Natural resource management

Last updated

The Tongass National Forest in Alaska is managed by the United States Forest Service Tongass national forest juneau img 7501.jpg
The Tongass National Forest in Alaska is managed by the United States Forest Service

Natural Resource Management is the management of natural resources such as land, water, soil, plants and animals, with a particular focus on how management affects the quality of life for both present and future generations (stewardship).


Natural Resource Management deals with managing the way in which people and natural landscapes interact. It brings together land use planning, water management, bio-diversity conservation, and the future sustainability of industries like agriculture, mining, tourism, fisheries and forestry. It recognises that people and their livelihoods rely on the health and productivity of our landscapes, and their actions as stewards of the land play a critical role in maintaining this health and productivity. [1]

Natural Resource Management specifically focuses on a scientific and technical understanding of resources and ecology and the life-supporting capacity of those resources. [2] Environmental Management is also similar to natural resource management. In academic contexts, the sociology of natural resources is closely related to, but distinct from, Natural Resource Management. And so on;)


The Bureau of Land Management in the United States manages America's public lands, totaling approximately 264 million acres (1,070,000 km2) or one-eighth of the landmass of the country. Logo of the United States Bureau of Land Management.svg
The Bureau of Land Management in the United States manages America's public lands, totaling approximately 264 million acres (1,070,000 km2) or one-eighth of the landmass of the country.

The emphasis on sustainability can be traced back to early attempts to understand the ecological nature of North American rangelands in the late 19th century, and the resource conservation movement of the same time. [3] [4] This type of analysis coalesced in the 20th century with recognition that preservationist conservation strategies had not been effective in halting the decline of natural resources. A more integrated approach was implemented recognising the intertwined social, cultural, economic and political aspects of resource management. [5] A more holistic, national and even global form evolved, from the Brundtland Commission and the advocacy of sustainable development.

In 2005 the government of New South Wales, Australia established a Standard for Quality Natural Resource Management, [6] to improve the consistency of practice, based on an adaptive management approach.

In the United States, the most active areas of natural resource management are fisheries management, [7] wildlife management, [8] often associated with ecotourism and rangeland management, and forest management. [9] In Australia, water sharing, such as the Murray Darling Basin Plan and catchment management are also significant.

Ownership regimes

Natural resource management approaches can be categorised according to the kind and right of stakeholders, natural resources:

body's property". An example is a lake fishery. Common land may exist without ownership, in which case in the UK it is vested in a local authority.

Stakeholder analysis

Stakeholder analysis originated from business management practices and has been incorporated into natural resource management in ever growing popularity. Stakeholder analysis in the context of natural resource management identifies distinctive interest groups affected in the utilisation and conservation of natural resources. [11]

There is no definitive definition of a stakeholder as illustrated in the table below. Especially in natural resource management as it is difficult to determine who has a stake and this will differ according to each potential stakeholder. [12]

Different approaches to who is a stakeholder: [12]

SourceWho is a stakeholderKind of research
Freeman. [13] "can affect or is affected by the achievement of the organization's objectives"Business Management
Bowie [14] "without whose support the organization would cease to exist"Business Management
Clarkson [15] "... persons or groups that have, or claim, ownership, rights, or interests in a corporation and its activities, past, present, or future."Business Management
Grimble and Wellard [16] "...any group of people, organized or unorganized, who share a common interest or stake in a particular issue or system..."Natural resource management
Gass et al. [17] "... any individual, group and institution who would potentially be affected, whether positively or negatively, by a specified event, process or change."Natural resource management
Buanes et al [18] "... any group or individual who may directly or indirectly affect—or be affected—...planning to be at least potential stakeholders."Natural resource management
Brugha and Varvasovszky [19] "... stakeholders (individuals, groups and organizations) who have an interest (stake) and the potential to influence the actions and aims of an organization, project or policy direction."Health policy
ODA [20] "... persons, groups or institutions with interests in a project or programme."Development

Therefore, it is dependent upon the circumstances of the stakeholders involved with natural resource as to which definition and subsequent theory is utilised.

Billgrena and Holme [12] identified the aims of stakeholder analysis in natural resource management:

This gives transparency and clarity to policy making allowing stakeholders to recognise conflicts of interest and facilitate resolutions. [12] [21] There are numerous stakeholder theories such as Mitchell et al. [22] however Grimble [21] created a framework of stages for a Stakeholder Analysis in natural resource management. Grimble [21] designed this framework to ensure that the analysis is specific to the essential aspects of natural resource management.

Stages in Stakeholder analysis: [21]

  1. Clarify objectives of the analysis
  2. Place issues in a systems context
  3. Identify decision-makers and stakeholders
  4. Investigate stakeholder interests and agendas
  5. Investigate patterns of inter-action and dependence (e.g. conflicts and compatibilities, trade-offs and synergies)


Grimble and Wellard [16] established that Stakeholder analysis in natural resource management is most relevant where issued can be characterised as;

Case studies:

In the case of the Bwindi Impenetrable National Park, a comprehensive stakeholder analysis would have been relevant and the Batwa people would have potentially been acknowledged as stakeholders preventing the loss of people's livelihoods and loss of life. [16] [21]

Nepal, Indonesia and Koreas' community forestry are successful examples of how stakeholder analysis can be incorporated into the management of natural resources. This allowed the stakeholders to identify their needs and level of involvement with the forests.


Alternatives/ Complementary forms of analysis:

Management of the resources

Natural resource management issues are inherently complex. They involve the ecological cycles, hydrological cycles, climate, animals, plants and geography, etc. All these are dynamic and inter-related. A change in one of them may have far reaching and/or long term impacts which may even be irreversible. In addition to the natural systems, natural resource management also has to manage various stakeholders and their interests, policies, politics, geographical boundaries, economic implications and the list goes on. It is a very difficult to satisfy all aspects at the same time. This results in conflicting situations.

After the United Nations Conference for the Environment and Development (UNCED) held in Rio de Janeiro in 1992, most nations subscribed to new principles for the integrated management of land, water, and forests. Although program names vary from nation to nation, all express similar aims.

The various approaches applied to natural resource management include:

Community-based natural resource management

The community-based natural resource management (CBNRM) approach combines conservation objectives with the generation of economic benefits for rural communities. The three key assumptions being that: locals are better placed to conserve natural resources, people will conserve a resource only if benefits exceed the costs of conservation, and people will conserve a resource that is linked directly to their quality of life. [5] When a local people's quality of life is enhanced, their efforts and commitment to ensure the future well-being of the resource are also enhanced. [26] Regional and community based natural resource management is also based on the principle of subsidiarity.

The United Nations advocates CBNRM in the Convention on Biodiversity and the Convention to Combat Desertification. Unless clearly defined, decentralised NRM can result an ambiguous socio-legal environment with local communities racing to exploit natural resources while they can e.g. forest communities in central Kalimantan (Indonesia). [27]

A problem of CBNRM is the difficulty of reconciling and harmonising the objectives of socioeconomic development, biodiversity protection and sustainable resource utilisation. [28] The concept and conflicting interests of CBNRM, [29] [30] show how the motives behind the participation are differentiated as either people-centred (active or participatory results that are truly empowering) [31] or planner-centred (nominal and results in passive recipients). Understanding power relations is crucial to the success of community based NRM. Locals may be reluctant to challenge government recommendations for fear of losing promised benefits.

CBNRM is based particularly on advocacy by nongovernmental organizations working with local groups and communities, on the one hand, and national and transnational organizations, on the other, to build and extend new versions of environmental and social advocacy that link social justice and environmental management agendas [32] with both direct and indirect benefits observed including a share of revenues, employment, diversification of livelihoods and increased pride and identity. Ecological and societal successes and failures of CBNRM projects have been documented. [33] [34] CBNRM has raised new challenges, as concepts of community, territory, conservation, and indigenous are worked into politically varied plans and programs in disparate sites. Warner and Jones [35] address strategies for effectively managing conflict in CBNRM.

The capacity of indigenous communities to conserve natural resources has been acknowledged by the Australian Government with the Caring for Country [36] Program. Caring for our Country is an Australian Government initiative jointly administered by the Australian Government Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry and the Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts. These Departments share responsibility for delivery of the Australian Government's environment and sustainable agriculture programs, which have traditionally been broadly referred to under the banner of ‘natural resource management’. These programs have been delivered regionally, through 56 State government bodies, successfully allowing regional communities to decide the natural resource priorities for their regions. [37]

More broadly, a research study based in Tanzania and the Pacific researched what motivates communities to adopt CBNRM's and found that aspects of the specific CBNRM program, of the community that has adopted the program, and of the broader social-ecological context together shape the why CBNRM's are adopted. [38] However, overall, program adoption seemed to mirror the relative advantage of CBNRM programs to local villagers and villager access to external technical assistance. [38] There have been socioeconomic critiques of CBNRM in Africa, [39] but ecological effectiveness of CBNRM measured by wildlife population densities has been shown repeatedly in Tanzania. [40] [41]

Governance is seen as a key consideration for delivering community-based or regional natural resource management. In the State of NSW, the 13 catchment management authorities (CMAs) are overseen by the Natural Resources Commission (NRC), responsible for undertaking audits of the effectiveness of regional natural resource management programs. [42]

Adaptive management

The primary methodological approach adopted by catchment management authorities (CMAs) for regional natural resource management in Australia is adaptive management. [6]

This approach includes recognition that adaption occurs through a process of ‘plan-do-review-act’. It also recognises seven key components that should be considered for quality natural resource management practice:

Integrated natural resource management

Integrated natural resource management (INRM) is a process of managing natural resources in a systematic way, which includes multiple aspects of natural resource use (biophysical, socio-political, and economic) meet production goals of producers and other direct users (e.g., food security, profitability, risk aversion) as well as goals of the wider community (e.g., poverty alleviation, welfare of future generations, environmental conservation). It focuses on sustainability and at the same time tries to incorporate all possible stakeholders from the planning level itself, reducing possible future conflicts. The conceptual basis of INRM has evolved in recent years through the convergence of research in diverse areas such as sustainable land use, participatory planning, integrated watershed management, and adaptive management. [43] [44] [44] INRM is being used extensively and been successful in regional and community based natural management. [45]

Frameworks and modelling

There are various frameworks and computer models developed to assist natural resource management.

Geographic Information Systems (GIS)

GIS is a powerful analytical tool as it is capable of overlaying datasets to identify links. A bush regeneration scheme can be informed by the overlay of rainfall, cleared land and erosion. [46] In Australia, Metadata Directories such as NDAR provide data on Australian natural resources such as vegetation, fisheries, soils and water. [47] These are limited by the potential for subjective input and data manipulation.

Natural Resources Management Audit Frameworks

The NSW Government in Australia has published an audit framework [48] for natural resource management, to assist the establishment of a performance audit role in the governance of regional natural resource management. This audit framework builds from other established audit methodologies, including performance audit, environmental audit and internal audit. Audits undertaken using this framework have provided confidence to stakeholders, identified areas for improvement and described policy expectations for the general public. [49] [50]

The Australian Government has established a framework for auditing greenhouse emissions and energy reporting, which closely follows Australian Standards for Assurance Engagements.

The Australian Government is also currently preparing an audit framework for auditing water management, focussing on the implementation of the Murray Darling Basin Plan.

Other elements

Biodiversity Conservation

The issue of biodiversity conservation is regarded as an important element in natural resource management. What is biodiversity? Biodiversity is a comprehensive concept, which is a description of the extent of natural diversity. Gaston and Spicer [51] (p. 3) point out that biodiversity is "the variety of life" and relate to different kinds of "biodiversity organization". According to Gray [52] (p. 154), the first widespread use of the definition of biodiversity, was put forward by the United Nations in 1992, involving different aspects of biological diversity.

Precautionary Biodiversity Management

The "threats" wreaking havoc on biodiversity include; habitat fragmentation, putting a strain on the already stretched biological resources; forest deterioration and deforestation; the invasion of "alien species" and "climate change" [53] ( p. 2). Since these threats have received increasing attention from environmentalists and the public, the precautionary management of biodiversity becomes an important part of natural resources management. According to Cooney, there are material measures to carry out precautionary management of biodiversity in natural resource management.

Concrete "policy tools"

Cooney claims that the policy making is dependent on "evidences", relating to "high standard of proof", the forbidding of special "activities" and "information and monitoring requirements". Before making the policy of precaution, categorical evidence is needed. When the potential menace of "activities" is regarded as a critical and "irreversible" endangerment, these "activities" should be forbidden. For example, since explosives and toxicants will have serious consequences to endanger human and natural environment, the South Africa Marine Living Resources Act promulgated a series of policies on completely forbidding to "catch fish" by using explosives and toxicants.

Administration and guidelines

According to Cooney, there are 4 methods to manage the precaution of biodiversity in natural resources management;

  1. "Ecosystem-based management" including "more risk-averse and precautionary management", where "given prevailing uncertainty regarding ecosystem structure, function, and inter-specific interactions, precaution demands an ecosystem rather than single-species approach to management". [54]
  2. "Adaptive management" is "a management approach that expressly tackles the uncertainty and dynamism of complex systems".
  3. "Environmental impact assessment" and exposure ratings decrease the "uncertainties" of precaution, even though it has deficiencies, and
  4. "Protectionist approaches", which "most frequently links to" biodiversity conservation in natural resources management.
Land management

In order to have a sustainable environment, understanding and using appropriate management strategies is important. In terms of understanding, Young [55] emphasises some important points of land management:

Dale et al. (2000) [56] study has shown that there are five fundamental and helpful ecological principles for the land manager and people who need them. The ecological principles relate to time, place, species, disturbance and the landscape and they interact in many ways. It is suggested that land managers could follow these guidelines:

See also

Related Research Articles

Natural resource Resources that exist without actions of humankind

Natural resources are resources that exist without any actions of humankind. This includes all valued characteristics such as magnetic, gravitational, electrical properties and forces, etc. On Earth, it includes sunlight, atmosphere, water, land along with all vegetation, crops, and animal life that naturally subsists upon or within the previously identified characteristics and substances.

Environmental protection is the practice of protecting the natural environment by individuals, organizations and governments. Its objectives are to conserve natural resources and the existing natural environment and, where possible, to repair damage and reverse trends.

Adaptive management (AM), also known as adaptive resource management (ARM) or adaptive environmental assessment and management (AEAM), is a structured, iterative process of robust decision making in the face of uncertainty, with an aim to reducing uncertainty over time via system monitoring. In this way, decision making simultaneously meets one or more resource management objectives and, either passively or actively, accrues information needed to improve future management. Adaptive management is a tool which should be used not only to change a system, but also to learn about the system. Because adaptive management is based on a learning process, it improves long-run management outcomes. The challenge in using the adaptive management approach lies in finding the correct balance between gaining knowledge to improve management in the future and achieving the best short-term outcome based on current knowledge. This approach has more recently been employed in implementing international development programs.

Environmental resource management Type of resource management

Environmental resource management is the management of the interaction and impact of human societies on the environment. It is not, as the phrase might suggest, the management of the environment itself. Environmental resources management aims to ensure that ecosystem services are protected and maintained for future human generations, and also maintain ecosystem integrity through considering ethical, economic, and scientific (ecological) variables. Environmental resource management tries to identify factors affected by conflicts that rise between meeting needs and protecting resources. It is thus linked to environmental protection, sustainability and integrated landscape management.

Ecosystem services benefits created by nature, forests and environmental systems

Ecosystem services are the many and varied benefits to humans gifted by the natural environment and from healthy ecosystems. Such ecosystems include, for example, agroecosystems, forest ecosystems, grassland ecosystems and aquatic ecosystems. These ecosystems, functioning in healthy relationship, offer such things like natural pollination of crops, clean air, extreme weather mitigation, human mental and physical well-being. Collectively, these benefits are becoming known as 'ecosystem services', and are often integral to the provisioning of clean drinking water, the decomposition of wastes, and resilience and productivity of food ecosystems.

Environmental planning is the process of facilitating decision making to carry out land development with the consideration given to the natural environment, social, political, economic and governance factors and provides a holistic framework to achieve sustainable outcomes. A major goal of environmental planning is to create sustainable communities, which aim to conserve and protect undeveloped land.

Forest management branch of forestry

Forest management is a branch of forestry concerned with overall administrative, legal, economic, and social aspects, as well as scientific and technical aspects, such as silviculture, protection, and forest regulation. This includes management for aesthetics, fish, recreation, urban values, water, wilderness, wildlife, wood products, forest genetic resources, and other forest resource values. Management can be based on conservation, economics, or a mixture of the two. Techniques include timber extraction, planting and replanting of different species, cutting roads and pathways through forests, and preventing fire.

Namibia is one of few countries in the world to specifically address habitat conservation and protection of natural resources in their constitution. Article 95 states, "The State shall actively promote and maintain the welfare of the people by adopting international policies aimed at the following: maintenance of ecosystems, essential ecological processes, and biological diversity of Namibia, and utilization of living natural resources on a sustainable basis for the benefit of all Namibians, both present and future.".

Sustainability metrics and indices are measures of sustainability, and attempt to quantify beyond the generic concept. Though there are disagreements among those from different disciplines, these disciplines and international organizations have each offered measures or indicators of how to measure the concept.

Marine spatial planning A multiple user process to make informed and coordinated decisions about sustainable use of marine resources

Marine spatial planning (MSP) is a process that brings together multiple users of the ocean – including energy, industry, government, conservation and recreation – to make informed and coordinated decisions about how to use marine resources sustainably. MSP generally uses maps to create a more comprehensive picture of a marine area – identifying where and how an ocean area is being used and what natural resources and habitat exist. It is similar to land-use planning, but for marine waters.

Index of environmental articles Wikipedia index

The natural environment, commonly referred to simply as the environment, includes all living and non-living things occurring naturally on Earth.

Ecosystem management Conservation paradigm factoring in natural and human use of resources and ecosystem services

Ecosystem management is a process that aims to conserve major ecological services and restore natural resources while meeting the socioeconomic, political, and cultural needs of current and future generations.

Environmental governance is a concept in political ecology and environmental policy that advocates sustainability as the supreme consideration for managing all human activities—political, social and economic. Governance includes government, business and civil society, and emphasizes whole system management. To capture this diverse range of elements, environmental governance often employs alternative systems of governance, for example watershed-based management.

Community-based management (CBM) is a bottom up approach of organization which can be facilitated by an upper government or NGO structure but it aims for local stakeholder participation in the planning, research, development, management and policy making for a community as a whole. The decentralization of managing tactics enables local people to deal with the unique social, political and ecological problems their community might face and find solutions ideal to their situation. Overwhelming national or local economic, political and social pressures can affect the efficiency of CBM as well as its long term application. CBM varies across spatial and temporal scales to reflect the ever-changing distinctive physical and/or human environment it is acting within. While the specifics of each practice might differ, existing research maintains that community based management, when implemented properly, is incredibly beneficial not only for the health of the environment, but also for the well-being of the stakeholders.

Soil governance refers to the policies, strategies, and the processes of decision-making employed by nation states and local governments regarding the use of soil. Globally, governance of the soil has been limited to an agricultural perspective due to increased food insecurity from the most populated regions on earth. The Global Soil Partnership, GSP, was initiated by the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) and its members with the hope to improve governance of the limited soil resources of the planet in order to guarantee healthy and productive soils for a food-secure world, as well as support other essential ecosystem services.

Forest restoration

Forest restoration is defined as “actions to re-instate ecological processes, which accelerate recovery of forest structure, ecological functioning and biodiversity levels towards those typical of climax forest” i.e. the end-stage of natural forest succession. Climax forests are relatively stable ecosystems that have developed the maximum biomass, structural complexity and species diversity that are possible within the limits imposed by climate and soil and without continued disturbance from humans. Climax forest is therefore the target ecosystem, which defines the ultimate aim of forest restoration. Since climate is a major factor that determines climax forest composition, global climate change may result in changing restoration aims.

David Lindenmayer Australian scientist

David Lindenmayer,, is an Australian scientist and academic. He is an expert in landscape ecology, conservation and biodiversity. His areas of expertise also include environmental management, forestry management and environment, terrestrial ecology, wildlife and habitat management, environmental monitoring, forestry fire management, natural resource management, zoology and forestry sciences.

Natural capital accounting is the process of calculating the total stocks and flows of natural resources and services in a given ecosystem or region. Accounting for such goods may occur in physical or monetary terms. This process can subsequently inform government, corporate and consumer decision making as each relates to the use or consumption of natural resources and land, and sustainable behaviour.

Participatory monitoring

Participatory monitoring is the regular collection of measurements or other kinds of data (monitoring), usually of natural resources and biodiversity, undertaken by local residents of the monitored area, who rely on local natural resources and thus have more local knowledge of those resources. Those involved usually live in communities with considerable social cohesion, where they regularly cooperate on shared projects.

Nature-based solutions Sustainable management and use of nature for tackling socio-environmental challenges

Nature-based solutions (NBS) refers to the sustainable management and use of nature for tackling socio-environmental challenges. The challenges include issues such as climate change, water security, water pollution, food security, human health, and disaster risk management.


  1. "Resilient landscapes and communities managing natural resources in New South Wales" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 8 February 2012. Retrieved 27 October 2014.
  2. "Bachelor of Applied Science (Natural Resource Management)". Massey University. Retrieved 27 October 2014.[ permanent dead link ]
  3. Berkeley University of California: Geography: Geog 175: Topics in the History of Natural Resource Management: Spring 2006: Rangelands Archived 11 June 2007 at the Wayback Machine
  4. San Francisco State University: Department of Geography: GEOG 657/ENVS 657: Natural Resource Management: Biotic Resources: Natural Resource Management and Environmental History Archived 17 December 2008 at the Wayback Machine
  5. 1 2 Thakadu, O. T. (2005). "Success factors in community based natural resources management in northern Botswana: Lessons from practice". Natural Resources Forum. 29 (3): 199–212. doi:10.1111/j.1477-8947.2005.00130.x.
  6. 1 2 3 NSW Government 2005, Standard for Quality Natural Resource Management, NSW Natural Resources Commission, Sydney
  7. Hubert, Wayne A.; Quist, Michael C., eds. (2010). Inland Fisheries Management in North America (Third ed.). Bethesda, MD: American Fisheries Society. p. 736. ISBN   978-1-934874-16-5.
  8. Bolen, Eric G.; Robinson, William L., eds. (2002). Wildlife Ecology and Management (5th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson. p. 634. ISBN   013066250X.
  9. Bettinger, Pete; Boston, Kevin; Siry, Jacek; Grebner, Donald, eds. (2017). Forest Management and Planning (Second ed.). Academic Press. p. 362. ISBN   9780128094761.
  10. "Native Vegetation Act 2003". Retrieved 27 October 2014.
  11. 1 2 Dandy, N. et al. (2009) ‘Who's in and why? A typology of stakeholder analysis methods for natural resource management,’ Journal of Environmental Management, vol. 90, pp. 1933–1949
  12. 1 2 3 4 5 Billgrena, C., Holme, H. (2008) ‘Approaching reality: Comparing stakeholder analysis and cultural theory in the context of natural resource management,’ Land Use Policy, vol. 25, pp. 550–562
  13. Freeman, E.R. (1999) ‘The politics of stakeholder theory: some further research directions,’ Business Ethics Quartley, vol. 4, Issue. 4, pp. 409–421
  14. Bowie, N. (1988) The moral obligations of multinational corporations. In: Luper-Foy (Ed.), Problems of International Justice. Boulder: Westview Press, pp. 97–113.
  15. Clarkson, M.B.E. (1995) ‘A stakeholder framework for analyzing and evaluating corporate social performance,’ Academy of Management Review, vol. 20, Issue. 1, pp. 92–117
  16. 1 2 3 4 Grimble, R., Wellard, K. (1997) ‘Stakeholder methodologies in natural resource management: a review of principles, contexts, experiences and opportunities.’ Agricultural Systems, vol. 55, Issue. 2, pp. 173–193
  17. Gass, G., Biggs, S., Kelly, A. (1997) ‘Stakeholders, science and decision making for poverty-focused rural mechanization research and development,’ World Development, vol. 25, Issue. 1, pp. 115–126
  18. Buanes, A., et al. (2004) ‘In whose interest? An exploratory analysis of stakeholders in Norwegian coastal zone planning,’ Ocean & Coastal Management, vol. 47, pp. 207–223
  19. Brugha, Ruairí; Varvasovszky, Zsuzsa (September 2000). "Stakeholder analysis: a review". Health Policy and Planning. 15 (3): 239–246. doi: 10.1093/heapol/15.3.239 .
  20. ODA (July 1995). "Guidance note on how to do stakeholder analysis of aid projects and programmes" (PDF). Overseas Development Administration, Social Development Department. Retrieved 29 April 2020.
  21. 1 2 3 4 5 6 Grimble, R (1998). Stakeholder methodologies in natural resource management, Socioeconomic Methodologies (PDF). Chatham: Natural Resources Institute. pp. 1–12. Retrieved 27 October 2014.[ permanent dead link ]
  23. Clarkson, M.B.E. (1994) A risk based model of stakeholder theory. Toronto: Working Paper, University of Toronto, pp.10
  24. Starik, M. (1995) ‘Should trees have managerial standing? Toward stakeholder status for non-human nature,’ Journal of Business Ethics, vol. 14, pp. 207–217
  25. 1 2 Prell, C., et al. (2007) Stakeholder Analysis and Social Network Analysis in Natural Resource Management. Leeds: Sustainability Research Institute, University of Leeds, pp. 1-21
  26. Ostrom, E, Schroeder, L and Wynne, S 1993. Institutional incentives and sustainable development: infrastructure policies in perspective. Westview Press. Oxford, UK. 266 pp.
  27. Bartley, T Andersson, K, Jager P and Van Laerhoven 2008 The contribution of Institutional Theories for explaining Decentralization of Natural Resource Governance. Society and Natural Resources, 21:160-174 doi : 10.1080/08941920701617973
  28. Kellert, S; Mehta, J; Ebbin, S; Litchtenfeld, L. (2000). Community natural resource management: promise, rhetoric, and reality (PDF). Society and Natural Resources, 13:705-715. Retrieved 27 October 2014.[ permanent dead link ]
  29. Brosius, J.; Peter Tsing; Anna Lowenhaupt; Zerner, Charles (1998). "Representing communities: Histories and politics of community-based natural resource management". Society & Natural Resources. 11 (2): 157–168. doi:10.1080/08941929809381069.
  30. Twyman, C 2000. Participatory Conservation? Community-based Natural Resource Management in Botswana. The Geographical Journal, Vol 166, No.4, December 2000, pp 323-335 doi : 10.1111/j.1475-4959.2000.tb00034.x
  31. Measham TG (2007) Building capacity for environmental management: local knowledge and rehabilitation on the Gippsland red gum plains, Australian Geographer , Vol 38 issue 2, pp 145–159 doi : 10.1080/00049180701392758
  32. Shackleton, S; Campbell, B; Wollenberg, E; Edmunds, D. (March 2002). Devolution and community-based natural resource management: creating space for local people to participate and benefit? (PDF). ODI, Natural Resource Perspectives. Retrieved 27 October 2014.
  33. Brooks, Jeremy S.; Waylen, Kerry A.; Mulder, Monique Borgerhoff (26 December 2012). "How national context, project design, and local community characteristics influence success in community-based conservation projects". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 109 (52): 21265–21270. doi:10.1073/pnas.1207141110. ISSN   0027-8424. PMC   3535631 . PMID   23236173.
  34. Lee, Derek E.; Bond, Monica L. (3 April 2018). "Quantifying the ecological success of a community-based wildlife conservation area in Tanzania". Journal of Mammalogy. 99 (2): 459–464. doi:10.1093/jmammal/gyy014. PMC   5965405 . PMID   29867255.
  35. Warner, M; Jones, P (July 1998). Assessing the need to manage conflict in community-based natural resource projects (PDF). ODI Natural Resource Perspectives. Retrieved 27 October 2014.
  36. "Caring for Country Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts". Australian Government. Archived from the original on 28 September 2011. Retrieved 27 October 2014.
  38. 1 2 Mascia, Michael B.; Mills, Morena (2018). "When conservation goes viral: The diffusion of innovative biodiversity conservation policies and practices". Conservation Letters. 11 (3): n/a. doi: 10.1111/conl.12442 . ISSN   1755-263X.
  39. Bluwstein, Jevgeniy; Moyo, Francis; Kicheleri, Rose Peter (1 July 2016). "Austere Conservation: Understanding Conflicts over Resource Governance in Tanzanian Wildlife Management Areas". Conservation and Society. 14 (3).
  40. Lee, Derek E. (10 August 2018). "Evaluating conservation effectiveness in a Tanzanian community wildlife management area". The Journal of Wildlife Management. 82 (8): 1767–1774. doi:10.1002/jwmg.21549. ISSN   0022-541X.
  41. Lee, Derek E; Bond, Monica L (26 February 2018). "Quantifying the ecological success of a community-based wildlife conservation area in Tanzania". Journal of Mammalogy. 99 (2): 459–464. doi:10.1093/jmammal/gyy014. ISSN   0022-2372. PMC   5965405 . PMID   29867255.
  42. "NSW Legislation". Retrieved 27 October 2014.
  43. Lovell, C.; Mandondo A.; Moriarty P. (2002). "The question of scale in integrated natural resource management". Conservation Ecology. 5 (2). doi:10.5751/ES-00347-050225. hdl: 10535/2766 .
  44. 1 2 Holling C.S. and Meffe, G. K. 2002 'Command and control and the Pathology of Natural Resource Management. Conservation Biology. vol.10. issue 2. pages 328–337, April 1996
  45. ICARDA 2005, Sustainable agricultural development for marginal dry areas, International Center for Agricultural Research in the Dry Areas, Aleppo, Syria
  46. Harding R., 1998, Environmental Decision-Making: The Role of Scientists, Engineers and the Public, Federation Press, Leichhardt. pp366.
  47. Hamilton, C and Attwater, R (1996) Usage of, and demand for Environmental Statistics in Australia, in Tracking Progress: Linking Environment and Economy Through Indicators and Accounting Systems Conference Papers, 1996 Australian Academy of Science Fenner Conference on the Environment, Institute of Environmental Studies, UNSW, Sydney, 30 September to 3 October 1996.
  48. "Framework for Auditing the Implementation of Catchment Action Plans" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 21 June 2014. Retrieved 27 October 2014.
  49. "MURRAY CATCHMENT MANAGEMENT AUTHORITY : Audit Report" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 21 June 2014. Retrieved 27 October 2014.
  50. "Nature Audit" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 27 February 2015. Retrieved 27 October 2014.
  51. Gaston, KJ & Spicer, JI 2004, Biodiversity: An Introduction, Blackwell Publishing Company, Malden.
  52. Gray, JS (1997). Marine biodiversity: patterns, threats and conservation needs (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 21 July 2011. Retrieved 27 October 2014.
  53. Cooney, R (2004). The Precautionary Principle in Biodiversity Conservation and Natural Resource Management (PDF). IUCN Policy and Global Change Series. Archived from the original (PDF) on 9 May 2010. Retrieved 27 October 2014.
  54. Lackey, Robert (1998). "Seven pillars of ecosystem management". Landscape and Urban Planning. 40 (1–3): 21–30. doi:10.1016/S0169-2046(97)00095-9.
  55. Young, A 1998, Land resources: now and for the future, Cambridge University Press, UK
  56. Dale, VH, Brown, S, Hawuber, RA, Hobbs, NT, Huntly, Nj Naiman, RJ, Riebsame, WE, Turner, MG & Valone, TJ 2000, ‘Ecological guidelines for land use and management’, in Dale, VH & Hawuber, RA (eds), Applying ecological principles to land management, Springer-Verlag, NY