Side Event: “Synergies between Multi-designations in Biosphere Reserves”

In many places around the world, Biosphere Reserves (BRs) are also designated under other international designation regimes: World Heritage Sites, Ramsar Sites, UNESCO Global Geoparks, and Global Important Agricultural Heritage Systems (GIAHS). All of these programmes and conventions have similar goals related to conservation and sustainable development. However, these frameworks sometimes compete with each other for funding, authority, and human resources because of the lack of communication and coordination among them. Keeping in mind that IUCN is preparing a guidance publication called “Multiple Internationally Designated Areas - Guidance for harmonizing the integrated management of overlapping Ramsar Sites, World Heritage Sites, Biosphere Reserves and Global Geoparks” to be launched at the IUCN World Conservation Congress in 2016, this event  discussed possible solutions for synergy between these international frameworks from the perspective of strengthening synergies and opportunities for cooperation under framework of activities under the World network of Biosphere Reserves..

The event was chaired by Mr. Hiroyuki Matsuda from the Japan MAB Committee.  Messrs William Dunber and Toshonori Tanaka served as rapporteurs. Eight speakers, from international, national and site levels, spoke at the event: Mr. Do-Soon Cho from ROK MAB spoke on “Jeju Island with 4 international protected area designation”; Mr. Thomas Schaaf from Terra-Sana Environmental Consultancy spoke on “Progress on IUCN Guidance on multiple internationally designated areas: Ramsar Sites, World Heritage sites, Biosphere Reserves and Global Geoparks”; Mr. Toshinori Tanaka from University of Tokyo spoke on “Building national-level network for synergizing internationally designated areas”; Mr. Andrew Bell from UNESCO UK spoke on “Experience of interactions between designations from the UK and Vietnam”; Mr. Shinsuke Nakamura from Mt. Hakusan BR, Japan spoke on “Synergy between Geoparks and BR through Hakusan as a focal point”; Mr. Yoshihiko Iida from UNU-IAS spoke on “Possibility of synergy between GIAHS and BR for generating biocultural diversity”; Mr. William Dunbar from UNU-IAS spoke on “Environmental, economic and social sustainability in the landscape: Synergy between MAB and the Satoyama Initiative”; and Mr. Natarajan Ishwaran from HIST spoke on “Labels and Performances: the case of UNESCO sites”.

Speakers working in BRs that either overlap with, are concurrently designated as, or in some cases are adjacent to, areas designated under other designations, identified a number of the benefits and challenges they have faced. Some benefits were that the different designations are often well-known in different sectors, so multiple designation can benefit each of these in terms of gaining promoting inter-sectoral collaboration for conservation and sustainable development. People responsible for each designation can learn valuable lessons from each others’ experiences. One challenge faced was that each  designation demands time-consuming monitoring and reporting requirements that are independent of one another which are  difficult to comply with;  multiple designations compound this problem when they are not coordinated. However, probably the biggest challenge identified was that responsible authorities for each designation often do not communicate well with each other.

The main common recommendation from the speakers’ experience was therefore the need for some kind of “integrated management” encompassing the various designations. In the case of Jeju Island in the Republic of Korea – the only site with all four designations in one place – one authority has been created to oversee coordination between all of the designations. It was also pointed out that it would be very helpful to coordinate and streamline the reporting requirements for each. In this way, it can be possible to ensure that the designations are strengthened from each other, rather than working in competition. Co-operation between actors responsible for different designations at the site and land and seascape levels are critical if individual biosphere reserves are to contribute to attaining global goals and targets linked sustainable development, climate change and conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity.

.

The 4WCBR organizer asked the following 3 questions.

1.What is your priority of action? – To encourage cooperation between IDAs and to enable BRs to contribute to implementation of Lima Action Plan (LAP) in a manner that supports international cooperation agenda for 2016-2030. .

2. What is your main commitment? – Promote cooperation between different IDAs  within the same, overlapping and adjacent territories in the implementation of the Lima Action Plan

3. What will be new in coming years? -- "Integrated management system" for cooperation amongst the different IDAs will be launched at the World Conservation Congress in Hawa’I (USA) in 2016 within the context of the follow-up to an IUCN WCC Resolution in September 2012. Synergistic approaches  between  BRs, Geoparks and WH and other  IDAs could also be promoted at national and local levels..

Lima Action Plan (LAP) recognizes the MAB Programme as a key partner within UNESCO (WH, Geopark, Ramsar) for cooperation  with other international initiatives  (GIAHS, Satoyama Initiative Partnership) and  conventions (C2). LAP encourages to create and realize opportunities for collaboration and partnerships within UNESCO (C2.1) and with international programmes and relevant conventions (C2.2).