A participatory sustainability assessment framework for biodiversity conservation in rural areas

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.