Beyond parks as monoliths: Spatially differentiating park-people relationships in the Tadoba Andhari Tiger Reserve in India

被引:36
作者
Nagendra, Harini [1 ,2 ]
Rocchini, Duccio [3 ]
Ghate, Rucha [4 ]
机构
[1] Ashoka Trust Res Ecol & Environm ATREE, Bangalore 560064, Karnataka, India
[2] Indiana Univ, Ctr Study Inst Populat & Environm Change CIPEC, Bloomington, IN 47408 USA
[3] Univ Siena, Dipartimento Sci Ambientali G Sarfatti, I-53100 Siena, Italy
[4] SHODH, Inst Res & Dev, Nagpur 440033, Maharashtra, India
关键词
Biodiversity; India; Land cover change; Parks and people; Protected area; Spatial patterns; PROTECTED AREAS; NATIONAL-PARK; LANDSCAPE FRAGMENTATION; WILDLIFE; BIODIVERSITY; CONSERVATION; VILLAGES; IMPACT; WORK;
D O I
10.1016/j.biocon.2010.04.050
中图分类号
X176 [生物多样性保护];
学科分类号
090705 ;
摘要
Parks represent spatially and socially heterogeneous conservation units, yet are often assessed and managed using spatially homogeneous approaches. This paper represents an effort to focus on the larger social-ecological landscapes within which protected areas are embedded, to understand why conservation succeeds and fails in different parts of the landscape. In a wildlife sanctuary in the central plains of India (Tadoba Andhari Tiger Reserve), we address: (i) how people living within and immediately outside a park differentially impact its resources and (ii) how the park differentially impacts communities living within. Using forest plots, satellite imagery and interviews, we evaluate park conservation by assessing plant diversity, land cover change, forest fragmentation, and attitudes of local communities towards conservation. We find that interior villages have a negative impact on regeneration, but there is a decline in tree species diversity, and increased forest cover change and fragmentation at the park periphery. Interior villages suffer greatly from crop and livestock depredations by wildlife and consider park rules to be unfairly devised. Yet, they affirm the importance of the park for conservation, and are willing to work with park authorities for stricter protection. Park authorities largely focus on resettlement of interior villages, when they should also pay attention to protecting the peripheral areas of the park from severe degradation by surrounding villages. In summary, we find that different parts of the park landscape face different conservation challenges. Taking into account spatial variations in the factors influencing conservation can greatly benefit the management of protected areas. (C) 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:2900 / 2908
页数:9
相关论文
共 40 条
[1]   Explaining success on the commons: Community forest governance in the Indian Himalaya [J].
Agrawal, A ;
Chhatre, A .
WORLD DEVELOPMENT, 2006, 34 (01) :149-166
[2]   Residents' perceptions of Royal Bardia National Park, Nepal [J].
Allendorf, Teri D. ;
Smith, James L. D. ;
Anderson, Dorothy H. .
LANDSCAPE AND URBAN PLANNING, 2007, 82 (1-2) :33-40
[3]  
[Anonymous], 2002, MAKING PARKS WORK ST
[4]  
[Anonymous], 1988, NUMERICAL ECOLOGY
[5]   Interrogating Notions of the Powerless Oustee [J].
Beazley, Kim .
DEVELOPMENT AND CHANGE, 2009, 40 (02) :219-248
[6]  
Bray DB, 2008, ECOL SOC, V13
[7]  
CHAPIN M, 2004, WORLD WATCH NOV
[8]   Forest biodiversity gradients and the human impact in Annapurna Conservation Area, Nepal [J].
Christensen, Morten ;
Heilmann-Clausen, Jacob .
BIODIVERSITY AND CONSERVATION, 2009, 18 (08) :2205-2221
[9]   Interactions between protected areas and their surroundings in human-dominated tropical landscapes [J].
DeFries, Ruth ;
Karanth, Krithi K. ;
Pareeth, Sajid .
BIOLOGICAL CONSERVATION, 2010, 143 (12) :2870-2880
[10]   Status of land cover classification accuracy assessment [J].
Foody, GM .
REMOTE SENSING OF ENVIRONMENT, 2002, 80 (01) :185-201