Abstract
This study adopts and modifies the WWF Rapid assessment and prioritization of protected areas management methodology (RAPPAM) to evaluate the management effectiveness of five protected areas in Taiwan. The results indicate that, unlike the situation in most developing countries, the threats and pressures faced by protected areas in Taiwan come mainly from the outside–with pollution as the most common pressure and threat, and difficult for their management authorities to deal with effectively. The categories and extent of these pressures and threats are related to remoteness and geographic location of the protected areas. All five cases under study reveal a similar management approach, clear management goals, adequate basic infrastructure and clear management decision-making; on the down side, however, all of them suffer from the lack of an effective comprehensive management plan, inadequate or poor quality human resources and insufficient funding. The present study suggests that first priority should be given to strengthening management planning in order to improve management effectiveness of protected areas in Taiwan. The adjustment made to RAPPAM in this study was to amend and take the format of the management plan as the basis for evaluation material preparations and open the discussion to encourage stakeholders’ participation to open the dialogue among them. The results indicate that, although the system evaluation design still has some constraints, the quality of information collected is improved and can respond more directly to the specific demands of the respective areas.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Batsukh N, Belokurov A (2005) Mongolia: management effectiveness assessment of the Mongolian protected areas system using WWF’s RAPPAM Methodology. WWF, Gland, Switzerland, p 44
Bertzky M, Stoll-Kleemann S (2009) Multi-level discrepancies with sharing data on protected areas: what we have and what we need for the global village. Journal of Environmental Management 90(1):8–24
Borgström S, Cousins SAO, Lindborg R (2011) Outside the boundary—land use changes in the surroundings of urban nature reserves. Applied Geography 32:350–359
Chape S, Harrison J, Spalding M, Lysenko I (2005) Measuring the extent and effectiveness of protected areas as an indicator for meeting global biodiversity targets. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society 360:443–455
Cook CN, Hockings M (2011) Opportunities for improving the rigor of management effectiveness evaluations in protected areas. Conservation Letters 4(5):372–382
Davey AG (1998) National system planning for protected areas. Best practice protected area guidelines series no. 1. IUCN, Gland, p 71
Ervin J (2003a) Rapid assessment and prioritization of protected area management (RAPPAM) methodology. WWF, Gland, p 50
Ervin J (2003b) Rapid assessment of protected area management effectiveness in four countries. BioScience 53(9):833–841
Goodman PS (2003a) Assessing management effectiveness and setting priorities in protected areas in KwaZulu-Natal. BioScience 53(9):843–850
Goodman PS (2003b) South Africa: management effectiveness assessment of protected areas in KwaZulu-Natal using WWF’s RAPPAM methodology. WWF, Gland, p 29
Hockings M, Stolton S, Dudley N (2000) Evaluating effectiveness: a framework for assessing the management of protected areas. Best practice protected guidelines series no. 6. IUCN, Gland, p 121
Hockings M, Stolton S, Leverington F, Dudley N, Courrau J (2006) Evaluating effectiveness: a framework for assessing management effectiveness of protected areas, 2nd edn. IUCN, Gland, p 121
Lacerda L, Schmitt K, Cutter P, Meas S (2004) Management effectiveness assessment of the system of protected areas in Cambodia using WWF’s RAPPAM methodology. Ministry of Environment, Biodiversity and Protected Areas Management Project, Phnom Penh, p 27
Leverington F, Hockings M, Pavese H, Lemos Costa K, Courrau J (2008) Management effectiveness evaluation in protected areas—a global study. Overview of approaches and methodologies. Supplementary report no. 1. IUCN WCPA, TNC, WWF University of Queensland, Gatton, p 192
Leverington F, Lemos Costa K, Pavese H, Lisle A, Hockings M (2010) A global analysis of protected area management effectiveness. Environmental Management 46:685–698
Li D, Zhou J, Dong K, Wu B, Zhu C (2003) China: management effectiveness assessment of protected areas in the upper Yangtze ecoregion using WWF’s RAPPAM methodology. WWF, Gland, p 25
Lockwood M, Worboys G, Kothari A (2006) Managing protected areas: a global guide. Earthscan, Sterling, p 832
Lu D, Wang M (2006) A preliminary study of assessing management effectiveness for the natural protected area: a case study of Wu-Wei-Kang wildlife Refuge in Ilan, Taiwan. Journal of National Park 16(2):85–100 (in Chinese)
Marques AS, Ramos TB, Caeiro S, Costa MH (2011) Adaptive-participative sustainability indicators in marine protected areas: design and communication. Ocean and Coastal Management
McNonald RI, Boucher TM (2011) Global development and the future of the protected area strategy. Biological Conservation 144:383–392
Quan J, Ouyang Z, Xu W (2009) Methodology for rapid assessment and prioritization of protected area management and its application. Chinese Journal of Ecology 28(6):1206–1212 (in Chinese)
Salafsky N, Salzer D, Stattersfield A, Hilton-Taylor C, Neugarten R, Butchart S, Collen B, Cox N, Master L, O’Connor S, Wilkie D (2008) A standard lexicon for biodiversity conservation: unified classifications of threats and actions. Conservation Biology 22(4):897–911
Stanciu E, Steindlegger G (2006) RAPPAM methodology implementation in Romania. WWF Gland, Switzerland, p 61
Stem C, Margoluis R, Salafsky N, Marcia B (2005) Monitoring and evaluation in conservation: a review of trends and approaches. Conservation Biology 19(2):295–309
Stoll-Kleemann S (2010) Evaluation of management effectiveness in protected areas: methodologies and results. Basic and Applied Ecology 11:377–382
Sushila CN (2006) Nepal: management effectiveness assessment of protected areas using WWF’s RAPPAM methodology. WWF Nepal Program, Kathmandu, p 33
Tshering K (2003) Bhutan: management effectiveness assessment of four protected areas using WWF’s RAPPAM methodology. WWF, Gland, p 27
Tyrlyshkin V, Blagovidov A, Belokurov A (2003) Russia: management effectiveness assessment of protected areas using WWF’s RAPPAM methodology. WWF, Gland, p 32
Worboy GL, Winkler C, Lockwood M (2006) Threats to protected areas. In: Lockwood M, Worboys G, Kothari A (eds) Managing protected areas—a global guide. Earthscan, London, pp 223–261
Acknowledgments
The research was sponsored by the Taiwanese National Science Council (93-2415-H-002-022-SSS) and Forestry Bureau (97-FD-03.1-Con-20). The authors are appreciative of those who helped us in the field, particularly the local residents concerned in each case study. Thanks to Pei-Hsing Hsu, Wei-Lin Chen, Ying-Tzu Chen, Hsin-Hsin Lai and Kai-Fang Cheng for their help in preparing figures and tables.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Lu, DJ., Kao, CW. & Chao, CL. Evaluating the Management Effectiveness of Five Protected Areas in Taiwan Using WWF’s RAPPAM. Environmental Management 50, 272–282 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-012-9875-9
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-012-9875-9