prilagođeno pretraživanje po punom tekstu

ŠUMARSKI LIST 7-8/2019 str. 27     <-- 27 -->        PDF

lose further importance in the public authorities’ policy agenda.
The Kruskal-Wallis non-parametric test show statistically significant differences among groups for the procedural conflicts related to the establishment of protected areas (p=0.002). In particular, the representatives of universities assigned a higher level of importance to almost all conflicts compared to the other three groups of interest.
In accordance with the results of this study, other European studies show that the establishment of a new protected area – i.e. Natura 2000 sites, national/regional parks and natural reserves – is the most important reason of conflict related to nature conservation issue. For example, in France, Pinton et al. (2005) highlighted that the highest level of environmental conflict was reached in 1993 during the identification of local sites to be included in the Natura 2000 network. The conflict reasons are to be found in the fact that the Natura 2000 sites have been identified according to biological criteria without considering economic, social, and legal consequences. In addition, a lack in communication between public authorities and citizens associated with economic and management restrictions have increased the level of conflict.
In Germany, Rauschmayer et al. (2009) emphasized that during the designation of Natura 2000 sites the participatory process (named “fake participation” by stakeholders) generated further conflicts associated with disillusions regarding participation. In other words, a top-down process on the other side disguised as a bottom-up process has been adopted. In this example, the public participation approach adopted in the first steps of the implementation process was the main reason of conflict between stakeholders. Similarly, also for the planning formulation and the definition of management activities in the parks, nature reserves and Natura 2000 sites the participatory process is the key to success as emphasized by many authors in different European countries (Stoll-Kleemann 2001; Dimitrakopoulos et al. 2010; Lovrić et al. 2011; Niedziałkowski et al. 2012; Paletto et al. 2016; Brescancin et al. 2017).
In Italy, during the transposition of the Habitats Directive into national legislation the implementation process was delegated to administrative regions that involved provinces, municipalities and mountain communities. Conversely, the involvement of non-state actors in the Natura 2000 implementation process was limited to the consultation (Ferranti et al. 2010). This different involvement of stakeholders has generated misunderstanding and distrust. In addition, De Meo et al. (2016) highlighted that the main conflicts in the management of Natura 2000 sites in Italy are conflicts due to the restrictive measures to human activities in Natura 2000 sites; conflicts due to the bureaucracy; conflicts due to the absence of complete information and communication about Natura 2000 network implementation. Some Italian stakeholders emphasized that many conflicts arise due to the lack of information and communication between public authorities and other stakeholders (Paletto et al. 2016).
In Slovenia, transposition of the Birds and Habitats Directives into the national legislation evidenced different philosophies and concepts about nature conservation between the Ministry for Environment and Spatial Planning and the Ministry for Agriculture, Forestry and Food (Ferlin et al. 2006). The first one considered more appropriate a segregation between Natura 2000 sites and sustainable forest management, while the second one emphasized the importance of integration within sustainable management. In addition, other conflicts arise due to a non-appropriate recognition of the existing forestry legal and management planning system such as the regional forest management plans (Ferlin et al. 2006). Similarly, Gallo et al. (2018), and Laktić and Pezdevšek Malovrh (2018) emphasized that the main conflict in the Natura 2000 Management Programme (2015–2020) is due to restrictions to human activities imposed by Natura 2000 legislation, resulting in a contrast between public authorities and private stakeholders involved in economic activities.
Also the report dealing with conflicts in the implementation and management of the Natura 2000 network show that the main reasons of conflicts between nature conservation and forestry sector are those related to reduced harvest due to need for increased deadwood; limitation to the period of building of forest roads; limitation to tree species selection/ban on introduction of non-native trees; ban on (clear)cutting; prohibition of drainage/change in water level; prohibition on fertilizer, biocides or use of chalk and clear cutting of non-native tree species/clear cutting for restoration of non-forest habitats (Bouwma et al. 2010).
Opportunities and obstacles for human activities – Prilike i prepreke za ljudske aktivnosti
The results show that for 63% of respondents the establishment of protected areas – national/regional parks and Natura 2000 sites – is a potential opportunity for human activities. Conversely, another 63% of respondents consider the establishment of protected areas as an obstacle. About 44% of respondents consider at the same time the establishment of protected areas as an opportunity and an obstacle.
Many stakeholders have indicated more than one opportunity and one obstacle, while some others have not indicated any (Table 3). The results show that the most important opportunity is related to the rural development of the marginal areas with special regard to the eco-tourism development, followed by the improvement of people’s well-being and quality of life related to the maintenance and improvement of ecosystem services. Conversely, according to the