云南大学工商管理与旅游管理学院,昆明 650091
International peace parks: Concept distinction, basic characteristics and research issues
WUXinzhi收稿日期:2018-04-21
网络出版日期:2018-10-20
版权声明:2018《地理研究》编辑部《地理研究》编辑部 所有
基金资助:
作者简介:
-->
展开
摘要
关键词：
Abstract
Keywords：
-->0
PDF (644KB)元数据多维度评价相关文章收藏文章
本文引用格式导出EndNoteRisBibtex收藏本文-->
主旨聚焦：在当前“一带一路”建设推动沿线各国共同发展的历史背景下,将“国际和平公园”概念引入国内旅游地理学界并促进其落地生根,无疑将具有积极的战略意义和重要的学术价值。
1 引言
跨越国家政治边界的“和平公园”或保护区在国外已经有很长一段发展历史。1924年,为解决边界争端,波兰和捷克斯洛伐克两国政府签署了克拉科夫协议（Krakow Protocol）,次年又通过签署一项附加议定书,拟在Pieniny山脉共同建设一个跨国界自然公园,并最终在1932年建成欧洲第一个跨界保护区[1]。同年,分别位于加拿大、美国境内的沃特顿湖国家公园（Waterton Lakes National Park）与冰川国家公园（Glacier National Park）合并为沃特顿—冰川国际和平公园（Waterton-Glacier International Peace Park）,其成立时间仅比欧洲首个跨界保护区早一个月,被公认为世界第一个跨界保护区,也是第一个“和平公园”[1,2,3,4]。加美两国联合打造该“和平公园”,不仅考虑到开展生态保护跨境合作的需要,还以此来象征并进一步增进双方的和平友好关系[5,6]。然而,在此后的数十年时间里,受世界政治局势影响,“和平公园”并没有产生明显的带动效应。到了20世纪80年代,在世界自然保护联盟（IUCN）的积极推动下,“和平公园”（Peace Park）这一概念正式出现并广受关注,此类跨境合作保护项目也因此在全球范围内获得迅速发展[5,7]。相关统计数据显示,1988年全球已建成和具有发展潜力的跨国界保护区总数为59个,到1997年达136个,2007年则增长至227个,并广泛分布于北美洲、中南美洲、欧洲、非洲和亚洲[8,9]。跨国界“和平公园”或保护区的兴起吸引了许多具有地理学、环境学、旅游学、管理学、社会学、政治学等不同学科背景的国外****的浓厚兴趣。****们从区域或社区发展[7,10-12]、旅游开发[13,14,15]、地缘关系[16,17,18]、边界效应[19,20]、全球或合作治理[21,22,23]、社区参与[24,25,26]、资源管理[27]、政治生态学[28]、国家安全与管控[29]等不同视角进行了广泛讨论。因此,多学科交叉优势在本领域的研究中得到凸显。但另一方面,国外****多基于具体的案例地进行探讨和分析,有关概念、特征等方面的基础理论却缺乏系统研究,致使不少理论问题尚未取得一致意见。以概念使用为例,目前这一领域还没有一个被广泛接受的概念,在术语使用方面更是存在许多混乱[8,30]。这显然不利于研究工作的进一步开展,也不利于研究成果的相互交流与借鉴。
跟国外相比,中国在该领域的实践发展仍处于初级阶段,理论研究也才刚刚起步,但发展前景一片光明。在实践发展方面,近年来中国高度重视生态保护的跨境合作。根据环保部于2010年出台的《中国生物多样性保护战略与行动计划（2011-2030年）》,中国将“在乌苏里江、内蒙古达赉湖、内蒙古乌拉特、新疆阿尔泰、新疆夏尔希里、新疆红其拉甫山口、西藏珠峰、图们江下游等地区研究建立跨国界保护区”列入优先行动计划。与此同时,自20世纪90年代以来,中国先后与蒙古、俄罗斯、老挝、越南等周边国家签署了《关于建立中、蒙、俄共同自然保护区的协定》《中俄关于兴凯湖自然保护区协定》《中国西双版纳尚勇—老挝南塔南木哈联合保护区域合作协议》《中越合作保护和开发德天（板约）瀑布旅游资源协定》等协议,并在东北和西南地区建成了若干个跨国界保护区,其中包括最早于1994年建成的中蒙俄达乌尔国际保护区（Dauria International Protected Area, DIPA）。随着“一带一路”理念深入人心,预计中国还将与更多邻国开展合作,共同推进跨国界保护区建设。另一方面,理论研究工作进展明显滞后,难以满足实践发展的需要。从目前为数不多的相关学术文献来看[31,32,33],国内较早涉足此领域的主要是从事环境保护研究工作的****。他们着重介绍国外跨界保护区的研究进展,并结合国内实际情况对中国未来研究提出展望。
基于上述分析,在“一带一路”建设背景下,为适应中国不断加强对外交流与合作的发展需要,统一使用“国际和平公园”这一术语,并尝试将其概念引入国内旅游地理学领域。在厘清相关概念基础上,提出国际和平公园的定义并探讨其基本特征,并提出一些研究议题供学界参考。
2 国际和平公园的相关概念辨析
根据国外当前的研究情况,跟国际和平公园有关的概念和术语不下10个,其中比较常用的是：① 跨界（境）保护区;② 跨境公园;③ “和平公园”。与之相对应的英文表述分别为：① Transboundary Protected Area（TBPA）、Transboundary Conservation Area（TBCA）或Transfrontier Conservation Area（TFCA）;② Transfrontier Park（TFP）;③ Peace Park或Park for Peace。这些概念和术语在内涵上不尽相同,但许多****却经常交替使用[7,27]。基于当代中国语境,结合前人的研究成果,在厘清几个相关概念基础上提出国际和平公园的定义。2.1 保护区
根据IUCN在1994年提出的定义,保护区（protected area）是陆地上和/或海洋中一个主要致力于保护和维持生物多样性以及自然和相关文化资源,并通过法律或其他有效手段进行管理的区域[8]。2008年,IUCN采纳了Dudley提出的新定义,将保护区界定为一个被明确划定、认可和管理的地理空间,该空间通过法律或其他有效手段来实现对自然及相关生态系统和文化价值的长久保护[1]。2.2 跨界（境）保护区与跨境公园
2.2.1 跨界保护区 跨界保护区（Transboundary Protected Area,TBPA）是保护区的一种特殊类型[31]。按照IUCN在2001年给出的定义,它指的是陆地上和/或海洋中一个跨越国家、国内不同行政区和/或国家主权或管辖范围外区域之间的一条或多条边界线的区域,该区域各组成部分主要用于生物多样性以及自然和相关文化资源的保护和维持,并通过法律或其他有效手段进行合作管理[8,32,33]。在该术语中,“boundary”一词的含义较为宽泛,不单包括国家之间的边界,还包括国家内部不同行政区之间的边界,甚至还可能是组织机构之间的“边界”[8,31]。不过,国外****主要关注的是跨越国家边界的保护区。为适应现实发展需要,IUCN在2008年对保护区定义进行“升级”的同时,将跨界保护区（TBPA）的定义修订为：一个具有明确界限的地理空间,该空间内的保护区彼此进行跨越一条或多条国家边界线的生态连接并涉及某种形式的合作[1]。根据IUCN所作的说明,“boundary”仅限于主权国家之间的边界,不再包括国家内部的边界,尽管IUCN也承认国内不同地区开展跨界合作的价值[1]。按照这一新定义,TBPA实际上就是跨国界保护区（或者称为跨境保护区）。在修订“boundary”和TPBA定义的同时,IUCN还提出一个外延比TBPA更宽泛的跨界保护区新概念：Transboundary Conservation Area（TBCA）,其基本含义是为实现保护目标而开展跨国界合作的区域[1]。为了便于区别,本文将TBPA称为狭义上的跨界保护区,而将TBCA称为广义上的跨界保护区。TBCA可分为三种基本类型,除了TBPA之外,还包括跨界保护陆地和/或海洋景观（Transboundary Conservation Landscape and/or Seascape,TBCL/S）以及跨界迁徙保护性区域（Transboundary Migration Conservation Area,TBMCA）[1],三者具有一定的差异性（表1）。
Tab. 1
表1
表1广义的跨界保护区各类型重要特征比较[
Tab. 1Comparison of key characteristics of types of TBCAs[
| 特征 | TBPA | TBCL/S | TBMCA |
|---|---|---|---|
| 开展跨国界合作 | 是 | 是 | 是 |
| 包含保护区 | 是 | 是 | 不一定 |
| 包含未受保护但进行可持续管理的区域 | 否 | 是 | 不一定 |
| 有共享的生态系统 | 是 | 是 | 不一定 |
| 区域内各组成单元相邻 | 是 | 是 | 不一定 |
| 在物种/生境管理方面开展跨国界合作 | 是 | 是 | 是 |
| 对迁徙物种进行保护是合作的主要原因 | 不一定 | 不一定 | 是 |
| 在日常管理中开展跨国界合作,并加强社区关系、游客管理、安全保障等方面的工作 | 是 | 是 | 不一定 |
新窗口打开
2.2.2 南部非洲语境下的跨境保护区与跨境公园 国家之间的边界均可用“boundary”和“frontier”来表示,但相对“boundary”而言,“frontier”的使用范围较小,多出现在研究南部非洲案例地的学术文献中。相关概念主要有跨境保护区（Transfrontier Conservation Area,TFCA）和跨境公园（Transfrontier Park,TFP）。TFCA的概念和广义的跨界保护区（TBCA）相近,一般是指包含一个或多个保护区,跨越两国或更多国家边界的范围较大的生态区[13,34]。TFP的含义则跟狭义的跨界保护区（TBPA）类似,指的是跨越国家边界并由相邻国家派代表组成合作机构进行统一管理的野生生物保护区[26]。除了概念上的一些差异,Munthali还从发展角度阐述了二者的主要区别：TFPs由国家控制和管理,面临着管理低效等一些挑战;TFCAs则在生态保护和多种资源利用方面可吸纳政府、私营部门、地方社区、非政府组织等更多利益相关者的参与,因而对促进生物多样性可持续保护和切实缓解农村贫困问题来说是一种更可取的发展模式[34]。
2.3 和平公园与国际和平公园
2.3.1 和平公园 和平公园通常是指国内那些以和平为主题的保护性公共区域。根据修建目的,这类主题型公园大体上又可分为两种基本类型：纪念性和平公园与象征性和平公园。纪念性和平公园主要是为了纪念战争、战乱等事件而进行修建,如义乌市为纪念侵华日军细菌战遇难者而修建的和平公园。对于此类和平公园,联合国和平大学用“Peace Park”来表述[1,8,30]。象征性和平公园则通过实现人与自然和谐共生、开展和平宣传活动等多种途径致力于促进人类和平发展,但其“促进人类和平”的功能更多地带有象征意义,如中国首个获得世界和平旅游研究所（IIPT）授牌的普洱太阳河世界和平公园。当然,也有的和平公园兼具纪念性和象征性特征。但不管是哪种类型,这些以和平为主题的公园都与跨界保护无关。在跨界保护领域,还存在另外一种“和平公园”,它指的是那些主要致力于生物多样性以及自然和相关文化资源的保护和维持,并为区域和平与合作贡献力量的跨界保护 区[8,31],故而与国内通常所说的和平公园有着本质上的区别。从1997年开始,IUCN便一直用“Park for Peace”来表述跨界保护领域的“和平公园”,以便区别于联合国和平大学所使用的“Peace Park”[1]。但是,在跨界保护领域相关研究中,国外大多数****不但不作区分,反而更广泛地使用后者。
2.3.2 国际和平公园 国际和平公园（International Peace Park,IPP）在概念内涵上等同于跨界保护领域的“和平公园”。综合各方研究,可对其概念进行如下界定：国际和平公园是指基于共同保护和管理生物多样性及自然、文化资源并致力于促进、庆祝和/或纪念和平与合作,由两个或更多国家联合设立的跨界保护区（TBCA）[1,6,7,35,36]。本文倾向于使用这一术语,主要基于两方面的考虑：一是加上“国际”二字突出跨境性,同时便于与国内那些以和平为主题的公园相区别;二是第一个跨界保护区沃特顿—冰川国际和平公园正是以此命名并在世界范围内享有盛誉,沿用此名有利于进一步推广。
至于国际和平公园与跨界保护区之间的关系,目前国外学界存在不同观点。有的****将二者同等看待,认为“和平公园”是跨界保护区的俗称[29];有的****则明确指出,不是所有的跨界保护区都是国际和平公园[7,35],即二者存在从属关系。但如果按照IUCN对相关概念的界定及修订情况,两者并非简单的同等或从属关系,而应体现为以下关系：首先,国际和平公园与广义上的跨界保护区（TBCA）是一种从属关系,前者是后者的一种特殊类型;其次,国际和平公园与狭义上的跨界保护区（TBPA）是一种交叉关系,主要原因是国际和平公园可适用于TBCA三种基本类型（TBPA、TBCL/S、TBMCA）中的任何一种[1]（图1）。
显示原图|下载原图ZIP|生成PPT图1国际和平公园与跨界保护区的关系示意图
-->Fig. 1Diagrammatic representation of the relationship between IPP and TBCA/TBPA
-->
值得一提的是,在实践发展中,尽管有许多跨越国界的保护区在名称上并没有出现“国际和平公园”字样,但由于它们在实施跨境合作保护的同时致力于促进、庆祝和/或纪念和平与合作,因而实际上都属于国际和平公园。
3 国际和平公园的基本特征
与国内一般的保护区或公园相比,国际和平公园具有一些明显特征,尤其表现在空间分布、发展目标、合作水平、联合管理等几个方面。3.1 空间分布的跨境性
国际和平公园具有空间分布上的跨境性,即国际和平公园要跨越两个甚至更多国家之间的政治边界线。以南部非洲为例,建成于2000年并成为非洲第一个国际和平公园的卡格拉格帝跨国公园（Kgalagadi Transfrontier Park）跨越南非和博茨瓦纳两国之间的边界线[7,22];著名的大林波波跨国公园（Great Limpopo Transfrontier Park）横跨南非、津巴布韦、莫桑比克3个国家[10];卡万戈—赞比西跨境保护区（Kavango-Zambezi TFCA）则横跨安哥拉、博茨瓦纳、纳米比亚、赞比亚、津巴布韦等5个赞比西河沿岸国家[37]。3.2 发展目标的多维性
国际和平公园具有发展目标上的多维性,即国际和平公园有助于实现多重发展目标,因而它被许多发展中国家寄予厚望。国际和平公园的发展目标主要涉及生态环境、国际关系和区域发展三个方面：第一,通过消除边界障碍来恢复野生动物的迁徙路线并形成完整的生态系统,从而促使生态资源得到有效保护;第二,通过开展生态保护的跨境合作来促进邻国之间友好往来、和平相处;第三,通过生态旅游开发推动当地经济社会发展[3,6,14,21,27,30]。如果说前两个为基本目标,最后一个则为更高目标。此外,IUCN曾于2001年提出“和平公园”的九大具体目标,内容包括对生态资源的长期合作保护,在有关各方之间建立良好的合作关系,促进矛盾和冲突的解决,促进自然资源的公平与可持续利用,促进有关各方的跨界利益共享等多个方面[8]。3.3 合作水平的多样性
国际和平公园具有合作水平上的多样性,即国际和平公园所涉及的跨境合作表现出不同的深度和广度,这种情况在跨界保护领域广泛存在。研究发现,国际邻接保护区（internationally adjoining protected areas）之间的合作水平可分为从“无合作”到“充分合作”6个层次（表2）。当然,彼此无合作的国际邻接保护区构不成国际和平公园,但可以看作是具有发展潜力的国际和平公园。一般来说,国际邻接保护区要被认定为国际和平公园或跨界保护区,至少应达到“通讯”合作水平[8]。从国际和平公园实践发展来看,目前能够达到较高合作水平的还只是少数,如位于美国—加拿大边境的国际和平花园（International Peace Garden）、罗斯福坎波贝洛国际公园（Roosevelt Campobello International Park）以及沃特顿—冰川国际和平公园[39]。Tab. 2
表2
表2国际邻接保护区之间的合作水平[
Tab. 2Levels of cooperation between internationally adjoining protected areas[
| 合作水平 | 主要特征 |
|---|---|
| 水平0：无合作 | 两个保护区的工作人员从来不进行交流或会面,也不就任何具体问题开展合作。 |
| 水平1：通讯 | 保护区之间进行一些相互交流活动（每年至少进行1次）;双方有时会共享信息,在采取可能影响对方的行动时进行相互通报。 |
| 水平2：咨询 | 保护区之间的交流更加频繁（每年至少3次）,并至少有两项不同的活动开展合作;通常会对影响对方的行动进行通报。 |
| 水平3：合作 | 保护区之间交流频繁（至少每2个月交流1次、每年会面3次）;双方至少在4项不同的活动中积极开展合作;有时对规划进行协调并在采取行动之前与对方进行磋商。 |
| 水平4：规划协调 | 两个保护区之间经常保持联系,定期举行会谈,发生突发事件时相互通报;至少共同开展5项不同的活动;双方通常对规划进行协调,经常将两地作为一个生态单元进行规划。 |
| 水平5：充分合作 | 两个保护区的规划完全进行整合,如果条件允许便基于同一生态系统进行联合决策并追求共同目标;有时会进行联合管理并成立一个联合委员会,该委员会至少在6项活动中为跨境合作提供建议。 |
新窗口打开
3.4 联合管理的复杂性
国际和平公园具有联合管理上的复杂性,即国际和平公园的联合管理比国内一般的保护区或公园要复杂得多。这是由于国际和平公园会涉及不同国家以及众多利益相关者,在合作管理过程中会受各种因素影响,如各合作方利益与价值观的契合程度,各合作方最高层政府的支持力度,各合作方经济实力及社会文化的差异性,资金来源及其保障情况,政治形势的发展演变,地方社区的参与程度,国家安全监管需要[10,20,24,29,35,40-43]。一旦参与各方在某方面出现难以调和的矛盾,联合管理就可能陷入困境。以大林波波跨国公园为例,南非比津巴布韦和莫桑比克拥有更多话语权,占据更大优势,从而对三方联合管理产生不利影响[7,21]。再如,卡格拉格帝跨国公园在联合管理过程中,面临着如何平衡政府与地方社区的权力关系,提高社区居民的参与度,满足不同群体的利益诉求等诸多难题[22,26]。4 国际和平公园的研究议题
从旅游地理学的角度来看,国际和平公园无疑是一种特殊的、颇具开发价值的生态型跨境旅游目的地,同时也是一个值得中国旅游地理****去开拓的新领域。为此,本文着眼于未来,重点提出以下几个研究议题供学界参考。4.1 项目可行性研究
重要项目在正式启动之前往往需要进行可行性研究,国际和平公园也不例外。在国外,随着国际和平公园理念的不断普及,一些****将目光转向那些还存在政治或军事冲突但却拥有一定数量自然资源的边境地区,并探讨这些地区建设国际和平公园的可能性,如朝韩边境的非军事区（Demilitarized Zone,DMZ）[30,44-46]、印巴边境的锡亚琴冰川（Siachen Glacier）[16,17]、克罗地亚与斯洛文尼亚之间的皮兰海湾（Piran Bay）[18]。从国内的情况来看,根据联合国环境规划署世界保护监测中心（UNEP-WCMC）于2007年公布的统计数据,中国与哈萨克斯坦、蒙古、俄罗斯、朝鲜、巴基斯坦、印度、尼泊尔、缅甸、老挝、越南等国交界所形成的国际邻接保护区联合体有17个之多[9],但目前真正实施跨境合作的毕竟还是少数。当然,也不是所有的国际邻接保护区联合体都有条件建设国际和平公园,需要进行可行性分析。除此之外,针对南海领土争端这一复杂问题[47],在维护中国主权利益的前提下,可考虑推进国际海洋和平公园项目的可行性研究工作。4.2 规划与建设研究
由于涉及众多不同层级、不同类型的利益相关者,国际和平公园规划与建设可谓是一项复杂的系统工程。为了让各方在利益及价值取向上达成共识,协调工作必不可少。总体而言,这项工程主要包括两个方面的任务：一是从战略全局出发,在国家层面推进国际和平公园发展规划的编制和实施工作,为此需要对沿边省区及相关邻国开展经济发展、社会文化、安全局势、资源环境等方面的调查研究;二是基于“人地关系”角度,与相关邻国一道共同推进单个国际和平公园的规划与建设,为此需要对发展定位、功能布局、运行管理、机构设置、项目策划、参与机制、保护模式、法律适用、保障措施等多方面进行深入探讨。目前,国外学界已经在这方面做了大量研究,许多成果值得国内****去比较和借鉴。4.3 开发与保护研究
国际和平公园并不是封闭的,可以进行适当开发利用,当然其前提条件是不能破坏生态环境及相关资源,而要处理好开发与保护的关系。因此,发展生态旅游或自然旅游成为国际和平公园最佳也是最普遍的开发利用方式。Timothy等的研究表明,国际政治边界及其环境本身具有许多独特性,可构成旅游资源[48,49]。如果相邻国家共同开发这些旅游资源,不仅能增强游客的旅游体验,还能为当地居民提供直接参与跨国界旅游开发和管理的机遇[6,20]。但有的****在对一些国际和平公园案例地进行研究时,却发现生态旅游开发存在不少问题[13,14,24]。对此,旅游地理****可充分发挥自身的学科优势,在旅游者行为、旅游资源评价、旅游项目策划、旅游线路设计、旅游环境容量、当地社区参与等方面进行深入研究。4.4 监测与评估研究
作为一种能够同时实现多种发展目标的“工具”,国际和平公园得到了许多国家政府、非政府组织以及专家****的大力支持。然而,对其功能表示怀疑甚至否定的****也不在少数。例如,通过对南部非洲案例地进行分析,一些****发现国际和平公园在带动地方经济社会发展和实现非洲复兴方面的作用并不明显[7,11,27];而在另一些****看来,国际和平公园甚至给当地居民生计和社会文化带来严重的负面影响[12,50,51]。此外,根据Barquet的研究,位于中美洲的尼加拉瓜和哥斯达黎加曾合作建设的国际和平公园非但没能给两国带来和平,反而激化了双方的矛盾[52]。这其实反映出国际和平公园会受到诸多情景因素的影响,因而在不同区域它所发挥的作用是有差异的[53]。这同时也提醒我们：必须高度重视国际和平公园的监测与评估研究,以便全面掌握它在建设和发展过程中可能产生的各种负面效应,并及时采取有效的应对措施。5 结论与讨论
在国外“和平公园”或跨界保护区研究领域,概念不统一和术语使用混乱已成为一个亟需解决的问题。为此,本文统一使用“国际和平公园”这一术语,在对相关概念进行系统梳理的基础上探讨了国际和平公园的基本特征,并得出以下主要研究结论。① 根据国外研究现状,所谓的“跨界保护区”,实际上指的是跨国界保护区或跨境保护区,它可分为广义上的概念（TBCA）和狭义上的概念（TBPA）;② 国际和平公园是广义跨界保护区（TBCA）的一种特殊类型,它与国内通常所说的和平公园有着本质上的区别;③ 国际和平公园具有空间分布的跨境性、发展目标的多维性、合作水平的多样性、联合管理的复杂性等4个基本特征。对中国而言,国际和平公园还是一个新鲜事物,尚未引起社会的关注。在当前中国正努力提高对外开放水平、致力于构建人类命运共同体的时代背景下,将这一新概念引入国内并促使其落地生根,是很有必要的,也是可行的。一方面,中国通过积极实施“一带一路”倡议,坚持从排他封闭走向包容开放,强调各国间的合作共赢[54],这为国际和平公园的发展提供了非常有利的政治环境。另一方面,近年来,中国一些地区陆续修建和平公园,其中包括“世界和平公园”。当然,国内所修建的“世界和平公园”同样是一种以和平为主题的公园,与国际和平公园截然不同,但也反映出人们对和平发展的向往与追求,而国际和平公园的建设正需要这样的民意基础。与此同时,为了促进国际和平公园健康发展,需要包括旅游地理****在内的****们发挥各自的学科优势,积极开展相关研究工作。
The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
参考文献 原文顺序
文献年度倒序
文中引用次数倒序
被引期刊影响因子
| [6] | . The role of tour guides in conveying information, offering explanations, and developing narratives has become a contemporary research theme. The guide is introduced as a translator of the culture, who has the crucial task of selecting, glossing, and interpreting sights. The study will examine how the Island of Peace—a border site between former adversaries, Israel and Jordan, is introduced to Israeli tourists by Israeli guides and what messages the guides deliver to their captive audience. Based on participant observation of the guided tours in the site the article will show that the guides’ narratives and messages in many cases do not portray the site as a site of peace (as its name suggests), but mostly as a site with a past of tension and conflict. |
| [7] | . The pursuit of an African Renaissance has become an important aspect of regional cooperation between South Africa and its neighbours. Transfrontier conservation areas, or 'Peace Parks' as they are popularly called, have been identified as key instruments to promote the African Renaissance dream, and are increasingly advocated and justified on this basis. By fostering joint conservation (and tourism) development in Southern Africa's marginalised border regions, Peace Parks are claimed to further international peace, regional cooperation and poverty reduction, and thus serve basic ideals of the African Renaissance. This article critically explores this assumption. Using the joint South African-Mozambican-Zimbabwean Great Limpopo Park as a case study, it argues that in reality the creation of Peace Parks hardly stimulates and possibly even undermines the realisation of the African Renaissance ideals of regional cooperation, emancipation, cultural reaffirmation, sustainable economic development and democratisation. So far, their achievement has been severely hindered by domination of national interests, insufficient community consultation, and sensitive border issues such as the illegal flows of goods and migrants between South Africa and neighbouring countries. Furthermore, exacerbation of inter-state differences induced by power imbalances in the region, and harmonisation of land use and legal systems across boundaries, are increasingly becoming sources of conflict and controversy. Some of these problems are so severe, we conclude, that they might eventually even undermine support for African Renaissance as a whole. Utmost care is thus required to optimally use the chances that Peace Parks do offer in furthering an African Renaissance. |
| [8] | , |
| [9] | |
| [10] | . The interface between local communities and transfrontier parks has received considerable attention, yet the utility of the transfrontier concept in developing livelihoods and environmental sustainability in southern Africa remains questionable. This paper argues that the benefits of transfrontier parks at regional, national and community levels cannot be overstated; neither should the problems be underestimated. Transfrontier parks may be viable alternatives in achieving development that is sustainable by protecting southern Africa's fragile environments, generating more funds and bringing significant and major improvements to the lives of the rural poor. At the same time, transfrontier parks raise issues of sovereignty of national governments, create complexity in governance processes and can lead to the needs of rural communities being sacrificed. Therefore, there is a need to find ways to reconcile conflictual and sometimes controversial circumstances in the establishment of transfrontier parks and, inquire further into the programmatic blueprints for transfrontier initiatives. |
| [11] | . Conservation is increasingly promoted as a sustainable development instrument in Southern Africa, particularly for remote rural communities. Conservation and development schemes are marketed as community-based projects providing local empowerment through the creation of jobs and cash stemming from protected areas, as well as increased biodiversity protection by local communities whose jobs are dependent on the resource. Transfrontier Conservation Areas (TFCAs), mega Peace Parks that cross international borders, are one of the latest conservation and development paradigms in Southern Africa. TFCAs have gained broad support, including government recognition as a development tool. However, there has been minimal research on the impact of TFCAs on local communities. This paper seeks to provide an empirical case study of a South African community bordering the Lubombo TFCA (South Africa, Swaziland, Mozambique). Results are presented that indicate the Mbangweni community in KwaZulu-Natal could experience decreased access to social, natural, and economic resources as a result of the Peace Park. |
| [12] | . |
| [13] | . Tourism in Southern Africa is synonymous with the wildlife safari. In the post-colonial era the establishment of so-called ' peaceparks' that straddle the borders of states has come to be seen as a key not only to increasing tourism in the Southern African region, but also to the modernizing of conservation policies and the development of rural economies. This paper focuses on the global and continental presence of transfrontier conservation areas, the link between conservation and tourism development, and the current factors that constrain and influence the realization of an ' African Dream' -' establishment of the greatest animal kingdom'. The unstable political situation in Zimbabwe and how this negatively affects wildlife conservation and tourism in the Gonarezhou part of the Greater Limpopo Transfrontier Park, serves as a case study. |
| [14] | . |
| [15] | . Community agency and entrepreneurship in ecotourism planning and development in the Great Limpopo Transfrontier Conservation Area. . ???aop.label???. doi: 10.1080/14724049.2015.1041967 |
| [16] | . Abstract Mountains have traditionally been havens for people seeking peace and spiritual solace. Nowhere has this been truer than in the Himalaya, the “Abode of the Gods,” from time immemorial. It is ironic, then, that in the Himalaya (or, to be more exact, in the Karakoram), a bitter, deadly, heroic, and absurd conflict is being fought. For 18 long years, the armed forces of India and Pakistan have fought on the Saltoro Ridge, south of the Siachen Glacier—the highest battlefield in the world. The creation of a Peace Park may contribute to resolving this half-century-old international conflict and preserving a unique high mountain environment currently being subjected to irreparable devastation. |
| [17] | . The peace process between India and Pakistan, which started in 2000, moved very slowly before coming to a standstill following the terror attack on Mumbai in November 2008. This article argues that both these two South Asian neighbours need to focus on new areas of bilateral cooperation, which might help them to build mutual trust and provide much-needed impetus to bring peace in the region. The Indus River Agreement of 1960 between India and Pakistan, with its only focus on water sharing, has not been able to generate positive spin-off effects. If both the countries agree to renegotiate the Indus Agreement into an integrated river basin management mechanism, the benefit-sharing might have other peace-enhancing effects and can contribute to bilateral cooperation in other areas. Besides renegotiating the Indus Treaty, both India and Pakistan may also opt for another resource-based conflict management strategy in their tense border areas. For a quarter of a century, both these countries have been involved in an armed conflict to gain control of the Siachen glacier. If they decide to covert this disputed area as a Peace Park, it may provide an excellent exit strategy for both the armed forces nd the local people will support this move as it will give a boost to eco-tourism in the area. India and Pakistan, by establishing a Peace Park in Siachen and forming a basin-based river management institution on the Indus River, can reduce their trust deficit, which will help them to address their other long-standing bilateral contentious issues. |
| [18] | . 78 The paper examines the dispute between Croatia and Slovenia over Piran Bay. 78 The Adriatic Sea is an important shared economic and ecological asset. 78 Dispute may be diffused by recognising common interests for both countries. 78 The EU provides the frameworks and regional policies to facilitate cooperation. 78 A bi-national, cross-border regional management body may help resolve the conflict. |
| [19] | . This paper examines the role of international boundaries as perceived barriers to tourism. Borders that divide similar cultural groups and where few safety issues exist are the focus of this study. Qualitative data were gathered from visitors at the International Peace Garden on the USA–Canada boundary, and interviews were conducted with administrators and border officials to see whether or not this frontier is perceived to be a barrier to tourism and if so to understand the nature of its barrier functions. For most tourists, the Canada–USA border does not function as a major barrier to travel. However, for a small cohort it does, and the crossing formalities, border officials, and lack of information work together to create a subjective hindrance to travel at a place where good international relations otherwise exist. |
| [20] | . 61This study investigates challenges militating against successful crossborder cooperation between borderlanders in TBPAs.61The study challenges the general conceptualisation of borders as essentially physical entities.61Cognitive borders influence the borderlanders' approach towards establishing crossborder tourism business partnerships.61Spatial-socialisation activities can encourage borderlanders to display approach rather than avoidance behaviour. |
| [21] | . This article examines the potential and problems associated with global environmental governance with particular reference to Transfrontier Conservation Areas (TFCAs) in Southern Africa. By taking a political ecology approach, it reflects on theories and practices of global environmental governance through an analysis of transboundary environmental management. In particular, it examines the politics of the struggle over control of and access to key natural resources and how it impacts on the implementation of transfrontier conservation. In order to do this, this article includes an analysis of the complex role of local and global NGOs, the changing role of the state in relation to international actors, the importance of community based natural resource management, the commitment to tourism to make conservation pay its way and the problems associated with illicit networks of traffickers of wildlife products, cars and people. It is important to investigate the politics of TFCAs because they are part of a wider context of increasing forms of transnational management of the environment; such transnational forms of management are often deemed to be more effective than national level management because of the transboundary nature of environmental problems. This article argues that the assumption that transnational management can be neatly implemented needs rethinking. In particular, it highlights the ways that complex networks of actors constitute a significant challenge to global environmental governance. This in turn raises more general questions about the effectiveness of other forms of global environmental governance centred on managing problems such as climate change, pollution or trafficking of endangered species and tropical hardwoods. |
| [22] | . |
| [23] | . This study describes the governance and management structures of the Curonian Spit World Heritage Site, a transboundary protected area shared by Lithuania and the Russian Federation. Focusing on the national park authorities it presents the site from a local administrative perspective. The paper shows that due to strong state level influence and a lack of full stakeholder inclusion, different philosophies and priorities on both sides of the border challenge common management efforts and co-operation. Presenting the existing problems the paper points out the need for increased efforts at the state level as well as for the full inclusion of local communities to remove obstacles and foster co-operation. Hence, by adapting to certain environmental and transboundary governance principles, conflicts can be avoided and better results achieved. |
| [24] | . Transfrontier cross-border nature conservation has become a fashionable target in many parts of the world, including Southern Africa. Transfrontier conservation initiatives are considered to have great capacity for biodiversity conservation and sustainable tourism development by providing employment and revenue opportunities for poor people and communities. However, many previous studies have indicated that in spite of expectations and rhetoric there is often rather minimal community awareness and participation in conservation management, tourism economy and related opportunities. This study aims to discuss local people perceptions of community participation, opportunities and constraints in sustainable transfrontier tourism in south-eastern Lowveld, Zimbabwe. The results based on community interviews show that the people are aware of the potential role of tourism in improving livelihoods. The major challenge, however, is to address how this can be turned into concrete benefits for households and communities. |
| [25] | . Scenario planning has gained prominence among conservationists and policy-makers as a tool for planning, forecasting and learning about the future. This paper explores how participatory scenario planning was applied as a tool for promoting stakeholder engagement on discussions of desired livelihood futures. The study was conducted in Sengwe Communal lands, an area that falls within the Great Limpopo Transfrontier Conservation Area (GLTFCA). Data collection was based on semi-structured interviews, document reviews, focus group discussions and scenario workshops. Future desirable livelihoods that emerged include tourism enterprise development, small-scale irrigation, wildlife and livestock improvement, and energy generation. Development options imagined by locals are inseparable from contemporary politics of transfrontier conservation area governance requiring researchers to shift roles from being catalysts and knowledge brokers to facilitators of learning and negotiation. This paper contributes to contemporary debates on novel approaches to promote engagement with communities for improving biodiversity conservation and livelihoods in emerging transfrontier conservation areas. |
| [26] | . Local and national public sector stakeholders are considered to be primary stakeholders and their knowledge and support for conservation initiatives of transfrontier parks are important for sustainable management of resources. Hence, it is critical to assess the attitudes and opinions of a major stakeholder group in order to establish partnerships between protected areas (PAs), adjacent communities and other management agencies. This study employed a qualitative inquiry to identify and assess factors that influence public sector stakeholder support for community-based ecotourism (CBE) development and for conservation of the Kgalagadi Transfrontier Park (KTP). In-depth semi-structured interviews were used to solicit data from 15 local and national representatives who have worked or resided in the Kgalagadi region for a period of at least 6 months. Findings revealed variations in opinion between local and national representatives in relation to collaboration and partnership initiatives, conservation projects, park management, tourism development and park benefits to local communities. There was overall uncertainty with respect to the designation of the KTP, since it had generated unfavourable conditions for adjacent local people, local authorities and village leaders. Nearly all local representatives indicated an imbalance with regard to resident collaboration and partnership in KTP conservation-related projects, and the general management activities. The contentions included concerns about land ownership and control, human ildlife interactions, perceptions about communication with park authorities, lack of transparency with respect to activities and inequality of park benefits. Two major policy concerns were a low level of community participation in park activities and a lack of collaboration and communication between management and residents. |
| [27] | . Recent years have witnessed the emergence of an ostensibly surprising coalition of interests around the notion of Transboundary Natural Resource Management (TBNRM) in Southern Africa. Deep green 'bioregionalists', conservation biologists and neo-liberal development advocates have found common cause in espousing the re-establishment of ecological integrity across 'artificial' frontiers and administrative boundaries. TBNRM has effects far beyond the realms of biodiversity protection and 'natural resource management'. It is bound up with regional debates on national sovereignty, land reform and poverty alleviation. This article explores the ideological, political and economic rationales for TBNRM with particular reference to Zimbabwe's involvement in the flagship Great Limpopo Transfrontier Park initiative, spanning Zimbabwe, South Africa and Mozambique. It investigates the competing agendas, and points of conflict surrounding the initiative at global, national and local levels, and explores the potential impact on agrarian livelihoods. |
| [1] | . |
| [2] | . |
| [28] | . |
| [29] | . Concern for environmental protection within an increasingly ‘globalised’ international system has led in many parts of the world to plans for transfrontier conservation areas, commonly known as ‘Peace Parks’. These offer the prospect of providing integrated management for bioregions that have been divided by state frontiers, and reopening animal migration routes. They also promise increased tourist revenues since visitors, too, would be free to benefit from the enhanced transnational space that the parks provide. This paper examines plans for such parks in two regions, Southern Africa and Central America. In practice, these plans have been undermined by the existing uses of transnational space for informal (and often criminal) transfers that themselves benefit from the permeability of frontiers in areas that are weakly controlled by state authorities; these include smuggling, poaching, illegal immigration and the trade in narcotics. Such activities, which likewise derive from ‘globalisation’, generate powerful political interests, both among local communities and more widely. Paradoxically, the creation of Peace Parks requires more, and not less, state control of frontier zones, and raises significant issues for the management or control of globalising forces in weakly administered regions of the developing world. |
| [3] | . An increasingly utilized strategy for expanding conservation in the developing world has been the promotion of protected areas that supersede national borders. Alternatively known as transfrontier biosphere reserves, transfrontier or transboundary conservation areas, or Peace Parks, these protected areas are aggressively advanced by conservation agencies for their purported ecological and economic benefits. This article provides a comparative assessment of two case studies to understand the various impacts of transboundary conservation. The Great Limpopo Transfrontier Park, which unites protected areas in South Africa, Mozambique and Zimbabwe, is contrasted with efforts to protect jaguars along the United States-Mexico border. We argue that while these cases are promising for the purposes of biodiversity protection, they demonstrate that transboundary conservation can minimize political context, contributes to the hegemony of international conservation agendas, and remains closely linked to economic neoliberalism and decentralization in the developing world. |
| [4] | . While the Canadian Pacific instigated the establishment of Banff, Waterton Lakes National Park never had a connection to the Canadian main line. Instead, the Great Northern, the northernmost US transcontinental railroad, stepped in to develop Waterton Lakes and Glacier along the Alberta/Montana borderlands. With the completion of the Prince of Wales Hotel in Waterton Townsite, the railroad integrated the two spaces five years before the parks were formally designated, in 1932, as the world first peace park. While big businesses, like the railroads, participated in the creation and development of parks, decidedly smaller businesses from shops, groceries, restaurants, and hoteliers operating both inside and adjacent to protected spaces also influenced and benefitted from them as well. Waterton Lakes and Glacier, as parks on the periphery of two nations, were profoundly shaped by ideas and actors that migrated across borders just as freely as the flora and fauna these spaces sought to protect. |
| [30] | . Abstract Conflicts remain an integral part in shaping the world. Tensions on the Korean Peninsula are no exceptions. The Korean DMZ (Demilitarized Zone) World Peace Park has been proposed to help obtain peace by erasing the memories of war and creating new beginnings of trust, cooperation, and unity on the Korean Peninsula. With their ties to geographical space and conflict, peace park research provides an excellent platform for both activism and research in positive peace. Little, however, is known about peoples willingness to pay (WTP) for the creation of peace parks, in general, and specifically for the development of the Korean DMZ World Peace Park. Using contingent valuation methods, the weighted average WTP for development of the Peace Park is $49.03 per household per year. It appears South Koreans are willing to pay not only for the conservation of the DMZ, but also for the peace and unification of the Korean Peninsula the Peace Park may bring to the area. |
| [31] | . 跨界保护区是保护区的一种特殊类型,而和平公园是跨界保护区的一种特殊类型.随着国家之间以 及一个国家的不同行政管理区域之间在经济、社会、政治和环境保护工作中深入合作的迫切要求,这类保护区正在蓬勃的兴起.该文主要对它们的形成和发展作一个 简略的介绍,期待引起国内从事保护生物多样性工作的同事和有关方面对它的关注. . 跨界保护区是保护区的一种特殊类型,而和平公园是跨界保护区的一种特殊类型.随着国家之间以 及一个国家的不同行政管理区域之间在经济、社会、政治和环境保护工作中深入合作的迫切要求,这类保护区正在蓬勃的兴起.该文主要对它们的形成和发展作一个 简略的介绍,期待引起国内从事保护生物多样性工作的同事和有关方面对它的关注. |
| [32] | . 随着区域合作和大尺度景观保护的需求不断增加,跨界资源管理越来越受到人们的关注,作为跨界资源管理的一种典型方式,跨界自然保护区正成为保护区研究中的热点问题。在对跨界自然保护区概念、类型及历史发展进行阐述的基础上,分析了建立跨界自然保护区的效益和代价及影响跨界自然保护区成败的因素,指出建立跨界自然保护区可能是在更大尺度上实现生态系统管理和生物多样性保护的有效途径。同时,分析了我国保护区的跨界现状和存在的问题,并对我国不同行政区间展开跨界合作的必要性进行了探讨。最后对跨界保护的未来研究提出展望。 . 随着区域合作和大尺度景观保护的需求不断增加,跨界资源管理越来越受到人们的关注,作为跨界资源管理的一种典型方式,跨界自然保护区正成为保护区研究中的热点问题。在对跨界自然保护区概念、类型及历史发展进行阐述的基础上,分析了建立跨界自然保护区的效益和代价及影响跨界自然保护区成败的因素,指出建立跨界自然保护区可能是在更大尺度上实现生态系统管理和生物多样性保护的有效途径。同时,分析了我国保护区的跨界现状和存在的问题,并对我国不同行政区间展开跨界合作的必要性进行了探讨。最后对跨界保护的未来研究提出展望。 |
| [33] | . 跨界保护区网络是生物多样性保护网络的一种特殊形式，对保护国家或地区边界线附近丰富的生物多样性具有重要意义。构建跨界保护区网络已被列为《生物多样性公约》（Convention on Biological Diversity）框架下“保护区工作组”的一项战略任务，涉及生态、环境、经济、政治等多个领域，成为全球保护区研究领域的热点问题之一。然而，目前我国对跨界保护区的研究尚处于起步阶段，在如何构建不同尺度的跨界保护区网络等方面的研究仍有待进一步加强。在分析了全球、洲际、两个或多个国家和地区之间等不同尺度跨界保护区网络研究的基础上，综述了国内外基于“节点”-“廊道”模式的跨界保护区网络构建研究进展，并结合我国跨界保护区网络建设的实际情况，对我国未来跨界保护区网络构建研究进行了展望。 . 跨界保护区网络是生物多样性保护网络的一种特殊形式，对保护国家或地区边界线附近丰富的生物多样性具有重要意义。构建跨界保护区网络已被列为《生物多样性公约》（Convention on Biological Diversity）框架下“保护区工作组”的一项战略任务，涉及生态、环境、经济、政治等多个领域，成为全球保护区研究领域的热点问题之一。然而，目前我国对跨界保护区的研究尚处于起步阶段，在如何构建不同尺度的跨界保护区网络等方面的研究仍有待进一步加强。在分析了全球、洲际、两个或多个国家和地区之间等不同尺度跨界保护区网络研究的基础上，综述了国内外基于“节点”-“廊道”模式的跨界保护区网络构建研究进展，并结合我国跨界保护区网络建设的实际情况，对我国未来跨界保护区网络构建研究进行了展望。 |
| [34] | . Sub-Saharan Africa continues to face the daunting challenge of alleviating poverty due to slow economic growth. In southern Africa, most countries are adopting policies that promote the integration of biodiversity conservation and rural development to contribute to rural poverty alleviation. Numerous approaches have been undertaken in this endeavour, including Transfrontier Parks (TFPs) and Transfrontier Conservation Areas (TFCAs). This paper discusses some of the limitations of the TFPs. In conclusion I posit that unlike TFPs, which are state controlled and managed, TFCAs, which promote multi-land use and multi-stakeholder participation are attainable and have a higher probability of sustaining biodiversity conservation and contributing to the alleviation of rural poverty, if: (i) areas of high biodiversity conservation within communal areas can be identified, zoned and leveraged to biodiversity conservation and managed in partnership between the communities and the private sector; (ii) local communities can secure legal rights to their customary land being devoted to biodiversity conservation and use such pieces of land as collateral in negotiating partnerships with the private sector in developing conservation-based enterprises; (iii) functional community natural resource governance institutions can be established and empowered to represent their constituencies in securing fair equity from profits made from sustainable use of the conserved biodiversity assets and tourism businesses; (iv) concerted effort can be invested in developing and implementing family planning and fertility reduction strategies that would slow down human population growth to levels that can be sustained by the available natural resources; and (v) if sustainable financing mechanisms can be developed, and the governance of protected areas occurring in the TFCAs can be broadened to include other stakeholders. |
| [35] | . |
| [36] | |
| [37] | . Ecology and other conservation sciences have largely been preoccupied with the establishment, number, size and the functions of nature conservation areas around the globe. Beyond these concerns, nature conservation areas mirror complex interrelationships between society and the environment, and how those relationships are, or should be managed in various contexts. These interrelationships cannot appropriately be understood within the confines of disciplinary boundaries; they require multi- and interdisciplinary perspectives. The aim of this article is to illustrate that various categories of nature conservation areas, including protected areas, embody ideas about nature and how it should be governed in changing socio-economic conditions. The article draws on examples from southern Africa to argue that significant turns in strategies for protecting nature were made during periods of political transformation. It concludes that the gradation of protected areas, as a group of conservation areas, reflects different ways in which human activities are incorporated or marginalised in these areas. These processes are contingent on sociopolitical conditions. |
| [38] | . |
| [39] | . This paper examines cross-border partnerships in three international parks along the US-Canada border based on principles of sustainable tourism. A model of intensity of cross-border partnerships is developed, and areas of coordination examined include management frameworks, infrastructure development, human resources, conservation, promotion, and international- and local-level border concessions and treaty waivers, all of which play a part in the sustainable management of trans-frontier resources. The findings suggest that the more integrated the two sides of an international park are in relation to the border, the higher the level of cooperation will be. Furthermore, the paper demonstrates the importance of bilateral treaties, official treaty waivers, and less formal local cooperation for laying the groundwork for sustainable management of cross-border tourism resources. |
| [40] | . |
| [41] | . |
| [42] | . Transboundary marine protected areas have been proposed in East Africa to tackle threats to marine biodiversity, meet international MPA targets, promote tourism, and contribute to poverty reduction. This article examines what may drive, facilitate, or constrain states in creating a regime for transboundary MPAs. In East Africa, a regime between Mozambique and Tanzania is not yet formed and may be indefinitely delayed due to oil prospecting and exploration. There is, however, a well-developed regime between Mozambique and South Africa that has resulted in the two adjoining MPAs being declared the first transboundary MPA on the continent. |
| [43] | . Sub-Saharan Africa has been the location of intense conservation planning since the colonial era. Under the auspices of wilderness protection, colonial authorities established national parks largely for the purpose of hunting and tourism while forcibly evicting indigenous populations. Concerns about the ethical and economic impacts of protected areas have generated interest in community conservation initiatives that attempt to include local participation in natural resource management. In recent years, the anticipated loss of biodiversity, coupled with the integration of ecological concepts into planning processes, has generated interest in larger-scale initiatives that maximize protected habitat. Central to this shift are transboundary conservation areas, or Peace Parks, that involve protected territory that supersedes national political borders. This study provides a review of national parks, community conservation, and Peace Parks, in order to understand the development politics and governance challenges of global conservation. Although these approaches are not mutually exclusive, the study asserts that they represent major trajectories to conservation planning in Sub-Saharan Africa and other parts of the developing world. In considering the histories of these models in Sub-Saharan Africa, I argue that conservation planners often prioritize economic and ecological factors over the political circumstances that influence the effectiveness of these approaches. The study concludes by suggesting that an analysis of these three models provides a lens to examine ongoing debates regarding the employ of conservation as an economic development strategy and the challenges to environmental governance in the 21st century. |
| [44] | . Tourism appears to be an increasingly important industry in many border areas, and it deserves more attention by academics and practitioners alike if it is to be effectively planned and promoted. The primary aims of this paper are to promote peace between South and North Korea and to conserve the natural environment on both sides of the border through the DMZ Peace Park. This paper examines the conditions and issues affecting the development of peace park in emerging countries, and assesses South and North Korea's particular circumstances in fostering nature-based tourism in peace park. It examines also some of the challenges that establish peace park where protected area meet on opposite sides of political boundaries. The primary survey carried out to discover the characteristics and attitudes relating to divided nation tourism in a selected destination: DMZ areas of South Korea, and in keeping with the objectives of the study identifies similarities and differences between domestic and international tourists. |
| [45] | . According to their advocates, Peace Parks represent a real and symbolic hope for peace and reconciliation. Peace Parks both create a buffer and a “bridge” for cooperation to generate peace. The South Korean government and elite-led green NGOs are placing the DMZ military buffer zone as a “soft power” Peace Park instrument for peace between the two Korea's. This paper argues that the conventional approaches to explaining the Korean DMZ Peace Park initiatives/proposals fail to address the underlying national identity questions and narratives. These conventional approaches can potentially reinforce conditions for inter-Korean hostility. This is because inter-Korean hostility is based on ongoing contestations from each Korea over what counts as the historically authentic and unified Korean heritage/identity. Contests are also based upon which of the Korea's has the legitimate right to monopolize these master-narratives of what counts as genuine Korean identity. Further investigations of the practices and processes of (South) Korean identity construction through inter-cultural tensions between the two Korea's need to be addressed before a Peace Park as concept and policy can move away from the initiatives that potentially reinforce these contested identity constructions. |
| [46] | . Iain Watson worked for a number of refugee NGOs in the United Kingdom before moving to South Korea in 2008. He has taught at Ajou University and at the United Nations Mandated UPeace University in Seoul. His single-authored work on Korean politics has been published in international, peer-reviewed journals. From January to March 2013 he was a Visiting Academic at the Centre on Migration, Policy and Society (COMPAS) based at the Department of Anthropology, Oxford University, UK researching the issue of North Korean Defectors in the United Kingdom. |
| [47] | . . |
| [48] | . |
| [49] | . Abstract This paper examines how a single international border can exact different policies, practices, spatial variations, and tourism spaces at various points along its length. Based on an examination of the westernmost portion of the Canada–US frontier, this constructivist study investigates how the juxtaposition of barriers, attractions, transit spaces, and tourism landscapes is created concurrently on a single stretch of an international boundary. Four coterminous ‘zones’ of tourism were identified, including an area of illegal activity, ports of entry or crossing points, the peace park, and the exclave zone. Theoretical and practical implications are drawn from this study for border managers, tourism planners, and border agencies. |
| [50] | . Abstract Conservation has the potential to negatively impact nearby communities through readily measurable losses, like economic livelihoods, and those less tangible, like cultural identity and a sense of place-based heritage. In this paper, I analyze interviews with residents living in the border zone of Mozambique's Limpopo National Park to identify the invisible losses of conservation. Using disemplacement as a critical lens, I illustrate how conservation disrupts the person-place bond that forms between people and the environment they inhabit. By using disemplacement, this paper shows one method to improve our ability to capture, understand, and respond to the invisible losses of conservation. |
| [51] | . |
| [52] | . The use of transboundary conservation as tools for improving interstate relations has become a widely supported initiative in nature conservation. The rationale follows the environmental peacemaking hypothesis, which argues that seemingly neutral environmental issues can provide a sound basis for cooperation between states. The paper investigates the hypothesis premise through the case of International System of Protected Areas for Peace (Si-A-Paz), a transboundary protected area shared by Costa Rica and Nicaragua. In recent years, both countries have been involved in a number of border conflicts within Si-A-Paz and linked to the use of the San Juan River, contested land areas, and oil resources. The case of Si-A-Paz shows that transboundary environmental issues can provide arguments for maintaining or even strengthening conflicts rather than fostering peace between states. The case also shows the emergence of environmental issues as a new arena for geopolitical play, where actors not only justify their actions through an environmental discourse but also, the environmental discourse is stretched to include a variety of issues through which actors can obtain international support. The events in Nicaragua and Costa Rica raise questions about the role of transboundary conservation as a peacebuilding tool. |
| [53] | . 61TBPAs are more likely to be established between countries that have engaged in militarized interstate disputes.61TBPAs are less likely to be established between countries that have engaged in fatal militarized interstate disputes.61TBPAs can be related to more peaceful co-existence between neighboring countries in Africa, Middle East, and Asia.61In Latin America, TBPAs are related to an increased likelihood of militarized interstate disputes.61The paper finds partial support for the environmental peacemaking hypothesis. |
| [54] | . 中国提出的“一带一路”倡议和实践行动,为全球治理提供了基于自身发展经验和价值理念的解决方案。分析基于民族国家的全球治理出现失灵的内在逻辑,归纳中国作为文明型国家具有提供国际公共物品的文化、发展和地理等基础性优势,以及作为全球治理新方案的“一带一路”与传统模式的区别。研究指出,“一带一路”是基于中国理念和情怀的全球治理新实践,是中国主导建立人类命运共同体的新探索,其“新”主要表现在三个方面：在指导理念上,“一带一路”倡导国家平等协商,主张摈弃实力定义一切的西方政治哲学;在道路实践上,“一带一路”坚持从排他封闭走向包容开放,强调各国间的合作共赢;在价值目标上,“一带一路”倡导从国家主义转向世界主义,强调对人类命运的终极关怀。 . 中国提出的“一带一路”倡议和实践行动,为全球治理提供了基于自身发展经验和价值理念的解决方案。分析基于民族国家的全球治理出现失灵的内在逻辑,归纳中国作为文明型国家具有提供国际公共物品的文化、发展和地理等基础性优势,以及作为全球治理新方案的“一带一路”与传统模式的区别。研究指出,“一带一路”是基于中国理念和情怀的全球治理新实践,是中国主导建立人类命运共同体的新探索,其“新”主要表现在三个方面：在指导理念上,“一带一路”倡导国家平等协商,主张摈弃实力定义一切的西方政治哲学;在道路实践上,“一带一路”坚持从排他封闭走向包容开放,强调各国间的合作共赢;在价值目标上,“一带一路”倡导从国家主义转向世界主义,强调对人类命运的终极关怀。 |
| [5] | . |
