Determination of Criteria and Importance Levels for Prioritization of Protected Areas

Öz

Protected areas form the basis of the most effective operational tools of national and international conservation strategies to protect and sustain natural and cultural resource values. This study aimed to score the essential criteria and sub-criteria according to the importance of identifying and prioritizing new protected areas. For this purpose, a 5 Likert scoring technique was applied to 30 experts. As a result, seven essential criteria and 37 sub-criteria that can be used in the prioritization process of protected areas according to their weight scores were determined. The main criteria are listed as natural values (0.32), social and cultural values (0.26), spatial values (0.11), negative criteria (pressures and threats) (0.09), legal, administrative and political situation (0.07), economic values (0.06), research and development potential (0.06). With the seven essential criteria and 37 sub-criteria developed in this study, a decision support tool based on a straightforward, fast, and scientific approach that can mainly serve planners, practitioners, and decision-makers according to the importance levels of protected areas has been created.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Protected areas
• assessment criteria
• importance levels
• nature conservation
• biodiversity.

Etik Beyan

The article complied with national and international research and publication ethics. Ethics committee approval was not required for the study.

Korunan Alanların Önceliklendirilmesinde Kullanılabilecek Ölçütler ve Önemlilik Düzeylerinin Belirlenmesi

Öz

Korunan alanlar, doğal ve kültürel kaynak değerlerinin korunması ve sürdürülebilirliğine yönelik ulusal ve uluslararası koruma stratejilerin en etkili eylemini oluşturur. Bu çalışmada yeni korunan alanların belirlenmesi ve önceliklendirilmesi için temel ölçüt ve alt ölçütlerin önemlilik düzeyine göre puanlandırılması amaçlanmıştır. Bu amaçla 30 uzman kişiye 5’li likert puanlama tekniği ile uygulanmıştır. Sonuç olarak; Korunan alanların önceliklendirme sürecinde ağırlık puanlarına göre kullanılabilecek 7 temel ölçüt ve 37 alt ölçüt belirlenmiştir. Temel ölçütler ağırlık puanlarına göre doğal değerler (0,32), sosyal ve kültürel değerler (0,26), mekânsal değerler (0,11), olumsuz ölçütler (baskı ve tehditler) (0,09), yasal, yönetsel ve politik durum (0,07), ekonomik değerler (0.06), araştırma ve geliştirme potansiyeli (0,06) şeklinde sıralanmıştır. Bu çalışma ile geliştirilen 7 temel ölçüt ve 37 alt ölçüt ile korunan alanların önemlilik düzeylerine göre özellikle plancılara, uygulayıcılara ve karar vericilere hizmet edebilecek kolay, hızlı ve bilimsel bir yaklaşıma dayalı bir karar destek aracı oluşturulmuştur.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Korunan alanlar
• değerlendirme ölçütleri
• önemlilik düzeyleri
• doğa koruma
• biyoçeşitlilik.

Etik Beyan

The article complied with national and international research and publication ethics. Ethics committee approval was not required for the study.

Kaynakça

1. Bierregaard, R.O., Gascon, C., Lovejoy, T.E., Mesquita, R. (Eds.), (2001). Lessons from Amazonia: Ecology and Conservation of a Fragmented Forest. Yale University Press, New Haven, Connecticut (11) (PDF) The fate of Amazonian forest fragments: A 32-year investigation. Available from: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/223834823_The_fate_of_Amazonian_forest_fragments_A_32-year_investigation [accessed April 29, 2024].)
2. Brandon, K., Redford, K. & Sanderson, S. (Eds.). (1998). Parks in Peril: People, politics, and protected areas (pp. 415–440). Covelo, CA, Washington, DC: Island Press.
3. Bruner, A. G., Gullison, R. E., Rice, R. E. & Fonseca, G. A. B. (2001). Effectiveness of parks in protecting tropical biodiversity. Science 291:125-128.
4. Cowling, R. M., Pressey, R. L., Lombard, A. T., Heijnis, C. E., Richardson, D. M., Cole, N. (1999). Framework for a conservation plan for the Cape Floristic Region. Institute for Plant Conservation Report 9902, University of Cape Town, Rondebosch.
5. Çevre, Şehircilik ve İklim Değişikliği Bakanlığı (2024). Çevresel östergeler. Korunan Alanlar. Access Address: (11.11. 2024), https://cevreselgostergeler.csb.gov.tr/korunan-alanlar-i-85778
6. Çolak, H. A. (2001). Ormanda Doğa Koruma (Kavramlar-Prensipler-Stratejiler-Önlemler), Milli Parklar ve Av-Yaban Hayatı Genel Müdürlüğü. Ankara.
7. Çolak, A.H., Rotherdam, I.D., Çalıkoğlu, M. (2003). Combining “Naturalness Concepts” with Close–to Nature silviculture. ISSN: 0015-8003.
8. Dinerstein, E., Olson, D., Joshi, A., Vynne, C., Burgess, N. D., ….. et al. (2017). An Ecoregion-Based Approach to Protecting Half the Terrestrial Realm. BioScience, Volume 67, Issue 6, June 2017, Pages 534–545.

9. Dudley, N. (Ed.). (2008). Guidelines for Applying Protected Area Management Categories. Gland, Switzerland: IUCN. Pp 86 + 10 appendixesEdwards, C. J. and Regier, H. A. (eds). 1990. An Ecosystem Approach to the Integrity of the Great Lakes in Turbulent Times. Special Publication 90-4, Great Lakes Fishery Commission, MI: Ann Arbor.
10. Dudley, N., S. Stolton, A. Belokurov, L. Krueger, N. Lopoukhine, K. MacKinnon, T. Sandwith & N. Sekhran [editors] (2009). Natural Solutions: Protected areas helping people cope with climate change, IUCN-WCPA, The Nature Conservancy, UNDP, Wildlife Conservation Society, The World Bank and WWF, Gland, Switzerland, Washington DC, and New York. https://www.iucn.org/content/natural-solutions-protected-areas-helping-people-cope-climate-change-0
11. Dudley, N., S. Stolton, A. Belokurov, L Krueger, N. Lopoukhine, K. MacKinnon, T. Sandwith & N. Sekhran [Eds.). (2010). Natural Solutions: Protected areas helping people cope with climate change, IUCN-WCPA, TNC, UNDP, WCS, The World Bank and WWF, Gland, Switzerland, Washington DC and New York, USA.
12. Edward, A. & Porter-Bolland, L. (2008). Is community-based forest management more effective than protected areas?: A comparison of land use/land cover change in two neighboring study areas of the Central Yucatan Peninsula, Mexico. Forest Ecology and Management, 256 (11).1971-1983.
13. Eken, G. Bozdoğan, M., İsfendiyaroğlu, S. Kılıç, D.T., Lise, Y (Eds.). (2006). Türkiye’nin Önemli Doğa Alanları. Doğa Derneği. ISBN: 978- 975 98901-3-1 (TK NO) Ankara.
14. Gaines, S. D., Lester, S. E., Grorud-Colvert, K., Costello, C. & Pollnac, R. (2010). Evolving science of marine reserves: new developments and emerging research frontiers. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science of the United States of America 107:18251-18255.
15. Game, E. T., Grantham, H. S., Hobday, A. J., Pressey, R. L. et al. (2009). Pelagic protected areas: the missing dimension in ocean conservation. Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 24:360-369.
16. Gehlbach, F. R. (1975). Investigation, evaluation, and priority ranking of natural areas. Biological Conservation, 8: 79-88.
17. Goldsmith, F. B. (1975). The evaluation of ecological resources in the countryside for conservation purposes. Biological Conservation 8: 89–96.
18. Gray, N. J. (2010). Sea change: exploring the international effort to promote marine protected areas. Conservation and Society 8: 331–338.
19. Gubbay, S. (1995). Marine Protected Areas: Principles and techniques for management (Conservation Biology Series). Chapman& Hall.
20. Gül, A. & Türker, H. B. (2014). Farkındalık ve bilinçlenme süreçleri kapsamında, doğa koruma- etik ilişkisi. SDU II. Uluslararası Davraz Kongresi (29-31 Mayıs 2014) Küresel Sorunlar ve Çözüm Arayışları. Bildiriler Kitabı. s.1745-1778. Isparta. ISBN: 978-9944-452-82-3
21. Gül, A. & Kurdoğlu, O. (2021). Discourse and Action Dimension of Nature Conservation Philosophy. Atila Gül and Mert Çakır (Eds.). Architectural Sciences and Protection &Conservation &Preservation. 2021, Volume 1, 221-280. ISBN: 978-625-8061-45-1. Iksad Publications.
22. Gül, A. & Metin, A. E. (2021). Legal and Administrative Current Situation and Problems of Protected Areas. Atila Gül and Mert Çakır (Eds.). Architectural Sciences and Protection & Conservation & Preservation. 2021, Volume 1, 1-62. ISBN: 978-625-8061-45-1. Iksad Publications.
23. Gül, A., Dinç, G. & Gül, H. E. (2021). Küresel iklim değişikliğine karşı korunan alanların önemi ve etkisi. (The importance and impact of protected areas against global climate change). “IArcSAS” 1st International Architectural Sciences and Application Symposium 27-29 October 2021. p. 1410-1432. Isparta, Turkey. Issued: 30/11/2021. ISBN: 978-625-7464-51-2. https://www.izdas.org/_files/ugd/614b1f_fa2eaa3ee5164ee5b722277d606dd6a9.pdf
24. Gül, A., Gül, H. E. & Gül, İ. E. (2023). Ecology & Economy Conflict in The Context of Sustainability. IV-International Rural Areas and Ecology Congress Within The Framework of Sustainable Development. (RUDESU2023). October 05-06, 2023 / Girne-Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus p. 331-352. Issued: October 25, 2023, ISBN: 978-625-367-377-2, DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10041278. web: https://www.iensci.org/rudesu
25. IUCN. (2024). Guidelines for Using the IUCN Red List Categories and Criteria. Access Date: 20.03.2024, https://www.iucnredlist.org/resources/redlistguidelines.
26. Kelleher, G. & Kenchington, R. (1992). Guidelines for Establishing Marine Protected Areas. A Marine Conservation and Development Report. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland. vii+ page 79.
27. Korunan Alanların Tespit, Tescil ve Onayına İlişkin Usul ve Esaslara Dair Yönetmelik, (2012). Endemik: Md 4 (j). Resmi Gazete 19 Temmuz 2012, Sayı: 28358.
28. Kowarik, I. (1999). Natürlichkeit, Naturnähe und Hemerobie als Bewertungskriterien. In: Konold, W., Böcker, R., Hampicke, U. (Eds.), Handbuch naturschutz und landschaftspflege ecomed landsberg, 1-18.
29. Kültür ve Turizm Bakanlığı, Kültür Varlıkları ve Müzeler Genel Müdürlüğü, (2024). Türkiye Geneli Sit Alanları İstatistikleri. Access Address: (01.11.2024), https://kvmgm.ktb.gov.tr/TR-44973/turkiye-geneli-sit-alanlari-İstatistikleri.Html
30. Lester, S. E., Halpern, B. S., Grorud-Colvert, K., Lubchenco, J., Ruttenberg, B. I., Gaines, S. D., Airamé, S., & Warner, R. R. (2009). Biological effects within no-take marine reserves: a global synthesis.
31. Levin, N., Watson, J. E. M., Joseph, L. N., Grantham, H. S., Hadar, L., Apel, N., Perevolotsky, A., DeMalach, N., Possingham, H. P. & Kark, S. (2013). A framework for systematic conservation planning and management of Mediterranean landscapes. Biological Conservation, 158: 371–383.
32. Lindenmayer, D. B. Margules, C. R., Botkin, D. B. (2000). Indicators of Biodiversity for Ecologically Sustainable Forest Management. Conservation Biology, 14 (4), p.941–950.
33. Lubchenco, J., Palumbi, S. R., Gaines, S. D., & Andelman, S. (2003). Plugging a hole in the ocean: The emerging science of marine reserves. Ecological Applications, 13: 3-7.
34. Margules, C. & Usher, M. (1981). Criteria used in assessing wildlife conservation potential: A review. Biological Conservation 21(2):79-109.
35. Oates, J. (1999). Myth and reality in the rain forest: how conservation strategies are failing in West Africa. Berkeley: University of California Press.
36. Pimm, S. L., Ayres, M., Balmford, A., Branch, G., et al. (2001). Can we defy nature’s end? Science 293:2207-2208.
37. protectedplanet.net. (2024). Protected Areas https://www.protectedplanet.net/en/thematic-areas/wdpa?tab=WDPA
38. Rita, E.-H., Carla, K., Thierry, T. Adam, A. A. & Errol, V. (2017). Indicators for Ecosystem Conservation and Protected Area Designation in the Mediterranean Context. Conservation & Society, 15(2): 217-231. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26393288
39. Sala O. E., Chapin III. F. S., Armesto, J.J., Berlow, E., Bloomfield, J., Dirzo R., Huber-Sanwald, E., Huenneke, L. F., Jackson, R. B., ……….. WallSource, D.H. (2000). Biodiversity-Global biodiversity scenarios for the year 2100. Science, New Series, Vol. 287, No. 5459 (March 10, 2000) pp. 1770-1774 https://www.researchgate.net/publication/12606072_Biodiversity_-_Global_biodiversity_scenarios_for_the_year_2100 [accessed December 23 2024].
40. Sharifi, N. Danehkar, A. Etemad V. & Mahmoudi, B. (2011). Identification and Prioritization of Criteria Used for Selecting Protected Areas in Forest Ecosystems Case Study: Iran's Hyrcanian Forests. Environment and Natural Resources Research Vol. 1, No. 1; December 2011 URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.5539/enrr.v1n1p189
41. Smith, R. & Theberge, B. (1986). A review of criteria for evaluating natural areas. Environmental Management, 10(6): 715-734.
42. Steinhardt, U., Herzog, F., Lausch, A., Müller, E., Lehmann, S. (1999). Hemeroby index for landscape monitoring and evaluation. – In Pykh, Y.A., Hyatt, D.E., Lenz, R.J., (eds): Enviromental Indices – System Analysis Approach. Oxford EOLSS Publ., pp.237-254.
43. Sukopp, H. (1972). Wandel von Flora und Vegetation in Mitteleuropa unter dem Einfluß des Menschen. Berichte über Landwirtschaft, 50, 112-139.
44. Tans, W. (1974). Priority ranking of biotic natural areas. Michigan Botanist 13: 31–39.
45. Tarım ve Orman Bakanlığı, Doğa Koruma ve Milli Parklar Genel Müdürlüğü (2024). Korunan Alan İstatistikleri, Access Address: (01.11.2024), https://www.tarimorman.gov.tr/DKMP/Menu/18/Korunan-Alan-Istatistikleri
46. The World Database on Protected Areas (WDPA). (2024). April 2024 update of the WDPA and WD-OECM. https://www.protectedplanet.net/en/resources/april-2024-update-of-the-wdpa-and-wd-oecm
47. Tubbs, C. R. & Blackwood, J. W. (1971). Ecological evaluation of land for planning purposes. Biological Conservation 3: 169–72.
48. Turner. M. & Corlett, R.T. (1996). The conservation value of small, isolated fragments of lowland tropical rainforest. Trerzds ir. Ecology MD Evolution. 11: 330–333.
49. UNEP Caribbean Environment Programme. (1996). Common guidelines and criteria for protected areas in the Wider Caribbean Region: Identification, selection, establishment and management. CEP Technical Report No. 37. Kingston, United Nations Environment Programme (available at http:// cep.unep.org/publications-and-resources/technical-reports/cep_tr_37-en. pdf/@@download/file/CEP_TR_37-en.pdf).
50. Watson, J. E. M & Venter, O. (2017). A global plan for nature conservation. Nature volume 550, pages 48–49. https://www.nature.com/articles/nature24144#author-information
51. Wilson, E. O. (2016). Half-Earth: Our Planet's Fight for Life. Liveright Publishing Corporation.
52. Wright, D. F. (1977). A site evaluation scheme for use in the assessment of potential nature reserves. Biological Conservation 11: 293–305.
53. WWF (1998). Agenda 2000- Reactions to the Proposed Regulations. Environmental Policy. WWF European Policy Office: Brussels.
54. WWF. (2020). Sürdürülebilir Bir Türkiye İçin Korunan Alanlar Hedef: 2030’a kadar %30. WWF-Türkiye. https://www.wwf.org.tr/?10800/Surdurulebilir-Bir-Turkiye-Icin-Korunan-Alanlar
55. Van Der Ploeg, S. W. F. & Vlijm, L. (1978). Ecological evaluation, nature conservation, and land use planning with particular reference to methods used in the Netherlands. Biological Conservation, 14: 197-221.
56. Zeydanlı, U., Ambarlı, D., Turak, A., Bilgin, C. (2017). Sistematik Koruma Planlaması ve Türkiye’deki Uygulamalar, Doğa Koruma Merkezi.