PROGRAMMES convention). A total of 13 species-speciﬁ c agreements and memoranda of understanding cover- Shared Body of Conservation Goals ing 89 countries have since been adopted.

The programmes that are described in this re- Wide Variation in Terminology view were selected on the basis of a shared body of conservation goals, management principles One aspect of the programmes that is the source and a functional confi guration. That is to say, in of some confusion is the wide variation in ter- general: minology. As was noted in the introduction, • they aim to conserve biodiversity by programmes that apply the ecological-network maintaining the functioning of ecosys- model use a variety of terms to describe the tems and promoting the sustainable use approach. The examples discussed in this re- of natural resources view carry the English or equivalent names of • they secure these goals by working at the “ecological network”, “green network”, “reserve landscape, ecosystem or ecoregion scale, network”, “wildlands network”, “interwoven strengthening ecological coherence, biotope system”, “territorial system of ecological minimizing the effects of potentially stability”, “corridor”, “biological corridor”, “eco- damaging external activities, restoring logical corridor”, “biodiversity corridor”, “con- degraded ecosystems and promoting servation corridor”, “biogeographical corridor”, complementarity between land uses “sustainable-development corridor”, “green and biodiversity conservation corridor”, “ecoregion plan”, “transboundary • they apply a spatial model comprising natural-resources management area” and “trans- core areas, corridors, buffer zones and frontier conservation area”. Still other names are sustainable-use areas undoubtedly used for programmes that have not been reviewed. Conservation programmes that In addition to these initiatives, two other types apply the principles of the ecosystem approach of programme are also included because of their can also in many cases be regarded as ecological close relationship to the ecological-network networks (which include to some extent many model: Biosphere Reserves and agreements un- freshweater management programmes with a der the Bonn Convention on the Conservation of comparable approach). Complicating the termi- Migratory Species of Wild Animals. Launched in nology issue further, not all programmes that use 1970, UNESCO’s Man and Biosphere Programme some of the names listed — such a proportion of introduced the management hierarchy of core WWF’s ecoregion programmes and certain trans- areas, buffer zones and transition areas into in- boundary natural resources management area in ternational conservation practice, thereby estab- Africa — can be regarded as ecological networks lishing a signifi cant precursor to the ecological (although most of those that do not correspond network. With 482 Biosphere Reserves desig- to the model adopt an approach comparable to nated in 102 countries, the programme has had that found in Biosphere Reserves). a major impact on protected-areas management. This variation in terminology may cause The Bonn Convention, adopted in 1979, marked confusion, but it also demonstrates that the eco- the fi rst international recognition of the generic logical-network model is a product of parallel importance of maintaining ecological linkages evolution. A regional pattern in terminology can for migratory species (although several bilateral nevertheless be discerned: across Europe and in

CCBD23_Interior_20060516.inddBD23_Interior_20060516.indd Sec1:86Sec1:86 55/16/06/16/06 3:52:053:52:05 PMPM Review of Experience with Ecological Networks, Corridors and Buffer Zones

international governmental organizations, the Ecological Networks Initiated by term “ecological network” is now generally used, Both Governments and NGOs in North America “reserve network” is preferred, while in South America and much of Asia many In this respect it is interesting to note that eco- programmes are known as “ecological corridors”. logical networks are initiated not only by govern- In Africa a generally accepted term has yet to ments but also by NGOs, and large numbers evolve. of both types of programmes are underway. Some regional patterns are nevertheless dis- Wide Variation in Scale cernible in the role taken by governmental and non- governmental organizations. In Europe the As the many examples of ecological networks show, majority of ecological-network programmes have the programmes may share certain generic fea- been initiated by national or, in a few instances tures, but the way in which the model is being ap- such as in Andalusia (Spain), Cheshire (UK) and plied varies in some important respects. The most Russia, by regional governments. The only NGO obvious variable is geographical scale. Ecological- programmes are a relatively small number of network programmes vary in scale from projects WWF ecoregion projects. In North America, by designed to conserve or re-establish linkages for contrast, virtually all the ongoing programmes specifi c local species populations (such as corridors have been initiated by NGOs, in most cases with- for the giant panda in China or ecoducts for deer in the framework of the continental Wildlands in the Netherlands) through regional programmes Project. In Australia, the nationwide WildCountry (such as North America’s Wildlands Project, many programme is also an NGO initiative, although of the programmes in Latin America and WWF’s the programme is being implemented in col- ecoregion projects) to continental strategies in the laboration with government bodies. In Latin form of the Pan-European Ecological Network America most initiatives have come from NGOs, and Australia’s WildCountry. However, although Conservation International being the primary the geographical scale of these programmes var- driver; in many cases, however, the programmes ies enormously, most share a focus on ecosystems are being developed in close cooperation with (the forest-steppe ecosystem of Central European regional and national governments, such as the Russia or the Guadiamar river basin in Spain), on Mesoamerican Biological Corridor. In Asia NGOs larger ecoregions (such as the link between the are again the most important initiators, with both wet forests in Australia’s southwest tip through to WWF and Conservation International playing an the dry inland, North America’s “megalinkages” active role, but also some smaller NGOs that fo- or the mountain systems between the Amazon cus on specifi c areas, such as the Philippine Eagle and the Orinovo rivers in northeastern South Conservation Program Foundation. America) or on metapopulations (carnivores in Italy or elephants in Africa and Asia). Even the BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION smaller-scale projects, although limited in terms of geographical scope, are usually framed within a It is clear from this broad experience that consid- broader ecological context. However, geopolitical erable work still needs to be done before it can boundaries often determine the practical scope be demonstrated with confi dence to what extent of a programme. This is particularly the case in the potential biodiversity-conservation value of the government-driven programmes, such as the ecological networks is realized on the ground national ecological networks in Europe and the and across a wide range of conditions. Most Green Belt. programmes are clearly in too early a phase for

CCBD23_Interior_20060516.inddBD23_Interior_20060516.indd Sec1:87Sec1:87 55/16/06/16/06 3:52:063:52:06 PMPM Review of Experience with Ecological Networks, Corridors and Buffer Zones

fi rm conclusions to be drawn in a generic sense, as the survival of a full complement of species while those networks that are in a more advanced within an ecosystem, the opportunity to move stage of implementation are almost invariably to away from an existing area that comes under be found in the more developed countries; they threat, and the occurrence of periodic natural therefore represent a limited sample of the con- disturbances that may require some form of ditions in which ecological networks are being linkage, such as fl ooding. Moreover, the island- applied. Nevertheless, encouraging results have biogeography fi nding that the risk of extinction been secured by many of the programmes that decreases as habitat size increases still holds for a have progressed to the implementation phase. large number of species. These results are of suffi cient substance and It can also be noted that protected areas of- signifi cance to justify some initial conclusions on fer extensive experience that is both relevant and progress to date. valuable to an assessment of ecologial networks. For example, large predators have become re- Focus on Conditions Necessary established in certain protected areas as a result for Long-Term Conservation of improved connectivity and increased size of the areas, such as in the European Alps, the The fi rst lesson that can be drawn is that the pro- Northern Rocky Mountains and the Apennines. grammes are explicitly attempting to establish This restores a needed trophic level to the eco- and maintain the environmental conditions that systems, giving more control of meso-predators are necessary to secure the long-term conserva- and herbivores that can cause and have caused tion of biodiversity rather than limiting them- damage to both animal and plant components. selves to the in-situ protection of valuable sites or threatened species populations. This involves, The Key Biodiversity-Conservation in the main, safeguarding assemblages of habitat Challenges for Ecological Networks large enough and of suffi cient quality to support species populations, providing, where neces- If it is accepted that these factors are indeed cru- sary, opportunities for movement between these cial to the conservation of biodiversity in the long reserves, buffering the network from potentially term, then the challenge for ecological networks damaging human activities and promoting sus- is to demonstrate: (a) that the programmes are tainable forms of land use in the contiguous succeeding in establishing the conditions on the landscapes. ground, (b) that the viability of species popula- That this model applies to species that re- tions and communities is thereby improved in quire access to very large areas or need to migrate practice and (c) that human communities have across a landscape is obvious. However, a debate access to sustainable livelihoods. on the general effectiveness of this approach in In assessing the degree to which current conserving a substantial proportion of biodiver- programmes are meeting these challenges, cer- sity has been underway for many years. For many tain factors should be taken into account. First, species, extensive linked and buffered systems of the many examples of ecological networks that core areas are not immediately essential to their are described in this review represent two classes survival. Most plant species, for example, do not of network design that operate at different levels critically depend on physical linkages with other and with different degrees of specifi city. The fi rst habitat patches in the short term. Even for many group is a strategic confi guration — the initial of these species, however, other factors become phase in virtually all the examples — that is important for their long-term viability, such based on a broad understanding of ecosystem

CCBD23_Interior_20060516.inddBD23_Interior_20060516.indd Sec1:88Sec1:88 55/16/06/16/06 3:52:083:52:08 PMPM Review of Experience with Ecological Networks, Corridors and Buffer Zones

processes, the needs of the species populations, The examples discussed in this review present a the threats that need to be resolved and the op- wide range of experience in how these three as- portunities for sustainable forms of land use. pects are given form and effect. As noted above, The second group comprises precisely delineated most programmes take one or more ecosystems confi gurations with broad stakeholder-oriented or the larger ecoregion as their operational action plans that are being implemented on the framework. This requires the programmes to ad- ground. Most of the examples reviewed, having dress three major challenges: (a) to understand been initiated in the past few years, clearly fall into how the respective ecosystems function, (b) to the fi rst group: that is, they are still at the stage of devise conservation measures that are effective a strategic programme. Many of these initiatives in maintaining ecosystem processes and (c) to are in the process of being elaborated into more secure and coordinate actions over large areas, detailed implementation programmes or a series which may involve devising appropriate mecha- of local projects but have not yet led to action nisms to facilitate cooperation between a large on the ground. Examples include the Guiana number of stakeholders. Shield in South America, the Far East Ecoregion These are clearly enormously complex tasks, in Russia and WildCountry in Australia. and few programmes have advanced to the stage In terms of assessing the value of the eco- where it can be demonstrated that all three chal- logical-network approach, the more interesting lenges have been met. With regard to understand- examples are those where implementing actions ing how ecosystems function, most programmes have already been taken. Although no eco- are based on a combination of habitat and species logical-network programmes are at a suffi ciently mapping (often using GIS) and an assessment of advanced stage of implementation to be able threats. Examples that are currently in this phase to draw conclusions on their overall effective- include Moldova’s National Ecological Network, ness — which in any case will only be possible the Italian National Ecological Network, the many years after their implementation when the Four Corners Transboundary Natural-Resources measures have had full opportunity to take ef- Management Area in Southern Africa, the fect — some valuable lessons can be drawn from Vilcabamba–Amboró Conservation Corridor in specifi c implementing actions and the research- Peru and Bolivia and many of WWF’s ecoregion and-development process. programmes (which commence with a biodiversity and socio-economic “reconnaissance”), The Potential Added Value of such as the Central European Forest-Steppe Ecological Networks Ecoregion. In these and many similar examples an indicative confi guration of the projected eco- In terms of biodiversity conservation, ecological logical network has also been formulated. networks have the potential to offer added value Only when programmes move beyond this over more traditional approaches in three main initial phase — which usually takes some years ways: — is it feasible to undertake more detailed analy- • by directly relating conservation actions ses which can then form the basis of an elabo- to ecosystem processes rated proposal that takes account of the interests • by linking sites together to create coher- of a broad array of stakeholders. In some cases, ent assemblages of habitat patches an incremental approach is adopted for fi nan- • by extending biodiversity conservation cial or political reasons or in order to elaborate into the wider landscape through com- certain parts of the network through pilot proj- patible forms of land use ects. A common feature of these programmes

CCBD23_Interior_20060516.inddBD23_Interior_20060516.indd Sec1:89Sec1:89 55/16/06/16/06 3:52:093:52:09 PMPM Review of Experience with Ecological Networks, Corridors and Buffer Zones

is the objective to conserve a representative ar- Lessons To Date ray of habitats. Examples include the Southern Rockies Wildlands Network in the US, some of The fact that few ecological networks have reached the giant panda corridors in China, the Atlantic an advanced stage of implementation — or that Forest Central Corridor in Brazil and Biosphere the measures that have been implemented on the Reserves such as Las Yungas (Argentina), Rhon ground have not yet been functional for a long (Germany), Kruger to Canyons (South Africa) enough period to be able to demonstrate that and Gran Cantabrica (Spain). they have improved the viability of the respec- Very few ecological-network programmes tive species populations — prevents a compre- have progressed to the stage where implementa- hensive scientifi c assessment of the value of the tion on the ground has made substantial progress. programmes. That is not to say, however, that no Examples include the Mesoamerican Biological lessons can be drawn from the experience to date Corridor, the Estonian Green Network, the Dutch on their likely long-term effectiveness. National Ecological Network and the Terai Arc Landscape. However, it will be many years before Based on Scientifi c Assessments even these ecological networks can be consid- First, it is worth noting that the ecological net- ered “established”, and measures to continue works that have reached the implementation strengthening the quality of the networks will be phase are all based on comprehensive scientifi c necessary beyond that. assessments of the needs of the habitats and species in relation to the threats to which they are exposed. These assessments — such as those for the Southern Rockies Wildlands Network, the Estonian Green Network, the Barbas–Bremen–

Summarized Checklist for Wildlands Network Designs 1. Scientists and other experts are intimately involved throughout the planning process, from the initial formulation of goals and hypotheses to the completion of the design and, in some cases, its implementation. 2. The methodology is rigorous and systematic, within the constraints imposed by broad-scale conservation planning, and seeks to address the stated goals and questions. 3. Methodology includes the three tracks of special elements, representation and focal-species analysis. In addition, existing or potential threats to biodiversity are addressed. 4. Methodology is well documented and replicable; studies could be repeated by others. 5. Interpretation and application of results are congruent with principles (i.e., empirical generaliza- tions) of conservation biology, demonstrate a good command of relevant literature and theory, and apply the precautionary principle. 6. The project is thoroughly peer reviewed. In addition, the wildlands network design is available to the public for review. Review comments are thoughtfully considered and addressed. 7. At least some of the results are publishable in reputable, peer-reviewed journals, as well as other outlets. 8. The entire process, from developing research methods through implementation, is iterative and adaptive. There is no “ﬁ nal plan”; rather, the wildlands network design is continually reﬁ ned and improved with feedback from research, monitoring, peer review and practice.

Taken from Noss (2003).

CCBD23_Interior_20060516.inddBD23_Interior_20060516.indd Sec1:90Sec1:90 55/16/06/16/06 3:52:103:52:10 PMPM Review of Experience with Ecological Networks, Corridors and Buffer Zones

Cestillal programme and many of the WWF species, it is fundamental to many ecosystem ecoregion projects — offer convincing evidence processes. Aquatic ecosystems are the most ob- of the justifi cation for applying the ecological- vious example. Inland water systems are prob- network model. The checklist developed by the ably the most fragmented of all ecosystems, yet Wildlands Project gives an indication of the con- they depend for their functioning on physical cern for scientifi c rigour in developing the plans connections between their upper and lower (see box). catchments, including temporal fl uxes such as fl ooding. Disrupting these fl ows can impact Increasing Evidence of the Value of Corridors the entire ecosystem. Maintaining the integrity A further source of evidence on the effect of of aquatic systems — for example where sites ecological networks is the experience that has are designated under the Ramsar Convention been generated through corridor projects. Over — therefore involves management approaches the past decades, a substantial literature on con- that are complementary to the ecological-net- nectivity has been generated and many projects work approach, as the extensive experience with have produced measurable results. Good exam- river-basin management demonstrates (see, for ples are the Bow Valley corridor in Canada and example, Ramsar Convention Secretariat, 2004). various elephant corridors in Africa and Asia. The role of large predators can also be cru- Although the concept of corridors has gener- cial in many ecosystems. By creating conditions ated a lively debate over many years, evidence for the return or maintenance of large predators from the increasing number of projects shows (often by migration through connectivity or that appropriately designed corridors generally by providing a larger “protected” home range), meet the expectations of how they will function we can restore or conserve ecosystem elements in practice. Moreover, most of the documented whose presence helps to control meso-predators examples of corridors suggest that establishing or herbivores that damage the ecosystems, such or maintaining the linkage was the most cost- as overbrowsing by deer or the loss of songbirds effective means of achieving the conservation to both meso-predators and the absence of un- objective. Indeed, in many cases the corridor was derstory cover. demonstrably the only feasible and practicable option to achieve the objective, while in other Climate Change cases alternative courses of action — such as en- An issue that is attracting growing attention is larging a protected area — would have involved the question of whether ecological networks intractable problems. A good illustration of offer a potentially useful conservation strategy this latter point was the proposal to enlarge the for responding to climate change. The ecological Bialowieza National Park, harbouring a remain- consequences of climate change are the subject of ing tract of the primeval European Forest, which an increasing number of studies (see, for exam- met considerable opposition from local com- ple, Watson et al., 1998; Thomas et al., 2004). It is munities. A compromise situation was attained projected that certain ecosystems are particularly by enlarging the Bialowieza Biosphere Reserve to vulnerable to climate change. These include man- allow a multiple land use approach with different grove forests, boreal and tropical montane cloud degrees of protection combined with sustainable forests, coastal marshes, alpine and arctic ecosys- use and optimum connectivity (MAB Poland, tems, wetlands overlying permafrost and coral 2005). reefs. Further, monitoring studies of ecosystems It is important to emphasize in this respect and migratory species are identifying changes that connectivity is essential not only for certain that seem to be linked to rising temperatures,

CCBD23_Interior_20060516.inddBD23_Interior_20060516.indd Sec1:91Sec1:91 55/16/06/16/06 3:52:113:52:11 PMPM Review of Experience with Ecological Networks, Corridors and Buffer Zones

such as different migratory patterns for certain further development if they are to be able to take bird species. However, to what degree ecological on such a role. However, if they can succeed in networks can assist in ameliorating the impacts this ambition their potential conservation value of climate change remains an open question. would be enormous. Corridors may offer populations of animal species opportunities to move away from threatened Successful International Cooperation habitats, but vegetation communities cannot A fi nal observation on the characteristics of shift so readily and many ecosystems are inextri- ecological networks in relation to the conserva- cably linked to geomorphological features, such tion of biodiversity concerns the issue of inter- as mountain ranges and estuaries. IUCN’s World national cooperation. A large number of the Commission on Protected Areas nevertheless programmes discussed in this review are being recommends that three strategies for adapting developed across the borders of two or more protected areas to global change are to link iso- countries. Rivers are a common focus of trans- lated core areas by corridors, surround core areas boundary management efforts. Working at the with buffer zones, and surround clusters of core international scale is an inevitable consequence areas, corridors and buffer zones with “biodiver- of focusing action on ecosystem processes. That, sity-friendly” land uses (World Commission on however, introduces further complications into Protected Areas, 2003). an already complex process. Yet in very few of the transboundary programmes does the interna- Retaining Coherence in Intact Ecosystems tional dimension seem to be a signifi cant barrier Another feature of the examples in this review is to progress (although for practical reasons many that the majority of ecological networks which of the implementing projects in these cases are are in an advanced stage of implementation are limited to one of the countries involved in the in developed countries where, in most cases, programme). What these examples demonstrate ecosystems have become highly fragmented. In is that operational methods are being found these circumstances, the network approach is within which fruitful international cooperation being applied to an important extent in order on biodiversity conservation can be realized. to restore ecological coherence. The Guadiamar Green Corridor in Spain and WildCountry in SUSTAINABLE USE Australia are good examples of this approach. However, as some of the examples show, the All Programmes Promote Sustainable Use ecological network is also being applied in order to retain the coherence of large ecosystems The integration of biodiversity conservation and or ecoregions which are still relatively intact sustainable use is one of the defi ning features of but are coming under increasing pressure ecological networks. Thus, all the programmes — often through a combination of develop- covered by this review promote an array of land- ment and underdevelopment — such as the Far use functions which can range from strictly pro- East Ecoregion and the Vilcabamba—Amboró tected areas (equivalent to IUCN’s Category Ia Conservation Corridor. In these cases the goal of Strict Nature Reserve or Category Ib Wilderness the network is to guide the region’s development Area) through to multiple-use areas in which the strategy so that confl icts with ecosystem proc- landscape has an important productive role. In esses and valuable concentrations of biodiversity virtually all cases this hierarchy of functions is are as far as possible avoided. It is clear that most based on an integral assessment of conservation of these programmes will require considerable priorities and socio-economic needs.

CCBD23_Interior_20060516.inddBD23_Interior_20060516.indd Sec1:92Sec1:92 55/16/06/16/06 3:52:123:52:12 PMPM Review of Experience with Ecological Networks, Corridors and Buffer Zones

Inevitably, the scope of the assessment and the Instruments and Methodologies rigour with which it is carried out vary consider- to Promote Sustainable Use ably from programme to programme, depending on the resources available or the working scale. A Most government-driven programmes use the large number of programmes have nevertheless spatial-planning system — but also a range of developed comprehensive guidelines and plans other instruments such as ﬁ nancial incentives for the sustainable use of biodiversity. Thus, the — to promote the sustainable use of biodiversity. older national ecological-network programmes in Support for extensive forms of traditional farm- Central Europe were based on an approach that ing in Europe is a common feature, such as in would now be called sustainable development the Andalusian ecological network. Purchase of and involved detailed elaboration at the local level land by government agencies or privately funded through the comprehensive planning systems in nature conservation organizations in order to those countries (although, due to the political ensure that appropriate forms of management disruptions of the 1990s, not all the programmes are applied — which can include sustainable uses have progressed to that stage). such as forestry and recreation — is also com- As the examples demonstrate, the variety mon, such as in the Dutch National Ecological of complementary land uses that are being pro- Network. A diverse range of other instruments moted is extremely wide. These include support are also applied by the programmes. These for extensive farming practices (Estonian Green include legal protection, spatial planning, land Network), the sustainable harvesting of non-tim- reform, the establishment of community forests, ber forest products and the cultivation of organic buying up logging concessions, compensating cocoa (Mesoamerican Biological Corridor), eco- livestock losses, organizing smallholders into tourism and developing sustainable forestry in producer associations, forest certiﬁ cation, con- indigenous territories (Vilcabamba—Amboró ducting awareness-raising campaigns and edu- Conservation Corridor), the establishment of tree cation programmes, offering training courses, nurseries (Terai Arc Landscape), promoting san- strengthening institutional capacity, and nego- dalwood growing, dry-country forestry and bush tiating voluntary agreements, environmental foods (Gondwana Link), developing recreational service payments and conservation easements opportunities (Heart of the West Wildlands with land owners. Network) and supporting livestock farming in The NGOs that operate at the continental corridors used by predatory species (Kenyan or international scale have developed more-or- Wildlife Conservation Lease Programme). less standard methodologies that encompass Given the recent initiation of many of the sustainable use. For example, WWF’s Annamites programmes and the lengthy implementation Conservation Plan, that extends across Vietnam, process, it is clearly too early to be able to demon- Lao and Cambodia and which is used as a model strate to what extent each particular type of land for some other ecoregion projects, sets out 10 use will prove in practice to be compatible with priority programmes for conservation action in environmental sustainability in the long term the region which explicitly integrate sustainable and how the various instruments will operate in use into the plan. Similarly, the Wildlands Project practice. Moreover, some of the projects cannot in North America has developed a common ap- strictly be regarded as economically sustainable proach to preparing plans that includes sustain- since they currently depend for their viability able use. For example, the Southern Rockies on a degree of external funding, whether from Wildlands Network distinguishes between four governments or donors. kinds of compatible-use lands: low-use lands,

CCBD23_Interior_20060516.inddBD23_Interior_20060516.indd Sec1:93Sec1:93 55/16/06/16/06 3:52:143:52:14 PMPM Review of Experience with Ecological Networks, Corridors and Buffer Zones

moderate-use lands, transportation lands and funders have to be attracted, local communities private lands (see box). should be fully involved, and all relevant stakeholders have to be brought together and their THE KEY SUSTAINABLE-USE CHALLENGES commitment secured. Certainly, by no means all the programmes have yet found workable and Management Resources and effective solutions in practice. However, many Integrative Approach of the programmes are becoming increasingly sophisticated in their approach to implementa- Several other major challenges also need to be tion. Many WWF ecoregion programmes, for ex- overcome if these programmes are to secure ample, include monitoring and evaluation plans sustainable use on the ground. Developing a which assess progress through indicators and the comprehensive and coherent proposal that is achievement of quantitative targets. appropriate to its setting and can meet strategic objectives requires a substantial investment in Need for Political Stability management resources and the adoption of an integrative approach: a complex array of data The long-term process that characterizes the de- need to be collected and assessed, long-term velopment and implementation of an ecological

Two Examples of Sustainable-use Planning The 10 priority programmes for conservation action in WWF’s Annamites Conservation Plan are: • protecting priority river basins • an effective protected-area network • three major landscape-scale initiatives • creating a constituency for conservation • understanding the Annamites • building the capacity for success • controlling unsustainable harvesting • promoting good infrastructure development • people, land and resources.

The Southern Rockies Wildlands Network Vision proposes the following uses in “low-use compatible-use lands”: • Primitive recreation, including mountain bike and vehicle use on designated dirt roads only, with no vehicle use off-road. Mountain bikes may be allowed on designated trails. • Low impact, small, developed camp grounds accessible by vehicle, and some dispersed camping areas. • Hunting and ﬁ shing, in so far as these are compatible with the full range of biological diversity. • Ecologically sensitive and predator-friendly livestock grazing, except in riparian areas or other highly sensitive areas. • Limited low-intensity silviculture, such as light selective cutting of previously logged forest followed by road obliteration and closure, and restoration thinning. Cutting of large trees should be prohibited and the goal should be to restore old-growth conditions and natural ﬁ re regimes. • Limited habitat manipulation for focal plant and animal species. • Restorative management, including those measures listed for Wilderness Areas, but without wilderness restrictions. • No road construction, vehicle use or resource extraction in roadless areas of 400 hectares or larger.

CCBD23_Interior_20060516.inddBD23_Interior_20060516.indd Sec1:94Sec1:94 55/16/06/16/06 3:52:153:52:15 PMPM Review of Experience with Ecological Networks, Corridors and Buffer Zones

network also has important implications for the POVERTY ALLEVIATION necessary degree of political stability. At the basic level this concerns the robustness of government Given the exceptionally wide range of circum- and basic political institutions. But at a higher stances in which ecological networks are being level it is also important that a particular vision developed — from advanced industrialized of conservation and economic development be countries to some of the poorest regions in shared across the political spectrum and by suc- the world — contributing to the alleviation of cessive governments. These types of programme poverty is a concern of only a proportion of the are therefore facing major challenges in politi- initiatives. The information available on these cally unstable countries and regions with weak programmes shows that they are predicated on institutional structures. the goal of establishing the conditions for sustainable livelihoods in combination with biodi- Involving Stakeholders versity conservation.

A particularly diffi cult issue that confronts all Poverty Alleviation Challenges and Responses the initiatives is how to ensure that dominant stakeholders can be persuaded to become fully It is clear that many of the programmes are con- involved in the programmes and committed to fronted with intractable problems that are closely achieving their goals. The examples suggest that related to extreme poverty. Many core areas, cor- it is in the more developed countries, where in- ridors and buffer zones, for example, are under stitutions are stronger and where stakeholders are high pressure from poor communities, such as more accustomed to working within these kinds in southern China where the buffer zones are of processes, that progress to date has been most densely populated and the protected forests have successful. Moreover, because the programmes traditionally been an important source of non- are generally applied at the landscape or regional timber forest products. In the Congo Basin, local level, involve a long-term process, operate across hunters are threatening the rainforest ecosystem, an array of administrative units and embrace an encouraged by the large market for dried meat in exceptionally large number and wide range of the surrounding urban centres and the increas- stakeholders, the development and realization of ing number of access roads that are constructed an ecological network place high demands on the by commercial logging companies. Corridors institutional framework and on process manage- used by large mammals in southern Africa are ment. It is worth noting, however, that many of a source of confl ict with local populations who the programmes are supported and managed depend on the land for their subsistence. by organizations with substantial resources and The examples give many illustrations of extensive experience of implementing biodiver- measures designed to achieve these conditions. sity conservation programmes in cooperation For instance, the Four Corners Transboundary with other stakeholders. In fact in many ways Natural-Resources Management Area in south- large, internationally active organizations such ern Africa is supporting the establishment of as WWF and Conservation International are bet- conservation business ventures that will gener- ter equipped for this task than many local and ate income for local communities; the Green regional governments since they are well-funded, Corridor project in Bhutan is supporting new have developed sophisticated assessment method- cottage industries such as cheese-making and ologies and also possess management resources honey production; the Forest Conservation and that benefi t from many years of experience. Community Development Project in southern

CCBD23_Interior_20060516.inddBD23_Interior_20060516.indd Sec1:95Sec1:95 55/16/06/16/06 3:52:163:52:16 PMPM Review of Experience with Ecological Networks, Corridors and Buffer Zones

China is supporting a large number of poverty- and the Kenyan Wildlife Conservation Lease alleviation measures such as improved drinking- Programme. Moreover, in underdeveloped re- water supplies, the construction of biogas pits gions or countries in transition, the examples and training in agricultural techniques; the Terai indicate that an ecological network can work Arc Landscape has provided education courses pro-actively to shape the policy agenda towards for local livestock herders; and the Mesoamerican an integrated approach to securing conservation Biological Corridor is promoting the cultivation and development as, for example, in Vietnam’s of organic cocoa. Greater Truong Son Ecoregion and, potentially, Russia’s Far East Ecoregion. Short-Term Versus Long-Term Priorities MEETING THE 2010 TARGET The urgency of the poverty challenge has raised concerns that ecological networks encourage too One of the most signifi cant political commit- large a share of the available resources to be di- ments of recent years has been the international rected at the realization of long-term conservation consensus to achieve a signifi cant reduction in the objectives at the cost of urgent poverty-alleviation current rate of loss of biodiversity by 2010 or even and biodiversity-protection measures. However, halt the loss altogether by that year. Specifi cally, an interesting consequence of the broad-based, in June 2001 the EU Heads of State committed integrative process that characterizes ecological themselves to halt the loss of biodiversity by networks is that it seems in practice to be offer- 2010, an objective that was reaffi rmed in March ing an increasingly attractive vehicle to donors for 2005. In April 2002 the Parties to the Convention channelling development aid. Thus, many of the on Biological Diversity adopted a Strategic Plan examples suggest that the initiatives are attracting that includes the target of achieving by 2010 a a higher level of funding from a broader range of signifi cant reduction in the current rate of bio- sources and over a longer period than would have diversity loss. In September 2002 the UN World been the case if the programmes had been limited Summit on Sustainable Development endorsed to isolated conservation or development projects. the achievement by 2010 of a signifi cant reduc- The programmes in Vilcabamba—Amboró, tion in the current rate of loss of biodiversity. Mesoamerica and the Congo Basin are good ex- Finally, in May 2003 at the Fifth Environment for amples of this phenomenon. The value of such in- Europe Ministerial Conference, over 50 Eurasian itiatives seems to be that they articulate politically states reiterated the objective to halt the loss of necessary sustainability objectives within a coher- biodiversity at all levels by the year 2010. ent programme, while still offering opportunities It is clear, given the rate at which biodiversity for supporting clearly defi ned complementary is being lost on all continents and the imminence actions at the local level. of the 2010 deadline, that these commitments in- The question of to what extent this ad- fer a substantial upgrading of conservation mea- ditional funding represents an increase in the sures, a stronger focus on sustainability across total funds that are being made available for a wide range of policy sectors and a marked biodiversity conservation and sustainable de- improvement in the effectiveness with which ac- velopment rather than a reallocation of existing tions are implemented on the ground. Meeting fi nancial support cannot be answered by this the 2010 target will therefore require not only review. However, there are strong indications specifi c biodiversity-conservation measures but that this is the case in some of the examples, also structural changes in how natural resources such as the Mesoamerican Biological Corridor are exploited.

CCBD23_Interior_20060516.inddBD23_Interior_20060516.indd Sec1:96Sec1:96 55/16/06/16/06 3:52:173:52:17 PMPM Review of Experience with Ecological Networks, Corridors and Buffer Zones

In that perspective, the management model that underlies ecological networks has much to offer: it not only aims to conserve specifi c sites and species populations, it has the goal of ensuring the maintenance of ecosystem functions and promoting the sustainable use of natural resources. In other words, it aims to establish and maintain the conditions that are necessary for the long-term conservation of biodiversity and to do so at the landscape, the ecosystem or even the ecoregion scale. The 2010 target — signifi cantly reducing the current rate of, or even halting the loss of biodiversity — is therefore intrinsic to the model. However, as the examples demonstrate, achieving this goal within a few years is beyond the capability of most of the current programmes, if only because of the scale at which they are being implemented and the recent commencement of most initiatives. To be sure, important progress in halting the decline in biodiversity has been achieved in limited areas and the sustainability of land use has been improved: examples that have produced tangible results are the Terai Arc Landscape and Canada’s Bow Valley Corridor. But even the older programmes which are in an advanced phase have not yet progressed to the point where the measures have been fully implemented on the ground across their geographical range, although a small number which are well advanced — Estonia and the Netherlands are good examples — have succeeded in contributing to a signifi cant reduction in the rate of biodiversity loss in recent years. Ecological networks, if they secure their goals, will certainly make an important contribution to achieving the 2010 target. In most cases, however, given the implementation timescales involved, this will only be achieved some years after 2010.

CCBD23_Interior_20060516.inddBD23_Interior_20060516.indd Sec1:97Sec1:97 55/16/06/16/06 3:52:183:52:18 PMPM Review of Experience with Ecological Networks, Corridors and Buffer Zones

REFERENCES

Andreev, A., et al. (2001). Concept of National Ecological Burkhardt, R., Baier, H., Bendzko, U., Bierhals, E., Finck, P., Network of Republic of Moldova. Chisinau: BIOTICA Liegl, A., Mast, R., Mirbach, E., Nagler, A., Pardey, A., Ecological Society. Riecken, U., Sachteleben, J., Schneider, A., Szekely, S., Arango, N., et al. (2003). Vacíos de Conservación del Sistema Ullrich, K., van Hengel, U., Zeltner, U. and Zimmermann, de Parques Nacionales Naturales desde una Perspectiva F. (2004). “Empfehlungen zur Umsetzung des § Ecoregional. Cali: Instituto de Investigación de Recursos 3 BNatSchG ‘Biotopverbund’”. Naturschutz und Biológicos Alexander von Humboldt/WWF. Biologische Vielfalt 2. Bonn-Bad Godesberg: Bundesamt Arenas Cabello, J.M. (2003). “Current Situation and proposals für Naturschutz. for Improving Functionality in the Guadiamar Fluvial Cracco, M., and Guerrero, E. (2004). Aplicación del Enfoque Corridor”. In: Dirección General de la RENP y Servicios Ecosistémico a la Gestión de Corredores en América del Ambientales (ed.). Protected Areas in the Mediterranean Sur: Memorias del Taller Regional, 3 al 5 de junio. Quito: Basin. Seville: Consejería de Medio Ambiente. UICN América del Sur. Arenas Cabello, J.M., Olmo, C.M. del, and Borja Barrera, Critical Ecosystem Partnership Fund (2000). Ecosystem F. (2003). The Guadiamar Green Corridor: From an Proﬁ le: Vilcabamba-Amboró Forest Ecosystem of the Ecological Disaster to a Newly Designated Protected Area. Tropical Andes Biodiversity Hotspot. Peru and Bolivia. Seville: Consejería de Medio Ambiente. Washington, DC: Critical Ecosystem Partnership Fund. Beier, P., and Noss, R.F. (1998). “Do Habitat Corridors Crofts, R. (2004). “Linking Protected Areas to the Wider World: Provide Connectivity?” Conservation Biology 12 (6): a Review of Approaches”. Journal of Environmental 1241–1252. Policy and Planning 6 (2): 143–156. Bennett, A.F. (1998). Linkages in the Landscape: the Role of Dawson, D. (1994). Are Habitat Corridors Conduits for Animals Corridors and Connectivity in Wildlife Conservation. and Plants in a Fragmented Landscape? A Review of the Gland/Cambridge: IUCN. Scientiﬁ c Evidence. Research Report 94. Peterborough: Bennett, A.F. and Lowe, K.W. (2002). From Design to English Nature. Implementation: Insights From Ecological Networks in Diamond, J. (1975). “The Island Dilemma: Lessons of Southern Australia. Paper presented to the 16th Annual Modern Biogeographic Studies for the Design of Nature Meeting of the Society for Conservation Biology. Preserves”. Biological Conservation 7: 129–146. Canterbury, 14–19 July. Duke, D.L. (2001). Wildlife Use of Corridors in the Central Bennett, G. (2004). Integrating Biodiversity Conservation Canadian Rockies: Multivariate Use of Habitat and Sustainable Use: Lessons Learned From Ecological Characteristics and Trends in Corridor Use. Edmonton: Networks. Gland/Cambridge: IUCN. University of Alberta. Bennett, G. (2004). Linkages in Practice: a Review of Their Duke, D.L., et al. (2001). “Restoring a Large-Carnivore Conservation Value. Gland/Cambridge: IUCN. Corridor in Banff National Park.” In: Maehr, D.S., Noss, Bennett, G. and Wit, P. (2001). The Development and R.F., and Larkin, J.R. (eds.). Large Mammal Restoration: Application of Ecological Networks: a Review of Proposals, Challenges for the 21st Century. Washington, DC: Island Plans and Programmes. Amsterdam: AIDEnvironment. Press. Bienen, L. (2002). “Conservation Corridors and the Spread Etter, A. (1998). “Mapa General de Ecosistemas de Colombia”. of Infectious Diseases”. Conservation in Practice 3 (2): In: Chaves, M.E., and Arango, N. (eds.). Informe 107. Nacional Sobre el Estado de la Biodiversidad, Colombia Boere, G.C. and Rubec, C.D.A. (2002). “Conservation 1997. Bogotá: Instituto de Investigación de Recursos Policies and Programmes Affecting Birds”. In: Norris, Biológicos Alexander von Humboldt. K., and Pain, D.J. (eds.). Conserving Bird Biodiversity: Etter, A. and Van Wyngaarden, W. (2000). “Patterns of General Principles and Their Application. Cambridge: Landscape Transformation in Colombia, with Emphasis Cambridge University Press. in the Andean Region”. Ambio 29: 432–439. Bouwma, I.M., Jongman, R.H.G. and Butovsky, R.O. (2002). Fjedsa, J. and Krabbe, N. (1990). Birds of the High Andes. Indicative Map of the Pan-European Network for Central Copenhagen: Apollo Books. and Eastern Europe. Tilburg: European Centre for Gichohi, H. (2002). Direct Payments and Other Mechanisms for Nature Conservation. Ecosystem Conservation: the Tanzania Land Conservation Burkhardt, R., Baier, H., Bendzko, U., Bierhals, E., Finck, P., Trust in the Masaai Steppe and the Wildlife Conservation Jenemann, K., Liegl, A., Mast, R., Mirbach, E., Nagler, Lease Programme in Kitengela. Paper presented at the A., Pardey, A., Riecken, U., Sachteleben, J., Schneider, A., Annual Meeting of the Society of Conservation Biology. Szekely, S., Ullrich, K., van Hengel, U. and Zeltner, U. Canterbury, 14–19 July. (2003). “Naturschutzfachliche Kriterien zur Umsetzung Gilpin, M.E., and Hanski, I. (eds.) (1991). Metapopulation des § 3 BNatSchG ‘Biotopverbund’”. Natur und Dynamics: Empirical and Theoretical Investigations. Landschaft 78 (9/10): 418–426. London: Linnaean Society/Academic Press. Inter-American Development Bank and World Bank (2001). The Mesoamerican Biological Corridor as a Vector for Sustainable Development in the Region: the Role of International Financing. Analysis prepared for the IDB/ World Bank seminar “Sustainable Natural Resource Management at the Regional Level”, Madrid.

CCBD23_Interior_20060516.inddBD23_Interior_20060516.indd Sec1:98Sec1:98 55/16/06/16/06 3:52:193:52:19 PMPM Review of Experience with Ecological Networks, Corridors and Buffer Zones

IUCN (1980). World Conservation Strategy: Living Resource Ministry of Agriculture, Nature and Food Quality Reference Conservation for Sustainable Development. Gland, Centre (2005). Ecological Networks: Experiences in IUCN. the Netherlands. The Hague: Ministry of Agriculture, Jongman, R.H.G. and Kristiansen, I. (1998). National and Nature and Food Quality. Regional Approaches for Ecological Networks in Europe. Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development (2004). The Wageningen: Wageningen Agricultural University. Central Truong Son Biodiversity Conservation Initiative Kamdem Toham, A., et al. (2001). Biological Priorities 2004–2020. Hanoi: Ministry of Agriculture and Rural for Conservation in the Guinean-Congolian Forest Development. and Freshwater Region. Libreville/Washington, DC: Ministry of Environment (1995). Concept of the Green CARPO/WWF-US. Network at the National Level: Creating Nature for the Kamdem Toham, A., et al. (2003). “Forest Conservation in Harmony of Living Organisms with Human Beings. the Congo Basin”. Science 299: 346. Seoul: Ministry of Environment. Kattan, G.H. and Murcia, C. (2003). “A Review and Synthesis Murphree, M. (1990). In Campfi re – a Zimbabwean of Conceptual Frameworks for the Study of Forest Approach to Sustainable Development and Community Fragmentation”. In: Bradshaw, G.A., and Marquet, P.A. Empowerment through Wildlife Utilization. Harare: (eds.). How Landscapes Change. Ecological Studies 162. University of Zimbabwe. Berlin/Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag. Noss, R.F. (1992). “The Wildlands Project: Land Conservation Külvick, M. (2002). Ecological Networks in Estonia – Concepts Strategy”. Wild Earth (special issue): 10–25. and Applications. Doctoral thesis. Tartu: University of Noss, R.F. (2003). “A Checklist for Wildlands Network Tartu. Designs”. Conservation Biology 17 (5): 1270–1275. Kuo, M. (2002). “The Establishment and Management Opdam, P. (1991). “Metapopulation Theory and Habitat Prospects of Conservation Corridor for Central Fragmentation: a Review of Holarctic Breeding Bird Mountain Core in Taiwan”. Proceedings of IUCN/ Studies”. Landscape Ecology 5: 93–106. WCPA-EA-4. Taipai Conference, Taipai, Taiwan. Taipai: Phillips, A. (2003). “Turning Ideas on Their Head – the New National Taiwan University. Paradigm for Protected Areas”. The George Wright Laurance, W.F. and Bierregaard, R.O. (eds.) (1997). Forum 20 (2): 8–32. Tropical Forest Remnants: Ecology, Management, and Plumptre, A. (2004). “Priority Sites for Conservation in the Conservation of Fragmented Communities. Chicago: Albertine Rift and the Importance of Transboundary University of Chicago Press. Collaboration to Preserve Landscape”. In: Harmon, D., Linde, H. van der, et al. (2001). Beyond Boundaries: and Worboys, G. (eds). Transboundary Natural Resources Management in Sub- Managing Mountain Protected Areas: Challenges and Responses Saharan Africa. Washington, DC: USAID Biodiversity for the 21st Century. Colledara: Andromeda Editrice. Support Program. Pulsford, I., Worboys, G.L., Gough, J., and Shepherd, T. Liro, A., et al. (1995). National Ecological Network EECO- (2004). “‘The Australian Alps and the Great Escarpment NET–Poland. Warsaw: Foundation IUCN Poland. of Eastern Australia Conservation Corridors”. In: Liro, A. (ed.) (1998). Development of a Common Approach to Harmon, D., and Worboys, G. (eds). the Design and Implementation of the National Ecological Managing Mountain Protected Areas: Challenges and Responses Networks in Central and Eastern Europe: Proceedings for the 21st Century. Colledara: Andromeda Editrice. of International Workshop. Warsaw: IUCN Offi ce for Ramirez Umana, M. (2004). “La Amistad Binational Central Europe. Biosphere Reserve in Costa Rica and Panama: a Case MAB National Committee of Poland. (2005). Extension of the Study of Transboundary Cooperation”. In: Harmon, D, Bialowieza Biosphere Reserve (nomination form). MAB and Worboys, G.L. (eds). Managing Mountain Protected National Committee of Poland. Areas: Challenges and Responses for the 21st Century. MacArthur, R.H. and Wilson, E.O. (1967). The Theory of Colledara: Andromeda Editrice. Island Biogeography. Princeton: Princeton University Ramsar Convention Secretariat (2004). River Basin Press. Management: Integrating Wetland Conservation and Mackey, B., et al. (2005). “Towards a Scientifi c Framework for Wise Use into River Basin Management. Ramsar the WildCountry Project”. In: Wu, J., and Hobbs, R.J. Handbook for the Wise Use of Wetlands no. 4, 2nd edi- (eds.). Key Topics and Perspectives in Landscape Ecology. tion. Gland: Ramsar Convention Secretariat. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Renjifo, L.M. (1999). “Composition Changes in a Subandean MacKinnon, J. (ed.) (1997). Protected Areas Systems Review of Avifauna After Long-Term Forest Fragmentation”. the Indo-Malayan Realm. Hongkong/Canterbury: Asian Conservation Biology 13: 1124–1139. Bureau for Conservation Ltd. Renjifo, L.M., et al. (1997). “Patterns of Species Composition Miller, B., et al. (2003). Southern Rockies Wildlands Network and Endemism in the Northern Neotropics: a Case for Vision. Boulder: Southern Rockies Ecosystem Project. Conservation of Montane Avifaunas”. In: Remsen, J.V. Miller, K., Chang, E., and Johnson, N. (2001). Defi ning (ed.). Studies in Neotropical Ornithology Honoring Ted Common Ground for the Mesoamerican Biological Parker. Ornithological Monographs 48. Washington, Corridor. Washington, DC: World Resources Institute. DC: American Ornithologists’ Union.

CCBD23_Interior_20060516.inddBD23_Interior_20060516.indd Sec1:99Sec1:99 55/16/06/16/06 3:52:203:52:20 PMPM Review of Experience with Ecological Networks, Corridors and Buffer Zones

Renjifo, L.M., et al. (eds.) (2002). Libro Rojo de Aves de UNESCO (1974). Task Force on Criteria and Guidelines for the Colombia. Bogotá: Instituto de Investigación de Recursos Choice and Establishment of Biosphere Reserves. MAB Biológicos Alexander von Humboldt/Ministerio del Report Series no. 22. Bonn: UNESCO. Medio Ambiente. UNESCO (1995). The Seville Strategy and the Statutory Rodoman, B.B. (1974). “Polijarzacija Landsafta kak Sredstvo Framework of the World Network of Biosphere Reserves. Sochraenija Biosfery I Rekreacionnych Resursov”. Paris: UNESCO. Resursy, Sreda, Raselenije. Moscow: Nauka. UNESCO (2000). Solving the Puzzle: the Ecosystem Approach Rosenberg, D., Noon, B.R., and Meslow, E.C. (1997). and Biosphere Reserves. Paris: UNESCO. “Biological Corridors: Form, Function, and Effi cacy”. UNESCO, (2005). The Biosphere Reserve Handbook (draft BioScience 47 (10): 677–687. manuscript). Paris: UNESCO Sandwith, T., et al. (2004). “Linking Mountains to Lowlands Vakarenko, L. (1999). Development of the ECONET of Ukraine. for Biodiversity Conservation in the Cape Floristic Kiev: National Ecological Centre of Ukraine. Region”. In: Harmon, D, and Worboys, G.L. (eds). Vázquez, F.M. (2003). “Connectivity Within the Andalusian Managing Mountain Protected Areas: Challenges and Network of Natural Protected Areas”. In: García Mora, Responses for the 21st Century. Colledara: Andromeda M.R. (ed.). Environmental Connectivity: Protected Areas Editrice. in the Mediterranean Basin. Seville: Consejería de Medio Santiapillai, C., and Jackson, P. (eds) (1990). The Asian Ambiente. Elephant: an Action Plan for its Conservation. Gland: Watson, J. (2005). “Stepping Outside – a Bioregional and IUCN. Landscape Approach to Nature Conservation”. In: Secretaría General Técnica (2000). The Strategy for the Green Worboys, G.L., Lockwood, M., and de Lacey, T. Protected Corridor of the Guadiamar River: Fundamentals of the Area Management Principles and Practice (second edi- Strategy. Conclusions of the International Seminar on tion). Melbourne: Oxford University Press. Ecological Corridors and Restoration of Rivers and Watson, R.T., et al. (eds.) (1998). The Regional Impacts Riparian Zone. Seville: Consejería de Medio Ambiente. of Climate Change: an Assessment of Vulnerability. Sepp, K., and Kaasik, A. (2002). Development of National Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Ecological Networks in the Baltic Countries in the Weimin, W. and Busstra, B. (eds.) (2004). Integrated Nature Framework of the Pan-European Ecological Network. Reserve Management: an Innovative and Practical Warsaw: IUCN Offi ce for Central Europe. Experience. Kunming: Yunnan Science and Technology Shepherd, G. (2004). The Ecosystem Approach: Five Steps to Press. Implementation. Gland/Cambridge: IUCN. World Commission on Protected Areas (2003). A Guide to Sherpa, M.N., Wangchuk, S., and Wikramanayake, E. (2004). Securing Protected Areas in the Face of Global Change. “Creating Biological Corridors for Conservation and Options and Guidelines. Gland/Cambridge: IUCN. Development: a Case Study from Bhutan”. In: Harmon, Yerena, E. and Torres, D. (1994). “Spectacled Bear Con- D, and Worboys, G.L. (eds). Managing Mountain servation and Dispersal Corridors in Venezuela”. Protected Areas: Challenges and Responses for the 21st International Conference on Bear Research and Century. Colledara: Andromeda Editrice. Management. 9 (1): 169–172. Shestakov, A., and Krever, V. (2003). Ecological Networks Zunckel, K., Mokuku, C. and Stewart, G. (2004). “The in Russia: an Ecoregional Approach. Moscow: WWF Maloti-Drakensberg Transfrontier Conservation and Russia. Development Project”. In: Harmon, D, and Worboys, Smith, R.D. and Maltby, E. (2003). Using the Ecosystem G.L. (eds). Managing Mountain Protected Areas: Approach to Implement the Convention on Biological Challenges and Responses for the 21st Century. Colledara: Diversity: Key Issues and Case Studies. Gland/Cambridge: Andromeda Editrice. IUCN. Soulé, M.E. and Terborough, J. (eds.) (1999). Continental Conservation: Scientifi c Foundations of Regional Reserve Networks. Washington, DC: Island Press. Soulé, M.E., et al. (2004). “The Role of Connectivity in Australian Conservation”. Pacifi c Conservation Biology. December. Tabor, G., and Locke, H. (2004). “Yellowstone to Yukon Conservation Initiative”. In: Harmon, D, and Worboys, G.L. (eds). Managing Mountain Protected Areas: Challenges and Responses for the 21st Century. Colledara: Andromeda Editrice. Tewksbury, J.J. (2002). “Corridors Affect Plants, Animals, and Their Interactions in Fragmented Landscapes”. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 99 (20): 12923–12926. Thomas, C.D., et al (2004). “Extinction Risk from Climate Change”. Nature 427: 145–148.

CCBD23_Interior_20060516.inddBD23_Interior_20060516.indd Sec1:100Sec1:100 55/16/06/16/06 3:52:223:52:22 PMPM Review of Experience with Ecological Networks, Corridors and Buffer Zones

AUTHORS

Graham Bennett graduated in Environmental Kalemani Jo Mulongoy Ph.D. is the Head Science at the University of East Anglia in the UK of the Division of Scientiﬁ c, Technical, and and gained his doctorate at the same university. Technological Matters of the Secretariat of the He has been actively involved in the analysis and Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD). development of the international dimension of Before this position at the CBD, he was an environmental policy, biodiversity conservation Associate Professor at the National University of and natural resource management for nearly 30 Kinshasa in the Democratic Republic of Congo, years. His work has covered all the member states Head of the Department of Microbiology at the of the European Union and many countries in International Institute of Tropical Agriculture, Eastern Europe, North America, Africa and Asia. Head of the Plant Biotechnology Department In particular he has been closely involved in the at the International Institute for Research for development of ecological networks for 15 years, Development in Africa, and Director of the including reviewing and assessing practical expe- Biodiversity and Biotechnology Programme at rience worldwide. Graham Bennett is director of the International Academy of the Environment. Syzygy, an expert centre in the Netherlands that He is author and co-author of many scientiﬁ c works internationally to advance the conserva- publications and has edited a number of books. tion and sustainable use of natural resources. He is also a member of IUCN’s World Commission on Protected Areas and a member of the Executive Group of the Countdown 2010 initiative.

CCBD23_Interior_20060516.inddBD23_Interior_20060516.indd Sec1:101Sec1:101 55/16/06/16/06 3:52:233:52:23 PMPM CCBD23_Interior_20060516.inddBD23_Interior_20060516.indd Sec1:102Sec1:102 55/16/06/16/06 3:52:243:52:24 PMPM