Transcript Economia dei territori protetti

Facoltà di Economia “G. Fuà”
Università Politecnica delle Marche
Economics of Protected Areas
 Protected areas in Italy and in Marche
region
 The national and regional legislation
 The EU strategy for protected areas
 Economic development and
programming within protected areas
1
References
 Sites:
 http://www.parks.it/ (portal of Italian parks)
 http://www.minambiente.it/index.php?id_sezione=962 (site of the Ministry of
Environment, DG Nature Protection)
 http://ec.europa.eu/environment/nature/index_en.htm (EU Commission, DG
Environment Natura 2000 website)
 Bibliography:
 Compagnucci, F., Mazzoni, F. (2002). Il territorio nei parchi nazionali.
Quaderni di Dipartimento, n. 172, Dipartimento di Economia - Università di
Ancona. (downloadable from: http://www.dea.unian.it/quaderni/pdf/172.pdf).
 Moschini, R. (2002). Parchi al bivio. E-Quaderni del Giornale dei Parchi
(downloadable from: http://www.parks.it/ilgiornaledeiparchi/eq1.pdf).
 Chiodo, E., Solustri, A. (2003). La programmazione economica per lo sviluppo
rurale nei parchi naturali italiani. In Arzeni, A., Esposti, R., Sotte, F.: Politiche
di sviluppo rurale tra programmazione e valutazione. Milano: Franco Angeli.
 In English (“old” books):
 Sherman, P., Dixon, J. (1990). The Economics of Protected Areas. A new look ate
benefits and costs. Washington: Island Press.
 Walkey, M., Swingland, I.R:, Russell, S. (1999). Integrated Protected Area
Management. Berlin: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
2
A short history
The history of protected areas in Italy can be roughly divided in two parts:
 Before 1991
 After 1991 (with “Legge Quadro sulle Aree Protette”, “Framework Law
on Protected Areas”, L. 394/91)
 Before 1991:
 The 5 “historical” national parks
 NP (National Park of) GranParadiso, NP Abruzzo (1922-1923) (now “Abruzzo,
Lazio and Molise”)
 NP Circeo, NP Stelvio (1934-1935)
 The NP of Calabria (1968)
 Other 6 National Parks established in the ‘80s
 After 1991:
 6 National Parks established with L. 394/91 itself
 Other 8 NPs (6 in the South) established in application of L. 394/91 (1994-1998)
 The NP of Sila replaces the NP of Calabria
 Total: 24 National Parks for a total area covered of more than 1,5 millions of ha
(more than 5% of total national area)
 But also: more than (the list is continuously updating…) 1100 protected areas of
(very) different typologies
 …and more than 3 millions of ha of overall land coverage (>10% national area)
3
The 24 National Parks
 The official list of protected areas at
the Ministry of Environment (see
also www.parks.it)
 The more recent NPs:
 NP Alta Murgia (Puglia)
 NP Sila (formerly NP Calabria)
 NP Val d’Agri and Lagonegrese
(Basilicata)
 Only two regions (both autonomus
regions) without any NP:
 Sicilia
 Friuli-Venezia-Giulia
4
Types of protected areas –
national level (L. 394/91)
 National Natural Parks (n.24; 2 in Marche region)
 These are terrestrial, fluvial, lake, marine areas containing either
one or more intact, or even partially altered by human
intervention, ecosystems, or one or more physical, geological,
geomorphologic, biological formations of national or
international relevance for their naturalistic, scientific,
aesthetical, cultural, educational and recreational values such
that their conservation requires State intervention.
 Marine Natural Protected Areas and Marine Natural Reserves*
(n. 26; 0 in region Marche ) (e.g. Marine Natural Reserve of “Isole
Tremiti”)
 National Natural Reserves (146; 3 in Marche region)
 Definition of Natural Reserve from L. 394/91: These are terrestrial,
fluvial, lake, marine areas or surfaces containing either one or more
animal or vegetal species of naturalistic relevance or one or more
important ecosystems for conservation of biodiversity or of genetic
resources. Natural reserves may be national or regional according to
their naturalistic relevance.
 Other National Natural Protected Areas (n. 1)
 “Mediterranean Sanctuary for marine mammals”
(“Santuario per i mammiferi marini”)
5
Types of protected areas –
regional (or local) level (L. 394/91)
 Regional Natural Parks (140; 4 in Marche region)
 These are terrestrial, fluvial, lake, or coastal areas of naturalistic and
environmental value constituting, in one or more bordering
regions, an homogenous system characterized by the naturalistic
traits of sites, by landscape and artistic values as well as by
cultural traditions and heritage of local populations.
 Regional Natural Reserves (371; 2 in Marche region)
 Other Regional Natural Protected Areas (434; 0 in Marche region)
 As autonomously classified and defined by regions
 these are areas (natural monuments, oases managed by
environmentalist associations, urban parks, biotopes, etc.) not
belonging to previous typologies. They can be either public areas,
as established by regional laws or similar regulations, or private
areas, managed as established by public regulations or by
contracts, concessions or other institutional forms.
6
The map
 An (hopefully updated) map of all kinds of protected areas in
Italy can be found at:
 http://www.parks.it/mappe/ap.php
 Interrogations can be made region-by-region and typologyby-typology
 More detailed information can be obtained also on the
underlying database:
http://www.parks.it/dbparks/index.html
7
Protected Areas in Marche region - 1
Currently Marche region has 11 protected
areas of different kinds and size
Protected Areas
5
National Parks
Natural
Reserves
Regional Parks
NATIONAL
REGIONAL
Sentina
8
Protected Areas in Marche region - 2
Le Aree
Protette nelle Marche
TYPOLOGIES
(86.630,54 ha - 8,94% della superficie regionale)

Parchi National
Nazionali Parks
Parco Nazionale dei Monte Sibillini (1989)
Parco Nazionale del Gran Sasso e Monti della Laga
(1991)
ParchiRegional
Regionali Parks
Parco del Conero (1987)
Parco Gola della Rossa e di Frasassi (1997)
Parco Naturale del Monte San Bartolo (1994)
Parco Sasso Simone e Simoncello (1994)
Natural
Reserves
Riserve
Naturali
Statali (nat.)
Abbadia di Fiastra (1985)
Montagna di Torricchio (1977)
Gola del Furlo (2001)
11
+ Riserva
Naturale
Statale “Gola
del Furlo” (2001)
Natural
Reserves
(reg.)
(2006)
+ 2Ripa
Oasi:bianca
Oasi WWF
Ripa Bianca di Jesi (riserva regionale) , Oasi WWF Bosco di Frasassi
Sentina (2008)
9
Protected Areas in Marche region - 3
90.50%
Tot. Marche Reg.
Prot. areas
89.550
9.50%
0,32%
SENTINA+
0,40%
10
Protected Areas in Marche region – 4
% Protected areas by region and typology (2003)
% of protected areas on
total regional area
_regionale_
11
Purposes of protected areas
According to Italian legislation, though with these different typologies and
definitions, all protected areas share the same general purposes. They are
areas with a particular presence or concentration of naturalistic values
aimed at achieving:
1) Conservation of natural habitats and of its wildlife within the protected
territory also allowing for the natural evolution and the maintenance of the
existing ecological equilibria;
2) Restoration of depleted and degradated habitats and marginal areas, as
well as of ecological equilibria;
3) Promotion of social, economic, and cultural development of local
populations by favouring activities highly compatible with environmental
conservation;
4) Promotion of inter-disciplinary scientific research on the environment, as
well as environmental education and information;
5) Facilitation of tourist fruition, as well as of recreational activities and
leisure within the area, respecting the capacity limits of the ecosystems and
giving priority to relations with the nature and the local culture.
12
National Parks:
area and population
The 2 most
recent NPs
are lacking
FONTE: Compagnucci – Mazzoni (2002)
Key message: NP are not necessarily either depopulated or low-density areas
13
National Parks:
agricultural activity
FONTE: Compagnucci – Mazzoni (2002)
Key message: In NP, most area is agricultural area thus managed by farmers
14
National Parks:
other sectors
FONTE: Compagnucci – Mazzoni (2002)
Key message: But NP economies are not agrarian economies; manufacturing and
services remain key-activities
15
National Parks:
evolution
• Population growth (1951-1998)
• Manufacturing employment (1951-1991)
FONTE: Compagnucci – Mazzoni (2002)
Key message: Some NP economies show relevant long-term dynamism and
attractiveness
16
National legislation on
protected areas: a short history
 For a long period the only national legislation on protected areas were the
ad hoc laws establishing the individual National Parks (“historical” parks)
 This situation continued until d.p.r. n. 616/1977 whose art. 83 redefined
the attribution of jurisdiction between the State and the Regions
 In practice, it attributed to the Region the jurisdiction on establishment
and management of protected areas:
 It made nearly impossible for the State, as well as for the Regions, to establish new
National Parks
 Subsequent interventions of the Constitutional Court clarified the matter
(1984, 1987, 1988) on:
 Distribution of competence between the State and the Regions (Titolo V Costit.)
 Constitutional characterization of nature protection (art. 9 Costit.)
 Need of a Framework Law on protected areas clarifying these issues
 ”Framework Law on Protected Areas”: Law 394/1991
17
National and regional
legislation on protected areas
1. “Framework Law on Protected Areas”: State Law 394/1991
• Grounded on art. 9 of Italian Constitution
• Clarifies competences
National Parks and Reserves: the State
Regional Parks, Reserves and other protected areas: the Regions
• Establishes “zonization” of protected areas (parks)
- integral reserves
- oriented general reserves
- protection areas (mostly agricultural)
- areas of socio-economic promotion (mostly urban)
• Establishes organs and instruments of governance and management within protected areas (parks)
The “Ente Parco” (art. 9 L. 394/91) is established as a juridically autonomous public institution and composed by the
following organs:
- the President
- the Directive Council
- the Executive Board
- the Board of Auditors
- the Park Community (representing the local community)
• Establishes instruments form managing parks
- The Plan for the Park
- The Pluriannual Socio-Economic Programme
- Regulation of activities
- Permission
2. Regional Law (Regione Marche) n. 15/1994: “Norms for the institution of
protected natural areas”
18
Ex.: “zonization” of Regional Park
of Conero
Port of Ancona
Ancona
Baia di
Portonovo
Adriatico Sea
Sirolo
Integral Reserve
Oriented Reserve
Osimo
Castelfidardo
Numana
Marcelli
Protection Areas
Areas of Socio-Economic Promotion
Loreto
Recanati
19
The Framework Law:
pros and cons
Pros:
 It clearly distinguished the different typologies of protected areas
 It clarified different jurisdiction between State-Regions
 It established and prioritized the different purposes of protected areas with
major emphasis on nature and wildlife protection, conservation and
valorisation
 It introduced new organs and principles of protected areas governance as
well as managerial instruments and criteria
Cons:
 It soon became outdated and required progressive updating due to change
of State-Regions competences and EU regulations and policies (Natura
2000):
 Law n. 59/1997 (Legge Bassanini) attributing administrative functions
and competences to local institutions
 Law n. 426/1998 (Ronchi-ter) introducing the National Ecological
Network (Natura 2000) within the national classification and legislation
 Successive reforms of “Titolo V” of the Constitution
20
The EU norms and policy for
protected areas - 1
For a long time there has been no specific EU norm on protected areas
and thus regulation has been left at the national level. However, two key
EU Directives started imposing a common standard:
 Directive 79/409/CEE (“Birds Directive”) providing for the creation of
SPAs (Special Protection Areas; Zone di Protezione Speciale, ZPS) to
protect wild-birds habitats
 Directive 92/43/CEE (“Habitats Directive”) more generally aiming at
safeguarding natural habitats and:
 Providing for the creation of SACs (Special Areas of Conservation; Zone
Speciali di Conservazione, ZSC)
 Establishing a programme aiming at creating the Pan-European Ecologial
Network (PEEN) (Rete Ecologica Comunitaria): “Natura 2000”
 The PEEN is thus made of ZPS+ZSC or “Natura 2000 Sites”
21
The EU norms and policy for
protected areas - 2
 The EU financial support for Natura 2000 is provided through two basic
instruments:
 EU structural funds
 Part of the LIFE Programme (LIFE+ for 2007-2013) called LIFE Natura
(about 100 mio € of funds for 2007-2013)
 Natura 2000 is an ambitious long-run project aiming at the creation of the
European Ecological Network with the harmonization of the often very different
national and regional regimes on protected areas: this harmonization should be
achieved through the respective National Ecological Networks. In Italy the
National Ecological Network has been created by adding the Natura 2000 sites
to the the Italian taxonomy (ex 394/91) in 1996 (Ronchi ter).
 The EU acknowledges large autonomy to member states and their regions in
proposing and managing Natura 2000 sites. In particular, under Directive 92/43
they propose sites (Sites of Community Importance, SCIs*; Siti di Importanza
Comunitaria, SIC) ; the EU has then to approve the proposed sites (thus
becoming SACs) and control their appropriate management.
 Nonetheless, this harmonization with the national/regional regulations has not
been easy so far. The two systems (EU and national ones) are often
overlapping rather than harmonising:
 Not all areas protected under national/regional regulations are Natura 2000
sites
 Not all Natura 2000 sites belongs to protected areas according to
22
national/regional definition
Natura Barometer - 1
Nature 2000 sites as % on total national areas, 2004
 The “success”
of Natura 2000 is
different across
the different EU
countries beyond
the real specific
naturalistic values
23
Natura Barometer - 2
 The EU monitors
the construction of
the National
Ecological Networks
with a biannual
Natura Barometer
signalising the latest
progress. The most
recent one is
updated at
December 2009
24
Natura 2000: Italian (partially
overlapping) sites
SPAs (or ZPS)
SACs (or ZSC)
25
Natura 2000 across Italian regions
 The “success”
of Natura 2000 is
different across
the Italian regions
as well, beyond
the real specific
naturalistic values
Implementation of Natura 2000 in Italian regions, 2006
% of protected areas on
total regional area
26
Natura 2000 sites (Ecological
Network) in Marche Region
SACs
 Any site is specifically
and strictly identified,
delimited and described
and then proposed by
the Region to the EU
27
“International” areas
 Beside protected areas established by national/regional regulations and
the Natura 2000 sites, there are also further protected areas depending
on International Agreements or Conventions.
 In particular, in the case of (1971) Ramsar Convention (on wetlands
protection) there are 50 protected sites:
 Overall, the total amount of
protected areas in Italy under
the different regimes cover
more than 5 millions of ha,
about 19% of total national
area. This makes Italy, at
least apparently, one of the
most “protected” country in
the EU
28
Economic development within protected
areas: managing and programming
Framework Law 394/91, in combination with the current EU
strategy for protected areas (Natura 2000), created a new
culture and attitude towards effective and efficient management
and programming of protected areas. This is mainly due to the
fact that:
 It established a new autonomous local institution (Ente Parco)
mostly engaged in technical and scientific tasks but also
expected to adopt good practices in management and
programming.
 This soon favoured an “integrated approach” to protected areas
management where integration is both between
naturalistic/ecological and socio-economic concerns and
between Ente Parco and contiguous areas and local/regional
authorities.
 It also progressively imposed a new form of governance of
these areas as well as the adoption of innovative programming
and managerial instruments.
29
Governance in protected areas
The distribution of competences and responsibilities across the
different organs of the Ente Parco is critical for a successful
management.
Hierarchical distribution of functions and responsibilities:
 The Directive Council: in terms of functions and responsibilities it is at the
highest hierarchical level. It is designed by the Region (Regional Parks) or by
the State-Government (National Parks)
 The President: it is designed by the Region (Regional Parks) or by the StateGovernment (National Parks) among components of the Directive Council;
he/she is the legal representative of the Park
 The Executive Board: nominated by the Directive Council and it mostly has
technical functions and responsibilities on the correct management of the Park
under the supervision and the political directions of the Directive Council .
 The Park Community: it is constituted by representatives of the Region and
of the involved Provinces and Municipalities (majors, for instance) as well as of
all other institutions involved. This organ thus aims at representing the local
community and population within the Park as institution (Ente Parco).
 The Board of Auditors: it evidently has the function and responsibility of
controlling the Park accounts and management. Therefore it should operate
autonomously from the Directive Council and it is designed by the Region
(Regional Parks) or by the State-Government (National Parks).
30
Instruments for managing and
programming within protected areas
This is the hierarchical order of the specific instruments for managing and
programming protected areas (Parks):
Hierarchical order

Plan for the Park (PfP): it is the key programming instrument and it aims at
achieving the key objectives of the Park, that is, conservation and restoration of
naturalistic values. Therefore, roughly speaking, it details all the constraints on human
activities within the park according to the different zones and activities. It hierarchically
overcomes all other planning instruments operating in the same territory. Thus, it is very
often the most controversial and divisive instrument to be implemented within the Park.
 Pluriannual Socio-Economic Programme (PPES): it should plan medium-term
initiatives supporting those activities, within the Park, that can make ecologicalnaturalistic objectives an opportunity for fostering local socio-economic and cultural
development and welfare.
 Regulation of activities: it disciplines in practical terms all activities run within
the Park to make the objectives and the constrains defined in the PfP (and, partially, the
PPES) be respected.
 Permission: it is the formal authorization required for any physical
intervention (buildings, plantations, etc.) within the Park.
This last, and strictly operational, instrument is the only that is exclusively under the
responsibility of the Directive Council. All other instruments must be also discussed
and approved together with the Park Community.
31
Plan for the Park
Naturalistic Plan
Forest Plan
Plan for the Park
Agricultural Plan
Plan of Environmental
Restoration
Detailed Urban Plan
Master Urban
Restoration Urban Plan
Plan
Plan implementation: Enter Parco + Other Local Authorities
32
Planning: critical issues
 Difficulties in coordinating and making all instruments operational, especially
the PPES
 In particular, the coordination between PfP and PPES is difficult
 Reconcile constraints (conservation) and opportunities (development)
 Priority of PfP (constraints) on PPES (opportunities)
 Conflicts between Park Community and technical organs of the Park
 Corrections of the relation between the two instruments in Law 426/98
and several regional laws
 Clarify objectives of PPES
 Strong selectivity is needed
 Indentifying key-sectors or activities
 Prioritizing interventions
 Major practical issues
 Poor financial resources
 Need of fund-raising and project financing
 Need of good ideas and projects: human capital
 Involvement of other public institutions and private agents
33
Ex.: Promoting tourism in protected
areas
 Tourism and agriculture are the two activities showing
highest compatibility with nature conservation and
protection: they can facilitate protection and protection
itself can favour certain kinds of agriculture and tourism
 these activities make evident that protected areas are not
against local development but can be an opportunity for it
 but not all forms of agriculture and tourism are compatible and
appropriate strategies are needed to improve their compatibility
 Tourism: according to the most recent Ecotur Report, in 2007 the
booked nights in Italian protected areas have been 97 millions with
a total revenue of about 10 billions €. How can tourists visit these
areas? The prevailing organized forms of fruition are:
- Centri Visita (Visiting Centres)
- Centri di Educazione Ambientale (Environmental Education Centres)
- Aree Faunistiche (Fauna Areas)
- Sentieri attrezzati (Equipped Paths)
- Itinerari di ciclo-escursionismo (Tracks for bike-excursions and trekking)
34
Promoting tourism in protected
areas: critical aspects and solutions
 Seasonal concentration of tourist demand (visitors)
 Most in July-August
 All-season programs are needed
 Integration with tourist offer outside the Park area can be helpful
and must be improved
 Inadequate and insufficient receptive structures
 Non-compatible structures (big hotels, big parking lots…)
 Architectonic barriers (difficulties of access and fruition also for
children, elder visitors…)
 Poor information (often not even in English…)
 Improve compatible receptive structures: rural and agro-tourism
 Specific information and fruition programmes for children
(schools) and elder people
 Certification of tourist offer of the Park: Quality Charters, Charter
for Sustainable Tourism, EMAS and ISO14001 certification, etc. 35