SUST 2001 - Module 1 Biodiversity

• Huge free-for-all
• Sharp drop-off in big game
• First emergence of preservation ethic in Africa leading to the emergence of game reserves

• BIG - 1000s of hectares
• Remote
• Marginal - little agricultural potential
• Categorical - certain species valued above others such as the lion and elephant
• Exclusionary - Hunting was for Europeans NOT Africans

• Broader concern with preservation of African wildlife in their natural state
• Why - increasing affluence and urbanization, preservation societies in Europe, new technologies

• Legality - NP is government owned, GR is private owned
• Finances 
• Clientele - NP is for tourists, GR is for elite hunters
• Priviliged Species

Game reserves --> A response to limited game elite hunters

National parks -->  More concern for preservation and aimed towards tourism

• Failure to distinguish between open access unowned resources and common property. 
• res nullius vs res communis

Selfishness - The rational actor model; people act in strict self-interest

Altruism- Functionalist theory: humans take account of the interests of the group

• CPRs are resources that 
• 1. are difficult to exclude users from accessing
• 2. are subtractable (one's use decreases what's available to others).

• 1. Open Access
• High seas, arctic
• 2. Private Property
• An area owned by an individual or organization
• 3. Common Property
• Pastures, forests, fishing grounds (owned by collectives)
• 4. Government Property
• National Parks, forests, fishing grounds

• Shift from fresh-water to marine fishing in the 11th Century 
• Catholicism's influence on diets
• Age of Exploration brought an abundance of fish for people (ex. Newfoundland)
• Technological revolutions for fishing - refrigerated boats, huge nets, larger vessels
•  Global industry for fish- Whaling industry with whaling locations all over the globe

• Baseline shift is the observation that each generation has a different notion of what is "normal" (the baseline).
• For example,
• Humans like to catch bigger fish and, in an evolutionary sense, that puts the bigger fishes at a disadvantage. As a result, fishes would have gotten smaller over time. However, each generation would think that the size of the fish during their life would be the "regular" size for the fish because of a lack of perspective on the larger scale.

• Scale
• - Ecosystems can cover huge areas and have indistinct boundaries (based on temperature, salinity, currents, tectonic features etc.) 
• - Fish move around --> hard to find site-dependent species with limited movement
• - Migratory species such as whales have more than one location

• Connectivity 
• - Spatially separated areas can be functionally connected (spawning, larval dispersal)
• - Events outside of the area can influence it (ex. oil spills, climate change etc.)

• Variability
• - Oceans are complex and adaptive systems (influenced by winds, temperature, acid, etc)
• - Our impacts have unpredictable effects

• Naturalness 
• - The sea is more pristine than land and requires a non intervention approach
• Limited Scientific Knowledge Base
• - Out-of-sight-out-of-mind mentality
• - Marine areas are complex and expensive to study. (our perspective is from land)
• Multiple Use of Coastal Seas
• - Diversity of uses = conflicts
• Alien Nature of Marine Ecosystems
• - Disturbance is not visible at the surface
• - Lack of empathy or familiarity with marine life. (Lack of intrinsic appeal)
• - Sea as an adversary (perception)

In the 1960s, the establishment of the Chagos MPA in the British Indian Ocean Territory resulted in the eviction of the residents to other islands and the UK of the archipelago. The inhabitants were given compensation in the 70s for their move. In 2004, residents took the case to the international courts where they lost. At the end, this set up a really bad image for MPAs in the area.

• - Not looking at one species, an ecosystem
• - Considers the whole food chain rather than one species
• - Acknowledges the role of humans in ecosystems
• - Uses a precautionary approach
• - Ecological not political boundaries
• - Takes adaptive measure to deal with ecological complexity

• Critiques
• It is very difficult to implement
• (jurisdictional issues and justice implications)
• --> Fortress conservationesque ex. Chagos
• The protected areas are often huge and pose significant enforcement challenges.

• An approach that understands that a lack of evidence for an effect doesn't mean that the effect does not exist.
• Instead of doing something until you're sure that it's bad, not doing something until you're sure that it's not bad

• Ecological Perspective
• Socioeconomic Perspective
• -Stakeholders, issues, and values
• Institutional Perspective
• -Laws and mandates, Staffing and funding

Defined areas that are managed with the intention of conservation and long term sustainability. 

• Benefits include
• -protection of habitat
• -biodiversity conservation
• -Protect or enhances ecosystem services
• -Recovery of depleted stocks
• -Insurance against environmental or management uncertainty
• -Sites for scientific investigation
• -A "Noah's Ark" in case everything else goes to shit

• Multiple zones with different protection levels that address the different uses
• A Rezoning process that involves the locals
• An increase in "no take" areas made possible

They don't account for activities that occur outside their boundaries such as oil spills and climate change

• Concerns about equity and justice - can exclude stakeholders and take on characteristics of "fortress conservation"
• ex. Chagos - natives are forced out

Not necessarily an ecosystem based approach

Not always politically possible to restrict fishing

The Ndumo game reserve was an area of land that was changed to CBNRM. The illiterate and poor locals were evicted in the 1960s for the reserve but regained the land in 1980 through CBNRM. Today there are tensions within the community over the small benefits of the program and between locals and the government.

Ndumo could be regarded as a failed case of CBNRM

1959 – Antarctic Treaty à for peaceful purposes only

1964 – Agreed measures for Conservation of Antarctic Fauna & Flora

1972 – Conservation of Antarctic Seals

1980 – Convention for Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources

1988 – Convention on the Regulation of Antarctic Mineral Resource Activities

• Political (is prioritized) vs the Ecological Scale
• - CBNRM is almost exclusively bound to the state boundaries whereas ecosystems cross borders

• The Local Trap
• - The local decision is not always socially just or ecologically sustainable (nothing inherently just or equitable about the local scale) and is romanticized   --> Elite Capture – the local elites get the majority of benefits

• CBNRM has been corrupted
• - There is an increased gap between how CBNRM is idealized and how it is implemented
• Tends to take a neoliberal character where the community wants max profits from their resource

1.  Communities were no longer viewed as enemies and were inseparable from their environment

2.  Sustainable Development Ideal (Our Common Future 1987)

• 3.  Neoliberalism – Resource use is best determined by market access
• The commodification of nature (selling it to save it)

Also known as “Fences and Fines” conservation, Fortress Conservation was the dominant paradigm for managing national parks in the 20th century.

Its primary function was to keep animals in and local people out

The view was that local people were the enemies of conservation (countering the view of “wild” and human free Africa)

Used forcible evictions (ex 1950s Massai eviction from the Serengeti)

• A response to fortress conservation
• Local empowerment --> local management
• Must be financially self sustaining
• A bottom-up approach
• Addresses economic, environmental and social goals

• Happened in Zimbabwe
• Shift in resource ownership from the State to local communities.
• The establishment of RDCs (Rural District Councils)
• - Must prove capacity to manage wildlife
• -Communities fully involved in decision making
• - Financial benefits direct to community

A poster child for CBNRM

• Critiques
• --> Majority of money still went to the elites
• -->The local trap - locals didn't always have the best intentions

• A proposal to Merge National Parks in Mozambique, S Africa, and Zimbabwe
• 100 000 km2
• Designed to accommodate the migratory paths of Elephants

However, there is skepticism from the locals who experienced evictions and promises of compensation in the 50s and 60s when the original parks were being formed

• Putting rights, access, and justice first before the economy and environment
• Addresses the needs of the community and requires the involvement of locals
• No new parks without informed consent of the indigenous and no forced evictions

• Minimum standards for protecting and enforcing IPR
• All nations must integrate IPR protection into national legislation
• Prioritizes individual/corporate ownership over shared ownership

Safe handling/transport/use of living modified organisms (LMOs) resulting from modern biotechnology that may have adverse effects on biological diversity

• A case of biopiracy
• Known to indians as a miracle plant used for medicinal, dental, and contraceptive uses.
• 1985 - American pharmaceutical company obtained patent for Azadirachtin, the chemical that gave the tree its benefits
• --> created tooth paste, birth pill, and medicine
• 1990 - 12 patents
• Indians were outraged (Vandana Shiva) and took the corporations to court --> won in 1995

The search for valuables from biota to develop industrial products such as cosmetics, medicine, and agriculture

• Stealing/plundering genetic material
• ex. Hoodia Cactus
• However there is is no specific case of biopiracy because it is difficult to identify such cases (they can look like examples of bioprospecting)

Hoodia Cactus was used as a hunger suppressant by indigenous people

Phytopharm patented P-57, the hunger suppressing ingredient obtained from the plant

Their stock was bought by Physer but were sued by the San people - they get 8% royalties