Neyin Sınırı: Ekoloji mi, İnsan mı?

Year 2019, Volume: 56 Issue: 4, 523 - 533, 31.12.2019

Sahar Pouya , Meltem Erdem Kaya

https://doi.org/10.20289/zfdergi.556246

Abstract

Amaç: İnsani sınırlarını (Siyasi sınırlar) doğal sınırlarla karşılaştırılması son yıllardaki yapılan çalışmalarda tartışılan konulardan birisi olmuştur. Siyasi sınırlar ekolojiyi olumsuz yönde etkilemiştir ve İran gibi bir ülkede ekolojik ve mekansal parçalanmaya ve biyolojik çeşitliliğin azalmasına neden olmuştur. Bu çalışmada İran sınırlarında çevre sorunlarının azalmasına yönelik pratik bir çözüm bulmayı hedeflenmiştir. Bu makale ekolojik koruma amacıyla İran›da “Sınır Ötesi Korunan Alanın” veya “Barış Parkın” oluşturulmasının etkisini değerlendirmiştir.

Materyal ve Yöntemler: Bu makale ekotonların ve doğal sınırların yapı ve işlevlerini açıklamaya çalışmıştır. İran’ ın siyası bölgelerindeki eşsiz ekolojik bölgeli korumak amacıyla uygun bir çözüm bulmak için bu makalede insani sınırlarının doğal sınırlar gibi davranıp davranmadığını ve ekolojik etkilerini azaltıp azaltmayacağı tartışılmıştır. Bu nedenle, doğal ve insan sınırının ortak beş özellikleri olan yer ve boyut, köken, biçim, işlev ve zaman içindeki istikrar dahil olmak üzere açıklanmış ve karşılaştırılmıştır.

Bulgular: İranın siyasi sınırlarını analiz ederek, İran›ın sınır bölgelerinin çoğunda farklı koruma bölgelerine ihtiyaç duyduğunu ve sınır ötesi alanlardaki mevcut karmaşık siyasi meseleler nedeniyle “Sınır Ötesi Korunan Alan” fikrinin mümkün olamayabileceğini göstermektedir.

Sonuç: İnsan sınırları, çevrelerindeki değişikliklere esnek olmalıdır; mevcut coğrafi yapılara uymalı ve ekolojik olarak mevsimsel ve dönemsel hayvan göçlerinin sürdürülmesine müsaide edilmelidir.

Keywords

Transboundary Peace Park, Artificial boundary, Ecotone

Border of What: Ecology or Human?

Abstract

Objective: The issue of human boundaries (political borders) vs. the natural boundaries (ecotones) has been controversial in recent studies. The political borders have negatively impacted the ecology and resulted in ecological and spatial fragmentation and biodiversity reduction in a country like Iran. The work aims to find a practical way to mitigate the environmental problems in the borderlands of Iran. This article evaluates the effect of creating a “Transboundary Conserved Area” or “Peace Park” in Iran with the purpose of ecological conservation.

Material and Methods: This article attempts to explain the structures and functions of ecotones and natural boundaries. To search for a feasible solution to protect the ecologically unique zones over the political borders of Iran, this article discusses whether human boundaries can act as a natural boundary and reduce its ecological effects. Therefore, five common characteristics of natural and human borders, including location and size, origination, form, function, and stability over time, are explained and compared.

Results: By analyzing the political borders of Iran, it shows that Iran needs different protected zones in most of its borderlands, and the idea of the “Transboundary Conserved Area” may not be possible due to the current complicated political matters over the borderlands.

Conclusion: The human boundaries should be flexible with the changes in their surrounding nature; they should be in tune with the current geographical structures and maintain ecological connectively and seasonal animal migrations.

Keywords

Artificial boundary, Ecotone, Iran, Transboundary Peace Park

References

• Ali, S. H. 2007. Peace Parks: Conservation and conflict resolution. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. https://doi.org/10.1080/17400201.2012.659513Agnew, J. 2008. Borders on the mind: re-framing border thinking. In: Ethics & Global Politics, 1 (4), pp. 175–191.
• Bider, J.R. 1968. Animal activity in uncontrolled terrestrial communities as determined by a sand transect technique. Ecological Monographs 38: pp.269–308.Cunningham, H. 2012. Companion to Border Studies: Permeabilities, Ecology and Geopolitical Boundarie, Blackwell `Publishing Ltd. Published 2012 by Blackwell Publishing Ltd. (chapter 21), pp 372-384. DOI: 10.1002/9781118255223.ch21
• Dramstad, W. Olson, D. J. and Forman T.T.R. 1996. Landscape Ecology Principles in Landscape Architecture and Land-use. Harvard University, Graduate School of Design. doi: 10.3368/lj.16.2.202Forman, R. T. T. and Moore, P. N. 1992. Theoretical foundations for understanding boundaries in landscape mosaics. In Landscape Boundaries: Consequences for Biotic Diversity and Ecological Flows. pp. 236-258. Edited by A J Hansen and F. di Castri. Springer-Verlag, New York.
• Forman, R. T. 1995. Land mosaics: the ecology of landscapes and regions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, p 652. https://doi.org/10.1016/0169-5347(96)88908-7Forman, R.T.I. Godron, M. 1986. Landscape Ecology. John Wiley & Sons, New York.
• Hartshorne, R. 1938. "Six Standard Seasons of the Year", Annals of the Association of American Geographers, Vol. 28, No. 3, pp. 165–178.Haughton, S. A. 2009. The US-Caribbean border: An important security border in the 21st century. Journal of Borderlands Studies, 24(3), pp1–20. https://doi.org/10.1080/08865655.2009.9695736
• Hansen, J. A. and di Castri, F. 1992. Landscape Boundaries Consequences for Biotic Diversity and Ecological Flows, Springer-Verlag, New York, Inc.Hendi, K. M. Danekar, A. 2012. Peace park: Environmetal use of the border opportunity. Foreign Policy Quarterly, 26(1)
• Jones, R. 2009. Categories, borders and boundaries. Progress in Human Geography, 33(2), 174–189. https://doi.org/10.1177/0309132508089828Kamel, M., 2003. Ecotone Classification According to its Origin. Pakistan Journal of Biological Sciences, 6: 1553-1563. DOI: 10.3923/pjbs.2003.1553.1563
• Kark, S. Van Rensburg, J. B. 2006, Ecotones: Marginal or central areas of transition? Israel Journal of Ecology &Evolution, 52: 29–53Kark, S. 2013. Ecotones and Ecological Gradients. Chapter 9, edited by R. Leemans (ed.), Ecological Systems: Selected Entries from the Encyclopedia of Sustainability Science and Technology, Springer Science+Business Media New York, pp.147-159. DOI 10.1007/978-1-4614-5755-8_9.
• Kapil, R. 1966. On the Conflict Potential of Inherited Boundaries in Africa, in World Politics, Vol. 18, No. 4, pp. 656-673. https://doi.org/10.2307/2009809Laverty, F. M. and Gibbs, P. J. 2007. Ecosystem Loss and Fragmentation: Synthesis: Lessons in Conservation, Vol. 1, pp. 72-96
• Odum, E. P. 1971. Fundamentals of ecology, 3rd edition. Philadelphia, PA: W. B. Saunders Company.p 574 Passi, A. 2009. Political Boundaries; In Kitchin R and N Thrift International Encyclopedia in HumanGeography. Elsevier , London, pp217-226.
• Pouya, S. and Pouya, S. 2018. Planning for Peace; Introduction of Transboundary Conservation Areas, Kocaeli Journal of Science and Engineering., 1(2), 33-41Pouya, S. and Özkul B. D. 2017. Creating Peace Park Between Turkey And Georgia, The Journal of International Social Research, 10 (53) http://dx.doi.org/10.17719/jisr.20175334140
• Rezai, G. 2005. Iran Border Survey, Tehran, Jahan Jamejam.Risser P G (1995) The science and status of examining ecotones. BioScience 45: 318–325.
• Strayer, L. D. Power, E. M. Fagan, F. W. Pickett, S. and Belnap, J. 2003.. A Classification of Ecological Boundaries. BioScience, Vol. 53 No. 8.Van Rensburg, B. J. Koleff, P. Gaston, K. J. Chown, S. L. 2004. Spatial congruence of ecological transition at the regional scale in South Africa. J Biogeogr 31:843–854. 10.1046/j.1365-2699.2003.00996.x
• Van der Maarel, E. 1976. On the establishment of plant community boundaries. Berichte der Deutschen Botanischen Gesellschaft 89:415-443.Walker, S. Wilson, J. B. Steel, J. B. Rapson, G.L. Smith, B. King, Warren McG. and Cottam, Y. H. 2003. Properties of ecotones: Evidence from five ecotones objectively determined from a coastal vegetation gradient, Journal of Vegetation Science 14: 579-590, 2003© IAVS; Opulus Press Uppsala, 580-590