We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Online ordering will be unavailable from 17:00 GMT on Friday, April 25 until 17:00 GMT on Sunday, April 27 due to maintenance. We apologise for the inconvenience.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected]
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
The IUCN protected area management category system provides an internationally-recognized, unifying framework for the description and classification of the world’s diverse protected areas. It includes six main categories, of which category V has attracted debate because of its emphasis on the role of harmonious people–nature interactions in maintaining biodiversity within cultural landscapes. Madagascar’s new generation of protected areas comprises sites mainly proposed as category V, with the joint management objectives of biodiversity conservation and the promotion of natural resource use for rural development. Here, I use a categorization decision tool to investigate the categorization of 10 new protected areas proposed as category V, and find that these sites fail to meet the criteria for any management category. I argue that category V is inappropriate for these new protected areas because their associated people–nature interactions are largely negative for biodiversity. I further argue that management of these new protected areas differs fundamentally from management of category V protected areas in Europe, and recommend the modification of the management category system to account for such distinctions.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.