35. Twelve respondents loaded significantly on this factor, of which seven were male and five were female. Eight respondents were from the national park site, two from the Natura 2000 site and two from the landscape park. Except for the administrator from the municipality office that is part of
the national park, the eleven remaining respondents were landowners (including all landowners from the national park site). Of the eleven landowners, Selleck Anlotinib nine were also farmers. Interpretation of Factor 1: The Skeptic—biodiversity conservation on private land is at a cost that landowners have to bear Including private land in biodiversity
conservation strategy is a proof that conserving nature is being prioritized over human Epoxomicin molecular weight needs and therefore has no outcome that can satisfy all stakeholder groups (27:+1; 6:+1). So far, it has been a top-down approach where the inclusion of private land in protected areas and the subsequent restrictions have been imposed in a manner similar to public protected areas (35:+2; 26:+2). Once a part of a protected area, a landowner is unable to use his land the way he has always used it (13:−4). Such an involuntary and imposed form of biodiversity conservation is unacceptable (23: + 1). Although it might not infringe on the property rights of a landowner directly, conservation on private land will significantly change how the land functions for the landowner (15:−2;
14:−3). It negatively impacts the income generated from the land without bringing in new economic opportunities (30:+4; 29:−3). There is also a lack of adequate compensatory support such as compensation schemes to offset the cost of becoming a private protected area and bearing the restrictions (3:−3). Additionally, conservation strategies do not complement or benefit the existing land use in any way that is useful for the landowner (25:−1). If a parcel Alanine-glyoxylate transaminase of land has been identified as having conservation value, it only implies that the landowner has been a good manager of his land (5:+1). Hence, even though private lands may Mdivi1 purchase sometimes hold important biological resources, it should not be treated as a priority in large scale nature conservation strategies as landowners are inherently good caretakers (1:0; 12:−2). Private land as a conservation strategy will work only when it is voluntary (17:+2). Also, the management and the decision making process needs to be more inclusive: managing authorities or ecological experts should not be the only group with the decision making power over a private or mixed model of protected area (11:−4).
Related posts:
- Although overall national policies are developed by the national
- Samples have been then loaded on a Criterion twelve 5% polyacryl
- Disease severity and cognitive capacity impacted significantly on
- Disease severity and cognitive capacity impacted significantly on
- A majority of all respondents (61%) reported inadequate training