Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jkksz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-29T17:49:52.926Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Increasing strict protection through protected areas on Brazilian private lands

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 November 2012

RENATO CROUZEILLES ,
MARIANA M. VALE ,
RUI CERQUEIRA  and
CARLOS E. V. GRELLE
RENATO CROUZEILLES*
Affiliation:
Laboratório de Vertebrados, Departamento de Ecologia, Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
MARIANA M. VALE
Affiliation:
Laboratório de Vertebrados, Departamento de Ecologia, Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
RUI CERQUEIRA
Affiliation:
Laboratório de Vertebrados, Departamento de Ecologia, Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
CARLOS E. V. GRELLE
Affiliation:
Laboratório de Vertebrados, Departamento de Ecologia, Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
*
*Correspondence: M Renato Crouzeilles e-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

A key strategy to reduce habitat loss and fragmentation involves the establishment of protected areas (PAs). Worldwide, c. 13% of land lies within PAs, but only 6% is subject to the more restrictive International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) categories I-IV. Private PAs may contribute to this figure, but require general guidance principles for their management. The Brazilian ‘Private Natural Heritage Reserves’ (RPPNs) constitute an example of good PA management, employing seven principles that should guide the creation of all private PAs. RPPNs have legal status and long-term security, allow only for indirect human uses, and provide a strategic conservation role in highly fragmented landscapes by improving connectivity. However, RPPNs are virtually absent from the World Database on Protected Areas, and given Brazil's continental size, and the considerable and increasing number of RPPNs in Brazil, this omission has the potential to skew accurate quantification of the area of land subject to strict protection. The RPPN model can make an important contribution to the discussion of the role of private PAs in conservation, especially in the tropics.

Type
Comment
Information
Environmental Conservation , Volume 40 , Issue 3 , September 2013 , pp. 209 - 210
Creative Commons
This is a work of the U.S. Government and is not subject to copyright protection in the United States.
Copyright
Copyright © Foundation for Environmental Conservation 2012

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

Brasil (1996) Lei Federal No. 9.393, de 19 de dezembro de 1996. Imposto sobre a Propriedade Territorial Rural. Diário Oficial da União 1247: 12–15.Google Scholar
Brasil (2000) Lei Federal No. 9985, de 18 de julho de 2000. Sistema Nacional de Unidades de Conservação da Natureza. Diário Oficial da União Seção 1138: 45–48.Google Scholar
Brazil (2010) Office of the National Program for Biodiversity Conservation: DCBio. Fourth National Report to the Convention on Biological Diversity: Brazil. Ministry of the Environment, Brasília, Brazil: 286 pp.Google Scholar
Chacon, C.M. (2005) Fostering conservation of key priority sites and rural development in Central America: the role of private protected areas. In: Private Protected Areas Programme: Parks Magazine, ed. Goriup, P., pp. 39–47. Gland, Switzerland: IUCN.Google Scholar
Dudley, N., ed. (2008) Guidelines for Applying Protected Area Management Categories. Gland, Switzerland: IUCN. 86 pp.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: 485–490.Google Scholar
Goriup, P., ed. (2005) Private Protected Areas Programme: Parks Magazine. Gland, Switzerland: IUCN: 83 pp.Google Scholar
ICMBio (2012) Sistema Informatizado de Monitoria de RPPN. ICMBio, Brasília, Brasil [www document]. URL http://sistemas.icmbio.gov.br/simrppn/publicoGoogle Scholar
IUCN (1994) Guidelines for Protected Areas Management Categories. Gland Switzerland and Cambridge, UK: CNPPA with the assistance of WCMC, IUCN: 261 pp.Google Scholar
Jenkins, C.N. & Joppa, L. (2009) Expansion of the global terrestrial protected area system. Biological Conservation 142: 2166–2174.Google Scholar
Langholz, J.A. & Krug, W. (2004) New forms of biodiversity governance: non-state actors and the private protected areas action plan. Journal of International Wildlife Law and Policy 7: 9–29.Google Scholar
Mittermeier, R.A., Fonseca, G.A.B., Rylands, A.B. & Brandon, K. (2005) A brief history of biodiversity conservation in Brazil. Conservation Biology 19: 601–607.Google Scholar
Pliscoff, P. & Fuentes-Castillo, T.A. (2011) Representativeness of terrestrial ecosystems in Chile's protected area system. Environmental Conservation 38: 303–311.Google Scholar
Rambaldi, D.M., Fernandes, R.V. & Schmidt, M.A.R. (2005) Private protected areas and their key role in the conservation of the Atlantic Forest biodiversity hotspot, Brazil. In: Private Protected Areas Programme: Parks Magazine, ed. Goriup, P., pp. 30–38. Gland, Switzerland: IUCN.Google Scholar
Rylands, A.B. & Brandon, K. (2005) Brazilian protected areas. Conservation Biology 19: 612–618.Google Scholar
Silva, M. (2005) The Brazilian Protected Areas Program. Conservation Biology 19: 608–611.Google Scholar
Swift, B., Arias, V., Bass, S., Chacón, C.M., Cortés, A., Gutierrez, M., Maldonado, V., Milano, L., Nunes, L., Tobar, M., Sanjinés, V., Solano, P. & Theulen, V. (2004) Private lands conservation in Latin America: the need for enhanced legal tools and incentives. Journal Environmental Law Litigation 19: 85–139.Google Scholar
Von Hase, A., Rouget, M. & Cowling, R.M. (2010). Evaluating private land conservation in the Cape Lowlands, South Africa. Conservation Biology 24: 1182–9.Google Scholar
WRI/IUCN/UNEP (1992) Global Biodiversity Strategy. Washington, DC, USA: World Resources Institute, International Union for the Conservation of Nature, United Nations Environment Program: 243 pp.Google Scholar
Supplementary material: File

CROUZEILLES, R. Supplementary Material

Appendix

Download CROUZEILLES, R. Supplementary Material(File)
File 17.8 KB