Environmental Engineering Reference
In-Depth Information
whaling exemplifies the different world-views that exist concerning the acceptabil-
ity of use of nature. In 1992, a poll coordinated by Gallup Canada asked people's
opinions about the statement that 'there is nothing wrong with whaling if it is
properly regulated'. About two-thirds of respondents in the UK and Australia dis-
agreed with this statement, while three-quarters of Norwegians and two-thirds of
Japanese respondents agreed with it (Freeman 1994).
In general, prohibition of use addresses the
symptom
of over-exploitation, but not
the cause. Unless the cause (for example, poverty, international demand, cultural
values) is addressed, this approach is just sticking-plaster. That is why we need to give
people further incentives to conserve, rather than relying solely on prohibition.
6.3.1.2 Regulated resource use
This involves bringing the use of the resource within sustainable limits. The
steps
are:
Calculate sustainable
use level
Institute management
framework
Users harvest within
limits set
The
underlying philosophy
is that it is in the interests of both society and users for
resources to be maintained through sustainable use. This is a materialistic perspec-
tive, whereby the resource is valued for its products rather than its intrinsic value.
The
scope
of the approach is broad. It is the fundamental basis of fisheries and
wildlife management. The usual strategy is to take the principles from these com-
mercially based resource use operations, and apply them to conservation situations
where Western regulatory institutions have not previously been used. Direct
regulation of resource use can occur at all levels: CITES aims to regulate resource
use at the international level, by agreeing export quotas for species that might be
threatened by trade. At the other extreme are village-level hunting cooperatives
which are formed with the aim of monitoring and controlling use of their
resources, whether it be for trophy hunting or subsistence (Box 6.3). There are
many regulatory tools available which have been tried in other sectors. Use can
also be non-consumptive, for example, ecotourism based on the resource's
aesthetic value.
The
keys to success
are:
●
The fact that the object of conservation concern is the focus of the manage-
ment intervention means that conservation and livelihood benefits are
explicitly linked. This focus is an advantage of this approach, so long as
the resource is able to support the
level of harvest
that is required to satisfy
livelihood needs. If the resource is overexploited at the outset, which is almost
invariably the case, then in the short term there will need to be a period
of reduced offtake while the resource recovers. There will need to be some
livelihood subsidy to take users through this period. There is an expectation
that by the end of this recovery period, the new regulated offtake levels will be
