Dr. habil. Karen Ziener Alpen-Adria-Universität Klagenfurt 28.11./29.11.2012

Conflicts between Recreational Use and Nature Conservation

in National Parks and Biosphere Reserves – examples from Germany and Austria

Dr. habil. Karen ZienerAlpen-Adria-Universität Klagenfurt

28.11./29.11.2012

2Conflicts: Recreation – Nature Conservation Brno and Olomouc, 28.11/.29.112012 Karen Ziener, Klagenfurt, Austria

Content

1. Theoretical Basics – approaches, aims, terms

2. Study areas in Germany and Austria (resp. Hungary)

3. Modelling of the field of conflict “recreational use – nature conservation”in a region

4. Basic points of a conflict strategy for national parks and biosphere reserves

5. Application of the findings in other projects

Examples

Examples

Examples

tourism as economic sector

supply and demand

recreation/leisure activities as

Grunddaseinsfunktion

tourism companies

tourism associations

recreational and tourism planning landscape

oriented tourism

Modern nature

protection

leisure activitiesNaherholungholidays

outings/excursions

Types of holiday makers

“hybrid tourist“

user groups

recreational potential

recreational suitabilitiy

touristic facilities

leisure sports association

species and habitat protection

(Red Lists)

protected areas

national parks

protection of natural processes

preservation and development of

cultural landscapes

protection through utilisation

habitat connectivity

biosphere reservese

natura 2000

nature conservation authorities

landscape planning on different spatial levels

conservationist organisations

3

own compilation


p a r t n e r s h i p ?

c o n f l i c t s ?

Conflicts: Recreation – Nature Conservation Brno and Olomouc, 28.11/.29.112012 Karen Ziener, Klagenfurt, Austria


social-science conflict research

conflicts in national parks and biosphere reserves

a lot of studies about

impact of tourism / recreation / leisure activities on nature and landscape

discussion about contrast and compatibility of nature conservation and utilisation of nature

but not analysed were

contentions

types of conflict / systematisation

relations between conflicts


Ziener, 2003, p. 8 ff.

conflicts between recreational use and nature conservation




broad research about

emergence, dynamic, management, effects of conflicts

but in other fields of research

family

company / organisation

5







studies about

functional analysis of land use conflicts

acceptance research instead of conflict research

no/scarce information about the

specific conflicts in (NP) and (BR)

importance of conflicts for their development

6




National Parks (4) and Biosphere Reserves (6) in the Czech Republic

České Švýcarsko Krkonoše National Šumava Podyjí(cross-border cooperation with neighbouring national parks)

Národní park Biosférická rezervaceKřivoklátsko (1977)Třeboňsko (1977)Pálava (1986) Dolní Morava (2003, extended)Šumava (1990)Krkonoše/Karkonosze (1992, transboundary)Bílé Karpaty (1996)

7



Source: NP České Švýcarsko, UNESCO, Ministry of the Environment, Ministerstvo zahraničních věcí ČR, CHKO Pálava, CHKO Třeboňsko

Photo: NP České Švýcarsko, CHKO Třeboňsko

National Parks(IUCN)

Biosphere Reserves(UNESCO)

Protection of near-natural landscapes (nature reserves),low man-made impact, ecological balance (no economic utilisation, only own/internal dynamics), protection of natural processes

”Natur Natur sein lassen”

Preservation of near-natural and historical cultural landscapes (protected landscape), protection, preservation and development of ecosystems with participation of locals(models of sustainable development)

”Schutz durch Nutzung”

basic conflict through education and recreation minimizing of conflict

consensus-oriented avoiding of conflicts between different user groups

Large area, settlements mostly not included

Zones with different levels of nature conservation (high percentage of core areas and nature reserves)

National Park Management

Ecosystem research

Large area, villages and towns are integratedZones with different protection levels (inner zones nature reserve, outer zones partly protected landscape partly no protected area) partly Biosphere Reserve ManagementResearch of Human-Environment Relations (Man and Biosphere Programme)

8



own compilation

Approaches

Connection between landscape oriented / spatial planning perspectives and activity-oriented as well as conflict oriented perspectives creation of a complex scientific view on these conflicts

Application / Adaption of social science conflict research in the field of conflict recreational use – nature conservation What is a conflict?

Structuring of this very complex field of conflict – the totality of all these conflicts and the connections among them, in a region (systemic view).

Analysis of conflict experiences in different study areas (national park and biosphere reserve regions) – general tendencies and regional specific

Combination of different perspective and variety of methods

9



Aims

Modelling of the field of conflict recreational use – nature conservation in

national parks and biosphere reserves

which can reduce the complexity and

integrate different conflict perspectives

Basic points of a regional conflict strategy for protected area management

which integrates potential conflicts and their effects

into planning and management and

enables flexible actions in conflict situations

10


What is a conflict?


contrast / area of tension between nature conservation and utilisation which based on the impact of tourism and recreational use on nature and landscape

conflicts are analysed as overlapping of ecological and land use attributes of landscape

contrast (problem)

solution as mainly task of nature conservation and spatial planning

Conception of conflict in science and spatial planning

Conflict definition in social sciences (social psychology)

two elements are contrary or incompatible

contentions between at least two persons respectively parties

conflict consists of subjects, the conflict parties, and at least one object, the conflict object

opposite between persons

no one-sided solution, but through the actions of conflict parties

I n t e g r a t i o n landscape or space oriented

spatial conflict potential


11

personal and situational conflict potential

two elements are contrary or incompatible

contentions between at least two persons respectively parties

conflict consists of subjects, the conflict parties, and at least one object, the conflict object

opposite between persons

no one-sided solution, but through the actions of conflict parties

conflict potentials the still dormant conflict parties

and the conflict object


own compilation

legal, planning, political factores of the different provinces and states

old and new federal states in Germany

national parks and biosphere reserves

Rügen

Spreewald

DonauauenNeusiedler See / Fertö

different landscapes from the Baltic Sea in the north to the Pannonian Bassin

Tourism regions and destinations of outing

different biosphere reserve concepts


Rhön

Harz


own compilation


13

Rügen

Harz

Rhön

Spreewald

Germany

Donauauen

Neusiedler See / Fertő

Austria


Source:Nationale Naturlandschaften

Source:Nationalparks Austria

conflict process and resolution

conflict types

spatial conflict potential

conflictconnections

spatial related concepts

ZIENER 2003, p. 46, modified

3. Modelling of the field of conflict “recreational use – nature conservation”

14

macro-analysis

micro-analysis

macro-/micro-analysis

mainlymacro-analysis

macro-/micro-analysis

inductive deductive

inductive deductive / inductive

deductive / inductive

further developed

applied

newlinked

new


(landscape and utilisation attributes)

A landscape is evaluated as being both worth protecting and attractive for recreation and leisure-time activities.

An unfavourable relationship exists between the sensitivity of a landscape and the intensity of its use for recreation and leisure-time activities.

Demands on using the area by those seeking recreation and leisure activity, are opposed to restrictions resulting from nature protection.

general view

ecological view

user’s view

15

3.1 Spatial conflict potential

delimitation of Potential conflict areas (GIS)


ZIENER 2003, p. 66-68

teilweise schutzwürdigschutzwürdig hochgradig schutzwürdig

hoch attraktiv

attraktiv

Bemerkung: Im Landkreis Rügen wurde die landschaftl iche Attraktivität nur für Landbereiche bestimmt. Die Küstenstreifen sind etwa 2 km breit.

vgl. Tab. C2-1 und C2-5

NP Jasmund

NP Vorpommer-sche Bodden-landschaft

BR Südost-Rügen

LSG Ostrügen

Europäisches Vogelschutzgebiet

#

10 km0

Bergen

Abb. C2-1 Schutzwürdigkeit und landschaftliche Attraktivität im Spreewald und im Landkreis Rügen / obere Bewertungsebene

BR Spreewald

#

#

#

Cottbus

Lübbenau

Lübben

0 10 km

Gewässer

Entwurf und Bearbeitung: K. ZienerKartengrundlage: Ministerium für Umwelt, Naturschutz und Raumordnung (Hrsg.): Daten zur Umweltsituation im Land Branden-burg, Region Lausitz-Spreewald, Landesumweltamt Brandenburg 1996; Landesvermessungsamt Mecklenburg-Vorpommern, Regionales Raumordnungsprogramm Vorpommern 1998, Umweltamt des Landkreises Rügen

Abb. C2-3 Schutzwürdigkeit und landschaftliche Attraktivität in der Rhön / obere Bewertungsebene

0 10 km

##

#

#

#

Fulda

Meiningen

Bad Neustadt

Bad Salzungen

Bad Kissingen

Biosphärenreservat Rhön

NaturparkHessische Rhön

NaturparkBayerische Rhön

NaturparkHaßberge

teilweise schutzwürdig

schutzwürdig

hochgradig schutzwürdig


Entwurf und Bearbeitung: K.ZienerKartengrundlage: ADAC Regionalkarte Süddeutschland, Kommunale Verwaltungsgrenzen Bayern 1994, HessenVerwaltungsgrenzenausgabe 1994, Übersichtskarte Thüringen 1994, Rahmenkonzept Biosphärenreservat Rhön 1995

Landesgrenzen

hoch attraktivattrakt iv


16

worthiness of protection > < attractivity for recreation


ZIENER 2003, annex, p. 158, 160


sensitivity > < intensity of use

Schutzzone III (Harmonische Kulturlandschaft),in der sich Schutz und Nutzung der Natur mitkulturellen Traditionen zur harmonischen Ganz-heit verbinden (LSG, 49.7 % der Reservatsfläche)

Schutzzone II (Pflege- und Entwicklungszone),dient der Abschirmung der Kernzonen vor Schadeinf lüssen sowie der Erhaltung und Pflege landschaftstypischer Vielfalt (23 NSG, 18.6 % der Reservatsfläche)

Schutzzone I (Kernzone),umfasst die Gebiete, die völlig ihrer natürlichen Dynamik überlassen bleiben (8 Totalreservate, 1.8 % der Reservatsf läche)

Zonen des Biosphärenreservats

Zonierung des Biosphärenreservats Spreewald

Bemerkung: Bei Vergleichen mit anderen Biosphären-reservaten werden die Schutzzonen II I und IV häufig zur Entwicklungszone zusammengefasst und die Schutz-zone I I nur als Pflegezone ausgewiesen.

Entwurf und Bearbeitung: K. ZienerKartengrundlage: Biosphärenreservat Spreewald 2000Quelle: Verordnung zur Festsetzung des Biosphären-reservates Spreewald 1990 und Landschaftsrahmenplan Biosphärenreservat Spreewald 1998

Schutzzone IV (Regenerierungszone), in der die durch unsachmäßige Bewirt-schaftung geschädigte Landschaft unterAnwendung ingenieurbiologischer undökotechnologischer Methoden zurharmonischen Kulturlandschaft entwickelt wird (LSG, 29.9 % der Reservatsfläche)

#

#

##

# #

##

#

#

#

BurgLeipe

Lübben

Lübbenau

Raddusch

Vetschau

Schlepzig

Straupitz

Alt Schadow

Werben

Alt Zauche

0 5 km

Core areaManaged zone Development zoneRegeneration zone


Schutzzone II (Pflege- und Entwicklungszone),dient der Abschirmung der Kernzonen vor Schadeinflüssen sowie der Erhaltung und Pflege landschaftstypischer Vielfalt (23 NSG, 18.6 % der Reservatsfläche)




Bemerkung: Bei Vergleichen mit anderen Biosphären-reservaten werden die Schutzzonen III und IV häufig zur Entwicklungszone zusammengefasst und die Schutz-zone II nur als Pflegezone ausgewiesen.


Schutzzone IV (Regenerierungszone), in der die durch unsachmäßige Bewirt-schaftung geschädigte Landschaft unterAnwendung ingenieurbiologischer undökotechnologischer Methoden zurharmonischen Kulturlandschaft entwickelt wird (LSG, 29.9 % der Reservatsf läche)

#

#

##

# #

##

#

#

#

BurgLeipe

Lübben

Lübbenau

Raddusch

Vetschau

Schlepzig

Straupitz

Alt Schadow

Werben

Alt Zauche

0 5 km



Schutzzone I (Kernzone),umfasst die Gebiete, die völlig ihrer natürlichen Dynamik überlassen bleiben (8 Totalreservate, 1.8 % der Reservatsfläche)



Bemerkung: Bei Vergleichen mit anderen Biosphären-reservaten werden die Schutzzonen III und IV häufig zur Entwicklungszone zusammengefasst und die Schutz-zone II nur als Pflegezone ausgewiesen.



#

#

##

# #

##

#

#

#

BurgLeipe

Lübben

Lübbenau

Raddusch

Vetschau

Schlepzig

Straupitz

Alt Schadow

Werben

Alt Zauche

0 5 km






Bemerkung: Bei Vergleichen mit anderen Biosphären-reservaten werden die Schutzzonen II I und IV häufig zur Entwicklungszone zusammengefasst und die Schutz-zone II nur als Pflegezone ausgewiesen.



#

#

##

# #

##

#

#

#

BurgLeipe

Lübben

Lübbenau

Raddusch

Vetschau

Schlepzig

Straupitz

Alt Schadow

Werben

Alt Zauche

0 5 km

17

worthiness of protection > <

attractivity for recreation

Abb. C2-5Konfliktpotenziale zwischen der Schutzwürdigkeit und der Erlebniswirksamkeit der sensiblen Bereiche im Biosphärenreservat Spreewald / untere Bewertungsebene

Konflik tpotenzial

großes Konf lik tpotenzial

0 5 km

Kernzone

kein Konfliktpotenzial

Lübben

Lübbenau

Schlepzig

Entwurf und Bearbeitung: K. Ziener

Quelle und Kartengrundlage: LandschaftsrahmenplanBR Spreewald 1998 und LandschaftsplanerischeErholungskonzeption BR Spreewald 1995

Burg

Erlebniswirksamkeitsehr hoch mittel einge-hoch schränkt Totalreservat Nachbarschaftswirkungen

Schutzwürdigkeit

Kernzonen

hochgradigschutzwürdig

schutzwürdig

Konfl ik tpotenziale


Abb. C2-5Konfliktpotenziale zwischen der Schutzwürdigkeit und der Erlebniswirksamkeit der sensiblen Bereiche im Biosphärenreservat Spreewald / untere Bewertungsebene

Konfliktpotenzial

großes Konf lik tpotenzial

0 5 km

Kernzone

kein Konfliktpotenzial

Lübben

Lübbenau

Schlepzig

Entwurf und Bearbeitung: K. Ziener

Quelle und Kartengrundlage: LandschaftsrahmenplanBR Spreewald 1998 und LandschaftsplanerischeErholungskonzeption BR Spreewald 1995

Burg

Erlebniswirksamkeitsehr hoch mittel einge-hoch schränkt Totalreservat Nachbarschaftswirkungen

Schutzwürdigkeit

Kernzonen

hochgradigschutzwürdig

schutzwürdig

Konflik tpotenziale



ZIENER 2003,annex p. 162

0 1 800 m

Abb. C2-18Konfliktpotenziale zwischen der Sensibilität der Landschaft und der Intensität ihrer Nutzung in der Lobau (Nationalpark Donau-Auen) / untere Bewertungsebene

Entwurf und Bearbeitung: K. ZienerQuelle und Kartengrundlage: Magistrat der Stadt Wien, Magistratsabteilung 22 undARNBERGER/BRANDENBURG/CERMAK/HINTERBERGER 2000

DonauStadtgrenze Wien

keine Angabenweniger oder nicht sensible Bereiche

sehr sensible Bereichesensible Bereiche

Bewertung der Phytotope

vgl. Tab. C2-9

169 - 2000 2001 - 40004001 - 6000

6001 - 80008001 - 11 579

Gesamtbesucherzahl an vier Tagen (hochgerechnet)

Konfliktpotenzial

BesucherzahlenSensibilität sehr hoch hoch gering bis mittel über 8000 4001- 8000 bis 2000

sehr sensibel sehr hoch hoch hoch sensibel hoch hoch mittel

3.1 Spatial conflict potential sensitivity (Phytotope)> < intensity of use (number of visitors) 0 1 800 m

Abb. C2-18Konfliktpotenziale zwischen der Sensibilität der Landschaft und der Intensität ihrer Nutzung in der Lobau (Nationalpark Donau-Auen) / untere Bewertungsebene

Entwurf und Bearbeitung: K. ZienerQuelle und Kartengrundlage: Magistrat der Stadt Wien, Magistratsabteilung 22 undARNBERGER/BRANDENBURG/CERMAK/HINTERBERGER 2000

DonauStadtgrenze Wien

keine Angabenweniger oder nicht sensible Bereiche

sehr sensible Bereichesensible Bereiche

Bewertung der Phytotope

vgl. Tab. C2-9

169 - 2000 2001 - 40004001 - 6000

6001 - 80008001 - 11 579

Gesamtbesucherzahl an vier Tagen (hochgerechnet)

Konfliktpotenzial

BesucherzahlenSensibilität sehr hoch hoch gering bis mittel über 8000 4001- 8000 bis 2000

sehr sensibel sehr hoch hoch hoch sensibel hoch hoch mittel

18

big/low spatial conflict potential

big/low conflict


ZIENER 2003, annex p. 181

information

communicationparticipation

cooperation

deficits

information

communicationparticipation

cooperation

fears missunderstandings

low acceptance resistance

conflicts

related with

19

Personal and situational conflict potential

3.2 Conflict process and resolution


own compilation

Model of conflict process according to BERKEL conflict potentials

(latent conflict)

causal event

Definition of the conflict by the persons involved(point of contention)

action of one side

short-term result(compromise, victory, settlement)

Long-term consequences,which increase or reduce the conflict potential

reaction of the other side

Source: BERKEL 1997, S. 40, modified

20



Accommodating /harmonising

Oriented on aims

and interests

of opposite

side

Oriented on own aims and interestsSource : own compilation using BERKEL 1987, BERKEL 1997, University of Maryland

Collaborating / common solution of problems

Compromising / negotiating

Withdrawing / avoiding

Competing / overpowering

Teddy Bear

Fox

Shark

Owl

Turtle

21


Conflict management stiles


qualitative interviews with regional decision makers

scientific studies, concepts and plans dealing with conflicts

the regional press

Conflicts in the regions

Description of the types Attributes of the types

Structure of conflict Conflict subject

Conflikt parties

Points of contention

Conflict form

Conflict result

Long-term effects

TimeSpace

3.3 Conflict types

22

Conflict types

Creation of the types


own compilation

Spatial-Use Conflict Types (objective-spatial aspects)

structurally, permanent, partly latent, conflicts

Leisure-time activities in sensitive landscapes

Environmental consequences of touristic use

Heavily frequented destinations for outings

Tourism-induced motorised private traffic

more differentiated, permanent conflicts

Lack of acceptance of

nature protection related

restrictions Impairment of the countryside image by tourism buildings

Change of status quo, temporary conflicts

Nature conservation projects and plans

Tourism projects and plans

Goal Conflict Types (protagonists / processes)

Leisure-time sport vs. nature protection

Communities vs. management of protected area

Economic stimulation vs. nature protection

3.3 Conflict types


ZIENER 2003, p. 85


Conflict subject / Points of contention / Spatial relationship

The demands placed on the landscape and spatial use when performing certain leisure-time activities collide with goals for conservation and restrictions in sensitive areas, worth protecting,

conflicts, because restrictions on use or control measures were, or should be, threatened, implemented or increased, usually small-scale, sensitive areas such as the

banks of lakes and rivers, the upper reaches of flowing waters, steep and flat coasts, moors and silt areas, dry-grass areas, close-to-nature woods, subalpine meadows.

Conflict participants leisure-time sport clubs and societies, homeland and hiking associations, tourism providers, societies and organisations, communities, national park or biosphere reserve management, environmental protection clubs and associations, ecologists

Outward form / Time / Conflict result In principle, permanent and not capable of being conclusively solved, fluctuation between latent and active conflicts, in recent times numerous examples of agreements and negotiations between management of protected areas, environmental protection bodies and users concerning routing, control measures, etc., compromises, temporary or permanent regulations, e.g., closing off of paths and water areas, relocation of paths and ski-trails, total or limited bans on admission, measures to control visitors and traffic guidance systems.

Long-term conflict effectse.g. cooperation with leisure-time sport organisations in the field of visitor management and environmental education, increase in the acceptance of national park or biosphere reserve

24

3.3 Conflict types


ZIENER 2003, p. 87

Key factors of conflict resolution

Conflict parties and their interests

NP or BR management in conflicts

organisations, groups, individuals conflict party like other

relations between conflict parties, coalitions, former conflicts

acting / reacting party

experiences of conflict

procedures of resolutions

Leisure-time activities in sensitive landscapes Lack of

acceptance of nature-protection

related restrictions

Tourism projects and plans

partly responsibilities of state or federal state authority

moderator / mediator

25

3.3 Conflict types


own compilation

Leisure-time activities

in sensitive

landscapes

Nature conservation projects and

plans

Communities vs. management of protected area

to find conflict potential in landscape communication sport clubs as partner common concept win-win situation

early information, complete information openness for other stakeholders readiness to compromise win-win situation

no conflict,but common solution of problems

reduction of conflict

regular information personal contacts cooperation participation common strategies

cooperative conflict situation

26

3.3 Conflict types

Conflict avoidance potential of conflict types


own compilation

3.4 Conflict connections

C

C

CC

conflict experience of involved persons attitude / awareness related to conflicts

and conflict solution in general (e.g. importance, solvability)

get to know the other conflict parties (e.g. interests, aims, behaviour)

conflict management skills (e.g. methods, strategies)

content solution of problem (e.g. separation of different functions, strategies of sustainable development)

macro-analytic view

contentual-spatial hierarchy administrative and planning levels e.g. NP Hochharz (today NP Harz after joinig) time hierarchy chronology and parallelism of conflicts

complex conflict situations

issues which bring together different conflicts or fields of conflict and their interactions,

big number of participants, diversity of interests and demands

spatial links (e.g. on the top of mountain Brocken, Hiddensee island) or planning links (e.g. Landscape Structure Plan Spreewald)

27

micro-analytic view


own compilation

Conflict hierarchy of existing conflicts in the National Park Hochharz

Konflikte der Gemeinde Schierke mit der NP-Verwaltung

Konflikte der Stadt Ilsenburg mit der NP-Verwaltung

Municipality

Konflikte der regionalen (Tourismus-)Wirtschaft mit

der NP-Verwaltung und dem Naturschutz

Konflikte der Regions bevölkerung mit der NP- Verwaltung

regional level / district

Konflikte um die Novellierung der Nationalparkverordnung bzw. die Regelungen des neuen Nationalparkgesetzes sowie die

Verordnung für den Brocken und das Befahren der Bahnstrecke

Federal statecontentualaggregation

Konflikt Skisport – Naturschutz (im NP

Hochharz)

Konflikte der Anwohner mit der NP-Verwaltung

contentualaggregation

Konflikte um den Schutz und die Nutzung des Brockens

spatialaggregation

Single conflicts

Skisport am Kleinen Winterberg (National-parkgebiet)

Loipen im NP Hoch-harz

Brocken-hotel (Ausbau des Fern-sehturms)

Öffnungs-zeiten der Brocken-gastronomie (Brockenwirt)

Abend-veranstal-tungen auf dem Brocken

Fahrzeiten der Brocken bahn (HSB)

Inwertset-zung des Geländes der Scharfen steinkaserne

Pilze und Beeren sammeln im NP

Bau eines NP-Hauses in Eckertal / Stapelburg

ZIENER 2003, p. 91

28



BR Rhön: Learning processes of conflict solution and prevention based on conflict analysis

Successful conflict solutions (1993-1998)

Modellprojekt Skilanglauf optimizing of cross-country ski trail network

Luftsportgutachtenanalysis of conflicts between aviation and

nature conservation.recommendations for environmentally compatible flying

Mountainbiking – NaturschutzMountainbiking – Wandern

3.4 Conflict connections#

#

#

#

#

#

# #

##

#

#

29

Perception of conflict potentials


own compilation

Höhere NaturschutzbehördeWürzburg (RBez)

(nature conservation authority )

Rhönklub (hiking)

Waldbesitzer (forest owners)

FAIRständnis-Regeln(rules, self-commitment)

Bayer. Verwaltungsstelledes BR Rhön

initiator

BR Rhön: Conflict prevention: common development of a network of mountain bike trails



own compilation

model character

Rhönklub (Wandern)

Waldbesitzer

win-win situation

Bayer. Radsportverband

ADFC Kreisverbände

Mountainbiker Wanderer

mountain bike offer as segment of sustainable tourism

Jagdverbände

BR Rhön: Conflict prevention: common development of a network of mountain bike trails


31

Bayer. Verwaltungsstelledes BR Rhön

Verein Naturpark undBR Bayer. Rhön


own compilation

at the beginning of the 1990s district of Rügen and Rhön Region started to focus on sustainable development

„Model Region for Sustainable Regional Development“

3.5 Model region of sustainable development and conflicts

enormous conflicts – at last the term “Model

region” was rejected

low and more simple conflict situation,

but greater impact outside

32

Why ?

islands in th baltic sea / former administrative district (Photo: K: Ziener)

transboundery mountain area in Hesse, Bavaria, Thuringia (Photo: K. Ziener)


own compilation

Why ?Basic Conditions

extremely high spatial conflict potential between tourism and nature protection

2 national parks, 1 biosphere reserve,nature park in development,

dynamic tourism development, big pressure on land use, big investors,

transformation situation in the new German federal states (economic crisis, high unemployment rate, high population loss due to migration)

“reunification” of Rhön / transboundary BR Rhön new Rhön identity,

on the whole, less spatial conflict potential between tourism and nature protection (Rhön region is five times as large as Rügen district with only three-quarters of the overnight stays),

in Hesse and Bavaria, in spite of structural weaknesses, established business structures and more economic protagonists (compared with the new German federal states)

enormous conflicts– at last the term “Model region” was rejected

low and more simple conflict situation, but greater impact outside



own compilation

Citizens’ initiative Rügen: “Recommendations for economic development” Model region for environmentally friendly development,

from the view point of the economic protagonists model region was solely linked with nature protection (model region = nature protection)

conflict: either landscape preservation or economic development

orientation to an integrated regional development and projects worth supporting (above all, Verein Natur und Lebensraum Rhön, Hessian BR management and Bavarian BR management),

model region linked with the possibility for funding (e.g. LEADER-Program),

only competition in implementation but no conflict between general aims

Protagonists Basic Conditions


Why ?

34




own compilation

long process of convergence supported by the “Regional Development Concept Rügen” and moderation by a new regional planner

way with ups and downs, increasing acceptance of the biosphere reserve and its management

Protagonists Basic Conditions

Explanation


Why ?

35




own compilation

1. Identify spatial conflict potentials as early as possible in order to avoid and delimet conflicts (conflict prevention)

2. Consider the rules of conflict management and avoiding (win-win strategy, individual solutions, cooperation, personal contacts)

3. Develop suitable conflict management strategies and tools for the different conflict situationes (conflict types)

4. Consider conflicts not isolated but in the context of former and simultaneous conflicts (conflct hierarchy, conflict experience)

5. Active development and implementation of regional concepts (sustainable regional development, tourism marketing, traffic concepts)

4. Basic points of a conflict strategy for national parks and biosphere reserves


own compilation

regional view

37

5. Application of the findings in other projects

IESP – Towards Integrated Ecological Spatial Planning for the

Wienerwald Biosphere Reserve Sustainable Wildlife Management and

Leisure Activities

2008-2012

F. Reimoser, W. Lexer, Ch. Brandenburg, K. Ziener,

B. Schreiber, A. Bartel, H. Tomek, F. Heckl,

F. Hirnschall, A. Kasper

Final Report 2012(pp. 479)

Biosphärenpark Wienerwald

Source: Biosphärenpark Wienerwald


5. Application of the findings in other projects BR Wienerwald – IESP

38

Intensive conflict potential and conflict analysis based on expert interviews in 4 selected areas

REIMOSER et al. 2012, S. 220

Indicator leisure activities

Indi

cato

r sp

ecie

s


recreational use in total

activity with dog

BallooningPicnic

red deer

wild boar

black stork

capercaillies


39

Overlapping of the habitats of indicator species and the areas of indicator leisure activities


sensitivity > <

intensity of use



40

Modeling of the probability of indicator leisure activitiesfor the whole biosphere reserve

REIMOSER et al. 2012, S. 252, 265



41

Gathering and modeling of the habitats of indicator species for the whole biosphere reserve

REIMOSER et al. 2012, S. 271, 277



42

Overlapping in order to estimate the spatial conflict potential

REIMOSER et al. 2012, S. 281, 287


Only tendencies of expected conflict area

43




44



Two conflict types as basis for differentiated options for the conflict management


Lack of acceptance of

nature-protection related

restrictions


Literature and Sources:ČR - Správa Národního parku České Švýcarsko – Mapa NP České Švýcarsko 1:50.000: http://www.npcs.cz/sites/default/files/user_files/FTP_NO/Mapy/110301_Vitejte_v_NP_CZ.pdf, ,23.11.2012

UNESCO – Europe & North America (284 biosphere reserves in 34 countries) Last update September 2012: http://www.unesco.org/new/en/natural-sciences/environment/ecological-sciences/biosphere-reserves/europe-north-america/, 23.11.2012.

Ministry of the Environment (MoE) of the Czech Republic – National Parks: http://www.mzp.cz/en/national_parks, 23.11.2012.

Správa CHKO Pálava a Krajské středisko Brno: http://www.palava.ochranaprirody.cz/, 23.11.2012.

Ministerstvo zahraničních věcí ČR - Biosférické rezervace UNESCO: http://www.mzv.cz/jnp/cz/zahranicni_vztahy/multilateralni_spoluprace/unesco/cr_v_unesco/biosfericke_rezervace_unesco.html, 23.11.2012.

Třeboňsko - CHKO Třeboňsko : http://www.trebonsko.cz/chko-trebonsko, 23.11.2012.

Správa CHKO Třeboňsko: http://www.trebonsko.ochranaprirody.cz/, 23.11.2012.

ZIENER, Karen (2003): Das Konfliktfeld Erholungsnutzung – Naturschutz in Nationalparken und Bio sphärenreservaten, Aachen (Habilitationsschrift).

BERKEL, Karl (1987): Zur Sozialpsychologie des Konflikts in Organisationen. In: Schulz-Gam bard, Jürgen (Hrsg.): Angewandte Sozialpsychologie: Konzepte, Ergeb nisse, Per spekti ven, Mün chen-Weinheim, S. 153-167.

BERKEL, Karl (1997): Konflikttraining. Konflikte verstehen, analysieren, bewältigen, 5. neu be arbei tete und erweiterte Auflage, Heidelberg (Arbeitshefte für Führungspsy cholo gie, Band 15).

University of Maryland – Solutions in your community: Conflict Management Styles : http://www.agrisk.umn.edu/conference/uploads/cterhune0790_02.pdf, 24.11.2012.


Literature and Sources:Nationale Naturlandschaften – Map of Germany: http://www.nationale-naturlandschaften.com/map-of-germany, 25.11.2012.

Nationalparks Austria – Naitonalparks 360°: Die Nationalparks: http://www.nationalparksaustria.at/nationalparks-360-grad/die-nationalparks/, 26.11.2012.

Peter Wilhelm Morgan (2012):: A Project Allocation System. URL: http://www.dcs.shef.ac.uk/intranet/teaching/public/projects/archive/l31112/pdf/PMorgan_A_Project_Allocation_System_Stage_3_FINAL.pdf, 25.11.2012.

Biosphärenpark Wienerwald – Zonierung im Biosphärenpark Wienerwald: Download A3: http://www.bpww.at/fileadmin/Redakteure/A3-CD-120326.pdf, 26.11.2012.

REIMOSER, Friedrich. LEXER, Wolfgang, BRANDENBURG, Christiane, ZIENER, Karen, SCHREIBER, Bernd, BARTEL, Andreas, TOMMEK, Hemma, HECKEL, Felix, HIRNSCHALL, Florin und Andreas KASPER (2012): Grundlagen für eine integrierte ökolo gisch-räumliche Planung im Biosphärenpark Wienerwald. Nachhaltiges Wildtiermanagement und Freizeitaktivitäten, Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften, 477 Seiten. URL: http://hw.oeaw.ac.at/IESP-Wienerwald, 26.11.2012.


47

Thank you for your attention


Documents

Dr. habil. Karen Ziener Alpen-Adria-Universität Klagenfurt 28.11./29.11.2012