Revisión de los objetivos de los espacios protegidosel parque natural y reserva de la biosfera de Redes

  1. González Díaz, José Antonio 1
  2. González Díaz, Benjamín 2
  3. Rosa García, Rocío 3
  1. 1 UNED GIJON
  2. 2 Universidad de Oviedo
    info

    Universidad de Oviedo

    Oviedo, España

    ROR https://ror.org/006gksa02

  3. 3 Servicio Regional de Investigación y Desarrollo Agroalimentario
    info

    Servicio Regional de Investigación y Desarrollo Agroalimentario

    Villaviciosa, España

    ROR https://ror.org/043gz6e45

Show affiliations +
Journal:
Espacio, tiempo y forma. Serie VI, Geografía

ISSN: 1130-2968

Year of publication: 2021

Tome: 14

Pages: 67-88

Type: Article

DOI: 10.5944/ETFVI.14.2021.28843 DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR

More publications in: Espacio, tiempo y forma. Serie VI, Geografía

Abstract

The Biosphere Reserves (BRs) are unique sites that aspire to harmonize the conservation of biodiversity (natural and cultural) with the sustainable use of the natural resources, the socioeconomic development, and the support to research and education initiatives. In this paper, we evaluated the degree of fulfilment of these objectives in a case study: the Redes Biosphere Reserve. The changes in the local landscape, in its agrobiodiversity (both natural and cultural) and in the socioeconomy were quantified before and after the designation of the RB. The degree of attention to cultural and natural values and to scientific experimentation and development were also evaluated between both periods. The methodology is a powerful tool for evaluating the compliance with the objectives of the BR. The landscape is becoming homogenized and it is losing its mosaic character. The agrobiodiversity of wild and domestic species shows no signs of recovery. The socioeconomic future of the BR is handicapped by the high degree of population aging and the loss of jobs that lead to an accentuated depopulation; these trends also show signs of worsening. The natural and cultural heritages receive unequal attention, the former enjoying greater support over the latter. Globally, the objectives of the BRs are not being met and they must be reviewed to reverse the situation and implement more effective sustainable strategies in a context of global change. Local communities must be part of the debate forum and decision-making must be agreed with all the agents.

Bibliographic References

  • Amend, T., Brown, J., Kothari, A., Phillips, A., & Stolton, S. (2008). Protected Landscapes and Agrobiodiversity Values. IUCN GTZ.
  • Berkes, F. (1993). Traditional ecological knowledge in perspective. En J.T. Inglis (Ed.), Traditional ecological knowledge: Concepts and Cases (pp. 1-9). Canadian Museum of Nature and the International Development Research Centre.
  • Caliet-Mir, L., Riu-Bosoms, C., González-Puente, M., Ruiz-Mallin, I., Reyes-García V., & Molina, J.L. (2016). The Transmission of Home Garden Knowledge: Safeguarding Biocultural Diversity and Enhancing Social–Ecological Resilience. Society & Natural Resources, 29, 556-571.
  • Castillo-Eguskitza, N., Rescia, A., & Onaindia, M. (2017). Urdaibai Biosphere Reserve (Biscay, Spain): Conservation against development. Science of The Total Environment, 592, 124-133.
  • Coetzer, K.L., Witkowski, E.T.F., & Erasmus, B.F.N. (2013). Reviewing Biosphere Reserves globally: effective conservation action or bureaucratic label. Biological Reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society, 89(1), 82-104.
  • De Diego-Sierra, V. (1999). La raza Asturiana de la Montaña. Vol. El Ganado Vacuno del Tronco Castaño. ASEAVA, ASEAMO.
  • EEA (2006a): Land accounts for Europe 1990-2000. Towards integrated land and ecosystems accounting, EEA Report 11/2006. European Environment Agency.
  • EEA (2006b): Urban sprawl in Europe. The ignored challenge, EEA Report 10. European Environment Agency.
  • FAO (2015). The Second Report on the State of the World’s Animal Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture, edited by B.D. Scherf & D. Pilling. FAO Commission on Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture Assessments. http://www.fao.org/3/a-i4787e/index.html.
  • Fernández-García, A. (2005). La presa de Tanes y su entorno. Análisis territorial del espacio de Redes. Estudio socioeconómico. Oviedo, Departamento de Geografía de la Universidad de Oviedo, 87 pp.
  • Garzón-García, R., & Mulero-Mendigorri, A. (2005). Espacios naturales protegidos y desarrollo rural en España: los Planes de Desarrollo Sostenible. Universidad de Córdoba. Córdoba.
  • González-Díaz, J.A., Celaya, R., Fernández-García, F., Osoro, K., & Rosa García, R. (2019). Dynamics of rural landscapes in marginal areas of northern Spain: Past, present, and future. Land Degradation and Development, 30(2), 141-150.
  • Grabherr, G., Björnsen-Gurung, A., Dedieu, J.P., Haeberli, W., Hohenwallner, D., Lotter, A.F., Nagy, L., Pauli, H., & Psenner, R. (2005). Long-term Environmental Observations in Mountain Biosphere Reserves: Recommendations from the EU GLOCHAMOR Project. Mountain Research and Development, 25(4), 376-382.
  • Gurrutxaga-San Vicente, M., & Lozano-Valencia, P.J. (2008). Evidencias sobre la eficacia de los corredores ecológico: ¿Solucionan la problemática de fragmentación de hábitats? Observatorio Medioambiental, 11, 171-183.
  • Hedden-Dunkhorst, B., & Schmitt, F. (2020). Exploring the Potential and Contribution of UNESCO Biosphere Reserves for Landscape Governance and Management in Africa. Land, 9, 237.
  • Herrán-Alonso, M., Fernández-García, F., & González-Díaz, J.A. (2008). Caracterización de la montaña asturiana a partir de indicaciones sociales, económicos y territoriales. Polígonos: Revista de Geografía, 18, 37-62.
  • Herzog, F., Lausch, A., Müller, E., Thulke, H.H., Steinhardt, U.T.A., & Lehmann, S. (2001). Landscape metrics for assessment of landscape destruction and rehabilitation. Environmental Management, 27(1), 91-107.
  • Hotl, E.A., & Miller, S.W. (2010). Bioindicators: Using Organisms to Measure Environmental Impacts. Nature Education Knowledge, 3(10), 75-89.
  • Jove-Canella, J.M., & Alonso, L. (1932). Topografía médica del término municipal Sobrescobio. Academia Nacional de medicina-Premio García Roel.
  • McGarigal, K., & Cushman, S. A. (2002). Comparative evaluation of experimental approaches to the study of habitat fragmentation effects. Ecological Applications, 12(2), 335-345.
  • Mata-Olmo, R. (2009). Paisaje y territorio: un desafío teórico y práctico. En L. Sánchez-Pérez, M.Á. Troitiño-Vinuesa (Coords.), Agua, territorio y paisaje: de los instrumentos programados a la planificación aplicada. V Congreso Internacional de Ordenación del Territorio (pp. 243-282). Asociación Interprofesional de Ordenación del Territorio FUNDICOT.
  • Martínez-Fernández, J., Ruiz-Benito, P., & Zavala, M.A. (2015). Recent land cover changes in Spain across biogeographical regions and protection levels: implications for conservation policies. Land Use Policy, 44, 62-75.
  • Martínez-Fernández, J., Ruiz-Benito, P., & Jornet, A.B. (2018). La última actualización de la cartografía CORINE Land Cover (CLC2012) en España: repercusiones para los estudios de cambios en la cobertura y uso del suelo. Estudios Geográficos, 79(284), 267-281
  • Moos, D., & Wyatt, B.K. (1994). The CORINE biotopes project: A database for conservation of nature and wildlife in the European community. Applied Geography, 14(4), 327-349.
  • Oldekop, J.A., Holmes, G., Harris, W.E. & Evans, K.L. (2016). A global assessment of the social and conservation outcomes of protected areas. Conservation Biology, 30, 133-141.
  • Pontius Jr, R.G., Huffaker, D., & Denman, K. (2004). Useful techniques of validation for spatially explicit land-change models. Ecological Modelling, 179(4), 445-461.
  • Prado-Velasco, M. J. (2012). Natururbanización y patrones urbanos en los Parques Nacionales de Andalucía. Boletín de la Asociación de Geógrafos Españoles, 60, 19‐44.
  • Rodríguez-Rodríguez, M., Aguilera, H., Guardiola-Albert, C., & Fernández-Ayuso, A. (2021). Climate Influence Vs. Local Drivers in Surface Water-Groundwater Interactions in Eight Ponds of Doñana National Park (Southern Spain). Wetlands, 41(2), 1-14.
  • Rodríguez-Rodríguez, D., Martínez-Vega, J., & Echavarría, P. (2019). A twenty year GIS-based assessment of environmental sustainability of land use changes in and around protected areas of a fast developing country: Spain. International Journal of Applied Earth Observation and Geoinformation, 74, 169-179.
  • SADEI (2016). Estadísticas de empleo por ramas y sectores años 2016 y 2018. Sociedad Asturiana de Estudios Económicos e Industriales.
  • Stoll-Kleemann, S., & O’Riordan, T. (2017). The challenges of the Antropocene for Biosphere Reserves. Parks, 231(1), 89-100.
  • Szilassi, P., Bata, T., Szabó, S., Czúcz, B., Molnár, Z., & Mezősi, G. (2017). The link between landscape pattern and vegetation naturalness on a regional scale. Ecological Indicators, 81, 252-259.
  • Turner, M.G. (2005). Landscape ecology: what is the state of the science?. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst., 36, 319-344.
  • UNESCO (1996). The Seville Strategy for Biosphere Reserves and the Stautory Framework of the World Network of Biosphere Reserves. UNESCO.
  • Vázquez, A., & Díaz, T. (2006). Parque Natural de Redes: tierras de bosques y urogallos. Ediciones Nobel.
  • Vila-Subirós, J., Varga, D., Llausàs i Pascual, A., & Ribas-Palom, A. (2006). Conceptos y métodos fundamentales en ecología del paisaje (landscape ecology). Una interpretación desde la geografía. Documents d’Anàlisi Geogràfica, 48, 151-166.
Data source: Dialnet