Doctoral Degrees (Centre for Environmental Management)
Permanent URI for this collection
Browse
Browsing Doctoral Degrees (Centre for Environmental Management) by Subject "Biodiversity conservation"
Now showing 1 - 3 of 3
Results Per Page
Sort Options
Item Open Access Application of multi-criteria analysis in land use decisions(University of the Free State, 2006-05) Kuyler, Peter; Du Preez, P. J.; Goodman, P. S.Global land use trends have resulted in extensive transformation and loss of biodiversity in natural landscapes. In South Africa these trends are apparent in the Grassland Biome. Although it has a very high level of biodiversity and provides essential ecosystem services for economic development, only 2% is formally protected and it is one of the most threatened biomes in the country. With over 60% transformed and less than 1% formally protected, the Mistbelt Grassland of KwaZulu-Natal is a priority for urgent conservation attention. The continued transformation of natural landscapes due to economic pressures and the limited opportunity for an increase in protected areas where production and development needs must be met, presents a challenge to biodiversity conservation. This study was motivated by the need for a strategic focus in the evaluation of the impacts of land use on the biodiversity integrity of landscapes in order to facilitate integrated environmental management and guide land use decisions that would promote conservation of biodiversity and sustainable development. A methodology for this evaluation is proposed that exploits the hierarchical approach to characterizing biodiversity and employs multi-criteria analysis in the form of the Analytic Hierarchy Process and decision-making by experts. Separate evaluations of the impacts of land use on biodiversity integrity in the Mistbelt Grassland of KwaZulu-Natal and the moist sub-biome of the Grassland Biome were conducted to examine the application of the methodology at the vegetation-type and biome levels. Accordingly, five land uses and fourteen biodiversity indicators were selected for the Mistbelt Grassland study, and ten land uses and fifty-two indicators for the Grassland Biome study. Indicators for the integrity of landscape composition, structure and function were selected. The overall relative weights for land uses were obtained from rankings of the impacts of each land use on indicator criteria. Relative impacts of land uses on landscape composition, function and structure were consistent and provided an unambiguous statement of the overall impact on biodiversity integrity. The greatest impact of land use was associated with that on landscape structure and was the result of the extent of transformation and fragmentation. The integrity of grassland habitat is important for landscape composition, while nutrient leakage and fire regime are considered important for landscape function. Urban settlements were considered to have the greatest negative impact on biodiversity, while timber plantations, croplands and rural settlements also had a high impact. Pastures and livestock ranching were associated with low impacts. Against the benchmark of conservation, activities like game ranching, livestock ranching and tourism accounted for slight impacts on biodiversity integrity and are recommended for the maintenance of landscape biodiversity. While timber plantations, dairy farming, rural settlements and croplands were considered to make little contribution to the maintenance of biodiversity, their spatial orientation was considered to be critical for the maintenance of regional connectivity and the biodiversity integrity of the greater landscape. In accordance with the methodology employed and insights obtained in the evaluation of land use impacts on biodiversity integrity, the Land Use Evaluation Model is proposed as an integrated environmental management tool. Within a single integrated, cost-effective evaluation procedure that allows for input by key stakeholders, the hierarchy of decisions in the Analytic Hierarchy Process can be expanded to accommodate a limitless number of indicator criteria to rank the impacts of alternative development plans or projects on the social, economic and biodiversity components of the environment. An examination was made of the Land Use Evaluation Model in strategic environmental assessments and its role in facilitating environmental impact assessment and the integrated development planning processes.Item Open Access A participatory sustainability assessment framework for biodiversity conservation in rural areas(University of the Free State, 2008) Letšela, Limpho Malerato Senior; Pelser, A. J.; Seaman, M. T.English: Biodiversity conservation is critical for the continued supply of ecosystem services to secure the sustainability of livelihoods, especially for poor rural people. Therefore, current rates of biodiversity loss, which threaten human survival, need to be curbed using effective interventions. Implementation and decision-making on interventions require timely information. Undertaking a Sustainability Assessment (SA) and structuring this information within a SA framework of components and objectives is one effective way to aid decision-makers. An effective SA framework addresses key sustainability issues and priorities that are aligned with the regulatory policy and legal framework, as well as stakeholder aspirations. Sustainability Assessment development and application is evolving and is more widespread in developed countries than developing countries. Hence, this study sought to investigate how to apply SA in a participatory manner within rural areas in a developing country. Key objectives of the study focused on: i) identification of key aspects that make a SA framework effective; ii) mechanisms of effectively incorporating participation into SA processes; iii) investigations of the perceptions of stakeholders regarding the ecosystem and human conditions required for the sustainability of biodiversity conservation; and iv) determination of stakeholder perceptions on progress towards sustainability. The study was conducted in Lesotho within a trans-boundary project area. The project is known as the MDTP and is a collaborative initiative between Lesotho and South Africa to conserve globally significant biodiversity. A qualitative case study approach was employed through a combination of techniques including a literature review, field observations, key informant interviews, group discussions and workshops to collect data. Study participants consisted of MDTP partners at the national, district and local levels, and some members of the general community. Two SA tools were applied in a complementary manner during the study, namely the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) SA approach and the Community Sustainability Assessment (CSA) approach, developed by the Global Ecovillage Network (GEN). Experiences of applying sustainability assessment in both developed and developing countries revealed that an overall generic SA tool is not practical. There is a need for a context-specific framework consisting of principles, criteria, generic steps, objectives, indicators, a toolkit and other context-specific components. The SA framework employed in this study had to fit biodiversity conservation conditions in rural areas. The SA process revealed that the MDTP partners were knowledgeable about the conditions of sustainability and threats to biodiversity, while members of the general community were unaware of these threats. Regarding progress towards the sustainability of biodiversity in the study area, the results indicated that current practices are unsustainable, more from the point of view of the socio-ecological components than the socio-cultural and spiritual or the socio-economic components. Consequently, there is a need to raise awareness at the community level and implement action plans to realize changes that support the sustainability of biodiversity in the long-term. Key components for a participatory SA framework depend on whether a SA is a partial assessment or a full one. The components of a partial SA framework also depend on whether the focus is on reflection and learning or data handling. Hence, the main components of a participatory sustainability assessment framework comprise: a comprehensive vision of sustainable development; goals towards attaining the vision; a participatory process engaging various stakeholders; a toolkit of appropriate SA tools used for various tasks; relevant principles of sustainability assessment; and sustainability-led decision criteria. There is no blueprint on how to undertake a SA process and no rigid way of integrating participation within the SA processes. The application of a SA requires adaptability and flexibility in specific circumstances. Therefore, the study presents guidelines, key components of a participatory SA process, and highlights the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats for applying a SA for biodiversity conservation in rural areas. Key words: sustainability assessment, stakeholder participation, environmental assessment, biodiversity conservation, rural areas, sustainability assessment framework.Item Open Access A participatory sustainability assessment framework for biodiversity conservation in rural areas(University of the Free State, 2008) Letšela, Limpho Malerato Senior; Pelser, A. J.; Seaman, M. T.English: Biodiversity conservation is critical for the continued supply of ecosystem services to secure the sustainability of livelihoods, especially for poor rural people. Therefore, current rates of biodiversity loss, which threaten human survival, need to be curbed using effective interventions. Implementation and decision-making on interventions require timely information. Undertaking a Sustainability Assessment (SA) and structuring this information within a SA framework of components and objectives is one effective way to aid decision-makers. An effective SA framework addresses key sustainability issues and priorities that are aligned with the regulatory policy and legal framework, as well as stakeholder aspirations. Sustainability Assessment development and application is evolving and is more widespread in developed countries than developing countries. Hence, this study sought to investigate how to apply SA in a participatory manner within rural areas in a developing country. Key objectives of the study focused on: i) identification of key aspects that make a SA framework effective; ii) mechanisms of effectively incorporating participation into SA processes; iii) investigations of the perceptions of stakeholders regarding the ecosystem and human conditions required for the sustainability of biodiversity conservation; and iv) determination of stakeholder perceptions on progress towards sustainability. The study was conducted in Lesotho within a trans-boundary project area. The project is known as the MDTP and is a collaborative initiative between Lesotho and South Africa to conserve globally significant biodiversity. A qualitative case study approach was employed through a combination of techniques including a literature review, field observations, key informant interviews, group discussions and workshops to collect data. Study participants consisted of MDTP partners at the national, district and local levels, and some members of the general community. Two SA tools were applied in a complementary manner during the study, namely the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) SA approach and the Community Sustainability Assessment (CSA) approach, developed by the Global Ecovillage Network (GEN). Experiences of applying sustainability assessment in both developed and developing countries revealed that an overall generic SA tool is not practical. There is a need for a context-specific framework consisting of principles, criteria, generic steps, objectives, indicators, a toolkit and other context-specific components. The SA framework employed in this study had to fit biodiversity conservation conditions in rural areas. The SA process revealed that the MDTP partners were knowledgeable about the conditions of sustainability and threats to biodiversity, while members of the general community were unaware of these threats. Regarding progress towards the sustain ability of biodiversity in the study area, the results indicated that current practices are unsustainable, more from the point of view of the socio-ecological components than the socio-cultural and spiritual or the socio-economic components. Consequently, there is a need to raise awareness at the community level and implement action plans to realize changes that support the sustainability of biodiversity in the long-term. Key components for a participatory SA framework depend on whether a SA is a partial assessment or a full one. The components of a partial SA framework also depend on whether the focus is on reflection and learning or data handling. Hence, the main components of a participatory sustainability assessment framework comprise: a comprehensive vision of sustainable development; goals towards attaining the vision; a participatory process engaging various stakeholders; a toolkit of appropriate SA tools used for various tasks; relevant principles of sustainability assessment; and sustainability-led decision criteria. There is no blueprint on how to undertake a SA process and no rigid way of integrating participation within the SA processes. The application of a SA requires adaptability and flexibility in specific circumstances. Therefore, the study presents guidelines, key components of a participatory SA process, and highlights the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats for applying a SA for biodiversity conservation in rural areas.