Charles Darwin University

CDU eSpace
Institutional Repository

 
CDU Staff and Student only
 

Cornerstones of biodiversity conservation? Comparing the management effectiveness of Kruger and Kakadu National Parks, two key savanna reserves

Parr, C, Woinarski, J and Pienaar, D (2009). Cornerstones of biodiversity conservation? Comparing the management effectiveness of Kruger and Kakadu National Parks, two key savanna reserves. Biodiversity and Conservation,18(13):3643-3662.

Document type: Journal Article

IRMA ID A00005xPUB11
Title Cornerstones of biodiversity conservation? Comparing the management effectiveness of Kruger and Kakadu National Parks, two key savanna reserves
Author Parr, C
Woinarski, J
Pienaar, D
Journal Name Biodiversity and Conservation
Publication Date 2009
Volume Number 18
Issue Number 13
ISSN 1572-9710   (check CDU catalogue open catalogue search in new window)
Scopus ID 2-s2.0-79952623787
Start Page 3643
End Page 3662
Total Pages 20
Place of Publication Netherlands
Publisher Springer Netherlands
HERDC Category C1 - Journal Article (DEST)
Abstract How effective are large, well-resourced protected areas at achieving biodiversity conservation goals? In this study we critically review biodiversity research and management practice in two of the world’s premier savanna reserves (Kruger National Park, South Africa and Kakadu National Park, Australia) by exploring management approaches to three shared conservation issues: fire, alien species and threatened species. These management approaches contrast sharply between the two reserves, with Kruger having notably more detailed and prescribed planning for biodiversity conservation. Overall assessment of the effectiveness of management is hampered by limited available information on trends for native species and threatening processes, but in general it is far more straightforward to understand the management framework and to measure biodiversity conservation performance for Kruger than for Kakadu. We conclude that biodiversity conservation outcomes are most likely to be related to the adequacy of dedicated resources and of monitoring programs, the explicit identification of clear objectives with associated performance indicators, and the considered application of management prescriptions. In Kakadu particularly, conflicting park objectives (e.g., biodiversity and cultural management) can reduce the effectiveness of biodiversity efforts. However, we recognize that for the long-term persistence of these large conservation areas and hence for biodiversity conservation, it is critical to include consideration of social context.
Keywords adaptive management
monitoring
protected areas
strategic planning
threats
DOI http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10531-009-9669-4   (check subscription with CDU E-Gateway service for CDU Staff and Students  check subscription with CDU E-Gateway in new window)
 
Versions
Version Filter Type
Access Statistics: 78 Abstract Views  -  Detailed Statistics
Created: Mon, 01 Mar 2010, 23:00:36 CST