Putting Nature on the Map

Applying the IUCN categories system within the UK

Adrian Phillips

Background

• IUCN system of 6 management categories widely used internationally – the 'common language’ of PAs

• CBD etc. requires all countries to report using system

• This PA data is collected nationally

• …and held by UNEP/WCMC on World Database for Protected Areas (WDPA)

• UK has reported PA data in the past but with limited regard to IUCN advice

• IUCN advice updated in 2008

The 2008 IUCN guidelines

• New definition of a PA:“A clearly defined geographical space, recognised, dedicated and managed,

through legal or other effective means, to achieve the long-term conservation of nature with associated ecosystem services and cultural values”

• A key principle: “For IUCN only those areas where the main objective is conserving nature can be considered protected areas; this can include many areas with other goals as well at the same level, but in case of conflict nature conservation will be the priority”

• An important definition: “Nature always refers to biodiversity, at genetic, species and ecosystem levels, and

often also refers to geodiversity, landform and broader natural values”

The 2008 IUCN guidelines (cont.)

6 management categories retained (but with new definitions)• Ia Strict Nature Reserve

• Ib Wilderness Area

• II National Park

• III Natural Monument or Feature

• IV Habitat/species Management Area

• V Protected landscape or seascape

• VI Protected area with sustainable use of natural resources

4 governance types introduced • A: Governance by government

• B: Shared governance

• C: Private governance (inc. NGOs)

• D: Governance by indigenous peoples and communities

The categories/governance matrix

NB – it should be possible to assign any individual PA to a specific point on the matrix

The challenge we were set …

…. to apply the 2008 IUCN protected area categories system to the UK

PNOTM began in 2010 at request of IUCN/WCPA Chair

Ended in 2014 with presentation of results at World Parks Congress

Undertaken by the UK National Committee for IUCN

Funded by WWF, SNH, NE, John Muir Trust and Sibthorp Trust

How we did the work

• Adopted a very inclusive approach from the outset

• Identified all sites that might be protected areas

• Developed UK-specific guidance

• Determined what is and isn’t a protected area under

the IUCN definition

• Assigned management categories and governance

types

• Collected and reported on data to WCMC

3 innovations:

1) A National Handbook (2012)

Explains how the IUCN guidance should be applied in UK – it helps make that advice “UK-specific”

Handbook also:

- Listed all possible PAs

- Identified what were not PAs (e.g. GBs, agri-environmental schemes)

- Explained how the rest of project would be undertaken –inc. roles of Assessment Panel and Statements of Compliance

3 innovations:

2) A UK/IUCN Assessment Panel

An Assessment Panel:

- WCPA experts

- providing peer review and rigorous debate

- “Which sites are PAs and what management categories and governance types?”

3 innovations:

3) Statements of Compliance

• Produced for most designations or ownerships

• Each reviewed legislation, management objectives and practice against IUCN definition of a PA

• 23 SOCs prepared (with both positive and negative outcomes)

• All on view at http://www.iucn-uk.org/projects/protectedareas/

3) Statements of Compliance

6 key questions:

1: Is it a clearly defined geographical area?

2: Is it recognised, dedicated and managed to achieve

long-term conservation of nature?

3: Is the main management objective nature conservation?

(other objectives of equal standing may be present but

should not cause conflict)

4: Does designation help prevent, or eliminate harmful

exploitation or management practice?

5: Does designation aim to maintain or increase the naturalness of the protected ecosystem?

6: Is long-term nature conservation ensured through legal or other effective means?

Main Results

Up-to date and far more accurate data on PAs in UK. In particular:- some designations added where previously missing- other designations identified as ‘non-compliant’- thousands of privately protected areas added to WDPA - wider range of management categories identified- data on governance types added

Types of area identified as PAs

• AONB (E, W)*• Areas of Special Scientific interest (NI)*• Marine Protected Area (S) - subject to confirmation• Marine Conservation Zone (E) - subject to confirmation• Marine Nature Reserve (UK)*• National Park (E, W and S)*• National Nature Reserve (UK)*• NGO owned and/or land managed for nature (Butterfly Conservation, John

Muir Trust, NT, NTS, Plantlife, RSPB, Wetlands and Wildfowl Trust, Wildlife Trusts, Woodland Trust)

• SSSI (E, W and S)*• Special Area of Conservation (UK)• Special Protection Area (UK)• Ramsar (Wetland) site*• UNESCO Biosphere Reserve (core and buffer zones only)*• World Heritage Site (Natural and Mixed only)** Previously on WDPA

Marine Acts2009/2010

NGOs

EC Directives

Types of area not identified as PAs

• AONB (NI)*• Forest Park (UK)*• Heritage Coast (E, W)*• Local Nature Reserve (UK) – but individual sites might qualify• Marine Consultation Area (S)• National Scenic Area (S)*• Regional Park (S)*• Local wildlife site (UK)• Voluntary reserve and Privately Protected Area managed by an

individual – but individual sites might qualify• UNESCO Geopark• UNESCO Biosphere Reserve (transition zone only)

* Previously reported as PAs

The conservation NGO sites that meet the IUCN definition of a PA

The Conservation NGOs are big actors

• Own 1.94% of all land in the UK

• Manage 12.5% of all SSSIs and ASSIs

• Manage c.300,000ha of SSSI and ASSI land

• ….plus c.176,000ha that is also PA status (not previously on WDPA)

• The three biggest owners of PA lands are:

– RSPB (150,486ha)

– NT (135,645ha)

– TWTs (c.90,000ha)

Some examples of sites

Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty

• 49 such areas in E, W and NI on WDPA in 2011

• Panel decided SoC for NI AONBs did not meet criteria (protection too weak, no clear primacy of conservation)

• Panel required the SoC for AONBs

in E and W to be strengthened

• And asked each AONB manager to

confirm their commitment to

IUCN’s understanding of PAs

• Now 38 areas on WDPA

Some examples of sites

National Trust holdings

• NT own 250,832ha of coast and countryside

• SoC says that - to be recognised as a PA - NT sites have to be:– > 5ha– Held inalienably– Managed by NT and/or part of SSSI

• 136,645ha (54%) are compliant• How can the remaining area attain PA

status?

Some examples of sitesMarine Protected Areas (MPAs)

• Pre-2009/2010 Marine Acts– Marine Nature Reserve – UK (3) – Marine Consultation Area – S. (2)

• European designations– SPA: recognised as PAs (incs. marine sites)– SAC: recognised as PAs (incs. marine sites)

• Post-2009 Marine and Coastal Access Act and 2010 Scottish Marine Act– Marine Protected Area – S. (30 sites)– Marine Conservation Zone – E. (27 sites)

Intent of both new national designations compatible with PA definitions but too early to say if practice matches up – revisit in 2017. Work on MPAs in Wales and NI will be assessed then too

New categories identified

• Previously all UK sites reported as Category IV (Nature Reserves) and V (Protected Landscapes/Seascapes):– Category IV : most nature conservation designations (e.g.

SSSI, ASSI, NNR)– Category V: most landscape protection designations (e.g.

AONB and NP)

• But PNOTM identified sites that are:– Category Ia (Strict Nature Reserve)– Category II (National Park) – Category III (Natural Monument)

Example – Wytham Woods, Oxford, Category Ia

• Ancient semi-natural woodland, SSSI

• Owned by Oxford University, used for environmental research

• One of the most researched woodlands in the world – data goes back 60 years

• Public access is by permit only

Category Ia: “Strictly protected area set aside to protect biodiversity … where human visitation, use and impacts are strictly controlled … (they are) indispensable reference areas for scientific research and monitoring” (IUCN 2008)

Example – The Island of Rum, Scotland, Category II

• An NNR since 1957

• Mostly owned and managed by SNH

• Aims:

• Woodland restoration and natural

heritage conservation

• Research in earth science, deer, and

wildlife and woodland restoration

• Manage visitors

• Work with resident community

Category II: “Large natural or near natural areas set aside to protect large sale ecological processes … with species and ecosystems characteristic of the area …. (and) environmentally and culturally compatible spiritual, scientific, recreational and visitor opportunities” (IUCN, 2008)

Category III: “Protected area set aside to protect a specific natural monument, which can be landform, sea mount, submarine cavern, geological features such as a cave….they a generally quite small areas and often have high visitor value” (IUCN 2008)

• Dramatic basalt columns 50-60 millions years old

• Marked the opening up of Atlantic• NI premier tourist site since 1768• Managed by NT; new Visitor Centre• Designated as a Natural WH site in 1986• .. and as an NNR in 1987• Part of an AONB

Example – Category III: Giants Causeway

IUCN Categories assigned against UK PA designations etc. IUCN Category Ia Ib II III IV V VI

AONB (E and W)

ASSI (NI) ? ? ?

Marine Protected Area (S) ? ?

Marine Conservation Zone (E) ? ?

Marine Nature Reserve (UK)

National Park (E, W and S)

National Nature Reserve (UK)

NGO-owned land managed for nature

SSSI (E, W and S) ? ? ?

SAC (UK) ? ? ? ?

SPA (UK) ? ? ? ?

Ramsar ? ? ? ?

UNESCO biosphere reserve ? ? ? ? ?

WHS (mixed and natural) (UK) ? ?

?

Classified previously, confirmed by PNOTM

Newly classified by PNOTM

Potential for categorisation

Categories

Ia: Strict nature reserveIb: Wilderness areaII: National parkIII: Natural monumentIV: Habitat/species management areaV: Protected landscape/seascapeVI: Protected area with sustainable use of natural resources

.

New information on governance

• Previously sites on the list were all official sites – i.e. government type of governance

• Now we recognise thousands of PAs as private type, run by NGOs

• Many are shared governance type – e.g. privately-owned SSSIs run under an agreement

• Community governance emerging

The categories/governance matrix pre-PNOTM

The categories/governance matrix post-PNOTM

The range of categorised sites in the UK – pre- and post-PNOTM

What are the outcomes of PNOTM?

• Better understanding of international standards for protected areas• The implications of the IUCN system for conservation management• Confirmation of the status of PAs in UK• Identification of sites that don’t make grade – and what to do about them• Revealing variety of management approaches and governance types

• Better data about PAs in the UK• Data more complete• Data more accurate• Improved map of PAs in UK

• Improved assignment processes• Inclusive process• Three innovations – National Handbook, Assessment Panel and SoCs

What are the implications of PNOTM?

• Helps UK meet its international obligations – CBD, IUCN etc.

• Provides better baseline data for work relating to PAs –management, protection, outreach etc.

• Promotes co-operation between PA data providers and managers – agencies, NGOs + JNCC, WCMC, EEA

• Generally informs the quality of debate about conservation in the UK (e.g. fracking)

Questions for today

• How do you see the results of this work being used?

• What needs to be done to improve the application of the IUCN categories system in the UK?

• Should “non-compliant” sites aim at eventual recognition?

• What is the role of IUCN/UK in protected areas work beyond PNOTM?