IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/osf/thesis/36h9n_v1.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Planning and Management Issues in Sharr Mountains National Park, Kosovo: livelihoods of local communities and their perceptions

Author

Listed:
  • Jupolli, Majlinda

Abstract

The establishment of protected areas in many countries has included restrictions on the use of park resources by local people, in some cases leading to further environmental deterioration (Vedeld et al. 2004). The research was aimed at exploring whether natural resources in Sharr Mountains National Park (SMNP) in Kosovo are managed in a way that contributes to a sustainable development process combining conservation and development as well as engaging communities to participate in conservation and development activities. Further, the study was aimed at analyzing the present day livelihood situation of communities living adjacent to SMNP. It also investigated local people‟s perceptions and attitudes towards conservation measures and government policies as well as their constraints to improved livelihoods. To accomplish this, a case study approach was adopted involving both qualitative and quantitative research methods and four villages adjacent to SMNP were purposively selected. A household survey was carried out and a total of 60 questionnaires administered. Stratified sampling technique was used to select the sampled households. Focus group discussions and key informant interviews were also part of the data collection methods. The study reveals that in Kosovo, the chief objectives of Sharr Mountains National Park management have been limited to defining parks‟ legal status, demarcation of boundaries, fire control measures, protecting flora and fauna and to some extent, providing visitor services. The role that national park could play in supporting local livelihood systems, has so far been neglected. Local communities are still seen as the principal „threat‟ to forests so that they have been denied access to most important forest products such as fuelwood. This has increased economic insecurity among the local communities and generated antipathy towards conservation measures. Further, study indicates that local people living adjacent to SMNP do not per se actively participate in management decisions and land-use policy. Participation as reported by respondents concentrated in the three lower levels of Pretty‟s typology, up to the participation by consultation (Pretty, 1995). The data also reveal that the main resource endowments are land, labor and forest. The most important income source among the sampled population is agriculture followed by off-farm activities. Environmental income represents a relatively significant income source with an average contribution to the household income of some 12.5 percent in the population sampled. The main sources of environmental incomes are fuelwood, timber, mushrooms and medicinal plants. The major constraints faced by households in their decreasing order of importance were: lack of available market and low market prices for their traditional products, access to forest products from the park, land access problems and access to financial capital. The findings also confirm that almost 62% of the local people have a negative relationship towards the National Park due to the presence of park guards, but this does not influence their positive perception of 69% towards the Park due to conservation and cultural reasons. Further, the findings indicate that 74% of the local people are willing to participate but have a negative perception of government policies with respect to local participation due to corruption and restricted user rights. The local people perceive participation as a means of the state to achieve its political and policy goals rather than a right for local communities. Further, lack of communication and little experience on participatory management does not increase the hopes for a collaborative future between the users and the protectors.

Suggested Citation

  • Jupolli, Majlinda, 2017. "Planning and Management Issues in Sharr Mountains National Park, Kosovo: livelihoods of local communities and their perceptions," Thesis Commons 36h9n_v1, Center for Open Science.
  • Handle: RePEc:osf:thesis:36h9n_v1
    DOI: 10.31219/osf.io/36h9n_v1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://osf.io/download/59955c456c613b0254076a74/
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.31219/osf.io/36h9n_v1?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Vedeld, Paul & Angelsen, Arild & Bojo, Jan & Sjaastad, Espen & Kobugabe Berg, Gertrude, 2007. "Forest environmental incomes and the rural poor," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 9(7), pages 869-879, April.
    2. Ferraro, Paul J., 2002. "The local costs of establishing protected areas in low-income nations: Ranomafana National Park, Madagascar," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(2-3), pages 261-275, December.
    3. Frances Cleaver, 1999. "Paradoxes of participation: questioning participatory approaches to development," Journal of International Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 11(4), pages 597-612.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Jupolli, Majlinda, 2017. "Planning and Management Issues in Sharr Mountains National Park, Kosovo: livelihoods of local communities and their perceptions," Thesis Commons 36h9n, Center for Open Science.
    2. Vedeld, Paul & Jumane, Abdallah & Wapalila, Gloria & Songorwa, Alexander, 2012. "Protected areas, poverty and conflicts," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(C), pages 20-31.
    3. Isyaku, Usman, 2021. "What motivates communities to participate in forest conservation? A study of REDD+ pilot sites in Cross River, Nigeria," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 133(C).
    4. Ojeda Luna, Tatiana & Zhunusova, Eliza & Günter, Sven & Dieter, Matthias, 2020. "Measuring forest and agricultural income in the Ecuadorian lowland rainforest frontiers: Do deforestation and conservation strategies matter?," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 111(C).
    5. Mugido, Worship & Shackleton, Charlie M., 2019. "The contribution of NTFPS to rural livelihoods in different agro-ecological zones of South Africa," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    6. Meyer, Maximilian & Hulke, Carolin & Kamwi, Jonathan & Kolem, Hannah & Börner, Jan, 2022. "Spatially heterogeneous effects of collective action on environmental dependence in Namibia’s Zambezi region," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 159(C).
    7. Sims, Katharine R.E., 2010. "Conservation and development: Evidence from Thai protected areas," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 60(2), pages 94-114, September.
    8. Porro, Roberto & Lopez-Feldman, Alejandro & Vela-Alvarado, Jorge W., 2015. "Forest use and agriculture in Ucayali, Peru: Livelihood strategies, poverty and wealth in an Amazon frontier," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 47-56.
    9. Lindsay C. Stringer & Mark S. Reed & Andrew J. Dougill & Mary K. Seely & Martin Rokitzki, 2007. "Implementing the UNCCD: Participatory challenges," Natural Resources Forum, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 31(3), pages 198-211, August.
    10. Desbureaux, Sébastien & Brimont, Laura, 2015. "Between economic loss and social identity: The multi-dimensional cost of avoiding deforestation in Eastern Madagascar," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 10-20.
    11. Felkner, John S. & Lee, Hyun & Shaikh, Sabina & Kolata, Alan & Binford, Michael, 2022. "The interrelated impacts of credit access, market access and forest proximity on livelihood strategies in Cambodia," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 155(C).
    12. Donna L. Roberts, 2019. "Learning from the Patient - The Cooperative Endeavor of Analytic Psychotherapy," European Journal of Medicine and Natural Sciences Articles, Revistia Research and Publishing, vol. 2, July -Dec.
    13. Shyamsundar, Priya & Ahlroth, Sofia & Kristjanson, Patricia & Onder, Stefanie, 2020. "Supporting pathways to prosperity in forest landscapes – A PRIME framework," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 125(C).
    14. Ghazala Mansuri, 2004. "Community-Based and -Driven Development: A Critical Review," The World Bank Research Observer, World Bank, vol. 19(1), pages 1-39.
    15. repec:asi:ajosrd:2012:p:39-45 is not listed on IDEAS
    16. William Clelland, 2021. "Visions, promises and understandings of development around Kenya’s Masinga reservoir," Development Policy Review, Overseas Development Institute, vol. 39(6), pages 990-1007, November.
    17. Bierkamp, Sina & Nguyen, Trung Thanh & Grote, Ulrike, 2021. "Environmental income and remittances: Evidence from rural central highlands of Vietnam," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 179(C).
    18. Sébastien Desbureaux & Eric Nazindigouba Kere & Pascale Combes Motel, 2016. "Impact Evaluation in a Landscape: Protected Natural Forests, Anthropized Forested Lands and Deforestation Leakages in Madagascar's Rainforests," Working Papers halshs-01342182, HAL.
    19. Estifanos, Tafesse Kefyalew & Polyakov, Maksym & Pandit, Ram & Hailu, Atakelty & Burton, Michael, 2020. "The impact of protected areas on the rural households’ incomes in Ethiopia," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 91(C).
    20. López-Feldman, Alejandro, 2014. "Shocks, Income and Wealth: Do They Affect the Extraction of Natural Resources by Rural Households?," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 64(S1), pages 91-100.
    21. Mojo, D. & Oduor, A.M.O. & Fu, C. & Bai, Y. & Long, H. & Wang, G. & Zhang, L., 2018. "The effects of protected areas on the welfare of local communities: the case of Maasai Mara National Reserve in Kenya," 2018 Conference, July 28-August 2, 2018, Vancouver, British Columbia 276956, International Association of Agricultural Economists.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:osf:thesis:36h9n_v1. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: OSF (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://thesiscommons.org .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.