the Indian Himalayan region where landscape complexity is comparatively high.
The concepts and insights described in this article are not unique among the disciplines; however, they should provide the basis for a discussion of
decision-making issues among multidisciplinary experts working on issues of
sustainable development within complex environments.
Keywords Empirical studies Á Theoretical model Á Conceptual model Á
Sustainable development Á Trade-offs Á Landscape Á Himalayas
1 Introduction
Landscape degradation is the major problem recognized in many parts of the world.
The conservation and development of the Himalayan landscape is one of the most
significant areas among the biodiversity hotspots of the world (Singh 2002; Saxena
et al. 2005; Nautiyal and Kaechele 2007a, b). In a global context this is important
for existing biodiversity; however, at a national and regional level it is the important
for the people actually living in the Himalayan region as well as those residing in
the adjoining great Gangetic plains (Ives and Messerli 1989; Saxena et al. 2001,
2005; Sen et al. 2002; Semwal et al. 2004). Therefore, sustainable landscape
management and development is the crucial issue for the long-term sustainability of
the Himalayan landscape and existing natural resources (Nautiyal and Kaechele
2008; Nautiyal et al. 2007).
During the 1970s, the landscape management and conservation approach
received considerable recognition under the Man and Biosphere (MAB) program of
the United Nations Educational and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). The main
aim of this agenda was to support an ecosystem conservation approach along with
the development of the local economy and the people. There have been a number of
studies conducted on issues related to landscape management, biodiversity conservation, and sustainable land use development in the mountains of the Indian
Himalayan region (Singh and Kaur 1983; Naithani et al. 1992; Virgo and Subba
1994; Thapa and Weber 1995; Schweik et al. 1997; Jackson et al. 1998; Nautiyal
1998; Maikhuri et al. 2000; Silori and Badola 2000; Silori 2001; Singh 2002; Rao
and Pant 2001; Sen et al. 2002; Gautam et al. 2002; Saxena et al. 2001, 2005; Kala
2004; Semwal et al. 2004; Rees et al. 2006; Hjortso et al. 2006) where >10 % of the
landscape is segregated for conservation and equally expected for the development
of the local people (Nautiyal and Kaechele 2007a, b, c). This has also been the case
in many other parts of the world (Pimbert and Pretty 1997; Dale et al. 1998; Turner
2000; Jackson et al. 2000; Farrow and Winograd 2001; Kaechele and Dabbert
2002; Schuler and Kaechele 2003; Rees 2003; Zander 2003; Pischke and Cashmore
2006; Huggett 2005; Herrick et al. 2006; Pinto-Correia et al. 2006; Prato 2007).
Landscape management is becoming the prime concern among researchers, policy
598
S. Nautiyal et al.
The concepts and insights described in this article are not unique among the disciplines; however, they should provide the basis for a discussion of
decision-making issues among multidisciplinary experts working on issues of
sustainable development within complex environments.
Keywords Empirical studies Á Theoretical model Á Conceptual model Á
Sustainable development Á Trade-offs Á Landscape Á Himalayas
1 Introduction
Landscape degradation is the major problem recognized in many parts of the world.
The conservation and development of the Himalayan landscape is one of the most
significant areas among the biodiversity hotspots of the world (Singh 2002; Saxena
et al. 2005; Nautiyal and Kaechele 2007a, b). In a global context this is important
for existing biodiversity; however, at a national and regional level it is the important
for the people actually living in the Himalayan region as well as those residing in
the adjoining great Gangetic plains (Ives and Messerli 1989; Saxena et al. 2001,
2005; Sen et al. 2002; Semwal et al. 2004). Therefore, sustainable landscape
management and development is the crucial issue for the long-term sustainability of
the Himalayan landscape and existing natural resources (Nautiyal and Kaechele
2008; Nautiyal et al. 2007).
During the 1970s, the landscape management and conservation approach
received considerable recognition under the Man and Biosphere (MAB) program of
the United Nations Educational and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). The main
aim of this agenda was to support an ecosystem conservation approach along with
the development of the local economy and the people. There have been a number of
studies conducted on issues related to landscape management, biodiversity conservation, and sustainable land use development in the mountains of the Indian
Himalayan region (Singh and Kaur 1983; Naithani et al. 1992; Virgo and Subba
1994; Thapa and Weber 1995; Schweik et al. 1997; Jackson et al. 1998; Nautiyal
1998; Maikhuri et al. 2000; Silori and Badola 2000; Silori 2001; Singh 2002; Rao
and Pant 2001; Sen et al. 2002; Gautam et al. 2002; Saxena et al. 2001, 2005; Kala
2004; Semwal et al. 2004; Rees et al. 2006; Hjortso et al. 2006) where >10 % of the
landscape is segregated for conservation and equally expected for the development
of the local people (Nautiyal and Kaechele 2007a, b, c). This has also been the case
in many other parts of the world (Pimbert and Pretty 1997; Dale et al. 1998; Turner
2000; Jackson et al. 2000; Farrow and Winograd 2001; Kaechele and Dabbert
2002; Schuler and Kaechele 2003; Rees 2003; Zander 2003; Pischke and Cashmore
2006; Huggett 2005; Herrick et al. 2006; Pinto-Correia et al. 2006; Prato 2007).
Landscape management is becoming the prime concern among researchers, policy
598
S. Nautiyal et al.