Why is it difficult to enlarge a protected areaα Ecosystem services perspective on the conflict around the extension of the Białowieża National Park in Poland

Land Use Policy

Volumn 38, Issue , 2014, Pages 314-329

  Niedzialkowski K ^a   Blicharska, M ^a,b   Mikusinski G ^a,b   Jedrzejewska, B ^a  

^a MAMMAL RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (Poland)

^b SWEDISH UNIVERSITY OF AGRICULTURAL SCIENCES   (Sweden)

Author keywords

Bia owie a Forest; Biodiversity conservation; Firewood; National park; Participation; Policy

Indexed keywords

BIODIVERSITY; DECISION MAKING; ECOSYSTEM SERVICE; ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY; FOREST RESOURCE; LOCAL PARTICIPATION; POLICY MAKING; PROTECTED AREA;

BIALOWIEZA NATIONAL PARK; POLAND;

EID: 84890849197     PISSN: 02648377     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2013.12.002     Document Type: Article

References (91)

1. Abbot J.I.O., Thomas D.H.L., Gardner A.A., Neba S.E., Khen M.W. Understanding the links between conservation and development in the Bamenda Highlands, Cameroon. World Dev. 2001, 29:1115-1136.
2. Adamczyk W. Rezerwat biosfery Puszczy Białowieskiej a jego mieszkańcy - diagnoza współdziałania. Studium socjologiczne 1994, Instytut Badawczy Leśnictwa, Warszawa/Białystok/Lublin.
3. Adams W., Hutton M. People, parks and poverty: political ecology and biodiversity conservation. Conserv. Soc. 2007, 5:147-183.
4. Allendorf T.D., Yang J. The role of ecosystem services in park-people relationships: the case of Gaoligongshan Nature Reserve in southwest China. Biol. Conserv. 2013, 167:187-193.
5. Agbenyega O., Burgess P.J., Cook M., Morris J. Application of an ecosystem function framework to perceptions of community woodlands. Land Use Policy 2009, 26:551-557.
6. Alphandéry P., Fortier A. Can a territorial policy be based on science aloneα The system for creating the Natura 2000 network in France. Sociol. Ruralis 2001, 41:311-328.
7. Bartczak A. Wartość funkcji rekreacyjnej lasów w Polsce. Ekonomia i Środowisko 2006, 30:23-41.
8. Berkes F. Rethinking community-based conservation. Conserv. Biol. 2004, 18(3):621-630.
9. Blicharska M., Angelstam P. Conservation at risk: conflict analysis in the Białowieża Forest, a European biodiversity hotspot. Int. J. Biodivers. Sci. Ecosyst. Serv. Manage. 2010, 6:68-74.
10. Blicharska M., Angelstam P., Antonson H., Elbakidze M., Axelsson R. Road, forestry and regional planners' work for biodiversity conservation and public participation: a case study in Poland's hotspots regions. J. Environ. Plan. Manage. 2011, 54:1373-1395.
11. BNP Białowieski Park Narodowy 2012, Available: http://bpn.com.pl/index.phpαoption=com_content&task=view&id=104&Itemid=178 (accessed 27.07.12).
12. Bobiec A. Gospodarka leśna jako źródło zagrożenia naturalnych zbiorowisk Puszczy Białowieskiej. Chrońmy Przyrode Ojczysta 1998, 54(6):58-65.
13. Bobiec A. Living stands and dead wood in the Białowieża Forest: suggestions for restoration management. For. Ecol. Manage. 2002, 165:125-140.
14. Börzel T. Coping with Accession to the European Union. New Modes of Environmental Governance 2009, 244-249. Palgrave Macmillan, Houndmills.
15. Börzel T., Buzogány A. Environmental organisations and the Europeanisation of public policy in Central and Eastern Europe: the case of biodiversity governance. Environ. Polit. 2010, 19:708-735.
16. Brooks S. Images of Wild Africa: nature tourism and the (re)creation of the Hluhluwe Game Reserve, 1930-1945. J. Hist. Geogr. 2005, 31:220-249.
17. Castro A.J., Martín-López B., García-Llorente M., Aguilera P.A., López E., Cabello J. Social preferences regarding the delivery of ecosystem services in a semiarid Mediterranean region. J. Arid Environ. 2011, 75:1201-1208.
18. Chhatre A., Agrawal A. Trade-offs and synergies between carbon storage and livelihood benefits from forest commons. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 2009, 106:17667-17670.
19. Constanza R., d'Arge R., de Groot R., Farberk S., Grasso M., Hannon B., Limburg K., Naeem S., O'Neill R.V., Paruelo J., Raskin R.G., Sutton P., van den Belt M. The value of the world's ecosystem services and natural capital. Nature 1997, 387:253-260.
20. Czajkowski M., Buszko-Briggs M., Hanley N. Valuing changes in forest biodiversity. Ecol. Econ. 2009, 68:2910-2917.
21. Ferraro P.J., Kiss A. Direct payments to conserve biodiversity. Science 2002, 298:1718-1719.
22. Franklin S. Białowieża Forest, Poland: representation, myth, and the politics of dispossession. Environ. Plan. A 2002, 34:1459-1485.
23. Furlong K. Unexpected narratives in conservation: discourses of identity and place in Šumava National Park, Czech Republic. Space Polity 2006, 10:47-65.
24. Gliński P. Konflikt o Puszcze. Raport z badań nad konfliktem społecznym z poszerzeniem BPN. Pogranicze: Studia Społeczne 2001, 10:47-114.
25. Gołos P., Zajac S. The role of forestry in the socio-economic development of Poland's agricultural region (input-output analysis). Folia For. Pol. Ser. A - For. 2007-2008, 49-50.
26. Gómez-Baggethun E., De Groot R., Lomas P.L., Montes C. The history of ecosystem services in economic theory and practice: from early notions to markets and payment schemes. Ecol. Econ. 2010, 69:1209-1218.
27. Gorner T., Najmanova K., Cihar M. Changes in local people's perceptions of the Sumava National Park in the Czech Republic over a ten-year period (1998-2008). Sustainability 2012, 4:1354-1370.
28. Grodzińska-Jurczak M., Cent J. Expansion of nature conservation areas: problems with Natura 2000 implementation in Polandα. Environ. Manage. 2011, 47:11-27.
29. GUS Ochrona Przyrody Główny Urzad Statystyczny, Warszawa 2010.
30. GUS Rocznik demograficzny - Demographic Yearbook of Poland 2011, Główny Urzad Statystyczny, Warszawa.
31. Gutowski J.M., Jedrzejewski W., Bobiec A., Faliński J.B., Okołów C., Popiel J., Jedrzejewska B., Brzeziecki B., Korczyk A. Zasady funkcjonowania Białowieskiego Parku Narodowego powiekszonego na cały obszar Puszczy Białowieskiej 2000, Białowieski Park Narodowy, Białowieża.
32. Hartter J. Resource use and ecosystem services in a forest park landscape. Soc. Nat. Resour. 2010, 23:207-223.
33. Hartter J., Goldman A. Local responses to a forest park in western Uganda: alternate narratives on fortress conservation. Oryx 2011, 45:60-68.
34. Hiedanpaa J. The edges of conflict and consensus: a case for creativity in regional forest policy in Southwest Finland. Ecol. Econ. 2005, 55:485-498.
35. Hirschnitz-Garbers M., Stoll-Kleemann S. Opportunities and barriers in the implementation of protected area management: a qualitative meta-analysis of case studies from European protected areas. Geogr. J. 2011, 177:321-334.
36. IUCN Recommendations. Vth IUCN World Parks Congress 2003.
37. Jedrzejewska B., Jedrzejewski W. Predation in Vertebrate Communities. The Białowieża Primeval Forest as a Case Study 1998, Springer, Berlin.
38. Jedrzejewska B., Jedrzejewski W. Ochrona Puszczy Białowieskiej - problem czy szansa na sukcesα. Biuletyn Informacyjny Rady Programowej Porozumienia Zielone Płuca Polski 2003, 24:143-163.
39. Jedrzejewski W., Jedrzejewska B. Projekt utworzenia Parku Narodowego Puszczy Białowieskiej. Chrońmy Przyrode Ojczysta 1995, 51:16-36.
40. Keulartz J. European nature conservation and restoration policy - problems and perspectives. Restor. Ecol. 2009, 17:446-450.
41. Kianicka S., Buchecker M., Hunziker M., Muller-Boker M. Locals' and tourists' sense of place - a case study of a Swiss Alpine village. Mt. Res. Dev. 2006, 26:55-63.
42. Kluvánková-Oravská T., Chobotová V., Banaszak I., Slavikova L., Trifunovova S. From government to governance for biodiversity: the perspective of central and Eastern European transition countries. Environ. Policy Gov. 2009, 19:186-196.
43. Knorn J., Kuemmerle T., Radeloff V.C., Szabo A., Mindrescu M., Keeton W.S., Abrudan I., Griffiths P., Gancz V., Hostert P. Forest restitution and protected area effectiveness in post-socialist Romania. Biol. Conserv. 2012, 146:204-212.
44. Królikowska K. Konflikty społeczne w polskich parkach narodowych 2007, Oficyna Wydawnicza Impuls, Kraków.
45. Lawrence A. Experiences with participatory conservation in post-socialist Europe. Int. J. Biodivers. Sci. Manage. 2008, 4:179-186.
46. Locke H., Dearden P. Rethinking protected area categories and the new paradigm. Environ. Conserv. 2005, 32:1-10.
47. Lockwood M., Worboys G., Kothari A. Managing Protected Areas: A Global Guide 2006, Earthscan, London.
48. MA Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. Ecosystems and Human Well-Being: Synthesis 2005, Island Press, Washington, DC.
49. Marris E. The heart of the wood. Nature 2008, 455:277-280.
50. Martín-López B., Iniesta-Arandia I., García-Llorente M., Palomo I., Casado-Arzuaga I., Amo D.G.D., Gómez-Baggethun E., Oteros-Rozas E., Palacios-Agundez I., Willaarts B., González J.A., Santos-Martín F., Onaindia M., López-Santiago C., Montes C. Uncovering ecosystem service bundles through social preferences. PLoS ONE 2012, 7:e38970.
51. McShane T.O., Hirsch P.D., Trung T.C., Songorwa A.N., Kinzig A., Monteferri B., Mutekanga D., Thang H.V., Dammert J.L., Pulgar-Vidal M., Welch-Devine M., Brosius J.P., Coppolillo P., O'Connor S. Hard choices: making trade-offs between biodiversity conservation and human well-being. Biol. Conserv. 2011, 144:966-972.
52. Milne S., Niesten E. Direct payments for biodiversity conservation in developing countries: practical insights for design and implementation. Oryx 2000, 43:530-541.
53. Mose I., Weixlbaumer N. Protected areas and regional development in Europe: towards a new model for the 21st century 2007, Ashgate, Aldershot.
54. MOŚZNiL Kontrakt dla Puszczy Białowieskiej. Działania na rzecz powiekszenia parku narodowego w obrebie polskiej cześci Puszczy Białowieskiej 1998, Ministerstwo Ochrony Środowiska, Zasobów Naturalnych i Leśnictwa, Warszawa.
55. Nelson F., Foley C., Foley L.S., Leposo A., Loure E., Peterson D., Peterson M., Peterson T., Sachedina H., Williams A. Payments for ecosystem services as a framework for community-based conservation in Northern Tanzania: conservation practice and policy. Conserv. Biol. 2010, 24:78-85.
56. Niedziałkowski K., Paavola J., Jedrzejewska B. Participation and protected areas governance: the impact of changing influence of local authorities on the conservation of the Białowieża Primeval Forest, Poland. Ecol. Soc. 2012, 17:2. 10.5751/ES04461-170102.
57. Noss R.F. Local priorities can be too parochial for biodiversity. Nature 2010, 463:424.
58. Olko J., Hedrzak M., Cent J., Subel A. Cooperation in the Polish national parks and their neighborhood in a view of different stakeholders - a long way aheadα. Innov.: Eur. J. Soc. Sci. 2011, 24:295-312.
59. Pabian O., Jaroszewicz B. Socio-economic benefits of Natura 2000: case study on the ecosystem services provided by Białowieża Forest PLC 20004. Output of the EC project Financing Natura 2000: cost estimate and benefits of Natura 2000. Contract No. 070307/2007/484403/MAR/B2 2007, Available: http://ec.europa.eu/environment/nature/natura2000/financing/docs/bialowiaza_case_study.pdf (accessed 26.02.13).
60. Paavola J. Protected areas governance and justice: theory and the European Union's habitats directive. Environ. Sci. 2004, 1:59-77.
61. Peterken G. Natural Woodland: Ecology and Conservation in Northern Temperate Regions 1996, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
62. Petrova S., Čihař M., Bouzarovski S. Local nuances in the perception of nature protection and place attachment: a tale of two parks. Area 2011, 43:327-335.
63. Phillips A. Turning ideas on their head: the new paradigm for protected areas. George Wright Forum 2003, 20:8-32.
64. Polish Parliament Proceedings from the Meeting of the Commission on the Environment, Natural Resources and Forestry on the Government Project on the Amendment of the Nature Conservation Law 2000, Available at: http://orka2.sejm.gov.pl/Debata3.nsf/main/15BDA44E (accessed 17.07.12).
65. Rauschmayer F., Berghöfer A., Omann I., Zikos D. Examining processes or/and outcomesα Evaluation concepts in European governance of natural resources. Environ. Policy Gov. 2009, 19:159-173.
66. Raymond C.M., Bryan B.A., MacDonald D.H., Cast A., Strathearn S., Grandgirard A., Kalivas T. Mapping community values for natural capital and ecosystem services. Ecol. Econ. 2009, 68:1301-1315.
67. Redford K.H., Adams W.M. Payment for ecosystem services and the challenge of saving nature. Conserv. Biol. 2009, 23:785-787.
68. Redford K.H., Stearman A.M. Forest-dwelling native Amazonians and the conservation of biodiversity: interests in common or in collisionα. Conserv. Biol. 1993, 7:248-255.
69. Rodela R., Udovč A. Participation in nature protection: does it benefit the local communityα A Triglav National Park case study. Int. J. Biodivers. Sci. Manage. 2008, 4:209-218.
70. Sadowski A. Społeczno-kulturowe nastepstwa poszerzenia Białowieskiego Parku Narodowego. Pogranicze: Studia Społeczne 2001, 10:7-46.
71. Schelhas J., Sherman R.E., Fahey T.J., Lassoie J.P. Linking community and national park development: a case from the Dominican Republic. Nat. Resour. Forum 2002, 26:140-149.
72. Schwartz K.Z.S. Masters in our native place: the politics of Latvian national parks on the road from communism to Europe. Polit. Geogr. 2006, 25:42-71.
73. Seppelt R., Dormann C.F., Eppink F.V., Lautenbach S., Schmidt S. A quantitative review of ecosystem service studies: approaches, shortcomings and the road ahead. J. Appl. Ecol. 2011, 48:630-636.
74. Sikor T. The commons in transition: agrarian and environmental change in Central and Eastern Europe. Environ. Manage. 2004, 34:270-280.
75. Sokal R.R., Rohlf F.J. Biometry 1995, W.H. Freeman, New York.
76. Stahl J., Sikor T., Dorondel S. The institutionalisation of property rights in Albanian and Romanian biodiversity conservation. Int. J. Agric. Resour. Gov. Ecol. 2009, 8:57-73.
77. Stringer L.C., Paavola J. Participation in environmental conservation and protected area management in Romania: a review of three case studies. Environ. Conserv. 2013, 40:138-146.
78. Švajda J. Participatory conservation in a post-communist context: the Tatra National Park and Biosphere Reserve, Slovakia. Int. J. Biodivers. Sci. Manage. 2008, 4:200-208.
79. Švajda J., Fenichel E.P. Evaluation of integrated protected area management in Slovakian National Parks. Pol. J. Environ. Stud. 2011, 20:1053-1060.
80. Symonides E. Ochrona przyrody 2008, Wydawnictwa Uniwersytetu Warszawskiego, Warszawa.
81. Szafer W. Pierwsze karty z historii Białowieskiego Parku Narodowego. Kosmos 1957, 6:469-475.
82. Tickle A., Clarke R. Nature and landscape conservation in transition in central and south-eastern Europe. Eur. Environ. 2000, 10(5):211-219.
83. Turner R.K., Daily G.C. The ecosystem services framework and natural capital conservation. Environ. Resour. Econ. 2008, 39:25-35.
84. UN Convention on biological diversity. Concluded at Rio de Janeiro on 5 June 1992. United Nations - Treaty Series No. 30619 1992.
85. UNESCO About MAB 2010, Available: http://www.unesco.org/new/en/natural-sciences/environment/ecological-sciences/man-and-biosphere-programme/about-mab/ (accessed 04.07.13).
86. Urzad Statystyczny w Białymstoku Ludność, ruch naturalny i migracje w województwie Podlaskim w 2010 r 2011, Urzad Statystyczny w Białymstoku, Białystok.
87. Walker P., Fortmann L. Whose landscapeα A political ecology of the 'exurban' Sierra. Cult. Geogr. 2003, 10:469-491.
88. Wells M., McShane T.O. Integrating protected area management with local needs and aspirations. AMBIO 2004, 33:513-519.
89. Wesselink A., Paavola J., Fritsch O., Renn O. Rationales for public participation in environmental policy and governance: practitioners' perspectives. Environ. Plan. A 2011, 43:2688-2704.
90. Wesołowski T. Virtual conservation: how the European Union is turning a blind eye to its vanishing primeval forests. Conserv. Biol. 2005, 19:1349-1358.
91. Zespół Prezydenta RP Puszcza Białowieska - Dziedzictwo Przyrodnicze i Kulturowe. Projekty Ustaw. Zespół Prezydenta Rzeczypospolitej Polskie do Opracowania Projektu Ustawy Regulujacej Status Dziedzictwa Przyrodniczego i Kulturowego Puszczy Białowieskiej, Warszawa, Poland 2006, Available at: http://puszcza-bialowieska.darz-bor.info/pliki/pnpb-projekt.pdf.