eScholarship provides open access, scholarly publishing services to the University of California and delivers a dynamic research platform to scholars worldwide.

Abstract

In recent years, buffer zones have become widely known as an operational approach in nature conservation, and are often applied in Integrated Conservation and Development Projects (ICDP). However, to the authors' knowledge, there has not yet been a thorough evaluation and analysis of the strengths and constraints of the buffer zone concept. One reason could be that, even though the concept has been known for quite some time, the systematic application of the buffer zone concept is rather recent. A second reason, as it will be argued in this document, is that buffer zone projects should have a long-term perspective. Since it takes time to institutionalise the multi-disciplinary approach, buffer zone projects of five years or less are not realistic and are doomed to failure. Moreover, proper buffer zone management demands a participatory process approach, which also takes time. Buffer zones are seen as important tools in both conserving areas of ecological importance and addressing development objectives. The latter are often rural objectives involving agricultural production, small-scale (cottage) industries and marketing. Various authors and experts have given their definition of buffer zones from different angles and perspectives. The Netherlands' policy context emphasises the buffer zones' dual function of serving both conservation and development goals. This dual goal is most appropriately reflected in Wild and Mutebi's definition (1996), which is used in this document. This definition of a buffer zone is: Any area, often peripheral to a protected area, inside or outside, in which activities are implemented or the area managed with the aim of enhancing the positive and reducing the negative impacts of conservation on neighbouring communities and neighbouring communities on conservation. Investments in nature conservation projects typically demand a long lead time before benefits start to materialise. By virtue of the classic economic view of time value, and since benefits only accrue in the distant (and for economists thus unattractive) future, appraisal of such projects through discounted measures of project worth often turns out to be rather unfavourable, with direct costs (capital investment) at establishment of the conservation programme weighing heavily (and negatively) in the analysis. Moreover, the benefits of nature conservation and management projects are often intangible or not easily quantified, let alone given a monetary value. If market prices for environmental services and amenities do prevail at all, they are often an imperfect reflection of value, i.e. market failure works to the detriment of nature conservation efforts. It is often difficult to integrate the direct and indirect benefits of nature conservation in an analytical framework, and the incremental costs and benefits of establishing buffer zones are even more difficult to assess. Unfortunately, the value and feasibility of buffer zones is indeed to be found in this incremental analysis. It is therefore difficult to establish the feasibility and sustainability of buffer zones from a purely economic point of view, using the available methodologies, even though it is acknowledged that such zones may have tremendous indirect (secondary, non-use and/or implicit) benefits. The buffer zone approach is a long-term intervention for various reasons, the main ones being: !" It demands a participatory and process approach, which takes time. It also often demands a change of attitude and even cultural thinking, changes which cannot be achieved overnight; !" Buffer zones are crucial areas for both people and nature. Therefore, careful planning based on complete information of the natural resource base and socio-economic context is necessary; !" The multi-disciplinary planning process is complicated, as many stakeholders at different levels will be involved, ranging from indigenous people to government officials at the national level; !" It usually takes a long time to establish a stable institutional structure. Identification and formulation of buffer zone projects is normally based on limited information. A blue-print approach does not work, nor is there a standard formula that can be applied. As a consequence, an inception phase is becoming standard procedure when Netherlands funding and assistance are involved.