China Management Effectiveness Assessment of Protected Areas in the Upper Yangtze Ecoregion using WWF s RAPPAM Methodology

Transcription

1 China China Management Effectiveness Assessment of Protected Areas in the Upper Yangtze Ecoregion using WWF s RAPPAM Methodology

2 Figure 2. Geography of the forests of the Upper Yangtze (FUY) ecoregion km 5 Li Diqiang, Zhou Jianhua, Dong Ke, Wu Bo, Zhu Chunquan 23 China: Management Effectiveness Assessment of Protected Areas in the Upper Yangtze Ecoregion using WWF s RAPPAM Methodology WWF Gland, Switzerland Front cover photograph: Ailurus fulgens red panda captive, on a tree branch, Wolong Research Station. WWF/Fritz Pölking

3 CHINA Management Effectiveness Assessment of Protected Areas in the Upper Yangtze Ecoregion using WWF s RAPPAM Methodology Li Diqiang, Chinese Academy of Forestry Zhou Jianhua, Beijing Forestry University Dong Ke, WWF-China Programme Office Wu Bo, Chinese Academy of Forestry Zhu Chunquan, WWF-China Programme Office

4 CONTENTS INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND 3 IMPLEMENTING THE METHODOLOGY 6 FINDINGS AND ANALYSES 9 RECOMMENDATIONS 23 REFERENCES AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS WWF CHINA CASE STUDY 2

5 INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND The forests of the Upper Yangtze (FUY) ecoregion occupy the southwestern portion of China. They are spread over 11 provinces and cover an area of just over a million square kilometres of the Upper Yangtze river system (Figure 1). The FUY ecoregion is characterized by dramatic variations in altitude and deep north south valleys which serve as major corridors for species exchange. The region is extremely rich in biodiversity, exhibiting high levels of species richness and endemism. As a result, the FUY ecoregion has been identified as one of the 25 focal Global 2 Ecoregions (Figure 2), and is one of the most important areas for natural forest conservation in China (Ginsberg, 1999; Olson and Dinerstein, 2). Several international nature conservation organizations, including Conservation International, The Nature Conservancy, and Birdlife International, have also identified this area as having high value for biodiversity conservation. Figure 1. Location of the forests of the Upper Yangtze (FUY) ecoregion in China km 5 INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND 3

6 The first protected areas to be established in the ecoregion Wolong, Baishuijiang, Wanglang, and Labahe protected areas, were set up in 1963 for the conservation of the giant panda. In time, with increased state attention being given to nature conservation, the numbers and area of protected areas increased rapidly during the 198s and 199s (see Figure 3). By the end of 2, there were 249 protected areas in the FUY ecoregion. The distribution of these protected areas is shown in Figure 4. Figure 3. The growth in number and area of nature reserves in the FUY ecoregion Area Number 25 Area (million ha) Number of nature reserves Year WWF CHINA CASE STUDY Since 21, WWF International has supported a systematic conservation planning project in the FUY ecoregion as part of its Forests for Life Programme. Assessing the management effectiveness of existing protected areas is regarded as an important step in the process of systematic conservation planning (Margules and Pressey, 2). Assessments of management effectiveness can play a major role in evaluating conservation goals at a broad, system-wide scale, evaluating pressures and threats within each protected area, evaluating management strengths and weaknesses, and evaluating and prioritizing conservation actions. At the start of the systematic conservation planning project, the WWF Forests for Life Programme was in the process of developing the Rapid Assessment and Prioritization of Protected Area Management (RAPPAM) Methodology (Ervin, 23). To support the conservation project, the WWF-China Programme Office adopted this methodology to assess the management effectiveness of existing protected areas in the FUY ecoregion. 4

7 Figure 4. Distribution of protected areas in the FUY ecoregion INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND 5

8 IMPLEMENTING THE METHODOLOGY SELECTION OF PROTECTED AREAS Although 249 protected areas have been established in the ecoregion, many were established in response to a specific conservation crisis such as a rapid decline in population of a key species, rather than as part of a systematic conservation strategy. Some protected areas are simply marked on paper and have no infrastructure or staff actually managing them. In this case study, the following criteria were used to select protected areas: protected areas that have been established for terrestrial biodiversity conservation protected areas that have a national or provincial level designation protected areas that have adequate data availability. A total number of 88 protected areas (out of 121 national and provincial level protected areas) were finally selected for this case study. Most of the selected protected areas contain forest ecosystems, although a few contain wetland and grassland ecosystems. Almost all of these protected areas are classified as strict protected areas, belonging to IUCN s Category I (IUCN, 1994). The 88 protected areas selected for the assessment are distributed across three subregions: Yunnan-Tibet, Sichuan-Guizhou, and Qinling-Daba. In the Yunnan-Tibet sub-region, 3 protected areas were selected from Yunnan and 2 from Tibet. In the Sichuan-Guizhou sub-region, 27 protected areas were selected from Sichuan and 3 from Guizhou province. The remaining 26 protected areas were selected from the Qinling- Daba sub-region, from the provinces of Hunan, Hubei, Henan, Gansu, and Shaanxi. Figure 5. Protected areas in the FUY ecoregion included in the study (reserves with circular boundaries do not have actual boundaries designated yet) WWF CHINA CASE STUDY 6

9 REVIEW OF EXISTING DATA Most of the national-level protected areas had a thorough master plan and comprehensive resource inventory, which provided basic data on the protected areas. Some of the provincial-level protected areas also had similar data. Additional data sources included the FUY ecoregion systematic conservation plan and a national forest protected area systematic plan. These two plans provided information on biodiversity conservation and social economic information factors. Specific GIS layers included vegetation maps, land use maps, human settlements, roads and railways, focal species distribution, and boundaries for most of the protected areas. Data also included information on the management level (e.g. local, provincial or national), development, history, area, species inventory, and management inputs and outputs of each protected area. An earlier, preliminary assessment of the management effectiveness of 22 panda reserves also provided useful information for the assessment within the FUY ecoregion. A workshop for biodiversity conservation prioritysetting within the FUY ecoregion was held in Chengdu, Sichuan province in March 22. More than 6 experts participated in the workshop, many of them professionals who had been working in the region for a number of years. The workshop provided detailed information on the pressures and threats for biodiversity conservation in priority areas. Most of the 88 selected protected areas for the RAPPAM assessment were distributed in these priority areas. Other data sources include national wildlife surveys, which provided recent animal distribution data for most of the protected areas. Published documents, including Biodiversity Review of China, Biodiversity Action Plan of China, China s Biodiversity: A country study and a series of reports of provincial forest and vegetation status studies provided additional data (Chen, 1993; SEPA, 1998; Tang, 1996; Xi 1984). DATA COLLECTION In 21, 18 responses were received from 2 questionnaires sent out to protected area managers in the FUY ecoregion, under the coordination of the State Forestry Administration. These 18 protected areas included the 88 selected protected areas for the RAPPAM assessment. The questionnaire included questions regarding personnel, investments, management goals, patrolling, monitoring, research, education and other critical management activities. The answers provided baseline data for most of the questions in the Rapid Assessment Questionnaire. In April 21, a workshop for introducing systematic conservation planning and the assessment of management effectiveness was held in Beijing. Around 3 protected area experts and staff from WWF-China participated in the workshop. Protected area managers completed 38 Rapid Assessment Questionnaires during two subsequent training workshops for protected area managers in September and November of 21. Based on data from these workshops, from the initial surveys, and materials from existing protected areas management plans and other data sources (as mentioned above), protected area experts completed Rapid Assessment Questionnaires for all 88 protected areas in the assessment. In April 22, a three-day RAPPAM workshop was held in Chengdu City in Sichuan Province. More than 3 protected area staff participated, including 24 participants from 18 protected areas in the ecoregion and 3 county-level government officials. After a detailed introduction to the RAPPAM Methodology, each aspect of the Rapid Assessment Questionnaire was discussed, and then scored individually. During the workshop, the preliminary assessment results for the selected 88 protected areas were presented and then compared with the questionnaires answered by participants from protected areas. The preliminary data for pressures and threats and the management strengths and weaknesses were IMPLEMENTING THE METHODOLOGY 7

10 consistent with data from the workshop. Although the full data set was not derived from an interactive, participatory workshop, it was felt that the data used had been adequately triangulated by various sources, including feedback from protected area managers. The data were considered to adequately identify key threats and management weaknesses, and enable the basic analyses of the RAPPAM Methodology. Figure 6. Participants at the management effectiveness workshop in Beijing, April 21 WWF CHINA CASE STUDY Photo: WWF/J. Ervin 8

11 FINDINGS AND ANALYSES MANAGEMENT EFFECTIVENESS In general, planning is quite strong (the system-wide average score is 3.3), while inputs and processes are weak, averaging scores of 2.3 and 2.5 respectively (see Table 1, page 1). Table 1 shows that site design receives the highest score of the ten aspects, while facilities and staff are among the lowest scores. The facilities and infrastructure aspect scored only 2.1; existing infrastructure and facilities are seriously insufficient for achieving protection objectives. In addition to infrastructure and finance inadequacies, staff is also insufficient for conducting critical management activities. Insufficient inputs have prevented the implementation of sound management practices. The processes section of the assessment also has relatively low scores, particularly in research. The assessment covered four major aspects of management effectiveness: planning (objectives, legal status, site design, and planning); inputs (staff, communication and information inputs, infrastructure, finances); management processes (management planning, management practices, research, monitoring and evaluation); and outputs (threat prevention, site restoration, wildlife management, community outreach, visitor management, planning outputs, monitoring, training, and research). When considering management effectiveness across all protected areas in each of the three sub-regions, all regions showed similar levels and ranges of management effectiveness, with the sum of scores for planning, inputs, and processes varying from a minimum of 4 to a maximum of 13 (see Figure 7). An effectively managed protected area was defined as one that had an average score of no less than 3. each for planning, inputs, and processes, and a total average score of no less than 9.. Given this definition, only 29 of the 88 protected areas (33%) can be considered well managed. Although 67 protected areas (76%) did have adequate planning, only 31 protected areas (35%) had adequate processes, and only 18 protected areas (2%) had adequate inputs. Among the 88 protected areas, 18 scored less than 6, out of a potential total score of 15, indicating significant problems in management effectiveness. Figure 7. Overall management effectiveness in three sub-regions Score Yunnan sub-region PA1 PA2 PA3 PA4 PA5 PA6 PA7 PA8 PA9 PA1 PA11 PA12 PA13 PA14 PA15 PA16 PA17 PA18 PA19 Planning Inputs Processes PA2 PA21 PA22 PA23 PA24 PA25 PA26 PA27 PA28 PA29 PA3 PA31 PA32 FINDINGS AND ANALYSES 9

12 Score Qinling-Daba sub-region PA33 PA34 PA35 PA36 PA37 PA38 PA39 PA4 PA41 PA42 PA43 PA44 PA45 PA46 PA47 PA48 Planning Inputs Processes PA49 PA5 PA51 PA52 PA53 PA54 PA55 PA56 PA57 PA58 Score Sichuan-Guizhou sub-region PA59 PA6 PA61 PA62 PA63 PA64 PA65 PA66 PA67 PA68 PA69 PA7 PA71 PA72 PA73 PA74 PA75 PA76 Planning Inputs Processes PA77 PA78 PA79 PA8 PA81 PA82 PA83 PA84 PA85 PA86 PA87 PA88 WWF CHINA CASE STUDY The rapid growth in the number of protected areas in China has resulted in insufficient inputs across the entire protected area system, although the Chinese government has increased funding to the protected area system since Hence, many protected areas lack infrastructure, facilities, and adequate staff to ensure sound management practices. Figure 7 shows 2 protected areas with scores greater than 1, indicating a stronger base of management effectiveness. Most of these high-scoring protected areas contain conservation projects that have been supported by NGOs and international conservation organizations. Table 1. Average scores for various aspects of management effectiveness Planning Objectives 3.4 Legal status 3.1 Site design 3.5 Inputs Staff 2.3 Communication 2.6 Infrastructure 2.1 Finance 2.3 Processes Management planning 2.8 Management processes 2.5 Research 2.4 1

13 PLANNING Figure 8 provides the average score of each question in the planning sections. This shows that planning as a whole has a relatively high score for the protected areas in the FUY ecoregion. All questions relating to objectives have scores averaging higher than 3., the threshold for effective management. In nearly all cases, the primary objective of establishing protected areas is the conservation of biodiversity, and the central government has developed a series of laws regarding the establishment of protected areas. Protected area design and boundary demarcation also receive considerable help from government and other experts. Thus planning-related scores are quite high. However, there are some specific weaknesses in planning. Law enforcement and community conflicts have quite low average scores (2.7 and 1.7) and surrounding land use scored only 2.4, far below the average score for planning and site design. The protected areas are mostly surrounded by heavily populated areas, and even parts of land within protected areas are under agricultural use. Local people have traditionally used and depended upon on the resources available within and surrounding the protected areas. Furthermore, while early stages of protected area design focus on biological integrity, protected areas may include both state-owned and community-owned land. As a result, there are likely to be conflicts over resource use rights in such areas, particularly if mechanisms for compensating local communities are absent or inadequate. Figure 8. Average score for planning sub-items Protects Biodiversity Linked to Biodiversity Assets Consistent Policies Employees Understand Community Support Average Score Long-term Security No Disputes Boundary Demarcation Law Enforcement Community Conflicts Appropriate Siting Layout and Configuration Zoning Surrounding Land Use Landscape Linkages Objectives Legal Security Site Design INPUTS As shown in Table 1, the infrastructure sub-item only has a score of 2.1, indicating that the existing infrastructure and facilities are seriously insufficient for realizing protection objectives. In addition to the infrastructure and facilities, staffing is also insufficient for conducting critical management activities. Figure 9 shows the average score of each question in the inputs section. The questions in this section received relatively lower scores in general. Only the questions on performance review, communication equipment, finance management, and budget allocations have a score over 3.; all other questions have average scores of less than 3.. The questions on staff employment conditions and field equipment have scores of 1.5 and 1.7 respectively; only 21.8 per cent of the protected areas chose mostly yes or yes to the former question, and 23.9 per cent chose mostly yes or yes to the latter. The workshop participants suggested that they faced shortages in salaries, personnel training, facilities, and equipment due to a general lack of funding support. The consequences of inadequately trained staff include inadequate communication with local communities and inadequate data collection and analysis. FINDINGS AND ANALYSES 11

14 The background and experience of protected area staff is also a critical factor for improving and maintaining the management effectiveness of protected areas. Many protected areas were created from former forestry bureaus (in China a forestry bureau is a forest management unit of between 1, and 4, hectares, made up of many forest farms, with logging, wood processing and silviculture activities). In most cases, logging workers, who have neither a strong education nor adequate knowledge of biological and social sciences, became staff in the protected areas. This explains the discrepancies in staff capabilities within the protected area system. For national-level protected areas, infrastructure costs are partly funded by the central government, and ongoing costs, such as personnel and operational fees, are funded by provincial or county government. All costs for local-level protected areas (including provincial, municipal, and county) are funded by local governments, with the exception of some funding from NGOs and international organizations. Therefore, the level of inputs into protected areas depends on the local economy and attitude of local governments toward the protected areas and biodiversity conservation. Unfortunately, most protected areas are located in economically poor areas, and local governments have other, more pressing, financial responsibilities. Generally, many local governments are unwilling or unable to support the inputs needed to adequately manage protected areas. Lack of adequate funding results in a number of critical management activities that cannot be implemented, especially those activities with high financial outlay, including research, monitoring, local community communication, and education. Figure 9. Average score for inputs sub-items 5 Average Score Number Skills Training Performance Reviews Employment Conditions Communication Equipment Ecological Data Socio-economic Data Data Collection Equipment Data Processing Transportation Equipment Field Equipment Staff Facilities Maintenance Visiting Facilities Past 5 Years Future 5 Years Financial Management Budget Allocation Long-term Outlook Staff Communication Infrastructure Finances WWF CHINA CASE STUDY PROCESSES Processes includes management planning (management plan, inventories, maps, threats analysis, annual workplan); management processes (internal organization, transparent decisions, collaboration, community participation, effective communication); and research (impacts recorded, ecological research, social research, access to research and results incorporated). Questions within the processes section also show low scores, with most questions receiving scores less than 3. (see Figure 1). Ecological research and social research only received a score of 1.8; only 29.5 per cent of protected areas chose mostly yes or yes to this question. In some protected areas, research, evaluation, and monitoring activities are conducted solely by external scientific institutions or universities. Questions regarding maps and threat analyses also received very low scores. 12

15 In the FUY ecoregion, a master plan and resource inventory are prerequisites for a protected area to be upgraded from a provincial to a national level. Therefore, national reserves received high average scores (3.3) for management planning. The questions on internal organization and collaboration also received scores of greater than 3. However, because of limited funding, restoration, prevention, education, and extension programmes were considered inadequate. Figure 1. Average score for processes sub-items 5 Average Score Management Plan Inventories Maps Threats Analysis Annual Workplan Management Planning Internal Organization Transparent Decisions Collaboration Community Participatiion Effective Communication Management Processes Impacts Recorded Ecological Research Social Research Access to Research Research Results Incorporated OUTPUTS Outputs are key indicators of management effectiveness. The questions in this section asked whether threat prevention, site restoration, wildlife management, community outreach, visitor management, planning outputs, monitoring, training, and research outputs have been consistent with the pressures and threats, PA objectives, and annual workplan over the last two years. Most participants felt that management outputs in their protected areas were weak, primarily because they lack sufficient financial support and skilled workers to conduct critical management activities. While the average scores for visitor management, infrastructure development, planning and inventorying, and staff monitoring outputs is above 3, outputs for community outreach, site restoration, and research scored much lower around 2. The lack of staff and facilities prevents protected area staff from adequately detecting, mitigating, and preventing threats. Many protected areas generally manage large areas with only a few staff members and insufficient guard-stations. As a result, only a small portion of these large areas can be patrolled regularly. Not only is the number of staff insufficient to effectively manage the area, but also the capacity of staff falls behind actual needs. This capacity gap can be solved by training and appropriate workshops. However, most protected areas have inadequate training programmes and insufficient funding to develop such programmes. Figure 11. Average score for outputs sub-items 5 4 Average Score Threat Prevention Site Restoration Wildlife Management Community Outreach Visitor Management Infrastructure Development Planning and Inventorying Staff Monitoring Training and Development Research Outputs FINDINGS AND ANALYSES 13

16 DISCUSSION Figure 12 shows a comparison of management effectiveness in different sub-regions. While there is almost no difference between the sub-regions in planning, there is a significant difference for inputs and processes. The Yunnan-Tibet sub-region as a whole is lower in inputs and management processes compared with the other two subregions. The protected areas in Yunnan-Tibet are mainly in Yunnan province, where the lack of funding from the provincial government is the critical factor for the low scores in inputs. Economic development in Yunnan province has been relatively slow, and the local government is unable to invest much money in protected areas. Furthermore, biodiversity conservation in Yunnan has not attracted the attention of international organizations until recently. International funding is also low compared with the other two sub-regions, which focus on panda protected areas. The central government is continuing to fund the panda conservation programme, and international organizations such as WWF have contributed substantial resources to panda conservation efforts, including promoting the improvement of management effectiveness in these protected areas. Although the level of inputs in the other two sub-regions is comparatively better than that for the Yunnan-Tibet sub-region, the protected areas in the FUY ecoregion as a whole have insufficient inputs. Figure 12. Comparison of management effectiveness in different sub-regions 5 Overall Yunan-Tibet Sichuan-Guizhou Qingling-Daba PLANNING AVERAGES Objectives Legal Status Design INPUTS AVERAGES Staff Communication Infrastructure PROCESSES AVERAGES Management Planning Management Processes Research/ Monitoring WWF CHINA CASE STUDY Insufficient inputs directly affect management processes. Because employment conditions are insufficient to retain staff, many protected areas cannot recruit or retain high quality staff, so many critical management activities cannot be completed. For example, a lack of skilled staff, equipment, and facilities prevented protected area staff from implementing effective restoration, prevention, and monitoring activities. This issue can be looked at from the reverse perspective; those protected areas with high inputs also have high scores in processes and evaluation. Among the selected protected areas in the Qinling-Daba subregion, only six protected areas receive funding from the GEF (Global Environment Facility) Programme: Shennongjia Foping Taibai Zhouzhi Niubeiliang Changqing The GEF Programme supported these protected areas through infrastructure construction, development of facilities, and purchase of equipment, as well as with staff capacity building. These protected areas with higher inputs also have better management processes. We can compare these six protected areas with the overall average in the FUY ecoregion in all three aspects (see Figure 13). These GEF Programme-supported protected areas all display quite high overall management effectiveness compared with other protected areas, especially in the inputs and processes categories. 14

17 Figure 13. Comparison of management effectiveness of the GEF protected areas with system-wide overall averages 14 Planning Inputs Processes Overall Average Shennongjia Zhouzhi Foping Taibai Niubeiliang Changqing THREATS AND PRESSURES In the FUY ecoregion most of the protected areas are surrounded by populous local communities who traditionally depend upon the use of resources within or around them. The protected area system as a whole faces numerous pressures and threats, with each protected area facing several specific pressures and threats. In this assessment, seven major pressures and threats were selected: logging, animal poaching, collection of non-timber forest products (NTFPs), grazing, tourism, agriculture, and mining. These pressures and threats vary in extent and impact among the protected areas. LOGGING Many protected areas were formerly forestry bureaus and have been extensively logged in the past. Though large-scale commercial logging activities have stopped since the establishment of the protected areas, especially since the implementation of a national programme in 1998 that banned logging in natural forests, logging for personal use such as house building, furniture, fuel wood, and mushroom cultivation continues. As many protected areas have only been established within the last ten years, it is easy to see that logging was a strong pressure in the past. Logging threatens some tree species more than others, including spruce (Picea sp.) and silver fir (Abies sp.). It also causes the destruction and fragmentation of wildlife habitats and can lead to the eradication and even extinction of some plant species. As figures 18 and 19 illustrate, logging has occurred in 9 per cent of the reserves. However, threats from future logging have declined throughout the entire ecoregion, with average degrees of threat ranging from 6 to 13. Figure 14 shows Changqing Protected Area, a panda protected area that was transformed from a forest bureau in After establishing this protected area, logging within decreased sharply, and the threat of logging was reduced to a very low degree. However, the impacts from past logging practices to wildlife habitat (e.g. destruction of habitat and resources, disruption of natural processes, habitat fragmentation) will be long term. POACHING The people who live in the FUY ecoregion have a long tradition of hunting. Local people, who generally poach small animals and fowl, mainly carry out subsistence poaching. Commercial poaching is primarily for economically high-value wildlife, such as musk deer (Moschus sp.) and black bear (Selenarctos thibetanus ussuriensis). Both local people and outsiders conduct illegal commercial poaching. The equipment they use includes guns, nets, and traps, and some outside FINDINGS AND ANALYSES 15

18 poachers use motor vehicles. From the assessment it appears that poaching is occurring in more than 9 per cent of the protected areas, although the threat of poaching appears to have been reduced slightly system-wide (see figures 18 and 19). Figure 14. Former logging site in Changqing Nature Reserve NON-TIMBER FOREST PRODUCTS The collection of NTFPs has changed from subsistence to primarily commercial harvesting, as a result of rising prices and the ban on logging in natural forests. The NTFPs harvested include mushrooms, herbal medicines, and wild fruits and vegetables. Commercial exploitation of NTFPs is occurring in most of the protected areas and is rising throughout the entire ecoregion (see figures 18 and 19). TOURISM Tourism includes hiking, camping, boating, and other forms of recreation. The major negative effects of tourism in protected areas are impacts to the ecosystem and to wildlife habitat. Visitor overcrowding may also cause a reduction and degradation of certain habitats, including sensitive alpine grassland ecosystems. Although tourism is an increasing threat, the government and local communities often regard tourism as an ideal activity for economic development (see figures 18 and 19). In the workshop, some protected area managers planned to develop protected area Figure 15. Mammal furs on sale in communities near protected areas WWF CHINA CASE STUDY Photo: Zhu Chunquan Photo: Zhu Chunquan 16

19 tourism to increase operational budgets and staff salaries. The main threat is that such tourism is primarily opportunistic and lacks adequate planning and environmental safeguarding measures. GRAZING The number of cattle and sheep kept by a family is considered a symbol of wealth. Traditional grazing practices include allowing cattle to freely graze throughout a protected area. Alpine meadows and grasslands are the most severely affected by grazing. Overgrazing can reduce food for wildlife as well as result in desertification. Grazing is likely to decrease slightly in extent and degree throughout the whole ecoregion (see figures 18 and 19). AGRICULTURE Agricultural pressures occur within protected areas, and the overuse of pesticides on surrounding farmland also threatens protected areas. In Yunnan province, the traditional method of clearing land for agriculture is burning, which can cause forest fires. With the implementation of national policy to convert steep agriculture land to forest and grassland, agriculture threats will see an obvious reduction. Figure 16. Some giant panda reserves run panda watching trips which have a high impact on panda habitats Photos: Zhu Chunquan Figure 17. Fruit harvesting is a major NTFP activity in some protected areas FINDINGS AND ANALYSES 17

20 AN ANALYSIS OF THE PRESSURES AND THREATS The degree of pressures and threats varied widely among different protected areas; the degree of cumulative pressures in any single protected area ranged from 7 to 19, and the degree of cumulative threats ranged from 7 to 9. Logging has been the most serious pressure, and its average degree of pressure system-wide is much higher than that of other activities. Figures 18, 19, and 2 show that overall threats are expected to decline slightly. Only a few protected areas face increasing threats, mainly from increased tourism and NTFP collection. NTFPs, poaching, and logging are the three most widespread pressures, and the overall average degrees of these three activities are 8.52, 7.65, and respectively. The three most serious threats are NTFPs, tourism, and poaching; average degrees for these threats are 8.92, 8.61, and 6.55 respectively. Comparatively, the threat of logging is expected to decrease sharply, and the threat of poaching to decrease slightly. Meanwhile, tourism, and NTFPs are set to increase slightly. Tourism has replaced logging as the number one threat in this region. With increasing incomes, people are beginning to pay more attention to tourism. Protected areas are becoming more and more attractive because of their beautiful scenery and rich wildlife. Tourism has become a major threat for almost all protected areas (see figures 18 and 19). Figure 18. Occurrence of pressures and threats in all protected areas 1 Pressures Threats 8 WWF CHINA CASE STUDY Average Degree Percentage of PAs Logging Grazing Poaching Tourism NTFP Mining Figure 19. Average degree of pressures and threats Pressures Logging Grazing Poaching Tourism NTFP Mining Agriculture Threats Agriculture 18

21 The variation in pressures and threats between the protected areas is caused by differing degrees of resource exploitation by local communities, the location of protected areas, and the value of the resources within them. Figure 2 shows some of the differences between the three sub-regions. The lowest cumulative degree of pressures and threats is around 22 and the highest is 18. There are four reserves where the cumulative degree of pressures and threats is over 15: protected areas 21, 22, 39, and 76. These significantly threatened protected areas warrant immediate attention in restoration and threat prevention measures. Figure 2. Comparing cumulative threats and pressures by sub-region Cumulative Degree of Pressures and Threats Yunnan-Tibet sub-region PA1 PA2 PA3 PA4 PA5 PA6 PA7 PA8 PA9 PA1 PA11 PA12 PA13 PA14 Overall degree of threats PA15 PA16 PA17 PA18 PA19 PA2 PA21 PA22 PA23 Overall degree of pressures PA24 PA25 PA26 PA27 PA28 PA29 PA3 PA31 PA32 Cumulative Degree of Pressures and Threats Qinling-Daba sub-region PA33 PA34 PA35 PA36 PA37 PA38 PA39 PA4 PA41 PA42 PA43 PA44 Overall degree of threats PA45 PA46 PA47 PA48 PA49 PA5 PA51 Overall degree of pressures PA52 PA53 PA54 PA55 PA56 PA57 PA58 FINDINGS AND ANALYSES 19

22 Cumulative Degree of Pressures and Threats Sichuan-Guizhou sub-region PA59 PA6 PA61 PA62 PA63 PA64 PA65 PA66 PA67 PA68 PA69 PA7 PA71 PA72 Overall degree of threats PA73 PA74 PA75 PA76 PA77 PA78 PA79 PA8 Overall degree of pressures PA81 PA82 PA83 PA84 PA85 PA86 PA87 PA88 Because the resource characteristics and levels of economic development are different in each of the three sub-regions, the threats facing protected areas within them are quite different. A comparison of the threats in each sub-region (see Figure 21) shows that NTFPs, tourism, and poaching are the three major threats system-wide. In the Yunnan- Tibet sub-region, tourism, NTFPs, and poaching are the three most serious threats; in the Sichuan- Guizhou sub-region, it is NTFPs, tourism, and logging; and in the Qingling-Daba sub-region, NTFPs, agriculture, and tourism are the greatest threats. In all three sub-regions, logging and poaching threats are declining sharply, while threats from NTFP collection and tourism are increasing. In Yunnan province, the provincial government plans for tourism to become the cornerstone of its economy, hence the tourism threat in Yunnan-Tibet sub-region is likely to increase rapidly, and it will also increase in the other two sub-regions. All pressures and threats, except grazing and agriculture, show a similar trend. The pressure and threat of agriculture varies between the three regions. In Yunnan-Tibet the threat is considered to be lower due to a reduction in slash-and-burn farming, while in Sichuan-Guizhou region the increased use of pesticides in agriculture makes it a higher threat. In Qingling-Daba the agriculturallyrelated threats are anticipated to decline as a result of out-migration of workers to urban centres. Figure 21. Comparison of pressures and threats in different sub-regions Logging Grazing Poaching Tourism NTFP Mining Agriculture WWF CHINA CASE STUDY Degree Pressures Threats Pressures Threats Pressures Threats Pressures Threats System-wide Yunnan-Tibet Sichuan-Guizhou Qingling-Daba 2

23 CONSERVATION PRIORITIES This assessment covered pressures and threats to the protected areas, as well as management strengths and weaknesses. In order to improve management effectiveness with limited resources, and to improve biodiversity conservation in the FUY ecoregion, it is important to set conservation priorities for protected area management. Conservation priorities can be set using three criteria: biological importance, degree of pressures and threats, and management effectiveness. Those protected areas with high biological importance and a high degree of threat should receive highest priority. Furthermore, those areas within this group with low management effectiveness should be considered the most urgent. The maximum potential score for biological importance is 5, with four classes: very low biological importance (less than 2) low biological importance (2 3) high biological importance (3 4) very high biological importance (greater than 4). The overall degree of threat can also be divided into four classes: very low threat (less than 3) low threat (3 45) high threat (45 6) very high (greater than 6). Thirdly, the overall management effectiveness can be classified as: high management effectiveness (greater than 9) low management effectiveness (less than 9). In order to identify high-priority protected areas, areas with high overall threats and high biological importance for both high management effectiveness and low management effectiveness were identified (see Figure 22). Figure 22 shows that protected areas with both low management effectiveness and high effectiveness have high overall threats, and can be considered vulnerable and in need of special Figure 22. The individual protected areas plotted in the two dimensional space are defined by the degree of threats and biological importance. The figure shows this for protected areas with low management effectiveness and high management effectiveness. Low Management Effectiveness Protected Areas 1 9 PA3 4 Overall Threats PA75 PA7 4 PA86 PA1 PA6 PA4 1 PA22 PA43 PA37 PA8 PA26 PA3 PA6 8 PA88 PA7 PA67 PA48 PA6 6 PA18 PA1 PA14 PA4 PA8 2 PA85 PA25 PA5 PA7 3 PA13 PA15 PA3 1 PA16 PA2 PA45 PA32 PA23 PA6 PA6 5 PA27PA11 PA44 PA8 PA61 PA49 PA83 PA24 PA12 PA2 PA99 PA47 PA62 PA87 PA3 5 PA46 PA1 7 PA59 PA64 PA63 PA Biological Importance FINDINGS AND ANALYSES 21

24 High Management Effectiveness Protected Areas 1 9 Overall Threats PA84 PA39 PA4 PA52 PA51 PA3 3 PA36 PA7 PA21 PA3 PA2 8 PA7 7PA79 PA8 1 PA19 PA3 8PA76 PA2 PA54 PA53 PA56PA4 2 PA55 PA78 PA5 7 PA58 PA6 9 PA71 PA attention. However, protected areas with the greatest conservation priority are those with high biological importance, high overall threats, and low management effectiveness. Using the criteria of a biological importance score of more than 4 and an overall threats score of more than 45, protected areas 1, 8, 1, 3, 34, 37, 48, 68, 74, 75, and 86 have the highest conservation priority. If the biological importance score threshold is reduced to 3, protected areas 6, 26, 41, and 66 would also be included in the highest conservation priority category. Those protected areas with high importance and high overall threats but high management effectiveness should be ranked as secondary conservation priority protected areas. Using the same criteria of a biological importance score of more than 4 and an overall threats score of more than 45, protected areas 3, 33, 36, 51, 77, 79, and 81 are identified. If the biological importance score is reduced to 3, protected areas 7, 1, 21, 28, 39, and 4 should also be included. WWF CHINA CASE STUDY Biological Importance 22

25 RECOMMENDATIONS The analyses show that the protected area system planning is quite strong overall, though there are a number of management problems: lack of funding, low staff capability, and insufficient facilities and infrastructure. Also, there is a gap between actual management practices and management objectives. Insufficient inputs eventually result in poor management processes. The major problem of the protected areas system is insufficient inputs from government. Local governments cannot provide adequate funding for protected area management. Insufficient funding prevents protected areas from attracting high quality staff, as well as from mitigating and restoring damage from pressures and threats. Two trends that warrant special attention are the increased collection of NTFPs and increases in tourism. As logging ban policies are implemented, the collection of NTFPs is becoming a critical threat. Secondly, as the local economy has improved in recent years, transportation and communication have also improved, enabling faster and more efficient means of getting NTFPs to market, and attracting more people to the protected areas to exploit the resources at a commercial rather than subsistence scale. These trends have also led to increases in tourism. The following recommendations will help to improve the management effectiveness of the protected area system. FINANCIAL SUSTAINABILITY Request central government to cover the operational costs of national level protected areas, as well as to establish a fund to compensate local communities for not exploiting resources within community-owned portions of protected areas (ecological compensation). Establish a mechanism to capture revenues from sustainable tourism flows within protected areas. Establish a quota-based, controlled, and sustainable use mechanism for natural resource use, particularly of NTFPs, within protected areas. PROTECTED AREA MANAGEMENT Develop comprehensive management plans for all protected areas as the first step towards improving management effectiveness. This step is especially important for provincial-level protected areas, where such plans are likely to be inadequate or absent. Establish a capacity-building programme for protected area personnel, emphasizing building the capacity of existing staff to train new staff in key skills, particularly management planning, human resource management, training, and research. Establish a comprehensive programme to monitor management effectiveness on a regular basis. RECOMMENDATIONS 23

26 THREAT PREVENTION, MITIGATION, AND MONITORING Establish a programme to monitor and assess the impact of pressures and threats, particularly of poaching, tourism, NTFP collection, and grazing. Develop strategies for mitigating and preventing future threats. Establish system-wide management policies to regulate and adequately plan for increases in tourism and NTFP collection. Such strategies should be cross-sectoral, involving local and national agencies, NGOs, and businesses. The focus should be on developing models of sustainable ecotourism and NTFP harvesting that are compatible with or do not violate protected area objectives. POLICIES RELATED TO PROTECTED AREAS Improve communications and cooperation between NGOs and local and central government agencies responsible for protected area management. Lessons and innovations in protected area management should be routinely shared system-wide. Focus resources and efforts on protected areas that have been identified as having high conservation priority. Enhance education levels in communities surrounding protected areas. Promote environmentally beneficial technologies and land management practices, particularly in areas within and adjacent to protected areas. Examples include fuel-efficient wood stoves, integrated pest management farming practices, and improved grazing techniques. WWF CHINA CASE STUDY 24

27 REFERENCES AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Chen, Lingzhi Biodiversity Review of China: Current situation and conservation strategy. Science Press, Beijing. Ervin, J. 23. WWF Rapid Assessment and Prioritization of Protected Area Management (RAPPAM) Methodology. WWF, Gland, Switzerland. Ginsberg, J Global conservation priorities. Conservation Biology, 13(1): 5. IUCN Guidelines for Protected Areas Management Categories. IUCN, Cambridge, UK and Gland, Switzerland. Li, D, Song, Y and Ouyang, Z. 22. The National Forestry Nature Reserve System Plan. China Land Press, Beijing. Margules, C R and Pressey, R L. 2. Systematic conservation planning. Nature, 45: Olson, D and Dinerstein, E The Global 2: A representation approach to conserving the earth s most biologically valuable ecoregions. Conservation Biology, 12(3): SEPA China s biodiversity: A country study. Science Press, Beijing. Tang, Chanzhu (ed.) Birds of the Henduan Mountains Region. Science Press, Beijing. Xi, Chengpan The State General Planning for China Nature Conservation. Science Press, Beijing. This study was undertaken and facilitated by financial assistance from WWF International (Forests for Life Programme). The Protected Areas Programme Manager Devendra Rana is thanked for his pivotal role and support in all phases of the project. Jamison Ervin, the developer of the methodology, provided invaluable assistance in implementing the methodology, analysing and interpreting the results, and commenting on the manuscript. Finally, our colleagues Karma Tsering from Bhutan, Vyacheslav Tyrlyshkin and Alexey Blagovidov from Russia, and Peter Goodman from South Africa provided valuable comments on this manuscript. ACRONYMS FUY GEF GIS IUCN NGO NTFP PA RAPPAM WWF Forests of the Upper Yangtze Global Environment Facility Geographic Information System World Conservation Union Non-governmental organization Non-timber forest product Protected area Rapid Assessment and Prioritization of Protected Area Management World Wide Fund For Nature

28 China Protected Areas Initiative Forests for Life WWF International This package is printed on Context FSC paper supplied by Paperback. Chain of custody number XXXXXXX. Context FSC is made from 75% de-inked fibre and 25% FSC certified pulp from well-managed forests independently certified in accordance with the rules of the Forest Stewardship Council. Avenue du Mont-Blanc 1196 Gland Switzerland Tel: Fax: