Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Reviewing the participatory management of UNESCO Biosphere Reserves: What do we miss by ignoring local academic knowledge in Mexico?

  • Review
  • Published:
Ambio Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This review article addresses challenges in the management of UNESCO Biosphere Reserves (BRs) by analyzing the value of research published in journals, chapters, and books that are not indexed by Web of Science or Scopus. This widely ignored body of grounded knowledge allows deeper insights when assessing participatory management of BRs, an imperative reflected in guiding principles such as Aichi Target 11. The scoping literature review conducted found 120 publications that address stakeholder participation in decision-making and the economic benefits generated in Mexican BRs. Only 65 of those studies were published in indexed journals, while national outlets accounted for the other 55, most of them also peer-reviewed publications. International papers differ from national ones regarding spatial coverage, research foci, and the methods applied. Though both bodies of publications identified similar challenges, each sheds a distinct light on social-environmental contexts and regions. However, there is a consensus that genuine stakeholder participation has not yet been achieved.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. BRs are a legally established category of PAs in Mexico. However, they are not considered PAs by the IUCN, but could be “Other Effective Area-Based Conservation Measures” (OECMs), though they might overlap with traditional PAs, with core zones frequently declared as National Parks. Regardless of these divergent classifications, integration into the surrounding landscape and man-made environments (highlighted by Aichi Goal 11) is a key objective of BRs (Job et al. 2017).

  2. BRs now comprise 62,952,750 hectares (including ocean surface), equivalent to 69.3% of the overall area protected by federal law. Of the 44 BRs declared by Mexican legislation, 41 are officially recognized by UNESCO and form part of the World Network of BRs (the three remaining BRs were declared recently, so UNESCO approval is pending). As to achieving the Aichi Targets, 10.9% of the national terrestrial and 22.3% of the marine territory have been declared federal protected areas (http://sig.conanp.gob.mx/website/pagsig/listanp/, retrieved 07/08/2020).

  3. In addition, the following strings were used (in English and Spanish): Protected AND Area(s) AND Mexico; Environmental AND Protection AND México; as well as Conservation AND Mexico. However, they turned out to be largely ineffective, as very few relevant publications were found.

  4. Qualitative methods generally refer to semi-structured expert/stakeholder interviews, coding, and content analysis supported by commercial software. Quantitative methods mostly comprise interviews using structured questionnaire and computer-assisted statistical analysis.

  5. Of the 120 publications that met the eligibility criteria, 107 contain case studies carried out in a total of 117 specific BRs (see Fig. 1 and ESM S3). In addition, we found 14 publications with regional or national assessments based on empirical studies that did not refer to any specific BRs All 120 publications were coded and analyzed to support the findings reported in the Results section. Table 1 presents the 117 case studies carried out in specific BRs (analyzed in 107 publications).

References

  • Aalbers, M.B. 2004. Creative destruction through the Anglo-American hegemony: A non-Anglo-American view on publications, referees and language. Area 3: 319–322. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0004-0894.2004.00229.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alatas, S.F. 2003. Academic dependency and the global division of labour in the social sciences. Current Sociology 51: 599–613. https://doi.org/10.1177/00113921030516003.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alonso-Yanez, G., K. Thumlert, and S. de Castell. 2016. Re-mapping integrative conservation: (Dis)Coordinate participation in a Biosphere Reserve in Mexico. Conservation and Society 14: 134–145. https://doi.org/10.4103/0972-4923.186335.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Altbach, P.G. 2013. Advancing the national and global knowledge economy: The role of research universities in developing countries. Studies in Higher Education 38: 316–330. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2013.773222.

  • Andrews, J.M. 2006. Shifts of strategies and focus of the conservation efforts of PRONATURA on the Yucatán Peninsula: A personal history. Landscape and Urban Planning 74: 193–203. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2004.09.003.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baber, Z. 2003. Provincial universalism: The landscape of knowledge production in an area of globalization. Current Sociology 51: 615–623. https://doi.org/10.1177/00113921030516004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bezaury-Creel, J.E. and D. Gutiérrez-Carbonell. 2009. Áreas naturales protegidas y desarrollo social en México. In Capital natural de México, vol. II: Estado de conservación y tendencias de cambio, ed. R. Dirzo, 385–43. Mexico-City: Comisión Nacional para el Conocimiento y Uso de la Biodiversidad (CONABIO).

  • Borrini-Feyerabend, G., N. Dudley, T. Jaeger, B. Lassen, N. Pathak Broome, A. Phillips and T. Sandwith. 2013. Governance of Protected Areas: From understanding to action. Gland: Best Practice Protected Area Guidelines Series 20.

  • Brenner, L. 2009. Aceptación de políticas de conservación ambiental: El caso de la Reserva de la Biosfera Mariposa Monarca. Economía, Sociedad y Territorio 9: 259–295.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brenner, L. 2010. Gobernanza ambiental, actores sociales y conflictos en las Áreas Naturales Protegidas de México. Revista Mexicana De Sociología 72: 283–310.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brenner, L. 2019. Multi-stakeholder platforms and protected area management: Evidence from El Vizcaíno Biosphere Reserve, Mexico. Conservation & Society 17: 147–160. https://doi.org/10.4103/cs.cs_18_63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brenner, L. 2020. La gestión participativa de Áreas Naturales Protegidas en México. Revista Mexicana De Sociología 82: 343–373. https://doi.org/10.22201/iis.01882503p.2020.2.58147.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brenner, L., and H. Job. 2006. Actor-oriented management of protected areas and ecotourism in Mexico. Journal of Latin American Geography 5: 7–27. https://doi.org/10.1353/lag.2006.0019.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brenner, L., and D. Vargas del Río. 2010. Gobernabilidad y gobernanza ambiental en México: La experiencia de la Reserva de la Biosfera Sian Ka´an. Polis 6: 115–152.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brenner, L., and S. San Germán. 2012. Gobernanza local para el “ecoturismo” en la Reserva de la Biosfera Mariposa Monarca, Mexico. Alteridades 22: 131–146.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brenner, L., and H. Job. 2012. Challenges to actor-oriented environmental governance: Examples from three Mexican Biosphere Reserves. Tijdschrift Voor Economische En Sociale Geografie 103: 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9663.2011.00671.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brenner, L., and A.C. De la Vega-Leinert. 2014. La gobernanza participativa de áreas naturales protegidas. El caso de la Reserva de la biosfera El Vizcaíno. Región y Sociedad 26: 183–213. https://doi.org/10.22198/rys.2014.59.a77.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carius, F., and H. Job. 2019. Community involvement and tourism revenue sharing as contributing factors to the UN Sustainable Development Goals in Jozani-Chwaka Bay National Park and Biosphere Reserve, Zanzibar. Journal of Sustainable Tourism 27: 826–846. https://doi.org/10.1080/09669582.2018.1560457.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD). 2010. Convention on Biological Diversity. Retrieved 27 July, 2020, from https://www.cbd.int/nbsap/training/quick-guides/.

  • Cruz, B., M. Gustavo and J. López García. 2017. Resiliencia de la reserva de la biosfera Mariposa Monarca. In Los sistemas socioecológicos y su resiliencia: Casos de estudio, ed. R. Calderón Contreras, 123–137. Mexico-City: Universidad Autónoma Metropolitana/Editorial Gedisa.

  • Cruz Morales, J. 2014. Desafíos para construir la democracia ambiental en la Cuenca Alta del Río Tablón, Reserva de la Biosfera La Sepultura, México. In Paradojas de las tierras en Chiapas, ed. C.L. Díaz, C.M. Rosano, and T. Trench, 21–60. Mexico-City: Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México/Universidad Autónoma de Chapingo.

    Google Scholar 

  • De la Rosa-Velázquez, M.I., A. Espinoza-Tenorio, M.Á.- Díaz-Perera, A. Ortega-Argueta, R. Ramos-Reyes, and I. Espejel. 2017. Development stressors are stronger than protected areas management: A case of the Pantanos de Centla Biosphere Reserve, Mexico. Land Use Policy 67: 340–351. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2017.06.009.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Díaz Ávila, M., L.H. Jhon Mendoza, M. Locht Peitzner, N. López Azuz, F. Padrón Gil, M.I. Rosas Hernández, and A. von Bertrab Tamm. 2005. Diagnóstico de los Consejos Asesores de 47 Áreas Naturales Protegidas. Mexico-City: Iniciativa Mexicana de Aprendizaje para la Conservación.

    Google Scholar 

  • Díaz Carrión, I.A. 2010. Ecoturismo comunitario y género en la Reserva de la Biosfera Los Tuxtlas (México). Pasos/Revista de Turismo y Patrimonio Cultural 8: 151–165.

  • Díaz Carrión, I.A., and C. Neger. 2014. Ecotourism in the Reserva de la Biosfera de Los Tuxtlas (Veracruz, Mexico). Athens Journal of Tourism 1: 191–202. https://doi.org/10.30958/ajt.1-3-2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dickinson Castillo, J., M. Pinkus Rendón, M. Pinkus Rendón, and C. Ramón Mac. 2014. Depredación y ecoturismo. Realidades de los prestadores de servicios en la Reserva de la Biosfera Ría Celestún. Yucatán. Península 10: 145–161. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pnsla.2015.05.004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Doyon, S., and C. Sabinot. 2014. A new “conservation space”? Protected areas, environmental economic activities and discourses in two Yucatán Biosphere Reserves in Mexico. Conservation & Society 12: 133–146. https://doi.org/10.4103/0972-4923.138409.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Durand, L. 2019. Power, identity and biodiversity conservation in the Montes Azules Biosphere Reserve, Chiapas, Mexico. Journal of Political Ecology 26: 19–37. https://doi.org/10.2458/v26i1.23160.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Durand, L., and E. Lazos. 2008. The local perception of tropical deforestation and its relation to conservation policies in Los Tuxtlas Biosphere Reserve, Mexico. Human Ecology 36: 383–394. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10745-008-9172-7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Durand, L., and L.B. Vázquez. 2011. Biodiversity conservation discourses. A case study on scientists and government authorities in Sierra de Huautla Biosphere Reserve. Land Use Policy 28: 76–82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2010.04.009.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Durand, L., F. Figueroa, and M.G. Guzmán. 2011. La ecología política en México. ¿Dónde estamos y para dónde vamos? Estudios Sociales 19: 282–307.

    Google Scholar 

  • Durand, L., F. Figueroa, and T. Trench. 2014. Inclusion and exclusion in participation strategies in the Montes Azules Biosphere Reserve, Chiapas, Mexico. Conservation and Society 12: 175–189. https://doi.org/10.4103/0972-4923.138420.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ergin, M., and A. Alkan. 2019. Academic neo-colonialism in writing practices: Geographic markers in three journals from Japan, Turkey and the US. Geoforum 104: 259–266. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2019.05.008.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Esquivel Ríos, S.G., L. Cruz Jiménez, Zizumbo Villarreal, and C. Cadena Inostroza. 2014. Gobernanza para el turismo en espacios rurales. Reserva de la biosfera Mariposa Monarca. Revista Mexicana De Ciencias Agrícolas 9: 1631–1643. https://doi.org/10.29312/remexca.v0i9.1053.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gannon, P., G. Dubois, N. Dudley, J. Ervin, S. Ferrier, S. Gidda, K. Mackinnon, K. Richardson, et al. 2019. Editorial Essay: An update on progress towards Aichi Biodiversity Target 11. Parks 25: 7–18. https://doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.CH.2019.PARKAS-25-2PG.en.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • García-Frapolli, E., G. Ramos-Fernández, E. Galicia, and A. Serrano. 2009. The complex reality of biodiversity conservation through Natural Protected Area policy: Three cases from the Yucatán Peninsula. Land Use Policy 26: 715–722. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2008.09.008.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • García-Frapolli, E., B. Ayala-Orozco, M. Oliva, and R.J. Smith. 2018. Different approaches towards the understanding of socioenvironmental conflicts in protected areas. Sustainability 10: 2240. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10072240.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gutiérrez, J., and P. López-Nieva. 2001. Are international journals of human geography really international? Progress in Human Geography 25: 35–69. https://doi.org/10.1191/030913201666823316.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guzmán Chávez, M.G. 2006. Biodiversidad y conocimiento local: del discurso a la práctica basada en el territorio. Espiral: Estudios Sobre Estado y Sociedad 13: 145–176.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haddaway, N.R., A. Bethel, V.L. Dicks, J. Koricheva, B. Macura, G. Petrokofsky, A.S. Pullin, S. Savilaakso, et al. 2020. Eight problems with literature reviews and how to fix them. Nature Ecology and Evolution 4: 1582–1589. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41559-020-01295-x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Halffter, G. 1981. Local participation in conservation and development. Ambio 10: 93–96. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-7956-7_8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Halffter, G. 2011. Reservas de la Biosfera: problemas y oportunidades en México. Acta Zoológica Mexicana 27: 177–189. https://doi.org/10.21829/azm.2011.271743.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoffman, D.M. 2014. Conch, cooperatives, and conflict: Conservation and resistance in the Banco Chinchorro Biosphere Reserve. Conservation & Society 12: 120–132. https://doi.org/10.4103/0972-4923.138408.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Isaac Márquez, R. 2016. Ecoturismo y desarrollo comunitario: El caso de “Valentín Natural” en el sureste de México. Turismo y Sociedad 18: 117–135. https://doi.org/10.18601/01207555.n18.07.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Job, H., S. Becken, and B. Lane. 2017. Protected Areas in a neoliberal world and the role of tourism in supporting conservation and sustainable development: An assessment of strategic planning, zoning, impact monitoring, and tourism management at natural World Heritage Sites. Journal of Sustainable Tourism 25: 1697–1718. https://doi.org/10.1080/09669582.2017.1377432.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Job, H., M. Engelbauer, and B. Engels. 2019. Das Portfolio deutscher Biosphärenreservate im Lichte der Sustainable Development Goals. Raumforschung Und Raumordnung 77: 57–79. https://doi.org/10.2478/rara-2019-0005.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaus, A. 1993. Environmental perceptions and social relations in the Mapimi Biosphere Reserve. Conservation Biology 7: 398–406. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1523-1739.1993.07020398.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Konno, K., A. Munemitzu, C. Koshida, N. Katayama, N. Osada, R. Spake, and T. Amano. 2020. Ignoring non-English-language studies may bias ecological meta-analyses. Ecology and Evolution 2020: 6373–6384. https://doi.org/10.1002/ece3.6368.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kratzer, A. 2018. Biosphere Reserves research: a bibliometric analysis. Eco.mont 10: 36–49. https://doi.org/10.1553/eco.mont-10-2s36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kraus, F., C. Merlin, and H. Job. 2014. Biosphere reserves and their contribution to sustainable development. A value-chain analysis in the Rhön Biosphere Reserve. Germany. Zeitschrift Für Wirtschaftsgeographie 58: 164–180. https://doi.org/10.1515/zfw.2014.0011.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, A.E. 2014. Territorialization, conservation, and neoliberalism in the Tehuacán-Cuicatlán Biosphere Reserve, Mexico. Conservation & Society 12: 147–161. https://doi.org/10.4103/0972-4923.138413.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Legorreta Díaz, M.C., and C. Márquez Rosano. 2014. Atrapados en el laberinto de la mendicidad Democracia y política ambiental en las reservas de la biosfera Montes Azules y Lacantún, Chiapas. In Paradojas de las tierras protegidas en Chiapas, ed. L. Díaz, M.C.M. Rosano, and T. Trench, 173–213. Mexico-City: Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México/Universidad Autónoma de Chapingo.

    Google Scholar 

  • López-Medellín, X., L.B. Vázquez, D. Valenzuela-Galván, E. Wehncke, B. Maldonado-Almanza, and L. Durand-Smith. 2017. Percepciones de los habitantes de la Reserva de la Biosfera Sierra de Huantla: Hacía el desarrollo de nuevas estrategias de manejo participativo. Interciencia 42: 8–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Manzo-Delgado, L., J. López-Garcia, and I. Alcántara-Ayala. 2014. Role of forest conservation in lessening land degradation in a temperate region: The Monarch Butterfly Biosphere Reserve, Mexico. Journal of Environmental Management 138: 55–66. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2013.11.017.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martínez, N., I. Espejel, and C. Martinez Valdés. 2016. Evaluation of governance in an administration of protected areas on the peninsula of Baja California. Frontera Norte 55: 103–129.

    Google Scholar 

  • Martínez-Reyes, J.E. 2014. Beyond nature appropriation: Towards post-development conservation in the Maya forest. Conservation & Society 12: 162–174. https://doi.org/10.4103/0972-4923.138417.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mayer, M.L., B. Brenner, C. Schauss, J. Arnegger. Stadler, and H. Job. 2018. The nexus between governance and economic impact of whale watching. The case of the coastal lagoons in the El Vizcaíno Reserve, Baja California; Mexico. Ocean & Coastal Management 162: 46–59. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2018.04.016.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meriläinen, S., J. Tienari, R. Thomas, and A. Davies. 2008. Hegemonic academic practices: Experiences of publishing from the periphery. Organization 15: 584–597. https://doi.org/10.1177/1350508408091008.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Merino Pérez, L., and M. Hernández Apolinar. 2004. Destrucción de instituciones comunitarias y deterioro de los bosques en la Reserva de la Biosfera Mariposa Monarca. Revista Mexicana De Sociología 66: 261–309. https://doi.org/10.2307/3541458.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morales Rodríguez, J.R., A. Ortega Argueta, D.E. Ramos Muñoz, and F.D. Gurri García. 2019. La capacidad de adaptación en la Reserva de la Biosfera Pantanos de Centla. Economía, Sociedad y Territorio 59: 1119–1153. https://doi.org/10.22136/est20191255.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Müller, M. 2021. Worlding geography. From linguistic privileges to decolonial anywheres. Progress in Human Geography. https://doi.org/10.1177/0309132520979356.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Müller, M., and H. Job. 2016. Governance und Regionalentwicklung in Großschutzgebieten der Schweiz und Österreichs. Raumforschung Und Raumordnung 74: 569–583. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13147-016-0451-2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Munn, Z., D.J.M.D.J. Peters, C. Stern, C. Tufanaru, A. McArthur, and E. Aromataris. 2018. Systematic review or scoping review? Guidance for authors when choosing between a systematic or scoping review approach. BMC Medical Research Methodology 18: 143. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-018-0611-x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Leary, B.C., K. Kvista, H.R. Bayliss, G. Derroire, J.R. Healey, K. Hughes, F. Kleinschroth, M. Sciberrasc, et al. 2016. The reliability of evidence review methodology in environmental science and conservation. Environmental Science and Policy 64: 75–82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2016.06.012.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Paré, L., and T. Fuentes. 2007. Gobernanza ambiental y políticas públicas en Áreas Naturales Protegidas: Lecciones desde Los Tuxtlas. Mexico-City: Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México/Instituto de Investigaciones Sociales.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pham, M.T., A. Rajić, J.D. Greig, J.M. Sargeant, A. Papadopoulos, and S.A. McEwen. 2014. A scoping review of scoping reviews: Advancing the approach and enhancing the consistency. Research Synthesis Methods 5: 371–385. https://doi.org/10.1002/jrsm.1123.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Piñar Álvarez, Á., M.D. García Segura, and H. García Campos. 2012. Ecoturismo y educación ambiental para la sustentabilidad en la Reserva de la Biosfera de Los Tuxtlas. Revista De Investigación En Turismo y Desarrollo Local 5: 1–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reyes-García, V., I. Ruiz-Mallen, L. Porter-Bolland, E. García-Frapolli, E.A. Ellis, M.E. Mendez, D.J. Pritchard, and M.C. Sánchez-González. 2013. Local understandings of conservation in southeastern Mexico and their implications for community-based conservation as an alternative paradigm. Conservation Biology 27: 856–865. https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.12056.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ruíz-Mallén, I., H. Newing, L. Porter-Bolland, D.J. Pritchard, E. García-Frapolli, M.E.M. López, M.C.S. González, A. De la Peña, et al. 2014. Cognisance, participation and protected areas in the Yucatán Peninsula. Environmental Conservation 41: 265–275. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0376892913000507.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sada Guevara, S. 2020. The Mexican Biosphere Reserves Landscape and sustainability. In UNESCO Biosphere Reserves. Supporting biocultural diversity, sustainability and society, ed. M.G. Reed and M.F. Price, 47–60. London: Earthscan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sengupta, P. 2021. Open access publication: Academic colonialism or philanthropy? Geoforum 118: 203–206. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2020.04.001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simonian, L. 1995. Defending the land of the jaguar. A history of conservation in Mexico. Austin: University of Texas Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Smardon, R., and B.B. Faust. 2006. Introduction: International policy in the biosphere reserves of Mexico’s Yucatan peninsula. Landscape and Urban Planning 74: 160–192. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2004.09.002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tejeda-Cruz, C. 2009. Conservación de la biodiversidad y comunidades locales: Conflictos en Áreas Naturales Protegidas de la Selva Lacandona, Chiapas, México. Canadian Journal of Latin American and Caribbean Studies 34: 57–88. https://doi.org/10.2307/41800468.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trench, T. 2008. From “Orphans of the State” to Comunidad Conservacionista Institucional: The case of the Lacandón community, Chiapas. Identities: Global Studies in Culture and Power 15: 607–634. https://doi.org/10.1080/10702890802333827.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trench, T. 2013. ¿Ganando terreno? La CONANP en la subregión Miramar de la Reserva de la Biosfera Montes Azules, Chiapas. In Paradojas de las tierras protegidas en Chiapas, eds. C. Legorreta Díaz, C. Márquez Rosano and T. Trench, 61–105. Mexico-City: Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México/Universidad Autónoma de Chapingo.

  • United Nations Environment Program/World Conservation Monitoring Centre (UNEP-WCMC). 2020. World database on protected areas. Retrieved 27 July, 2020, from www.unep-wcme.org/resource-and-data/wdpahttps://www.cbd.int/article/2020-01-10-19-02-38.

  • United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). 1996. Biosphere reserves: The Seville Strategy and the Statutory Framework of the World Network. Retrieved 10 August, 2020, from http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0010/001038/103849eb.pdf.

  • United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). 2008. Madrid Action Plan for Biosphere Reserves (2008–2013). Retrieved 10 August, 2020, from http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0016/001633/163301e.pdf.

  • Woodley, S., N. Bhola, C. Money, and H. Locke. 2019. A review of evidence for area-based conservation targets for the post-2020 global biodiversity framework. Parks 25: 31–46. https://doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.CH.2019.PARKS-25-2SW2.en.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank Winfried Weber for the design and elaboration of maps.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Universidad Autónoma Metropolitana, Unidad Iztapalapa, Avenida San Rafael Atlixco 186, 09340, Mexico City, Mexico

    Ludger Brenner

  2. Julius-Maximilians-Universität Würzburg, Am Hubland, 97074, Würzburg, Germany

    Hubert Job

Authors
  1. Ludger Brenner
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Hubert Job
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ludger Brenner.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file1 (PDF 407 KB)

Supplementary file2 (ODS 73 KB)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Brenner, L., Job, H. Reviewing the participatory management of UNESCO Biosphere Reserves: What do we miss by ignoring local academic knowledge in Mexico?. Ambio 51, 1726–1738 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13280-021-01672-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13280-021-01672-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation