Threatened species lists as tools of environmental governance in South Africa
No Thumbnail Available
Date
2009-09-10T08:20:49Z
Authors
Friedmann, Yolan
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Abstract
Formal environmental governance systems mostly comprise the policy and
regulatory frameworks that determine natural resource access, ownership and
benefit sharing. Outside of this framework, civil society groups and academics
also develop systems and frameworks to support and guide decision‐making
around natural resource use and management. The environmental governance
frameworks around the assessment and management of threatened species in
South Africa provides the specific context for this report, which evaluates how
the regulatory framework developed for threatened species listing and
management in South Africa operates in comparison to the framework
developed by scientists for this key aspect of threatened species conservation.
The findings are contextualised within an examination of some of the global
approaches to the development and application of threatened species lists and
the overarching framework of environmental governance globally and in South
Africa.
This report uses the South African Red Data List of mammals and the subset of
mammals listed in the national list of Threatened or Protected Species (ToPS) list
to investigate the different approaches taken to developing threatened species lists, and their supporting frameworks. To do this, the report includes a parallel
evaluation of these South African species listing processes, and a critique of their
strengths and weaknesses to inform a discussion around the possible nexus
between science‐based species lists and those designed with a regulatory
function. An analysis of the institutional relationships underpinning the
prevailing South African biodiversity conservation paradigm is also attempted.
Some recommendations as to how both listing processes can either be improved
or aligned are finally made, along with suggestions for altering the institutional
relationships that characterise these processes. These recommendations include
effective consultative processes which build on existing bodies of knowledge and share ideologies, perceptions, needs and issues; the development of sound,
scientifically informed and widely communicated processes for developing the
listing criteria; a mechanism to delist species based on these criteria; a reevaluation
of the current terminology used in the ToPS List and regulations; the
development of possible enforceable regulations and policies which reduce
conflict and administrative complications at the provincial level; and stimulating
fresh debate around the practicality of producing both national and provincial
lists. The findings suggest that a merger of the two listing processes and
functions is not necessarily required as long as there is clear delineation between
their intended purpose and fundamental composition.
These suggested recommendations are made to help inform future revisions of
local threatened species lists by contextualising them within the current
framework of thinking about environmental governance in South Africa and how
this is developing. The overall aim is to improve the relevance, reliability and
credibility of the assessment processes that are used for biodiversity research,
planning, management and regulation.