A framework for improving the management of protected areas from a social perspective: The case of Bahía de San Antonio Protected Natural Area, Argentina

Land Use Policy 87 (2019) 104044

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Land Use Policy journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/landusepol

A framework for improving the management of protected areas from a social perspective: The case of Bahía de San Antonio Protected Natural Area, Argentina Juan Pablo Moreaa,b, a b

T

⁎

Department of Geography, Universidad Nacional de Mar del Plata, Funes 3350 - (7600), Mar del Plata, Pcia. de Buenos Aires, Argentina National Scientific and Technical Research Council, Godoy Cruz 2290 (C1425FQB) CABA, Argentina

A R T I C LE I N FO

A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Protected area Bahía de San Antonio Coastal management Land-use planning Evaluation framework

The management of protected areas and the recognition of a problem regarding its effectiveness are a global concern. Worldwide, protected areas are facing increasing pressures to join human development and biodiversity conservation. There are clear difficulties in connecting use and conservation, and there is also a gap between the planning of objectives and the management of protected areas. To improve management effectiveness, we developed a general framework to integrate the steps into an operational system. This framework was created from a social perspective, prioritizing the analysis of uses and activities, and the territorial conflicts in the protected area. In this case study, we applied the framework to Bahía de San Antonio Protected Natural Area (BSAPNA), Argentina. The results have enabled us to identify four major conflicts that hinder the implementation of the management plan: between uses and conservation; due to incompatibilities between different uses and activities; at the institutional and political level, and due to land-use changes. The framework allows us to define the manifestation of these conflicts in the territory and to identify a series of critical and strategic areas, which are useful to make management recommendations for the examined case. In addition, our modeling approach, that can also be applied to other reserves, provides a solid basis to improve the management of protected areas.

1. Introduction In recent decades, the planning and management of protected areas has been a topic of interest for conservationists around the world. The elaboration of management plans has been the main instrument used to help each conservation unit achieve its ideal functioning. However, assessments of management effectiveness have shown that there are great difficulties in the application and enforcement of such plans, and that there are still many protected areas suspected to be “paper parks” (Hockings, 2006; Geldmann et al., 2015; Gong et al., 2017; RodríguezRodríguez et al., 2019). Studies that propose methodologies and approaches to evaluate management effectiveness in these areas have been useful to shape a state of affairs. Based on them, it has been possible to recognize a gap between the conservation objectives proposed for these protected areas and the actual functionality in terms of complex environmental and territorial systems (Gaston et al., 2008; Hull et al., 2011; Geldmann et al., 2013, 2015; Gong et al., 2017; Dawson et al., 2018). However, the difficulty in achieving the stated objectives and the gap between the

⁎

desired and actual functionality can vary depending on each case. The major contribution of this evaluation lies in stressing the need to improve and develop management strategies that facilitate the compliance and scope of the objectives and aims of each conservation unit. The management of protected areas and the recognition of a problem around its effectiveness are a global concern. Because of this, numerous methodologies have been developed to evaluate protected areas, most of which are thought to identify problems in planning, development of preservation tasks, financing, infrastructure, and threats (de Faria, 1993; Cifuentes et al., 2000; Hockings, 2006; Gong et al., 2017; López-Rodríguez and Rosado, 2017). However, the level of difficulty in managing protected areas also depends on other factors. The problems in connecting use and preservation, the growing disputes over land tenure due to urban and productive expansion, the change processes of land use, the effects of climate change, the high levels of pollution, among others, are recognized worldwide as factors that hinder the achievement of higher levels of management effectiveness (Rodríguez-Rodríguez and Martínez-Vega, 2018; Soliku and Schraml, 2018; Rodríguez-Rodríguez et al., 2019).

Corresponding author. E-mail address: [email protected].

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2019.104044 Received 26 December 2018; Received in revised form 6 June 2019; Accepted 7 June 2019 0264-8377/ © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Land Use Policy 87 (2019) 104044

J.P. Morea

encountered in protected areas across Latin America and other parts of the world. Also, this reserve is interesting as a case study because, in 2013, it developed its own management plan to regulate the use of space and to propose a management model to achieve its conservation objectives. Unlike other proposals, the designed approach suggests a social perspective and weighs the analysis of territorial issues as a main characteristic. Analyzing the use of space and economic activities, characterizing the interests and visions of social actors, and identifying conflicts is fundamental to recognize possible discrepancies or gaps between planning and management. This analysis will help determine how the problems and conflicts of the protected area show on the space and, therefore, identify critical and strategic areas, which are useful to adopt management recommendations.

In Latin America, shortcomings in planning, conflicts over land tenure, lack of economic resources and basic infrastructure, and noncompliance with environmental legislation are common problems for the vast majority of conservation units throughout the region (Báez and Acuña, 2003; De la et al., 2003; Elbers, 2011; Guerrero et al., 2007; López-Rodríguez and Rosado, 2017). Nevertheless, the characteristics of this problem and the causes and factors that hinder the achievement of objectives and the better functioning of protected areas depend on different contextual situations. In Argentina, the factors that generate environmental imbalances, threaten the conservation of biodiversity, and hinder the management of protected areas are associated with either the over-exploitation of strategic natural resources, such as mining, oil, gas, water, wood, and cotton, or the territorial expansion of agricultural establishments for the plantation of high-priced products in the international market, such as soy and corn (Galafassi, 2012; Zarrilli, 2016; Morea, 2017). These processes are part of a phenomenon of productive expansion present throughout Latin America. The demand for the availability of all the resources or territories that have the potential to develop economic activities has been a great impediment to the establishment of environmental policies (Leff, 2005; Delgado Ramos, 2008; Coronado and Uc, 2010; Leff, 2012; Galafassi, 2014; Miranda et al., 2016). This means that management effectiveness does not depend exclusively on internal factors or on what happens within the limits of the reserves. These processes have not only affected habitats, but also the availability of spaces that are important to preserve biodiversity, reducing the distance between many protected areas and the nearest urban or productive areas. Many protected areas have become of interest for the development of economic and productive activities within their limits, sometimes losing part of the area designated for conservation purposes (Galafassi, 2013; Dourojeanni, 2014; Jasso and Abellán, 2015; Lopes et al., 2015; Guerrero and Peyroti, 2016). That is why, in Latin America, the consolidation and extension of national protected areas depend on processes of land-use planning to counteract the advance of productive borders. So far, few countries have proposed this kind of planning initiatives with a regional or national scope. Different international organizations and sectors related to protected areas recognize this problem (Alvarez and Isabel, 2008; Gudiño, 2010; Armijo, 2015; CEPAL, 2016, 2017; Máttar and Cuervo González, 2017). The Argentine experience has been in line with regional trends. Several publications have shown that improving management effectiveness continues to be an outstanding debt. Studies aimed at assessing the management of protected areas in Argentina reflect that the main causes that hinder management are the lack of management plans for each area, the lack of strong or sufficient regulatory frameworks, the lack of land-use planning processes at national and regional scales, and institutional weakness, which shows in the scarcity of resources to carry out the management (Almirón et al., 2007; M. Giaccardi and Tagliorette, 2007; Morea, 2014; Zarrilli, 2016). Given this situation, a fundamental aim is to promote new strategies to improve management effectiveness; strategies that focus on conservation from a social perspective, controlling the economic activities, working with local communities, and reducing social and environmental conflicts. Based on the above, the main aim of this work is to propose a general framework to improve the management of protected areas and identify corrective measures for the aforementioned problems. In order to do so, we developed a case study in Bahía de San Antonio Protected Natural Area (BSAPNA) in Argentina, not only because of its importance for the conservation of biodiversity in the regional and international context, but also for being a reserve that has many uses and activities within its limits. The existence of permanent population within its boundaries, and the coexistence of conservation actions and economic, productive, and industrial activities make it difficult to manage and turn this reserve into a test case for many of the problems

2. Materials and methods 2.1. Study area Bahía de San Antonio Protected Natural Area is a coastal marine reserve located northwest of San Matías Gulf (40°42′to 40°50′S and 64°43′ to 65°07′W), province of Río Negro, in Patagonia, Argentina (Fig. 1). It has an approximate area of 81 200 ha: 20 300 ha correspond to the mainland and 60 900 ha to the marine sector. Because of its location, it covers San Antonio Este harbor, the cities of San Antonio Oeste and Las Grutas and its adjacent areas, sandy beaches with shells, and an extensive marsh that forms the Bay of San Antonio, which is uncovered whenever there is a low tide, exposing large sandy plains crossed by drainage channels. The geomorphological composition of the protected area can be divided into six groups: tidal flats, wind accumulations, coastal cords, ancient beaches, current beaches, abrasion platforms, and active cliffs (Maricel Giaccardi and Reyes, 2012). Bay of San Antonio is considered a wetland of importance since criterion 2 and criterion 3 of Ramsar Sites can be applied. It was also declared an International Reserve of the Western Hemispheric Shorebird Reserve Network (WHSRN) because it contains charismatic species and species of economic importance. It is considered an Important Bird Area (IBA) for 16 globally endangered species. The reserve has a varied fauna that includes both invertebrates and vertebrates, some of which are of commercial importance or of high conservation value. The San Antonio Department has 29 284 inhabitants (INDEC, 2010). The most important economic activities are artisan and trawl fishing, the Solvay plant of soda, and tourism. Mainly, San Antonio Este harbor exports fruits, vegetables, and their derivatives to Patagonia and, to a lesser extent, it also exports fish. Artisan fishing is also a historical activity that takes place in different sectors of the bay and its surrounding areas through diving, coastal fishing, and embarked fishing. Regarding tourism, the three main localities of this area make up a circuit that connects different forms of tourism and a wide diversity of recreational activities. The practice of sun and beach tourism takes place in almost the entire area, but Las Grutas stands out, complementing it with sport and leisure activities. 2.2. The operational framework We designed the evaluation process based on a method that prioritizes understanding the dynamics of the protected area as a territorial system and analyzing the existing problems through their manifestation in space. This process comprises three stages that must be adapted to the case study: the analysis of planning and management, the analysis of uses and activities, and the identification of critical and strategic areas. The flexible design allows for the combination of different theoretical perspectives, data sources, methods, and techniques. In this case, it helped combine methodological strategies, such as documentary research and case study, with data construction techniques, such as 2

Land Use Policy 87 (2019) 104044

J.P. Morea

Fig. 1. Study Area.

During fieldwork, the techniques that prevailed were field observations and semi-structured and unstructured interviews (AnderEgg, 1980; Guber, 2001). We included field observations to conduct surveys on different sectors, equipment, infrastructure, and tourist attractions through photographic records and field notes. The use of a GPS device allowed for the recognition of different sectors, mobility networks, and points of interest. The combination of these techniques enabled the description, characterization, and understanding of the unit of analysis as a complex territorial system (Sánchez Crispín et al., 2012; Morea, 2016). The semi-structured interview allowed us to talk about themes and objectives that were considered important, while also contemplating some freedom and flexibility (Ander-Egg, 1980). We carried out these interviews with those involved in the management of the protected area

participant observation, field notes, photographic records, and semistructured interviews. The techniques and methods used can be divided into two main phases: data collection and construction, and data analysis. 2.3. Data collection and construction Documentary research and bibliographic reviews are essential methodological strategies to deepen the knowledge about the unit of analysis and to get statistical and cartographic information, related to the legal framework. Data collection includes a selection of assessments, technical and official documents, statistical information at regional and local levels, plans of the reserve, and internal and external evaluations conducted by NGOs and governmental bodies. 3

Land Use Policy 87 (2019) 104044

J.P. Morea

dialogues with key informants were essential. During fieldwork, we used a GPS device to survey points of interest, sectors, and mobility relationships. We also used digital images from Google Maps and thematic cartography from the Ministry of Environment and Sustainable Development of Argentina. Part of the data processing included the making of thematic cartography necessary to identify incompatibilities and conflicts of use, and define strategic and critical zones.

in order to get essential information regarding planning, management, and land-use planning. On the other hand, the unstructured interview was not based on a list of specific topics. This kind of interview was considered appropriate for a selected group of key informants, made up of residents, businessmen, tour operators, and local users (Guber, 2001). We conducted 20 semi-structured interviews between March 2017 and November 2017. The target population covered conservation workers, local researchers, and government and management personnel. During the same period, we conducted 30 unstructured interviews. The target population covered all the stakeholder groups in the reserve, including conservation workers, local research experts, traders, residents, tour operators, fishermen, and tourists.

2.4.3. Identification of critical and strategic areas The identification of critical and strategic areas arises from the analysis of the real use of space. We must understand these zones as contested spaces, which combine the interest of different sectors and are, at the same time, important for conservation. Recognizing the uses of the reserve and analyzing the discrepancies between intended and real uses allows us to establish incompatibilities and conflicts of use. Critical and strategic areas reflect the territorial dimension of these conflicts and make it easier to locate those areas that require special attention when it comes to decision making regarding the management of the protected area.

2.4. Data analysis In accordance with the methodological design, we created a triangulation on three main elements: bibliographic surveys, fieldwork, and interviews. The process was continuous and over a relationship of multiple influences. We were able to contrast the information got in the written documents with the reality; not only did the interviewees’ statements and the field records validate each other, but also with the bibliographic sources (Giddens, 2000). The processing of the interviews allowed us to find common patterns. The answers obtained were listed and cross-linked to get common concepts, ideas, and visions. Later, they were grouped to identify certain patterns for each of the topics addressed, which shaped views or coinciding criteria among different actors. To create land-use patterns and to identify areas or units of interest, we processed statistical, cartographic, and bibliographic information. During fieldwork, we located points, paths, and roads with a GPS device. All the information collected was processed in a GIS system to classify different patterns: conservation, urban, productive, recreational, etc. From this work, thematic cartography was elaborated with the definition of critical and strategic areas (Geneletti and van Duren, 2008; Hull et al., 2011).

3. Results 3.1. Interviews and bibliographical review Dividing the analysis into main topics allowed us to identify the patterns and criteria shown in Table 1, which are a synthesis of some coinciding aspects of interviewees, social actors, and information gathered in different documents. 3.1.1. Planning and land-use planning The MP of the protected area was established in 2013 as a policy equivalent to a provincial law. The overall aim of the MP states the following: “This MP aims to provide clear and agreed guidelines so that the enforcement authority can exercise management with clear goals and under certain rules.” (Giaccardi and Reyes, 2012, p. 11) This plan also sets the objectives of the protected area:

• Preserve biodiversity, natural and cultural features, ecological processes, and environmental services provided by the protected area. • Preserve sites of paleontological, archaeological, and historicalcultural importance. • Preserve the landscape. • Promote and facilitate research and the monitoring of natural and cultural heritage. • Encourage residents and visitors to preserve the protected area. • Encourage that the uses within the protected area be carried out

2.4.1. Analysis of planning and management This analysis is essential to understand the objectives, functionalities, and regulations regarding permitted and prohibited activities within the reserve. The information gathered is essential to establish a point of comparison between the dynamics and expectations of the intended use, and the actual and effective use of space. We structured this analysis based on certain topics that were considered fundamental. In relation to planning and land-use planning, the main topics were: a) objectives of the protected area, b) current plans, c) land-use guidelines, and d) size, design, and zoning of the reserve. Regarding management, the main topics were: a) management body, b) main management strategies, and c) deficiencies and problems.

• • •

2.4.2. Analysis of uses and activities The analysis of uses and activities in the reserve is fundamental to understand its dynamics, functioning, territorial structure, and spatial dimension. Through this, we intend to understand the real use of space. In this phase, the concept of territorial structure is important. This concept analyzes the economic activities of a territory based on the elements implanted according to production and consumption areas, and their physical and functional interconnections (Sánchez Crispín et al., 2012). This way of approaching the use of space in protected areas allows us to analyze differences between the forecasts of future use and the effective or actual functioning of the protected area (Salvador Antón Clavé et al., 2008; Salvador Anton Clavé and Reverté, 2011; Hull et al., 2011; Santos and del Álamo, 2012). This is important to identify gaps between planning and management, and to understand the root causes. Surveys of different sectors, interviews with managers, and

through responsible practices that ensure the conservation and permanent exploitation of resources. Promote the development of responsible recreational and tourism activities. Promote and strengthen interdepartamental management areas. Guarantee mechanisms for the responsible management of the area (Giaccardi & Reyes, 2012, p. 140).

Based on the patterns identified in the interviews, the annual operational plans (AOP), which are used as an update strategy or as a complementation of the original plan, have not been elaborated either. Although only five years have passed, so far, the production of periodic reports and evaluations has been low. According to the Provincial Secretariat of Environment, which is responsible for the management of the reserve, “The reasons why the management plan is not fully implemented are the shortage of budget, the lack of political will, and the multiplicity of actors and interests that bid for the use of space and that sometimes make it difficult to implement management actions.” (Personal communication, April 15, 2017) Regarding land-use planning in the BSAPNA, along with the 4

Land Use Policy 87 (2019) 104044

J.P. Morea

Table 1 Interview Analysis. Main Topics Planning Objectives of the Reserve

Currents Plans

Land-use Guidelines Design and Zoning

Management Management Body

Management Strategies Deficiencies and Problems

Criteria and Patterns Identified conservation; • shorebird awareness and education; • environmental of conservation and use. • integration implementation of management plan (MP); • partial operational plans or updates; • noprogress made over the past few years; • lack of dissemination the community. • land-use planning andamong are present in the MP, but they are not enforced and are difficult to apply; • there is a judicial disputeguidelines the municipality and the province to change the original land-use plan. • the limits and the design arebetween in accordance with conservation and ecosystem criteria; • although the size is large, thereestablished for an extension to the northern limit; • limits and zoning in the territoryisarea request not clear. • highest authority is the Provincial Secretariat of Environment; • the municipality of San Antonio has its own management responsibilities; • the is a local conservation authority that works as an advisory body. • there safe habitats for birds; • provide impacts and monitor activities. • mitigate of funding and resources is the central problem; • lack mobility, and signage are the essential needs; • staff, between municipality and province are the source of many problems; • discrepancies • environmental education could reduce conflicts among the community.

Fig. 2. Zoning of the BSAPNA.

bay, directing and limiting urban expansion and tourism development in areas of environmental fragility.” (Personal communication, March 10, 2017). However, considering the patterns identified in the interviews, the level of implementation and enforcement of these guidelines has been low. Moreover, in 2015, the Municipality of San Antonio Oeste developed a new land-use plan that revoked and countered the previous one through a more developmental vision. This change affected the land-use regulations of the protected area: first, through the appearance of a conflict of interest between the local administration and the Río Negro Province, and second, because at present there is no land-use plan in force, which limits the application of the management plan. With regard to the design of the protected area, during the interview process there was consensus about the size and limits of the

guidelines proposed in the MP, there is a regulatory framework that precedes and complements the plan. Major tools are law no. 2951 (Río Negro Province), and the Master Plan for Land Use of the Municipality of San Antonio Oeste, developed in 2005. Law no. 2951 is a regulatory framework for the use and protection of the coastal area of the province. It promotes the development of economic activities subject to the conservation of the environment, and the installation of any kind of construction, buildings, or permanent activities subject to the prior authorization of the enforcement authority (Rio Negro Province). The Master Plan for Land Use, as expressed by several of the actors interviewed, was a plan with a protectionist vision. According to the responsible for the coordination of the plan, it “was an important source at the time of the elaboration of the management plan. The aim was to organize the use of the whole 5

Land Use Policy 87 (2019) 104044

J.P. Morea

plan and no annual evaluations of the management programs as it was actually intended.” (Personal communication, April 15, 2017). Regarding the main problems and deficiencies in management, discrepancies between municipality and province cause many of the current problems and prevent the achievement of greater progress in the management of the protected area. Another important obstacle has been the lack of resources and budget, which specifically impacts personnel, equipment available, and (insufficient) signage.

conservation unit, considering that the main criteria were ecosystem and environmental. However, there were either fixed or pre-existing limits that had to be adopted, such as those corresponding to urban areas and routes. The Provincial Secretariat of Environment requested an extension to the north coastal front, which would allow the incorporation of sand dunes and resting areas for some shorebirds. Just like with the limits, there were certain determinants that had to be considered when establishing the zoning of the protected area. The main aim of the zoning was to protect important areas for migratory birds, but, according to the management plan, the zonification was decided in participatory workshops, taking into account the most important elements of natural and cultural heritage, and the intensity and temporality of the uses. Based on this criteria, they defined five management areas and a series of critical areas important to shorebirds. The delimitation of each zone is clear and very precise, and it clearly explains the permitted and prohibited uses in the MP. Fig. 2 shows the comprehensive zoning of the BSAPNA. The interviewees agreed that it is difficult to design the zoning on the ground. In the vision of the leader of the environmental guards: “Most of the users of the place only recognize some critical areas because of our presence. The zoning is only a drawing on a map that could not be transferred to the territory.” (Personal communication, April 20, 2017). The lack of signage showing the limits and zoning of the reserve could also be verified during fieldwork. The MP has allowed the making of important decisions regarding the overall design of the protected area; however, users cannot be adequately informed because the limits and the zoning are not clearly established. This does not allow visualizing fundamental aspects of the design that help the space function as a territorial system.

3.2. Field works 3.2.1. Analysis of uses and activities When analyzing uses and activities, an important aspect is the existence of a program which comprises four subprograms that show the actual and intended uses: a) tourism and recreation, b) artisan and sports fishing, c) industrial activities, and d) human settlements. These uses should be distributed according to the objectives defined for each of the management and critical areas established in the MP. We must also take into account the Master Plan for Land Use (the original version and the last modification implemented in 2015). However, to establish the territorial structure of the BSAPNA, it is necessary to identify those elements that are important for the development of different uses and activities. Understanding social dynamics is fundamental to determine the real use of space. The main areas that articulate the use in the reserve are the three large urban areas, which concentrate mainly tourism and intensive uses, as defined in the management plan. Other key areas are those that are important for birds. In the bay, the use of space is based on these main areas. In fact, the classification of the use zones defined in the management plan was thought to be functional to these main areas. Mobility networks and spatial interconnections between different areas are a determining use factor. The design of the protected area transforms it into a vulnerable and permeable area with multiple formal access channels and many informal roads. The main formal entrances are national routes 3 and 251, and provincial routes 1 and 2. We also have to consider the access and connecting roads to the urban areas and the interconnections between routes. The main informal roads are along route 1, in Punta Perdiz and south of Las Grutas. The actors interviewed say this area allows easy access to all the coastal front. According to those responsible for the management, the protected area is vulnerable because, usually, everyone opens their way to get where they want. The president of the environmental foundation Inalafquen said: “It is a vulnerable, sensitive area. It is easy to enter; therefore, quads and motorcycles are one of the main problems.” (Personal communication, April 16, 2017). Environmental guards stated: “It is an absolutely permeable area because it is placed on the coast and there are multiple accesses. Also, there are a number of informal routes and roads open.” (Personal communication, March 25, 2017). This results in numerous, unauthorized paths and footprints, visible in the entire protected area. However, although it is easy to access most of the bay, the environment also imposes some limitations that hinder access to certain areas. Thanks to this, some of the areas with the highest level of protection are inaccessible to residents and tourists. In the case of BSAPNA, changes in certain practices and new use trends are also a key factor to understand the actual use of the protected area. Many of the actors involved in the elaboration of the management plan mentioned the need to update the land-use management programs. Tourist flows are the first important change. Las Grutas is now the main summer tourist destination in Patagonia. It concentrates the intensive uses of the reserve, causing the saturation of the area. As a result, tourist flows have been transferred to the north and south of Las Grutas and Puerto San Antonio Este, a key area for the future operation of the bay. Some of the uses that are beginning to appear are beaches, camping activities, fishing, and marine wildlife viewing. Another great agent of land-use change is urban expansion,

3.1.2. Management The Provincial Secretariat of Environment is the enforcement authority and the main responsible for the management of the reserve. The municipality of San Antonio Oeste also has jurisdiction over the territory, especially in urban areas. Those interviewed also identified the Local Conservation Authority as an important structure for management, despite being an advisory body. The headquarters staff of the Secretariat of Environment and Sustainable Development manage the operational and administrative matters. A territorial delegate of the Secretariat in San Antonio Oeste and a chief of the conservation unit with 6 other environmental guards are in charge of the rest of the management actions. The Local Conservation Authority includes all the important actors of public administration, scientific research centers, and various environmental foundations, and has operated with intermittence since 2004 as a legally recognized advisory body. Most managers and key informants said that there is no clarity on who has jurisdiction over land management. The main discrepancy arises between the provincial government and the municipality of San Antonio Oeste. The Secretary of Environment said: “The enforcement authority is the province and there are times in which we do not share the same vision with the municipality.” (Personal communication, April 15, 2017). The responsible for the coordination of the plan expressed: “The municipalities are autonomous and in environmental matters there are things that are a bit diffuse. The problem is that there is no regulation that says how far autonomy comes.” (Personal communication, March 10, 2017). Regarding management strategies, the MP establishes four major programs: program for the conservation and management of natural and cultural heritage; sustainable use program; education, awareness, and training program, and operational management and institutional relations program. The actors consulted agreed that the only management actions that were implemented were protection of bird habitats, mitigation of impacts, and monitoring of activities. The Secretary of Environment also stated: “Up to now, there has been no update on the 6

Land Use Policy 87 (2019) 104044

J.P. Morea

Fig. 3. Territorial Structure of BSAPNA.

Main conflicts between uses and conservation are disturbance to birds, destruction of habitats, sand compaction, different forms of pollution, overfishing, and extraction of sand, gravel, and shells, among other impacts. The territorial dimension of this conflict is wide and extends practically across the entire beach area between Las Grutas and San Antonio Oeste, particularly the dunes in Punta Piedras, Puerto San Antonio Este. In this reserve, conflicts due to incompatibilities between different uses are incipient and represent a challenge for the future, which requires decision-making in the present. Several of the actors consulted said that the area of Puerto San Antonio Este has the greatest potential for development and is awakening the interest of many sectors. Conflicts at the institutional and political level can be seen in the lack of coordination between municipality and province. In recent years, they have drifted apart due to a modification in the land-use plan that could lead to negative consequences for the protected area and could cause great difficulties in the management application programs. This conflict was taken to court. Conflicts over land-use changes come from urban expansion and tourism growth. In recent years, there has been a development of new activities that alter the land-uses projected in the management plan. Changes in trends in some tourism and recreational activities can also be associated with increasing tourist flows. Urban expansion also creates conflicts that have several aspects. Real estate speculation pretends to subdivide and urbanize areas of the reserve where these uses are not planned.

generated by tourism and population growth. The need to provide services for increasing tourist flows has promoted urban expansion in the south and north of Las Grutas and in other areas of the bay. Population growth is a respond to urban expansion processes associated with the growth projected by the new land-use plan. From this situation, it is possible to affirm that there are important dysfunctions regarding the management plan. Fig. 3 shows the territorial structure established for the BSAPNA. 3.2.2. Conflicts that affect the management of the protected area From the territorial structure and the differences between the intended and actual use of space, it is possible to identify a series of conflicts. According to their origin, conservation conflicts can be classified into several types (Baynham-Herd et al., 2018; Vucetich et al., 2018). In this case, conflicts are over land use, defined by Hersperger et al. (2015) as situations in which the parties involved have competing interests concerning the use of a certain portion of land. The analysis made in the previous sections shows that many of the difficulties in implementing management programs are due to unresolved conflicts. During fieldwork, we verified the implementation of management programs to try to understand management deficiencies and needs. Main deficiencies are identified outside critical areas for birds. There are no specific management plans for other areas, no tasks have been carried out on recovery zones, and there are no controls on the marine area. When accompanying environmental guards, we could see the lack of work materials, such as binoculars, telephones, radios, and vehicles to move around the place. Most guards travel by public transport, bicycle, or foot. Another shortcoming observed was the low number of shelters and the precariousness of some of them. For the case study, it was possible to identify four different conflicts:

3.2.3. Critical and strategic areas During fieldwork, it was possible to identify critical and strategic areas that arise from the territorial structure and the analysis of different existing conflicts. Critical and strategic areas reflect the territorial dimension of these conflicts and make it easier to locate those areas that require special attention when it comes to decision making regarding the management of the protected area. These areas are shown in Fig. 4. In this case, three critical and strategic areas are identified: those that respond to conflicts between uses and conservation, those associated with improper vehicle circulation, and those related to land-use changes. In addition to these areas, the figure also shows different use

1 conflicts between uses and conservation; 2 conflicts due to incompatibilities between different uses and activities; 3 conflicts at the institutional and political level, and 4 conflicts due to land-use changes. Table 2 shows the manifestation of these conflicts. These activities affect conservation objectives in different ways. 7

Land Use Policy 87 (2019) 104044

J.P. Morea

Table 2 Conflict Analysis. Conflicts Between uses and conservation

Due to incompatibilities between different uses and activities

At the institutional and political level

Due to land-use changes

Actors

Activities/manifestation

due to land use changes; • Conflicts and conservation agents; • management • local community. community; • local developers; • urban • tourists; • fishermen. responsible for the management of the • those protected area and the local community; relationship between province and municipality • the of Environment; • Secretariat estate agents; • real • tourists; • municipality of San Antonio Oeste

and recreational activities; • Productive circulation along the beach; • vehicle activity; • tourist • fishing; • industries between tourist and recreational activities, and • overlaps industries, urban expansion, and artisan fishing. among the inhabitants regarding land-use • disagreements regulations established in the MP; of coordination between municipality and province. • lack expansion and tourism growth; • urban settlements; • irregular • changes in trends in some tourism and recreational activities.

• It is necessary to consider institutional strengthening as a fundamental element to manage the protected area. • Information and environmental education and awareness are key factors for the effective management of the reserve. • The gap between planning and management must be sealed. • The revision of current dynamics and future trends regarding the

areas established in the management plan and areas of importance for bird conservation. These critical areas represent both the expansion of many activities and the transgressions made on the zoning of the protected area. The three critical areas overlap with core areas, recovery areas, and areas of importance for conservation, all of which are strategic areas as well because they require urgent attention in terms of management measures, and because the effective management of these areas would solve the most important conflicts of the reserve. The resolution of conflicts and the proper management of these areas can constitute an important strategy to promote or approach a sustainable development model.

actual use of space should be continuous.

These premises are central elements that must be addressed to make progress in the management of the protected area. However, realizing these premises is not a simple matter and will require adopting a set of measures or performing certain actions that, for the purpose of this work, can be reflected in a series of recommended guidelines. Recommendations for planning and land-use planning:

3.3. Management recommendations

• Concluding an agreement between municipality and province is a

The identification of strategic areas, together with other elements, allows us to propose recommendations to correct deficiencies in the reserve management model. Based on the analysis carried out, we identified a set of premises or elements that represent the basic needs or issues that should be solved to move towards a more efficient management model:

•

priority to reaffirm the land-use guidelines for the protected area and to build a vision of future development. The provincial government should guarantee consultation spaces with the local community and economic sectors to carry out

Fig. 4. Critical and Strategic Areas. 8

Land Use Policy 87 (2019) 104044

J.P. Morea

local people and the development of social economy were largely ignored. This often led to policy failures and conflicts between the management of the protected area and the needs of the population, which determines the effectiveness of the functions and subfunctions of the reserve, and the overall management effectiveness. This phenomenon is common in other protected areas in Argentina and deserves close attention (Galafassi, 2013; Morea, 2017). Another important finding concerns the question of how effective zoning is in restricting human activity across different areas. The results show that zoning was largely ineffective in regulating the use of space and achieving objectives. There is limited knowledge of boundaries and use areas, which did not go beyond cartographic elaboration. The results presented show that the design of the protected area is not visible in the territory, which makes it impossible to disseminate its implications and use them as management tools. The case study shows the complexities inherent to all zoning schemes (Hull et al., 2011; Gong et al., 2017). To better understand these complexities, it is useful to consider this system as a Coupled Human and Natural System (CHANS). Zoning highlights the extent to which regulatory designations are difficult to design on land when human and natural elements interact and cannot be divided into different and exclusive zones (Geneletti and van Duren, 2008; Hull et al., 2011). In this sense, one of the major contributions of this work has been defining critical and strategic areas based on the recognition of discrepancies between the zoning schemes and the actual use of space, and the conflicts these differences cause. The evaluation framework has revealed places where zoning is violated and birds are disturbed by tourism, fishing, and other activities. It has also made it possible to identify main zones of conflict of use. This tool has been useful to make specific management recommendations for the BSAPNA. Recommendations were made considering that conflicts between seabirds and recreational and industrial uses are likely to increase in the future due to growing pressure upon coastal marine areas. Our assessment model may ensure compatibility between seabird conservation and recreational and industrial uses, helping to achieve conservation and human goals in coastal marine reserves. Although specific management measures may only apply to particular circumstances of this study, the variables and the analytical approach used may apply to other locations and other circumstances. The evaluation methodology may also be applied to other reserves to develop corrective management measures.

evaluations and management plan adjustments.

• It is necessary to guarantee the mechanisms required to develop the

various sectoral plans that are stated in the management plan and that would allow the application of many of the programs and actions defined for the protected area. Recommendations to improve management effectiveness:

• Provincial and municipal public administrations must establish clear • • • •

responsibilities for the management of the protected area or form a mixed management body with representation from all sectors. Funding mechanisms must guarantee the resources needed to implement management programs. It is necessary to create management programs for the marine area, which currently lacks management. Those responsible for the management must implement environmental education and awareness programs to increase the appreciation for the protected area and create a sense of belonging. It is necessary to design a program to guarantee a continuous assessment of the management of the protected area. Recommendations regarding the actual use of space:

• It is essential to design a public use plan complementary to the • • • •

management plan and in accordance with current and future use trends of the protected area. The management body must agree on compatible uses to overcome incompatibilities and conflicts of this nature, paying special attention to the identified strategic areas. Uses assigned to each area —especially recovery and buffer areas— must be reassessed due to land-use changes and new interests. The management body should design awareness programs for the local community and ensure a more responsible use of resources. It is important to clearly demarcate boundaries and use areas, and disseminate this information.

These recommendations are related to the established premises and to a deeper concept, which is linked to the idea of connecting use and conservation as the main aim of the reserve. The most significant recommendations are aimed at filling the existing gap between planning and management, which is the main challenge. 4. Discussion

5. Conclusions This study established a framework for evaluating the management of protected areas. This framework presents a methodology designed from a territorial analysis that considers the management of the use of space as a strategy to improve conservation actions and management effectiveness. In this sense, our case study can be regarded as a “rapid assessment.” However, in protected areas of Argentina, it is necessary to conduct this kind of assessments due to limited human and financial resources. Our approach provides a solid basis for assessing the management of protected areas. The approach adopted provides a solid basis for assessing the management of protected areas through the development of articulated stages that allow the identification of problems and the making of management recommendations. Other protected areas can be evaluated following the steps of the approach used in this paper, which can be helpful in urging protected areas to improve their management. The results obtained in this case study show that the methodology applied has been useful to recognize gaps between planning and management, identify the main conflicts in the management of the protected area, and evaluate the effectiveness of the established zoning scheme. Nature conservation was emphasized, but other functions such as development and education were overlooked. A lot of importance was placed on the protection of specific species; however, the livelihood of

Understanding the underlying mechanisms and interrelationships of the functions of protected areas is critical to design and implement viable policies to balance conservation and development, which is a common challenge faced by protected areas and nature reserves around the world. The assessment has shown that BSAPNA is a protected area whose complexity is summarized in its inability to implement policies, programs, and projects defined in the planning stages. Addressing this issue and making progress in the implementation of a management plan requires solving central problems, which would allow the implementation of specific actions. It is necessary to conclude two different types of formal agreements. On the one hand, an agreement between the two levels of public administration. This agreement should delimit the autonomy of the municipal government in terms of land management competences. Providing clarity on this issue will considerably reduce the level of conflict in the protected area and make up for many of the malfunctions observed in the strategic zones. On the other hand, a broad agreement with the local community is necessary. This agreement should focus on two central aspects: the relationship between individuals and environment, and the use of space and resources. Local participation is essential for the planning and management of the reserve. In addition, we must improve the 9

Land Use Policy 87 (2019) 104044

J.P. Morea

environmental education of local population and visitors. These intersectoral agreements should redefine aspects of the design of the protected area taking into account trend changes that have taken place in recent years. One problem associated with this issue is the lack of delimitation of boundaries and use areas, and the consequent ignorance of users. All these difficulties caused when trying to bring order to the protected area have led to different kinds of incompatibilities and numerous conflicts of interest between different sectors. Although the priority must always be the conservation of the environment, zoning involves exclusion and sacrifice for both economic development and conservation; ultimately, it is a negotiation. Under this conception, some use areas can be reclassified or suffer certain modifications in terms of allowed and not allowed activities and, also, some limits can be changed. Due to all these factors, it is understood that discrepancies between the intended and actual use of space are based on the inability to effectively manage the protected area. There is a need for land-use planning in protected areas across Latin America and BSANPA is part of this problem. The evaluation framework used in this study matches the need to strengthen management from a territorial point of view. It is, at the same time, flexible and highly adaptable to efficiently solve assessment problems in different protected areas.

para el futuro. UICN, Oficina Regional para América del Sur. Galafassi, G., 2012. Renovadas versiones de un proceso histórico en marcha. La predación del territorio y la naturaleza como acumulación. Revista Theomai 25, 1–14. Galafassi, G., 2013. Conflictos por los recursos y el territorio en Patagonia Norte. Un caso de estudio en un área entre el Parque Nacional Nahuel Huapi y la cuenca del río Ñirihuau (Argentina). Scripta Nova: revista electrónica de geografía y ciencias sociales 17, 426. Galafassi, G., 2014. Acumulación, conflictos sociales y políticas de Estado en América Latina en las últimas décadas. Cambios y rupturas en el escenario regional. Revista Encuentros Latinoamericanos Montevideo 8 (1). Gaston, K.J., Jackson, S.F., Cantú-Salazar, L., Cruz-Piñón, G., 2008. The ecological performance of protected areas. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst. 39, 93–113. Geldmann, J., Barnes, M., Coad, L., Craigie, I.D., Hockings, M., Burgess, N.D., 2013. Effectiveness of terrestrial protected areas in reducing habitat loss and population declines. Biol. Conserv. 161, 230–238. Geldmann, J., Coad, L., Barnes, M., Craigie, I.D., Hockings, M., Knights, K., et al., 2015. Changes in protected area management effectiveness over time: a global analysis. Biol. Conserv. 191, 692–699. Geneletti, D., van Duren, I., 2008. Protected area zoning for conservation and use: a combination of spatial multicriteria and multiobjective evaluation. Landsc. Urban Plan. 85 (2), 97–110. Giaccardi, M., Tagliorette, A., 2007. Efectividad del manejo de las áreas protegidas marino costeras de la Argentina. Buenos Aires: Secretaría de Ambiente y Desarrollo Sustentable de la Nación. Fundación Patagonia Natural y Fundación Vida Silvestre Argentina. Giaccardi, Maricel, Reyes, L., 2012. Plan de Manejo del Área Natural Protegida Bahía de San Antonio, Rio Negro. Gobierno de la provincia de Río Negro. Giddens, A., 2000. Manual de sociología. Ciencias Sociales. Alianza Editorial, España. Gong, M., Fan, Z., Zhang, X., Liu, G., Wen, W., Zhang, L., 2017. Measuring the effectiveness of protected area management by comparing habitat utilization and threat dynamics. Biol. Conserv. 210, 253–260. Guber, R., 2001. La etnografía: método, campo y reflexividad. Norma. Gudiño, M.E., 2010. Del urbanismo reglamentario a las nuevas concepciones de ordenamiento territorial. Scripta Nova: revista electrónica de geografía y ciencias sociales 14. pp. 25. Guerrero, E., Sguerra, S., Rey, C., 2007. Áreas Protegidas en América Latina: De Santa Marta 1997 a Bariloche 2007. Bogotá, Parques Nacionales Naturales de Colombia y Comité Colombiano UICN. Guerrero, J.M., Peyroti, G.F., 2016. Las áreas naturales protegidas de Córdoba (Argentina): desarrollo normativo y ausencia de gestión territorial. Cuadernos Geográficos 55 (1), 33–58. Hersperger, A.M., Ioja, C., Steiner, F., Tudor, C.A., 2015. Comprehensive consideration of conflicts in the land-use planning process: a conceptual contribution. Carpathian J. Earth Environ. Sci. 10 (4), 5–13. Hockings, M., 2006. Evaluating Effectiveness: a Framework for Assessing Management Effectiveness of Protected Areas. IUCN. Hull, V., Xu, W., Liu, W., Zhou, S., Viña, A., Zhang, J., et al., 2011. Evaluating the efficacy of zoning designations for protected area management. Biol. Conserv. 144 (12), 3028–3037. INDEC, A., 2010. Censo Nacional de Población. Hogares y Vivienda. Buenos Aires, Argentina. Jasso, J.M.S., Abellán, F.C., 2015. Turismo de naturaleza en áreas protegidas de México. Una propuesta de conservación, aprovechamiento y desarrollo local en el Nevado de Toluca. Cuadernos de Turismo 36, 339–365. Leff, E., 2005. La geopolítica de la biodiversidad y el desarrollo sustentable. Revista del Observatorio Social de América Latina 17. Leff, E., 2012. Political ecology: a Latin American perspective. Desenvolvimento e Meio Ambiente 35, 29–64. Lopes, P.F.M., Pacheco, S., Clauzet, M., Silvano, R.A.M., Begossi, A., 2015. Fisheries, tourism, and marine protected areas: Conflicting or synergistic interactions? Ecosyst. Serv. 16, 333–340. López-Rodríguez, F., Rosado, D., 2017. Management effectiveness evaluation in protected areas of southern Ecuador. J. Environ. Manage. 190, 45–52. Máttar, J., Cuervo González, L.M., 2017. Planificación para el desarrollo en América Latina y el Caribe: enfoques, experiencias y perspectivas. Miranda, J.J., Corral, L., Blackman, A., Asner, G., Lima, E., 2016. Effects of protected areas on forest cover change and local communities: evidence from the Peruvian Amazon. World Dev. 78, 288–307. Morea, J.P., 2014. Situación actual de la gestión de las áreas protegidas de la Argentina: Problemáticas actuales y tendencias futuras. Revista Universitaria de Geografía 23 (1), 57–75. Recuperado de. http://bibliotecadigital.uns.edu.ar/scielo.php?script= sci_abstract&pid=S1852-42652014001100003&lng=es&nrm=iso&tlng=es. Morea, J.P., 2016. Metodologías de planificación del uso público en espacios protegidos: Antecedentes y perspectivas futuras. Papeles de Geografía 62. Morea, J.P., 2017. Problemática territorial y conservación de la biodiversidad en espacios protegidos de Argentina. Investigaciones Geográficas 68. Rodríguez-Rodríguez, D., Martínez-Vega, J., 2018. Protected area effectiveness against land development in Spain. J. Environ. Manage. 215, 345–357. Rodríguez-Rodríguez, D., Martínez-Vega, J., Echavarría, P., 2019. A twenty year GISbased assessment of environmental sustainability of land use changes in and around protected areas of a fast developing country: Spain. Int. J. Appl. Earth Obs. Geoinf. 74, 169–179. Sánchez Crispín, Á., Mollinedo Beltrán, G., Propin Frejomil, E., 2012. Estructura territorial del turismo en Guatemala. Investig. Geogrã¡ficas 78, 104–121. Santos, M., del Álamo, J.B., 2012. El uso público en la red de parques nacionales de España una propuesta de evaluación. Organismo Autónomo Parques Nacionales.

Funding This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors. References Almirón, M., Balabusic, A., Bosso, A., Bukart, R., Carminati, A., Carpinetti, B., et al., 2007. Las Áreas Protegidas en la Argentina. Herramienta Superior para la conservación de nuestro patrimonio natural y cultura (APN y FVSA). Buenos Aires. . Alvarez, M.I.M., Isabel, M., 2008. ORDENAMIENTO TERRITORAL Y LA DIMENSIÓN AMBIENTAL DE LOS INSTRUMENTOS DE PLANIFICACIÓN EN CHILE. Ecosostenible 40, 40–51. Ander-Egg, E., 1980. Técnicas de investigación social. El Cid., Buenos Aires. Armijo, M., 2015. La coherencia entre la planificación del largo y corto plazo: el presupuesto orientado a resultados en Chile. Estudio de caso. Santiago, Comisión Económica para América Latina y el Caribe (CEPAL). inédito. . Báez, A.L., Acuña, A., 2003. Guía para las mejores prácticas de ecoturismo en áreas protegidas. Comisión Nacional para el Desarrollo de los Pueblos Indígenas. Baynham-Herd, Z., Redpath, S., Bunnefeld, N., Molony, T., Keane, A., 2018. Conservation conflicts: behavioural threats, frames, and intervention recommendations. Biol. Conserv. 222, 180–188. CEPAL, 2016. Informe de la XV Reunión del Consejo Regional de Planificación del Instituto Latinoamericano y del Caribe de Planificación Económica y Social (ILPES) (N.o (LC/L.4151)). Santiago. . CEPAL, 2017. Informe de la XVI Reunión del Consejo Regional de Planificación del Instituto Latinoamericano y del Caribe de Planificación Económica y Social (ILPES) (N.o LC/CRP.16/5)). Lima. . Cifuentes, M., Izurieta, A., de Faria, H.H., 2000. Medición de la efectividad del manejo de áreas protegidas. Clavé, Salvador Antón, Boqué, J.B., Salvat, J.S., 2008. Turismo, actividades recreativas y uso público en los Parques Naturales: propuesta para la conservación de los valores ambientales y el desarrollo productivo local. Boletín de la Asociación de Geógrafos Españoles 48, 5–38. Clavé, Salvador Anton, Reverté, F.G., 2011. Planificación territorial del turismo. Editorial UOC. Coronado, J.P., Uc, P., 2010. La construcción de una geopolítica crítica desde América Latina y el Caribe. Hacia una agenda de investigación regional. Geopolítica (s). Revista de estudios sobre espacio y poder 1 (1), 65–94. Dawson, N., Martin, A., Danielsen, F., 2018. Assessing equity in protected area governance: approaches to promote just and effective conservation. Conserv. Lett. 11 (2), e12388. de Faria, H.H., 1993. Elaboración de un procedimiento para medir la efectividad de manejo de áreas silvestres protegidas y su aplicación en dos áreas protegidas de Costa Rica. CATIE, Turrialba (Costa Rica). De la, Maza, Elvira, J., Cadena González, R., Piguerón Wirz, C., SC, Q. C. E, 2003. Estado actual de las áreas naturales protegidas de América Latina y el Caribe. Delgado Ramos, G.C., 2008. El carácter geoeconómico y geopolítico de la biodiversidad: el caso de América Latina. CLACSO, Consejo Latinoamericano de Ciencias Sociales. Buenos Aires. Dourojeanni, M.J., 2014. Ocupación humana y áreas protegidas de la Amazonia del Perú. Ecol. Apl. 13 (2), 225–232. Elbers, J., 2011. Las áreas protegidas de América Latina: Situación actual y perspectivas

10

Land Use Policy 87 (2019) 104044

J.P. Morea

we pursue it? Biol. Conserv. 221, 23–33. Zarrilli, A.G., 2016. Ambiente, producción y mercado. El impacto transformador en una economía periférica, el Gran Chaco Argentino en el siglo XX. Areas. Rev. Int. Cienc. Soc. Interdiscip. 35, 121–139.

Soliku, O., Schraml, U., 2018. Making sense of protected area conflicts and management approaches: a review of causes, contexts and conflict management strategies. Biol. Conserv. 222, 136–145. Vucetich, J.A., Burnham, D., Macdonald, E.A., Bruskotter, J.T., Marchini, S., Zimmermann, A., Macdonald, D.W., 2018. Just conservation: What is it and should

11