IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v12y2020i14p5497-d381679.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Biosphere Reserves’ Management Effectiveness—A Systematic Literature Review and a Research Agenda

Author

Listed:
  • Ana Filipa Ferreira

    (CENSE—Center for Environmental and Sustainability Research, NOVA College of Science and Technology, NOVA University Lisbon, 2829-516 Caparica, Portugal
    Institute of Ecology, Faculty of Sustainability and Center for Methods, Leuphana University, 21335 Lüneburg, Germany)

  • Heike Zimmermann

    (Institute for Ethics and Transdisciplinary Sustainability Research, Faculty of Sustainability, Leuphana University, 21335 Lüneburg, Germany)

  • Rui Santos

    (CENSE—Center for Environmental and Sustainability Research, NOVA College of Science and Technology, NOVA University Lisbon, 2829-516 Caparica, Portugal)

  • Henrik von Wehrden

    (Institute of Ecology, Faculty of Sustainability and Center for Methods, Leuphana University, 21335 Lüneburg, Germany)

Abstract

Research about biosphere reserves’ management effectiveness can contribute to better understanding of the existing gap between the biosphere reserve concept and its implementation. However, there is a limited understanding about where and how research about biosphere reserves’ management effectiveness has been conducted, what topics are investigated, and which are the main findings. This study addresses these gaps in the field, building on a systematic literature review of scientific papers. To this end, we investigated characteristics of publications, scope, status and location of biosphere reserves, research methods and management effectiveness. The results indicate that research is conceptually and methodologically diverse, but unevenly distributed. Three groups of papers associated with different goals of biosphere reserves were identified: capacity building, biodiversity conservation and sustainable development. In general, each group is associated with different methodological approaches and different regions of the world. The results indicate the importance of scale dynamics and trade-offs between goals, which are advanced as important leverage points for the success of biosphere reserves. Building on the gaps identified in the literature, a research agenda is proposed, focusing on the need to investigate mechanisms for holistic research, outcomes and trade-offs, transformations for social-ecological fit and institutions for integrated management across scales.

Suggested Citation

  • Ana Filipa Ferreira & Heike Zimmermann & Rui Santos & Henrik von Wehrden, 2020. "Biosphere Reserves’ Management Effectiveness—A Systematic Literature Review and a Research Agenda," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(14), pages 1-32, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:14:p:5497-:d:381679
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/14/5497/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/14/5497/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Cuong, Chu Van & Dart, Peter & Dudley, Nigel & Hockings, Marc, 2017. "Factors influencing successful implementation of Biosphere Reserves in Vietnam: Challenges, opportunities and lessons learnt," Environmental Science & Policy, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 16-26.
    2. Ana F. Ferreira & Heike Zimmermann & Rui Santos & Henrik Von Wehrden, 2018. "A Social–Ecological Systems Framework as a Tool for Understanding the Effectiveness of Biosphere Reserve Management," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(10), pages 1-26, October.
    3. Plummer, Ryan & Baird, Julia & Dzyundzyak, Angela & Armitage, Derek & Bodin, Örjan & Schultz, Lisen, 2017. "Is Adaptive Co-management Delivering? Examining Relationships Between Collaboration, Learning and Outcomes in UNESCO Biosphere Reserves," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 79-88.
    4. Schultz, Lisen & Duit, Andreas & Folke, Carl, 2011. "Participation, Adaptive Co-management, and Management Performance in the World Network of Biosphere Reserves," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 39(4), pages 662-671, April.
    5. Sebastian Schmidt & Stephan Busse & Elshan Nuriyev, 2017. "Government and biodiversity governance in Post-Soviet Azerbaijan: an institutional perspective," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 19(5), pages 1953-1980, October.
    6. Nick Kirsop-Taylor & Duncan Russel & Michael Winter, 2020. "The Contours of State Retreat from Collaborative Environmental Governance under Austerity," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-16, April.
    7. repec:lib:000cis:v:5:y:2017:i:1:p:35-42 is not listed on IDEAS
    8. Ashish Kothari & Federico Demaria & Alberto Acosta, 2014. "Buen Vivir, Degrowth and Ecological Swaraj: Alternatives to sustainable development and the Green Economy," Development, Palgrave Macmillan;Society for International Deveopment, vol. 57(3-4), pages 362-375, December.
    9. Robert Fletcher, 2012. "Using the Master's Tools? Neoliberal Conservation and the Evasion of Inequality," Development and Change, International Institute of Social Studies, vol. 43(1), pages 295-317, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Mónica de Castro-Pardo & João C. Azevedo, 2021. "A Goal Programming Model to Guide Decision-Making Processes towards Conservation Consensuses," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-25, February.
    2. Susana Perera-Valderrama & Laura Olivia Rosique-de la Cruz & Hansel Caballero-Aragón & Sergio Cerdeira-Estrada & Raúl Martell-Dubois & Rainer Ressl, 2023. "Mexico on Track to Protect 30% of Its Marine Area by 2030," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(19), pages 1-21, September.
    3. Jana Špulerová & Veronika Piscová & Noemi Matušicová, 2023. "The Contribution of Scientists to the Research in Biosphere Reserves in Slovakia," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-19, February.
    4. Aida Mammadova & Christopher D. Smith & Tatiana Yashina, 2021. "Comparative Analysis between the Role of Local Communities in Regional Development inside Japanese and Russian UNESCO’s Biosphere Reserves: Case Studies of Mount Hakusan and Katunskiy Biosphere Reserv," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(18), pages 1-23, September.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Alessandro Scuderi & Luisa Sturiale & Giuseppe Timpanaro & Agata Matarazzo & Silvia Zingale & Paolo Guarnaccia, 2022. "A Model to Support Sustainable Resource Management in the “Etna River Valleys” Biosphere Reserve: The Dominance-Based Rough Set Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-19, April.
    2. Pool-Stanvliet, Ruida & Stoll-Kleemann, Susanne & Giliomee, Jan H., 2018. "Criteria for selection and evaluation of biosphere reserves in support of the UNESCO MAB programme in South Africa," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 654-663.
    3. Sena-Vittini, Mildred & Gomez-Valenzuela, Victor & Ramirez, Katerin, 2023. "Social perceptions and conservation in protected areas: Taking stock of the literature," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 131(C).
    4. Sri Astutik & Jürgen Pretzsch & Jude Ndzifon Kimengsi, 2019. "Asian Medicinal Plants’ Production and Utilization Potentials: A Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(19), pages 1-33, October.
    5. Mónica de Castro-Pardo & Fernando Pérez-Rodríguez & José María Martín-Martín & João C. Azevedo, 2019. "Planning for Democracy in Protected Rural Areas: Application of a Voting Method in a Spanish-Portuguese Reserve," Land, MDPI, vol. 8(10), pages 1-17, October.
    6. František Petrovič & Martin Boltižiar & Iveta Rakytová & Ivana Tomčíková & Eva Pauditšová, 2021. "Long-Term Development Trend of the Historical Cultural Landscape of the UNESCO Monument: Vlkolínec (Slovakia)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-19, February.
    7. Barbara Quimby & Arielle Levine, 2018. "Participation, Power, and Equity: Examining Three Key Social Dimensions of Fisheries Comanagement," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-20, September.
    8. Ana F. Ferreira & Heike Zimmermann & Rui Santos & Henrik Von Wehrden, 2018. "A Social–Ecological Systems Framework as a Tool for Understanding the Effectiveness of Biosphere Reserve Management," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(10), pages 1-26, October.
    9. Gavin Melles, 2021. "Figuring the Transition from Circular Economy to Circular Society in Australia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(19), pages 1-20, September.
    10. Laterra, Pedro & Weyland, Federico & Auer, Alejandra & Barral, Paula & González, Aira & Mastrángelo, Matías & Rositano, Florencia & Sirimarco, Ximena, 2023. "MARCHI: A serious game for participatory governance of ecosystem services in multiple-use protected areas," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 63(C).
    11. Auliz-Ortiz, Daniel Martín & Arroyo-Rodríguez, Víctor & Mendoza, Eduardo & Martínez-Ramos, Miguel, 2023. "Are there trade-offs between conservation and development caused by Mexican protected areas?," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 127(C).
    12. Beling, Adrián E. & Vanhulst, Julien & Demaria, Federico & Rabi, Violeta & Carballo, Ana E. & Pelenc, Jérôme, 2018. "Discursive Synergies for a ‘Great Transformation’ Towards Sustainability: Pragmatic Contributions to a Necessary Dialogue Between Human Development, Degrowth, and Buen Vivir," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 144(C), pages 304-313.
    13. Ravikumar, Ashwin & Chairez Uriarte, Esperanza & Lizano, Daniela & Muñoz Ledo Farré, Andrea & Montero, Mariel, 2023. "How payments for ecosystem services can undermine Indigenous institutions: The case of Peru's Ampiyacu-Apayacu watershed," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 205(C).
    14. Pant, Laxmi Prasad, 2016. "Paradox of mainstreaming agroecology for regional and rural food security in developing countries," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 305-316.
    15. Sattler, Claudia & Schröter, Barbara & Jericó-Daminello, Camila & Sessin-Dilascio, Karla & Meyer, Claas & Matzdorf, Bettina & Wortmann, Lukas & de Almeida Sinisgalli, Paulo Antonio & Meyer, Angela &, 2015. "Understanding governance structures in community management of ecosystems and natural resources: The Marujá case study in Brazil," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 16(C), pages 182-191.
    16. Gräbner-Radkowitsch, Claudius & Strunk, Birte, 2023. "Degrowth and the Global South: The twin problem of global dependencies," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 213(C).
    17. Bhattarai, Kiran Kumari & Pant, Laxmi Prasad & FitzGibbon, John, 2020. "Contested governance of drinking water provisioning services in Nepal’s transboundary river basins," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 45(C).
    18. Dengler, Corinna & Seebacher, Lisa Marie, 2019. "What About the Global South? Towards a Feminist Decolonial Degrowth Approach," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 157(C), pages 246-252.
    19. Andreas Scheba, 2018. "Market-Based Conservation for Better Livelihoods? The Promises and Fallacies of REDD+ in Tanzania," Land, MDPI, vol. 7(4), pages 1-18, October.
    20. Mccourt, Willy, 2012. "Can Top-Down and Bottom-Up be Reconciled? Electoral Competition and Service Delivery in Malaysia," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 40(11), pages 2329-2341.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:14:p:5497-:d:381679. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.