spruce dominated region. Also retrospective analysis can be an interesting source to
analyse historical developments e.g. using remote sensing data from the last
decades or historical maps from the last centuries. For continuous remote sensing
monitoring comparable data sources with a high revisit rate and an appropriate
spatial and spectral resolution are required.
In addition, coordination and standardisation for monitoring changes in biodiversity
and impacts of climate change are necessary on a larger scale. Monitoring programmes
should cover regional and national levels and provide for centralised data management,
so that biodiversity status and its responses to climate change can be identified.
Monitoring programmes for protected areas should focus on impacts and effectiveness
of management activities within the areas. Only harmonised monitoring methods allow
for an exchange of results between areas and provide a network of data to identify
regional or continental trends. Furthermore, monitoring is an integrative part of the
Adaptive Management cycle. Results can be used to review the performance of
measures and for awareness raising activities.
In summary, it can be said that a lot of effort is needed to generate this kind of
scientific-based knowledge. On the other hand much specific local expertise exists
that should be captured (e.g. within a stakeholder involvement process) and used.
The most important finding was that science-based results need to be broken down
to locally applicable knowledge for conservation management. There are several
techniques available, like visualisations and maps, story-telling or experimental
games that can illustrate the regional effects of climate change and its impacts on
everyday activities.
20.3 Lessons Learned from the Process of Adapting
Conservation Management
During recent years guidelines and concepts for the adaptation of conservation
management have mushroomed (e.g. Baron et al. 2009; Cross et al. 2012; European
Commission 2012; Glick et al. 2011a; Hansen and Hoffmann 2011; Lawler 2009;
Welch 2005). Building on this wealth of literature and intensive discussions a
framework for the adaptation of conservation management in protected areas of
Central and Eastern Europe was drafted. The framework aimed at the development
of Climate Change-Adapted Management Plans (CAMPs).
The application of this framework in six protected areas showed that the
framework needed to be adapted to the site-specific conditions and management
tasks. Sometimes additional steps were necessary and some required extra efforts.
Particularly the definition of objectives and scope of the adaptation process needs
special attention, and a clear definition of the area to be analysed, the problems and
sectors to be included (e.g. agriculture, tourism) and target groups to be addressed
is required. These decisions are essential to identify adequate methods for the
assessment and to streamline stakeholder involvement.
20 Conclusions and Recommendations for Adapting Conservation Management. . .
295
analyse historical developments e.g. using remote sensing data from the last
decades or historical maps from the last centuries. For continuous remote sensing
monitoring comparable data sources with a high revisit rate and an appropriate
spatial and spectral resolution are required.
In addition, coordination and standardisation for monitoring changes in biodiversity
and impacts of climate change are necessary on a larger scale. Monitoring programmes
should cover regional and national levels and provide for centralised data management,
so that biodiversity status and its responses to climate change can be identified.
Monitoring programmes for protected areas should focus on impacts and effectiveness
of management activities within the areas. Only harmonised monitoring methods allow
for an exchange of results between areas and provide a network of data to identify
regional or continental trends. Furthermore, monitoring is an integrative part of the
Adaptive Management cycle. Results can be used to review the performance of
measures and for awareness raising activities.
In summary, it can be said that a lot of effort is needed to generate this kind of
scientific-based knowledge. On the other hand much specific local expertise exists
that should be captured (e.g. within a stakeholder involvement process) and used.
The most important finding was that science-based results need to be broken down
to locally applicable knowledge for conservation management. There are several
techniques available, like visualisations and maps, story-telling or experimental
games that can illustrate the regional effects of climate change and its impacts on
everyday activities.
20.3 Lessons Learned from the Process of Adapting
Conservation Management
During recent years guidelines and concepts for the adaptation of conservation
management have mushroomed (e.g. Baron et al. 2009; Cross et al. 2012; European
Commission 2012; Glick et al. 2011a; Hansen and Hoffmann 2011; Lawler 2009;
Welch 2005). Building on this wealth of literature and intensive discussions a
framework for the adaptation of conservation management in protected areas of
Central and Eastern Europe was drafted. The framework aimed at the development
of Climate Change-Adapted Management Plans (CAMPs).
The application of this framework in six protected areas showed that the
framework needed to be adapted to the site-specific conditions and management
tasks. Sometimes additional steps were necessary and some required extra efforts.
Particularly the definition of objectives and scope of the adaptation process needs
special attention, and a clear definition of the area to be analysed, the problems and
sectors to be included (e.g. agriculture, tourism) and target groups to be addressed
is required. These decisions are essential to identify adequate methods for the
assessment and to streamline stakeholder involvement.
20 Conclusions and Recommendations for Adapting Conservation Management. . .
295