Sustainable Mountain Development - Mountain Geography: Physical and Human Dimensions - page 637

exploited, with little local involvement in decision making. The clear definition of loc-
al rights to resources and the development of strong mountain institutions are neces-
sary for mountain people to have the resources to negotiate the exploitation of their
resources in ways that bring long-term sustainable benefits, following many of the prin-
ciples presented above.
This typology is only one of many that could be applied to mountain areas; others
include those of Allan (1986), Grötzbach (1988), and those developed in a study for the
European Commission (2004). Typologies are useful in identifying options; but laws,
policies, and institutions have to be adapted to the specific context—cultural, economic,
environmental, and political—at appropriate scales.
Partnerships
The success of the IYM can be measured in many ways, including the large number
of meetings, media attention, and increasing awareness of the importance of mountain
regions and their sustainable development (Price and Hofer 2005). However, given
that SMD involves both mountain and lowland people, perhaps the greatest success of
the IYM was in establishing and strengthening partnerships, creating social capital for
mountain people and their environments not only within mountain areas but at wider
scales. One of the key means for implementing International Years is the establishment
of national committees; by the end of 2002, these had been created in 78 countries.
While most national IYM committees were led by a government agency, many included
representatives of mountain people, grassroots organizations, NGOs, civil society in-
stitutions, the private sector, research institutions, UN agencies, national government
agencies, and decentralized authorities.
The involvement of a wide range of stakeholders is a prerequisite for SMD. In many
countries, the national IYM committee was the first national mechanism addressing the
sustainable development of mountain areas and the first opportunity to implement a
holistic approach to mountains. While a number of these committees disappeared, all
provided opportunities for dialogue. Many have undergone institutional transformation
into more permanent structures to help develop and implement sustainable strategies,
policies, and laws designed to respond to the specific needs, priorities, and conditions
of the mountain areas of their respective countries. In doing so, it is hoped that they
will take into account the principles presented and discussed above. Many of these in-
stitutions and initiatives will require significant support in the areas of communications,
capacity building, information, strategic planning, policy development, expert consulta-
tion, and financial resources.
The national level will always be key for policies and institutions to implement SMD.
Providing support for such national initiatives is anticipated to continue to be a ma-
jor activity for FAO in its capacity as the UN lead agency for mountain issues. It
has also taken on responsibility for hosting the central hub of the Secretariat of the
Mountain Partnership, one of the many partnerships that emerged from the WSSD
(Price and Hofer 2005): “a voluntary alliance of partners dedicated to improving the
lives of mountain people and protecting mountain environments around the world”
( www.mountainpartnership.org ) , thus effectively addressing the second goal of Chapter
13 of Agenda 21: to improve livelihoods, conservation, and stewardship across the