Research eco.mont - Volume 1, Number 1, June 2009 ISSN 2073-106X print version 45 ISSN 2073-1558 online version: http://epub.oeaw.ac.at/eco.mont Critical Issues in Managing Protected Areas by Multi-Stakeholder Participation – Analysis of a Process in the Swiss Alps Astrid Wallner & Urs Wiesmann Keywords: protected areas, participation, integrated management, Switzerland, World Heritage Site Abstract Profile There is common agreement in discourses on nature protection that it can only Protected area succeed if local participation in conservation measures is granted. In the region of the UNESCO World Heritage Site Swiss Alps Jungfrau-Aletsch a multi-stakeholder UNESCO World Heritage Site participatory process was initiated to negotiate concrete objectives for the World Heritage Site Jungfrau-Aletsch. In this way persistent conflicting expectations should Swiss Alps Jungfrau-Aletsch be overcome and ownership and common responsibility for the region enhanced. In this paper we critically reflect this multi-stakeholder participatory process and Mountain range evaluate three core issues, which we regard as decisive in participatory processes: conflict resolution, power play, and continued participation. We conclude that Alps participatory processes support mutual learning, but at the same time inherent multi- level power play can threaten continued participation. Country Switzerland Introduction In its operational guidelines for the implementation of the World Heritage Convention, the UNESCO World Heritage Committee requires a management plan for each property inscribed in the World Heritage List (http://whc.unesco.org/archive/opguide08-en. pdf). In the case of the World Heritage Site Swiss Alps Jungfrau-Aletsch (WHS) – nominated by the World Heritage Committee in 2001 – a unique process was launched to negotiate concrete objectives, measures and activities for the WHS, which was to form the ba- sis for developing the management plan: a multi-stake- | downloaded: 16.5.2016 holder participatory process in the region. There were two reasons for choosing this approach: First, there is common agreement in the discourses on conservation that it can only succeed if local participation in na- ture protection measures is granted (Pimbert & Pretty 1997), and second, very diverse and in many cases con- View from the Aletschwald towards the Great Aletsch Glacier © Astrid Wallner flicting expectations of a WHS existed in this region. These different expectations were discovered by eva- be given to cultural landscapes, and another group of luating opinions expressed in the local press between stakeholders expected immediate economic gains. The 1997 and 2003 – which covered the period before and management centre of the WHS Jungfrau-Aletsch after the nomination of the WHS Jungfrau-Aletsch. initiated a multi-stakeholder participatory process to Prior to the nomination in 2001 a formal democratic negotiate concrete objectives, measures and activities decision-making process had taken place at the level for the WHS in the hope to overcome the persistent of the communes involved. Each commune had voted conflicting expectations and to enhance ownership on the idea of a WHS in the region, and the results and common responsibility for the region. These are had shown a high level of acceptance. However, this two aspects which are seen as crucial for increasing https://doi.org/10.7892/boris.36576 acceptance was based on diverse expectations and not understanding and lowering conflicts in relation to on common goals and strategies for implementation protected areas (Mannigel 2008). But even though and management (Wiesmann et al. 2005; Liechti et there is general agreement that public participation is al. 2008). Some parties expected increased conserva- an important principle and goal for achieving ecologi- source: tion efforts, others expected increased attention to cally sustainable and socially just environmental go- Research 46 vernance (Sneddon & Fox 2007), participation is an The World Heritage Site Swiss Alps Jungfrau-Aletsch exceedingly difficult objective to define and implement encompasses a high-alpine landscape and consists (Cooke & Kothari 2001). ‘Participation’ can be under- mainly of rock, ice and unproductive vegetation. This stood in many different ways. The approach chosen in perimeter is surrounded by an area of settlements and the case of the WHS Jungfrau-Aletsch corresponds small-scale cultural landscapes. Altogether this region to what Pimbert and Pretty (1997) have described as makes up world renown tourist attraction and serves ‘interactive participation’ and which can be interpreted as an important economic basis for the local residents as ‘empowerment’ (Pimbert & Pretty 1997; Berghöfer (35 000 people live in the communes of the region of & Berghöfer 2008). However, a participatory process the WHS Jungfrau-Aletsch). It is the declared inten- in the sense of interactive participation does not au- tion of the involved communes to preserve the whole tomatically imply that just because the actors are fully region made up by the 26 communes in all its diversity engaged there won’t be any tricky moments in these for future generations and to promote its sustainable processes. As Berghöfer and Berghöfer (2008) put it: development as an economic, living, recreational, and ‘If participation is to mean more than a mainstream natural space (Jungfrau-Aletsch-Bietschhorn Associa- acclaim, its different levels and objectives have to be tion 2005/2007). This means that there are ongoing made explicit.’ This request leads to the question of efforts in the region to combine protection and eco- limitations and risks of participatory processes. We nomic use, which poses one of the greatest challenges tackle this issue in this paper by critically reflecting the for the management. multi-stakeholder participatory process of the WHS The multi-stakeholder participatory process aimed at Jungfrau-Aletsch from a scientific perspective and negotiating concrete objectives, measures and actions evaluating core issues of this process. This reflection was divided into several phases (Figure 2). Some par- of the process is based on the insights of the process ticipants were selected after a preparatory workshop we gained in our role as researchers in an interdiscipli- in the region, others joined as a result of several an- nary research project which accompanied the multi- nouncements in the media or after face-to-face com- stakeholder participatory process (see Wiesmann et munication. 256 participants representing various al. 2005; Wallner et al. 2008). The methods used in stakeholder groups (i.e. groups from agriculture, tour- this project included semi-structured interviews with ism, trade, public administration, conservation, edu- participants of the participatory process, standardized cation, transport) were separated into two thematic questionnaires filled in by the participants, observation groups: one group dealt with questions of agriculture, during the discussions, as well as an analysis of news- forestry, tourism and trade, while the other group dealt paper articles published in the run-up to the designa- with questions of education, sensitization, natural and tion of the region as a World Heritage Site. cultural values. In each canton these two groups working on topics Defining a vision for the World Heritage met at the same time. In total, three rounds took place Site Jungfrau-Aletsch (Forum A – C) with a core group taking intermediate steps between the rounds. The central purpose of this process was to develop a The process resulted in a total of 69 objectives and common vision with the aim of assuming responsibi- 226 related measures being formulated in relation to lity for sustainable regional development. Developing issues of protection and economic development in the a common vision was particularly important as the region of the WHS Jungfrau-Aletsch. These objectives WHS Jungfrau-Aletsch is situated in a region charac- and measures were prioritized by the participants and terized by a high level of complexity. What we call the grouped into 21 project lines – 7 on issues of conser- Jungfrau-Aletsch World Heritage Region is neither a vation, 7 on development efforts, and 7 on manage- political, nor an economic, administrative, social or cul- ment and sensitization (Jungfrau-Aletsch-Bietschhorn tural unit. In administrative terms this region stretches Association 2005/2007). For each of these project across two cantons and covers part of the territory of lines, a so-called core group, consisting of participants 26 communes (Figure 1). Furthermore there are five of the process and newly recruited people interested regional planning associations that play an important in working on the future of their own region, devel- part in planning the region’s development strategies. oped concrete projects and recommended them to These associations aim to bridge the institutional gap the Jungfrau-Aletsch World Heritage Association for between the local and cantonal levels and serve as a implementation. Such projects included an upgrading platform where largely sectorally organized entities of of important regions to achieve a significant improve- public administration and representatives of civil soci- ment in the quality of habitat for flora and fauna; ety can coordinate actions in a more inclusive and trans- marketing possibilities for local agricultural products; sectoral manner (Hammer 2007). Given this complex enhancing local people’s and visitors’