Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-8ctnn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T23:27:07.808Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Beyond segregative or integrative models for protected areas: a case study of French nature reserves

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 March 2016

CLARA THERVILLE ,
LIVIO CASELLA-COLOMBEAU ,
RAPHAËL MATHEVET  and
FREDERIC BIORET
CLARA THERVILLE*
Affiliation:
CEFE UMR 5175, CNRS, 1919 route de Mende, 34293 Montpellier Cedex 5, France EA 2119 Géoarchitecture, Université de Bretagne Occidentale, CS 93837, 29238 Brest cedex, France Réserves Naturelles de France, 6 bis rue de la Gouge BP 100, 21803 Quetigny cedex, France
LIVIO CASELLA-COLOMBEAU
Affiliation:
CEFE UMR 5175, CNRS, 1919 route de Mende, 34293 Montpellier Cedex 5, France
RAPHAËL MATHEVET
Affiliation:
CEFE UMR 5175, CNRS, 1919 route de Mende, 34293 Montpellier Cedex 5, France
FREDERIC BIORET
Affiliation:
EA 2119 Géoarchitecture, Université de Bretagne Occidentale, CS 93837, 29238 Brest cedex, France
*
*Correspondence: Dr Clara Therville Tel: +33 4 67 61 32 69 Fax: +33 4 67 41 21 38 e-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Initially conceived as human-exclusion zones (the segregative model), protected areas are more and more often established within a management framework that integrates conservation and development projects with multiple partnerships and encourages engagement with local stakeholders (the integrative model). In this study, we investigated the conservation attitudes and practices of management staff in the network of nature reserves (NRs) in France. We found that conservation practices, such as law enforcement, habitat management, environmental education and partnerships, and the socio–cultural and psychological profiles of their managers show a wide distribution along a segregative to integrative gradient. Our results indicate that while the policy of these protected areas is still structured by a segregative cliché, in practice, many managers implement a more integrated approach. This coexistence of the two approaches reflects a general pattern of evolution of nature protection thought and the institutionalization of NRs, as well as demonstrating the adaptation of NRs to their local contexts and how they function, within the surrounding landscape, as a single but complex social–ecological system.

Keywords

attitudeFranceintegrated conservationnature reserveprotected areasocial–ecological system
Type
Papers
Information
Environmental Conservation , Volume 43 , Issue 3 , September 2016 , pp. 284 - 293
Copyright
Copyright © Foundation for Environmental Conservation 2016 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Agrawal, A. & Redford, K. (2009) Conservation and displacement: an overview. Conservation and Society 7 (1): 1–10.Google Scholar
Ajzen, I. & Fishbein, M. (1977) Attitude–behavior relations: a theoretical analysis and review of empirical research. Psychological Bulletin 84 (5): 888–918.Google Scholar
Berkes, F. & Folke, C. (1998) Linking social and ecological systems: management practices and social mechanisms for building resilience. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Bertzky, B., Corrigan, C., Kemsey, J., Kenney, S., Ravilious, C., Besançon, C. & Burgess, N. (2012) Protected Planet Report 2012: Tracking progress towards global targets for protected areas. Gland, Switzerland: UICN; and Cambridge, UK: UNEP-WCMC.Google Scholar
Bioret, F., Estève, R. & Sturbois, A. (2009) Dictionnaire de la protection de la nature. [Dictionary of nature protection]. Rennes, France: PU Rennes.Google Scholar
Brosius, J.P. (2006) Common ground between anthropology and conservation biology. Conservation Biology 20 (3): 683–685.Google Scholar
Brown, L.D. (1991) Bridging organizations and sustainable development. Human Relations 44: 807–831.Google Scholar
Cans, R. (1994) Les trois âges de la politique française de l'environnement. Aménagement et nature 116: 23–26.Google Scholar
Carlson, R. (1962) Silent spring. Boston, USA: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar
Charles, L. & Kalaora, B. (2003) Assistance à la maîtrise d’œuvre pour la réalisation d'un cahier des charges en vue d'une enquête sur l'insertion des Parcs Nationaux dans leurs contextes locaux et régionaux. Paris, France: Ministère de l’écologie et du développement durable, Direction de la Nature et des Paysages.Google Scholar
Charvolin, F. (2003) L'invention de l'environnement en France – chroniques anthropologiques d'une institutionnalisation. Paris, France: La découverte.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chessel, D., Dufour, A. B. & Thioulouse, J. (2004) The ade4 package – I: one-table methods. R News 4 (1): 5–10.Google Scholar
Cumming, G. S., Allen, C. R., Ban, N. C., Biggs, D., Biggs, H. C., Cumming, D. H., De Vos, A., Epstein, G., Etienne, M., Maciejewski, K., Mathevet, R., Moore, C., Nenadovic, M. & Schoon, M. (2015) Understanding protected area resilience: a multi-scale, social-ecological approach. Ecological Applications 25 (2): 299–319.Google Scholar
Dearden, P., Bennett, M. & Johnston, J. (2005) Trends in global protected area governance, 1992–2002. Environmental Management 36 (1): 89–100.Google Scholar
Dejours, C. (2003) L’Évaluation du travail à l’épreuve du réel: critique des fondements de l’évaluation. Versailles, France: INRA, Quae.Google Scholar
Depraz, S. (2008) Géographie des espaces naturels protégés. Genèse, principes et enjeux territoriaux. Paris, France: Armand Colin.Google Scholar
Dudley, N. (2008) Guidelines for applying protected area management categories. Gland, Switzerland: UICN.Google Scholar
Dudley, N., Parrish, J. D., Redford, K. H. & Stolton, S. (2010) The revised IUCN protected area management categories: the debate and ways forward. Oryx 44 (4): 485–490.Google Scholar
Dunlap, R. E. & Van Liere, K. D. (1978) The new environmental paradigm: a proposed instrument and preliminary results. Journal of Environmental Education 9: 10–19.Google Scholar
Dunlap, R. E., Van Liere, K. D., Mertig, A. G. & Jones, R. E. (2000) New trends in measuring environmental attitudes: measuring endorsement of the new ecological paradigm: a revised NEP scale. Journal of Social Issues 56 (3): 425–442.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gautier, D. & Benjaminsen, T. A. (2012) Environnement, discours et pouvoir: L'approche political ecology. Versailles, France: Quae.Google Scholar
Giraudoux, P. (2012) Package “pgirmess” R-Cran Project. [www document]. URL http://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/pgirmess/pgirmess.pdf Google Scholar
Granjou, C., Mauz, I. & Cosson, A. (2010) Les travailleurs de la nature: une professionnalisation en tension. SociologieS. [www document]. URL http://sociologies.revues.org/3296 Google Scholar
Hansen, A. J. & DeFries, R. (2007) Ecological mechanisms linking protected areas to surrounding lands. Ecological Applications 17 (4): 974–988.Google Scholar
Hawcroft, L. J. & Milfont, T. L. (2010) The use (and abuse) of the new environmental paradigm scale over the last 30 years: a meta-analysis. Journal of Environmental Psychology 30 (2): 143–158.Google Scholar
France, IUCN (2010) Les espaces protégés français: une pluralité d'outils au service de la conservation de la biodiversité. Paris, France: Comité français de l'UICN.Google Scholar
Kaiser, F. G., Wolfing, S. & Fuhrer, U. (1999) Environmental attitude and ecological behaviour. Journal of Environmental Psychology 19 (1): 1–19.Google Scholar
Kroonenberg, P. M. & Lombardo, R. (1999) Nonsymmetric correspondence analysis: a tool for analyzing contingency tables with a dependence structure. Multivariate Behavioral Research 34 (3): 367–396.Google Scholar
Larrère, R., Lizet, B. & Berlan-Darqué, M. (2009) Histoire(s) et mémoires des parcs nationaux. In: Histoire des parcs nationaux. Comment prendre soin de la nature?, ed. Larrère, R. et al. (Coord.), pp. 23–41. Versailles, France: Quae.Google Scholar
Lascoumes, P. (1994) L’éco-pouvoir. Paris, France: La découverte.Google Scholar
Lê, S., Josse, J. & Husson, F. (2008) FactoMineR: an R package for multivariate analysis. Journal Statistical Software 25 (1): 18.Google Scholar
Linnell, J. D. C., Kaczensky, P., Wotschikowsky, U., Lescureux, N. & Boitani, L. (2015) Framing the relationship between people and nature in the context of European conservation. Conservation Biology 29 (4): 978–985.Google Scholar
Locke, H. & Dearden, P. (2005) Rethinking protected area categories and the new paradigm. Environmental Conservation 32 (1): 1–10.Google Scholar
Lockwood, M. (2010) Good governance for terrestrial protected areas: a framework, principles, and performance outcomes. Journal of Environmental Management 91 (3): 754–766.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mathevet, R. & Mauchamp, A. (2005) Evidence-based conservation: dealing with social issues. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 20 (8): 422–423.Google Scholar
Mathevet, R., Thompson, J., Delanoë, O., Cheylan, M., Gil-Fourrier, C. & Bonnin, M. (2010) La solidarité écologique: un nouveau concept pour une gestion intégrée des parcs nationaux et des territoires. Natures, Sciences, Sociétés 18 (4): 424–433.Google Scholar
Mathevet, R., Thompson, J., Folke, C. & Chapin III, F. S. (2016) Protected areas and their surrounding territory: social–ecological systems in the context of ecological solidarity. Ecological Applications 26 (1): 3–15.Google Scholar
McFarlane, B. L. & Boxall, P. C. (2003) The role of social psychological and social structural variables in environmental activism: an example of the forest sector. Journal of Environmental Psychology 23 (1): 79–87.Google Scholar
Meadows, D., Meadows, D., Randers, J. & Behrens, W. (1972) The limits to growth: a report for the club of Rome's project on the predicament of mankind. New York, USA: Universe Books.Google Scholar
Miller, T. R., Minteer, B. A. & Malan, L.-C. (2011) The new conservation debate: the view from practical ethics. Biological Conservation 144 (3): 948–957.Google Scholar
Ministère de l'Aménagement du Territoire et de l'Environnement (MATE) and Direction de la Nature et des Paysages (DNP) (1997) Fiche de synthèse sur les réserves naturelles. Paris, France: RNF.Google Scholar
Mose, I. (2007) Protected areas and regional development in Europe. Towards a new model for the 21st century. Aldershot, UK: Ashgate Publishing Limited.Google Scholar
Ostrom, E. (2009) A general framework for analyzing sustainability of social–ecological systems. Science 325 (5939): 419–422.Google Scholar
Palomo, I., Montes, C., Martín-López, B., González, J. A., García-Llorente, M., Alcorlo, P. & Mora, M. R. G. (2014) Incorporating the social–ecological approach in protected areas in the Anthropocene. Bioscience 64 (3): 181–191.Google Scholar
Peluso, N. (1993) Coercing conservation?: the politics of state resource control. Global Environmental Change 3 (2): 199–217.Google Scholar
Phillips, A. (2004) Turning ideas on their head: the new paradigm for protected areas. Environmental History 9 (1):173–198.Google Scholar
RNF (2008) CR du groupe Développement Durable des Territoires du 1er Septembre 2008. Paris, France: RNF.Google Scholar
Robbins, P. (2012) Political ecology: a critical introduction, 2nd edition. Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishing.Google Scholar
Runte, P. (2010) National Parks: The American Experience. Lanham, USA: Taylor Trade Publishing.Google Scholar
Schultz, P. W. (2011) Conservation means behavior. Conservation Biology 25 (6): 1080–1083.Google Scholar
Siegel, S. & Castellan, N. J. (1988) Nonparametric statistics for the behavioral sciences. New York, USA: MacGraw Hill International.Google Scholar
Stern, P. C. & Dietz, T. (1994) The value basis of environmental concern. Journal of Social Issues 50 (3): 65–84.Google Scholar
Therville, C. (2013) Des clichés protectionnistes aux approches intégratives: l'exemple des réserves naturelles de France. PhD thesis. Brest, France: Université de Bretagne Occidentale.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Therville, C., Mathevet, R. & Bioret, F. (2012) Des clichés protectionnistes aux discours intégrateurs: l'institutionnalisation de Réserves Naturelles de France. Vertigo 12 (3). [www document]. URL http://vertigo.revues.org/13046 Google Scholar
Thompson, J. D., Mathevet, R., Delanoë, O., Gil-Fourrier, C., Bonnin, M. & Cheylan, M. (2011) Ecological solidarity as a conceptual tool for rethinking ecological and social interdependence in conservation policy for protected areas and their surrounding landscape. Comptes-Rendus de l'Académie des Sciences, Série Biologies 334 (5–6): 412–419.Google Scholar
Thompson, S. C. G. & Barton, M. A. (1994) Ecocentric and anthropocentric attitudes toward the environment. Journal of Environmental Psychology 14 (2): 149–157.Google Scholar
Zube, E. H. & Busch, M. L. (1990) Park–people relationships: an international review. Landscape and Urban Planning 19 (2): 117–131.Google Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Therville supplementary material S1

Supplementary Table

Download Therville supplementary material S1(File)
File 29.7 KB
Supplementary material: File

Therville supplementary material S2

Supplementary Table

Download Therville supplementary material S2(File)
File 67.6 KB