Files from Blackboard

---

The introduction to assignment 2

---

MAN 2009

Assignment 2

Case: Green blue zone “Oostvaarderswold” Flevoland, The Netherlands

Note: most available information is in Dutch

Context

In the Netherlands the demand for bioenergy is growing because of climate and energy policy. Colleagues of STS expect that energy crops, both first generation (grain, vegetable oils, sugars) and second generation crops (woody crops), can play an important role in the supply of biomass for bioenergy. Depending on the scenario chosen the role of second generation crops will be small or big. Supply may be both national and international. (Hoeven, 2009). The Dutch agricultural sector will profit from a bio-based economy.
Production of energy crops may have negative impacts on the environment, especially in the tropics. However, sustainable solutions are available. Criteria for sustainable biomass production for energy purposes are under construction (NEN, 2009). In search for options to combine energy crops and biodiversity conservation in the Netherlands, one of the options was the production of energy crops like willow in corridors of ecological networks (Londo, 2002).

One of the main nature conservation aims of the Dutch government is to establish an Ecological Main Structure (Ecologische Hoofdstructuur: EHS). The EHS is an ecological network. The connectivity of the network depends on corridors. Most of them will be rather small or patchy, while some of them will be robust.
One such robust corridor will be the green blue zone Oostvaarderswold in the province of Flevoland (see map). This zone is planned to connect the Oostvaardersplassen, a famous new wetland and part of both the EHS and the European ecological network Natura 2000, and the Horsterwold, a young forest area and part of the EHS. Via the Horsterwold species should be able to migrate towards the Veluwe, a sandy hill range, part of the EHS and Natura 2000. Green blue means that both land and water have a place and function in the corridor. The corridor will be about 1800 ha, 11 km long and on average 1.5 km wide. Besides connectivity, recreation and water management (water storage) will be important functions of the zone. Oostvaardersplassen, OostvaardersWold and Horsterwold together will constitute the new natural area “Het Oostvaardersland”, about 15,000 ha in size, see map. (Provincie Flevoland, 2009). This new natural area will include or border other existing nature areas like Fluitbos, Kotterbos, Grote Trap, Roerdomptochtstrok, Vaartbos and Priembos (Alterra, 2009).

One of the focus species that should be able to migrate between the Oostvaardersplassen and the Veluwe is the Red Deer (Cervus elaphus; Edelhert), but also other species should be able to make use of the corridor, like Koniks (horses) and Heck cattle, and many others. Because of its conservation status the biodiversity of the Oostvaardersplassen is well known. The same holds true for the Veluwe.
The plan of the corridor is already decided on by the province of Flevoland, responsible for the development of this corridor. It should be realised in 2014. Part of the decision process was the making of an (Plan) Environmental impact assessment (Arcadis, 2009), a study that contains much information about the planned corridor and some alternatives. It also contains an agricultural impact assessment, because the corridor has to be developed on agricultural land.

Flevoland has a modern and strong agricultural structure. This is the result of the young agricultural history of Flevoland. It was impoldered in 1957 (eastern part) and 1968 (western part). Because after impoldering the land was ‘empty’, a modern farm structure could be established. Farms are 10-20 years old, with an average size of 58 hectares. Production conditions are favourable for all kinds of agricultural production. Most farms produce crops like potatoes, sugar beets, grain, maize, onions or grass, some have got an intensive farming branch. There are some dairy farms. On the planned site of the corridor 35 farms have land, 15 farms with all their land and 20 farms part of it within the zone (Arcadis, 2009).

In the Oosterwold plan no agricultural activities or functions are included. Corridor and agriculture will be strictly separated. The farms within the planned corridor area will be bought as a whole or part of it. The principle is that farmers sell voluntarily. There will be room for farmers to participate in nature management of the corridor and to offer environmental services (groenblauwe diensten).

A specific ecological problem in the region is that till 2050 land surface will fall about 50 cm. Both the corridor and surrounding agricultural land will face problems of rising groundwater table.


The assignment

We suppose that one of the farmers is reluctant to sell his farm for the corridor. Half of his farm lies within the corridor plan. He has a good farm and he likes the location and its environment. However, he is willing to cooperate by adapting his land use. One option is to produce energy crops. So he asks you to find out if energy crops could ecologically support the aims of the corridor. More precisely he asks you to design a sustainable multifunctional energy crop plantation that supports the aims of the corridor. Attention has to be paid to the connection between plantation and corridor. You only have to look at the ecological aspects of this option, including productivity of selected energy crops. The economic side of the question has to be looked at by another consultancy. (It is not very likely that in Flevoland energy crops can compete with crops like potatoes, sugar beets etc)

Some characteristics of the farm (no reel data):
Location: south of the corridor (see map)
Size: ca 60 ha of which ca 30 within the planned boundaries of the corridor.
Farm buildings outside the corridor
Current crops: potatoes, grass or other crops
Energy crops: first and/or second generation crops
Preference for multifunctional land use: combinations with e.g. biodiversity conservation, restoration and development at the site and in its surroundings; (ground)water conservation; recreation.

Important criteria for framing the design are the Cramer criteria, which are further developed by the NEN:
NEN, 2009. Sustainability criteria for biomass for energy purposes. NTA 8080 English draft CEN TC 383 (on blackboard)

References

Provincie Flevoland, 2009. Oostvaarderswold. http://provincie.flevoland.nl/omgevingsplan/oostvaarderswold_2/index.xml
This is the website of the Province of Flevoland about Oostvaarderswold. With many links to plans, documents and maps.

A selection from these plans etc and other references:
Arcadis, 2009. Planmer groenblauwe zone Oostvaarderswold. Provincie Flevoland, Lelystad. http://provincie.flevoland.nl/omgevingsplan/oostvaarderswold_2/links_downloads_2/Publicaties/planmer_oostvaarderswold/21-09%20Plan%20MER%20Oostvaarderswold%20LR.pdf
Bade, T., B. van Middendorp & G. Smid, 2009. Nieuwe natuur, nieuwe economie. Over de potentiële baten van het Oostvaardersland. Triple E, Arnhem. http://provincie.flevoland.nl/omgevingsplan/oostvaarderswold_2/links_downloads_2/Publicaties/NieuweNatuurNieuweEconomie.pdf
Biemans, M. et al., 2008. Impacts of biofuel production on biodiversity in Europe. ECNC, Tilburg. http://www.ecnc.org/file_handler/documents/original/view/73/final-report-biofuelspdf.pdf
Brenninkmeijer, A., N. Beemster & D. Bos 2006. Foerageermogelijkheden voor kiekendieven en herbivore watervogels rond de Oostvaardersplassen en Lepelaarplassen. Veenwouden. Altenburg&Wymenga, ecologisch onderzoek bv.
ICMO, 2006. Reconciling Nature and human interests. Report of the international Committee on the management of large herbivores in the Oostvaardersplassen (ICMO). Den Haag/Wageningen. Wageningen UR. http://www.knepp.co.uk/Other_docs/Frans%20Vera/OOSTVAARDERSPLASSEN_DEFINITIEF1.pdf
Ministerie van LNV, 2009. Gebiedendatabase http://www.synbiosys.alterra.nl/natura2000/
Natuurloket. www.natuurloket.nl (maps with distribution of protected and threatened species)
Projectorganisatie OostvaardersWold, 2008. Voorstudie Alternatieven. Inrichting OostvaardersWold. Rotterdam. Enno Zuidema Stedebouw/Dienst Landelijk Gebied. http://provincie.flevoland.nl/omgevingsplan/oostvaarderswold_2/onderzoek/voorstudie_alternatieven_/pdf_voorstudie/Voorstudie%20Alternatieven%20Inrichting%20OostvaardersWold-2008-06-04.pdf
Provincie Flevoland, 2003. W-tje(s) van de Flevolandse natuur. Lelystad. http://provincie.flevoland.nl/themas/natuurlandschap/natuur_beleven/natuurkennis/weetjes.pdf
Provincie Flevoland, 2009. Plangebied Oostvaarderswold met geografische namen. Lelystad. http://provincie.flevoland.nl/omgevingsplan/oostvaarderswold_2/links_downloads_2/Downloads/overzichtskaart_oostvaard/plangebied%20met%20namen.PDF
Provincie Flevoland, 2009. Plankaart Oostvaarderswold. Lelystad. http://provincie.flevoland.nl/omgevingsplan/oostvaarderswold_2/links_downloads_2/Downloads/plankaart_oostvaarderswol/EZS-0103D-00-Plankaart%20OostvaardersWold-totaal-2009-04-28.pdf
Provincie Flevoland, 2009. Structuurvisie OostvaardersWold – ontwerp. Lelystad. http://provincie.flevoland.nl/omgevingsplan/oostvaarderswold_2/links_downloads_2/Publicaties/structuurvisie_oostvaarderswold%20jan09/Structuurvisie_met_lay_out_januari_2009%20LR.pdf
Provincie Flevoland, 2009. Vragen en antwoorden n.a.v. de PlanMER en Landbouw Effect Rapportage OostvaardersWold. Lelystad. http://provincie.flevoland.nl/omgevingsplan/oostvaarderswold_2/vragen_over_de_planmer/pdf_vragenlijst_planmer/vragen_en_antwoorden_nav_de_planmer_en_LER_Oostvaarderswold-19juni09.pdf
Provincie Flevoland, 2009. Antwoordnota + aanvullingen Ontwerp-structuurvisie Oostvaarderswold en Planmer groenblauwe zone Oostvaarderswold, 9 juni 2009. Lelystad. http://provincie.flevoland.nl/omgevingsplan/oostvaarderswold_2/links_downloads_2/Publicaties/antwoordnota_ontwerpstruc/OVW_09-06-09%20Antwoordnota%20OVW-incl%20aanvulling.pdf
Sikkema, R., M. Junginger & A. Faaij, 2007. IEA Bioenergy Task 40 – Country report for the Netherlands. Copernicus Institute, Utrecht. http://www.bioenergytrade.org/downloads/netherlandscountryreport2007ieatask40.pdf

See also references for assignment 2 in the manual.

Department of Science, Technology and Society

Copernicus Institute

Faculty of Science





MSc programme Environmental Biology Specialisation ‘Ecology and Natural resource
management’





Management of natural resources in context (MAN)









A 7.5 ECTS course



August 31 – November 4 2009











Manual





















OSIRIS: SK-MNMAN













Co-ordination and supervision

Dr Jos Dekker, Van Unnikgebouw, room 1126B;
030 253 9153/7600; j.n.m.dekker@uu.nl

Dr Pita Verweij, Van Unnikgebouw, room 1127;
030 253 7605/7600; p.a.verweij@uu.nl

Department STS/Copernicus Institute

Universiteit Utrecht









Preface



This course is part of the MSc programme Environmental Biology specialisation E&NRM. It
is an obligatory course of 7.5 ECTS in period 1 of the second year of the MSc programme.

The starting point is different from other NRM courses. The number of lectures is limited,
there are two assignments, and the focus is on solving an NRM problem and on reflecting
your position as manager.

We would like to receive any comments on the course, during the course or afterwards.



Jos Dekker & Pita Verweij



Utrecht, August 2009







Contents



Study guide

This part contains the information you need to participate in the course



1. Overview..............................................................................................................4
MAN........................................................................................................................4
Context...................................................................................................................4
Aims.......................................................................................................................4
Two assignments......................................................................................................5
Grading...................................................................................................................6
Supervision..............................................................................................................6
2. Management of Natural Resources in Context..............................................................7
Mapping Natural Resource Management.........................................................................7
Questions................................................................................................................7
A complex problem....................................................................................................8
NRM in this course....................................................................................................10
3. Two assignments..................................................................................................11
A1. Essay on community-based natural resources management.........................................11
A2. Design of a sustainable multi-functional bio-energy plantation.....................................13
Phases and interim products (see time schedule)...........................................................16
4. Guiding lectures...................................................................................................22
6. Programme..........................................................................................................25




1. Overview



MAN



The course ‘Management of natural resources in context (MAN)’ is a reflection on and
exercise in natural resources management in its societal context. The emphasis is on
application of what you already know, what you are able to do and what you can learn
yourself. Your main activity is working on two assignments.

In the first assignment you write an essay about man's position in the conservation of nature.
More precisely, you evaluate the strategy of community-based natural resources management.
The second assignment is a project in which you design a sustainable multifunctional
bioenergy plantation. The evaluation of the first assignment can and should be applied as a
part of the design framework in the second assignment.



The course is obligatory for E&NRM students.

It counts for 7.5 ECTS.

It is not full time, but it fits in the system of timeslots. The timeslot is A: Monday morning
and Wednesday morning are available meeting moments. We expect you to spend on average
20 hours a week during the course.



Context



This course is programmed as the first course of the second year of E&NRM. It is a bridge
between the first year with its focus on scientific education and the second year focussing on
the application of your knowledge and skills on real world natural resource management
problems in an internship.

More about the position of MAN in the E&NRM program, see chapter 2.





Educational principles



We suppose that you already have learned a lot of relevant facts, concepts and theories. You
have mastered important academic skills and methodologies.

Now the emphasis is on the application of what you know and what you are able to do. At the
same time we suppose that you will learn new things just by doing. This applies for this
course and especially for the internship in the second half of this academic year.

So, our position changes from teaching to challenging, and your position from learning to
application and learning in practice. Moreover the focus changes from analysing systems to
the construction or design of new systems by means of useful knowledge and concepts,
strategies and instruments.



Aims

. To develop an innovative design concerning the management of an NRM problem.

. To apply already learned methodologies, knowledge and skills to analyse problems
and develop innovative designs.

. To develop new skills.

. To learn about the roles of academics and (natural) science in the context of natural
resources management.

. To enhance individual professional identity and social responsibility in relation to
natural resources management.










Two assignments



Following the educational principles, the number of lectures is restricted. The main activity is
working on two assignments:



A1. To write an evaluative essay about community-based natural resources management

A2. To develop a design of a sustainable multi-functional bio-energy plantation.



A1. In the first assignment you have to determine your own position in a debate about
community-based NRM (CBNRM). CBNRM is one out of different possible institutional
arrangements for managing common-pool resources. Many resources are a common-pool
resource, which means that they are not privately owned but accessible and available for more
than one person.

The debate is about the role of man in nature. Many views exist about this topic, in terms of
acceptable or desired attitudes towards nature, views and images of nature, and strategies and
activities concerning conservation. Points of view vary from on the one hand total exclusion
of man, among them local people, out of national parks, to on the other hand the inclusion of
(sustainable) human activities because of a social point of view and/or their necessary role in
management and conservation.

In this assignment you reflect on the principle of inclusion/exclusion of man and his activities
in natural resources management.



A2. In the second assignment you have to develop an all embracing view or design for a
sustainable multifunctional bio-energy plantation. Biomass is a natural resource for energy
production. In principle it is a sustainable energy resource, because you can let it grow again
and again. Moreover, it stores CO2 during its growing phase and that makes it an option for
reduction of CO2 emissions and by that climate change. Its potentials are huge and the area for
bio-energy plantations is fast increasing. However, there are serious ecological and social
impacts of bio-energy plantations. As other kinds of agricultural land use they have direct and
indirect impacts on biodiversity and environment. Besides they compete with other
agricultural productions and as a consequence they may have impacts on food availability and
food prices.

New policies (Cramer criteria) enhance a sustainable production of bio-energy. Taking into
account environmental conditions, choosing the most suitable plant species and the best


management practice, trying to use a multifunctional approach (protecting or enhancing local
biodiversity, protecting water resources, enriching the landscape) are options to develop a
more sustainable production.

In the assignment the plantation should include different functions in a sustainable way. Many
options are possible. It is up to you and your group to design an innovative plan for such a
plantation. Being innovative is an important requirement of the assignment.

In this assignment you can make use of the arguments and experiences concerning the
principle of inclusion/exclusion of man in natural resources management, discussed in the
first assignment.



A more detailed description of the assignments can be found in chapter 3.



Grading



Requirements

. To follow all the lectures, see the schedule (chapture 6) and the overview of the
lectures (chapter 4).

. To write an essay on CBNRM.

. To write a plan for a sustainable multifunctional sea reserve with a group.

. You can find the detailed requirements for the two assignments in chapter 3.






Grading



Assignment 1: Essay CBNRM

Assignment 2: Design of a sustainable multifunctional sea reserve

Grade is equal for all participants of a group.



The grades for both assignments will be rounded off according to education and examination
regulations (5.49 or lower in whole numbers and 5.5 or higher in whole or half numbers). The
grades for both assignments should be at least 4.0.

A1 counts for 30% and A2 for 70% of the final grade. The final grade will be rounded off like
the grades for the assignments.

Too much absence during the lectures may reduce the final grade with a maximum of 1 point.



You will have passed if the final grade is at least 6.0 (5.5 will be rounded off to 6).

When this is not met, and the final mark is at least 4.0, the individual student is given a once-
only opportunity to do an additional or substitute assignment.



Supervision


Jos Dekker and Pita Verweij will lead the course. Jos is the co-ordinator, responsible for the
course as a whole and supervisor of the North Sea project. Pita is the supervisor of the
CBNRM essay.




2. Management of Natural Resources in Context



Mapping Natural Resource Management



What is NRM? The question has been asked in the first course, Ecology and NRM. But in the
run of the programme last year you may have asked this question yourself again. For in
different parts of this programme different approaches and perspectives were used.

The question is the more important because in the second half of the second year you have to
present yourself as a coming natural resources manager. And after that you have to know what
your professional identity is and what your competences are.

To find an answer is not so easy. In the environment of the natural resources management
program there are plenty of related competences: environmental science, environmental
management and policy, ecology and nature protection, sustainable development, etc.

The problem of NRM is as old as man. Throughout history most people lived at the edge of
scarcity. Most of them had to struggle to get access to natural resources. The start of the recent
concerns about the supply of natural resources was during and after World War II. The USA
and Europe were concerned about the availability of minerals and energy for reconstruction
and renewed industrial growth. Environmentalists started to warn for environmental impacts
of growing resource use in the sixties. Hardin (1968) characterised the problem as 'The
tragedy of the commons'. The tragedy is that man is part of a social system that forces him to
individually increase the use of common-pool resources, while these resources are limited.
The result is depletion or devastation of the resources.

It was already a topic at the first UN conference concerning the environment in 1972. Themes
of natural resource management on that conference were agriculture, forestry, fisheries,
…wildlife, and the countryside. At the same time less developed countries were afraid that
environmental concerns would slow down their development.

The strict preservation of wildlife in a tropical forest with exclusion of all kinds of human use,
is that NRM? Is farming a kind of natural resource management? Is Shell a natural resource
managing company?


Questions

Reflecting on NRM, a lot of questions come to mind. First, what do we mean with natural?
Only biodiversity and the living environment? Are oil, gas and minerals natural resources as
well? Is the intensively used landscape a natural resource? And the air and the climate?

Second, what is a resource? Something directly useful, as some definitions say? Is a forest
only a resource related to the products extracted (timber, fruits, game). If so, are other plants
and animals of the forest, that are not explored, just nature? Are resources only things used
now, or something to save for our offspring as well? Is a resource useful for humans only, or
for other beings too? Does it make sense to call the whole natural environment a natural
resource?

What are resource problems? Of course, scarcity and depletion of resources are important
problems. So are environmental pollution and degradation. Is the free rider problem a serious
problem? And equity of access and use and the fair distribution of benefits and costs of
resource exploitation, now and in the future, are these resource problems?

Third, what do we mean with management? Is management just conservation in the field or
are planning and decision making core management activities? Is management a rational
science-based process or is it a daily struggling and muddling through a complex social
environment? Is NRM conservation or is it exploitation too? Is all management good or is
wise management something better? What kind of perspectives on resource use and
management do exist? What kind of management strategies are possible, which ones do we
prefer? Is the government the best manager, what can be the role of market forces, civil
society, local communities? How can you best organise the participation of stakeholders?
How can you link local, national and international institutions in a constructive way? How can
you relate administrative boundaries to those of natural resources?

Look at the figure. Is management of nature, not being a resource, NRM? Is a natural
resource, not being managed, an issue for NRM?

Finally, what can be the role and contribution of scientists? Should the interface between
science and management be organised in a decisionist model (managers are decisive), a
technocratic model (scientists know best) or in a more pragmatic way (co-operation of
scientists and managers)? What are the pros and cons of these different relations?

In our programme we haven’t made clear demarcations. We presented to you themes like
water and soil, fossil and renewable energy resources, biodiversity, and agriculture. We dealt
with all kinds of problems and policies. We taught you a lot of methodologies and skills.
However, our NRM coordinates seem a little bit green. In the introductory lecture I will
reflect on that.


A complex problem

All these questions show that NRM is not a simple problem. First, NRM is multi-dimensional.
It has got environmental, social, economic, political and institutional aspects. It can be
approached in a scientific-technical way and a pragmatic-management way. These dimensions
can conflict. For example the need to know more about the problem, with the urgency to take
decisions. Internationally accepted science-based practices of environmental ngo’s can
conflict with community-based practices stemming from indigenous knowledge.

Second, in space and time NRM problems are multi-level. NRM problems may vary in size
from the local to the global level. These levels are often interconnected. The local
conservation of certain species may be required because of international agreements as the
Ramsar Convention, and the Biodiversity Convention. And globalisation has its impacts on
resource use at the local level. Moreover, NRM problems may have very different time-scales,
from years to ages, but also these levels are often interconnected. Climate change is the result
of many short-term actions and can lead to short-term impacts.

Third, NRM is multi-actor. Mostly many stakeholders are involved, from scientists,
companies with their employees, employers and shareholders, non-governmental
organisations, local communities to governments. They have different relations, interests, and
views concerning the management of natural resources. Their problems are different and so
the solutions they want.

Thinking about management we are often inclined to the conservation of natural resources.
But others may want to exploit the resource. Smart, innovative solutions are needed from a
sustainable perspective. But what sustainable is, is not clear and different stakeholders may
have very different opinions about that. Even scientists take different positions.

NRM is not a science, it is an activity, or a chain of activities. First of all, management is a
process. The outcome is a certain state of the resource. Mostly there are different management
strategies to reach the same state. So, you not only have to reflect on the desired state of the
natural resource you are dealing with, you also have to think about how to come there and
how to manage that process.

Natural resources management can be institutionalized in different ways: open access regimes
(no management), private property, community property or governmental property. Except
private property these regimes have a common-pool (commons) character. A common-pool
resource is available to more than one person. Most of he complex problems of NRM relate to
these common-pool resources (CPRs). Since the mid-1980s there is a remarkable shift in
attitude towards the management of CPRs. In many (developing) countries local communities
are involved in the management institutions. A growing field of research is focusing on this
community-based natural resources management (CBNRM). However, not all CBNRM is
successful, that is why scientists are looking for design principles of sustainable CBNRM.
Agrawal (in Ostrom et al., 2002) sums up 33 different critical enabling conditions for
sustainability on the commons. Such conditions for resource system characteristics are: small
size, well-defined boundaries, low levels of mobility of the resource, possibilities of storage of
benefits from the resource and predictability. Other conditions concern group characteristics,
the relationship between resource system and group characteristics, institutional arrangements,
the relationship between resource system and institutional arrangement, and finally the
external environment (technology, markets and state).

According to Agrawal, there is no one best strategy to manage CPRs. Best strategies depend
on the kind of resource and the kind of users. There is also no one list of success factors
possible. Different configurations of resource-society relations need different sets of
principles. For example, stable (immobile) and storageable resources like lakes are better
manageable than mobile and limited storageable resources like wildlife and fish.

Important concepts in the science of CPRs are co-management and adaptive management.

Co-management is the cross-level co-operation of government and local communities. It is in
progress but not an easy strategy.

Adaptive management is learning by doing. It uses tools of systems modelling and iterative
hypothesis testing, adapting management prescriptions by treating policies as hypotheses. It
was designed to integrate uncertainty into the decision making especially regarding complex
(eco)systems like oceans. (Ostrom et al., 2002)

Thus, NRM is an activity in a complex space of very different types of natural resources, with
a lot of aspects, different levels of time and space, many actors with all their needs and views,
and plenty of possible strategies or approaches. This space is permanently changing and
different actors see it in different ways.

In that puzzling space the NRM manager and scientist need to choose positions. His/her role
and responsibility are not clear and simple. You have to reflect on the role you want to play,
on your own professional identity.

However, although this NRM space is hugh, there are lots of constraints. Most positions are
already occupied and financial and human resources to take the position you want are often
scarce. Your room to operate is bounded.

The NRM program may help you to define your own position, at least for the near future.



Sources:

Rees, Judith, 1990. Natural resources – Allocation, Economics and Policy. 2e ed. Routledge,
London.

Elinor Ostrom et al. (eds.), 2002. The drama of the commons. National Academy Press,
Washington.



NRM in this course

Besides the required knowledge and skills you have to learn, two additional points are
important to reflect on. First, wise management of natural resources. Management in itself is
not good; it can be good or bad. Management is just “all activities with the aim (to try) to
control societal processes” or, in another definition, “ the iterative process in which problems
and possible solutions are identified, priorities established, actions undertaken and results
evaluated”. So, what is ‘wise’ management?

A general accepted framework of values for management of natural resources is the concept
of sustainable development, a ‘development meeting the needs of the present generation
without compromising the capacity of the future generations to meet their own needs’
(WCED, 1987). However, this definition is still so broad that you can choose very different
and conflicting solutions for very different perceived problems.

This should be a core problem of NRM. Who defines the problems and options, which visions
and interests are at stake, which strategies can be followed, which strategy is the best one for a
specific problem in its context, how can you influence decisions of others, what has to be
researched to support good decisions or to criticise bad ones?

In MAN you need to reflect on wise management.

The second important point concerns your responsability as academically educated manager.
Coming from the university, you have special competencies and responsibilities. You can
produce the knowledge necessary to support the identification of problems and solutions and
to evaluate the results of natural resources management. And you know how to judge relevant
theories, methodologies and facts concerning their objectivity, reliability and verifiability.
You know or you can find out what values are involved in those theories and in the problem
definitions and solutions proposed, and which are not. You can assess how complete the facts
are and what the uncertainties may be. Besides, scientists have a social responsibility for the
good use of their knowledge by others.

In MAN you have to reflect on your academic responsibilities.

Both assignments offer cases in which you can deal with these two points: wise management
and academic responsibility. In the first assignment you have to choose between man-
inclusive and man-exclusive management of resources (the case you may choose yourself). In
the biomass plantation case you have to develop a sustainable multifunctional biomass
plantation in which human use of natural resources is a requirement.


3. Two assignments

A1. Essay on community-based natural resources management

Community-based natural resources management (CBRNM) is a strategy for managing
natural resources, mostly applied in relation to national parks and common pool resources, in
particular in the tropics. People living in or in the neighbourhood of nature reserves such as
national parks have to play a role in the management of the reserve according to this strategy,
for both social and ecological reasons. However, its relevance is under discussion. Related
concepts are integrated conservation and development projects (ICDPs), joint-management
programmes, co-ordinated resource management (CRM), co-management, adaptive
management etc.

Individually, you write an essay of 10 to 15 pages with an evaluation of this strategy from a
personal point of view.

The essay structure includes the following elements:

. Introduction, aim and/or main question, and scope of the essay

. Definitions and principles of CBNRM

. Your own selected evaluation criteria, and a motivation of the selection (your point of
view)

. Some cases: examples from literature (to be selected by yourselves)

. Evaluation of the selected cases: both positive and negative impacts, according to your
own evaluation criteria

. Roles of scientists and managers in the case(s)

. Discussion

. Conclusion(s)


The kind of natural resource may be the biodiversity of a national park, a more specific (group
of) species, but other natural resources may be the subject of the essay too. You will select
the topic of the essay yourselves, including the kind of natural resource and the cases you
want to focus on. You may focus on experiences in a particular country or region, or decide to
evaluate certain aspects of CBNRM (e.g. economic, ecological, social or institutional aspects).
You have to search most of the literature yourselves. Two scientific articles on CBNRM are
provided as a starting point (see p.14).


The following are examples of essay topics chosen by the NRM students in 2004/2005:

o Community based whaling management

o Community based forestry in China and Nepal

o Community-Based Natural Resources Management in the Transcarpathian Province of
Ukraine

o Community Based Natural Resources Management in South-Eastern Africa (legal and
social aspects)

o Cost-benefit analysis of CBNRM approaches in African wildlife management

o Co-management in the national park of Lanin Neuquen- Argentina (social and
institutional aspects)

o CBNRM in the Reserva Comunal Tamishiyacu-Tahuayo, Peru: Fisheries Management
in El Chino Community


The assignment will be introduced with some lectures about CBRNM. The first lecture is a
general introduction to CBNRM; and the other lecture series presents practical cases
highlighting the importance of incorporating local communities in natural resources
management around the world.

For these introductory lectures see time schedule.

The assignment will be concluded with some presentations of the most interesting essays, on:
see time schedule.



The assessment of the essays will be done according to the following evaluation criteria:

. content (70%): structure, approach, criteria chosen (point of view), analysis and
evaluation, conclusions

. form (30%): style, language, editing, references, tables and figures



Time planning:

The overall time available is 48 hours, including introduction and evaluation meetings; the net
time available for writing the essay is 41 hours. See the time schedule for the planning of
contact hours.

The supervisor of this assignment, Pita Verweij, will be available during the time slot of this
course to answer questions on the choice of the topic of the essay, the scope, the selection of
case studies, etc. You can ask her questions preferably on Monday or Wednesday between 11
and 12 AM; or by e-mail.



Literature:

Bwalya, S.M., 2004. Critical analysis of community-based wildlife resource management in
Southern Africa: case study from Zambia. Occasional paper, University of Rhode Island,
Kingston, USA, 29 pp.

http://www.cbnrm.net/pdf/bwalya_sm_001_zambiacbwm.pdf

Ylhäisi, J., 2003. Forest privatisation and the role of community in forests and nature
protection in Tanzania. Environmental Science & Policy 6: 279-290.

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=MImg&_imagekey=B6VP6-48GNXF4-3-
1&_cdi=6198&_user=3021536&_orig=search&_coverDate=06%2F30%2F2003&_qd=1&_sk=999939996&view=c&wchp=dGLbVlz-
zSkWz&md5=b0e1072fb5adc6fe6f3b4f593fa6d7b8&ie=/sdarticle.pdf



Supervision:

Dr. Pita Verweij

(e-mail p.a.verweij@uu.nl; tel. 7605).








A2. Design of a sustainable multi-functional bio-energy plantation

In this assignment you have to develop a design for a sustainable multifunctional bio-energy
plantation. Biomass is a natural resource for energy production. In principle it is a sustainable
energy resource, because you can let it grow again and again. Moreover, it stores CO2 during
its growing phase and that makes it an option for reduction of CO2 emissions and by that
climate change compared to fossil fuels. Its potentials are huge and the area for bio-energy
plantations is fast increasing. However, there are serious ecological and social impacts of bio-
energy plantations. As other kinds of agricultural land use they have direct and indirect
impacts on biodiversity and environment. Besides they compete with other agricultural
productions and by that they may have impacts on food availability and food prices.

New policies, based on the Cramer criteria, enhance a sustainable production of bio-energy.
Taking into account environmental conditions, choosing the most suitable plant species and
the best available management practice, trying to use a multifunctional approach (protecting
or enhancing local biodiversity, protecting water resources, enriching the landscape) are
options to develop a more sustainable production.

In the assignment the plantation should include different functions in a sustainable way. Many
options are possible. It is up to you and your group to design an innovative plan for such a
plantation. Being innovative is an important requirement of the assignment.

The challenge is to develop an innovative plan (design) for a sustainable multifunctional
sea reserve with protection of marine biodiversity as one of the main functions.

In groups of approximately 5 students, you have to develop such a design with an innovative
character.

See yourself (your group) as a professional NRM consultant.

Make use of the results of assignment 1, the arguments and experiences of CBNRM, for your
perspective on a sustainable multifunctional sea reserve!

The design should fit within a given case with certain characteristics. Three cases are eligible:

1. Green blue zone (ecological corridor) “Oostvaarderswold”, Flevoland, The
Netherlands

2. Oil palm production on degraded land, East Kalimantan, Borneo, Indonesia

3. Jatropha cultivation for smallholders in southern Tanzania

Detailed descriptions of the cases are available on Blackboard, just as reference lists and
documents.



Plan site characteristics:

Case: Green blue zone Oostvaarderswold

Country: The Netherlands

Region: Flevoland

Landmanager/holding: One farmer/holding

Project goal: Plan for bio-energy plantation contributing to green blue zone
OostvaardersWold and profitable for the farmer

Current crops: Arable crops

Plantation area: Ca 30 of 60 ha

Soil type: Clay

Water supply: Sufficient, rising groundwater table

Optional crop species: first and second generation crops: grain,
vegetable oils, sugars; grass, woody crops

Natural environment: Green blue zone (robust corridor) EHS, Natura 2000,
wetlands (see map), protected and other species

Optional secondary functions: Other crops, biodiversity conservation, water
conservation, landscape development, connectivity, recreation, care,
education, other green or blue services

Relevant policies: Biobased economy, NTA8080, EHS, HR, VR, Natura 2000,
RAMSAR, Nb-wet, Ff-wet, Rode lijst, PSAN, multifunctionele landbouw
(multifunctional agriculture), WRO etc

The structure of the plan you have to make is based on the model of a management cycle with
different management functions:


The model represents a rational view on management. In practice management is often a
process of muddling through.

The emphasis in the plan should be on the options survey, the selection of the best options,
and the design of the plan with the selected options in a spatial configuration.



The structure of the report in which you present your plan, should reflect the management
cycle, see table below. The table indicates relevant methods to be used.




Model report contents

Relevant methods

. Introduction

. Problems of biomass production (problem setting)
System analysis; chain
perspective; OOPP;
SEAN

. Description of plan site and its environment

. Analysis of site biodiversity; actual functions and
use; positive and negative impacts of functions
inside and outside the area (problem analysis)

. Analysis of (inter)national policies, their
obligations, opportunities and constraints


Policy analysis

. Social map of stakeholders and their interests,
resources, power relations and views on the system


Stakeholder analysis

. Selection of priority problems

. Survey of (new) options energy crops and other
functions (option survey)

. Design principles and procedure

. Proposed design (aims, strategies, configuration)


Impact assessment;
SWOT-analysis; MCA

. Arguments supporting your design


Problemsetting

Problemanalysis

Options survey

Design

Implementation

Monitoring

Evaluation



. Instruments, (management) institutions and steps
needed to implement the plan (implementation)

. Monitoring and evaluation system

. Questions for further research.

. Discussion and conclusions



The maximum size of the report is 30 pages, standard layout, except for cover, preface, index
and annexes. Make use of point-by-point descriptions, figures, tables, graphs, maps, sketches
etc. to keep the text as short as possible.

All literature has to be searched by you. Share hardcopy reports not available on Internet with
other groups and exchange information about interviewees and interviews.

For a number of steps in the design process different methodologies or techniques can be
used, see table above. Some of them you already learned in other courses (a.o. system
analysis, MCA), others you will learn in this one (a.o. OOPP, SWOT-analysis). See Phases
and interim products below.

Total time available per person: gross 136 hours, including introduction, guiding lectures,
work group meetings, presentations of interim products and final presentation and assessment;
net time: approximately 120 hours.

See time schedule for the planning. In this time schedule meetings are planned for discussing
drafts (chapters and total) of the plan (see phases and interim products below).

Further instructions may follow during the course.

Supervision: Jos Dekker





Phases and interim products (see time schedule)



In the time schedule a number of meetings with the supervisor have been planned to discuss
interim products.

To discuss drafts on Monday morning you have to hand them in on the Friday morning
before. To discuss drafts on Wednesday morning you have to hand them in on the Tuesday
morning before.



1. Draft project plan

A good project plan is fundamental to the second assignment. Without such a plan time
pressure at the end of the course may become too high, especially for those who do another
course in the same period. The deadlines are hard and the assignment is complex, full of
uncertainties and open ends (as in real life planning).

The project plan is the tool to define and limit the assignment. A good plan can help to
organize the assignment in an efficient and effective way and to allocate the tasks in a fair and
adequate manner. Although a good plan works, there will always be unexpected events
(illness, no information available), so the plan should be adaptive.

The project plan contains:

. the composition of the group

. a Logframe matrix, including purposes, results and activities of the project

. a planning schedule (bar chart model)

. a preliminary outline of the report

. the organisation of the group.


Logframe is the Logical Framework Matrix for describing and evaluating a project in a
systematic and logical way. Making a logframe matrix is a new skill, presented at the start of
the project (see time schedule: projectplans & logframe). We will use a simplified version, see
figure.


Part of it is making a problem tree and an objective tree, which techniques will be introduced
by Pita Verweij during the first assignment (see time schedule: projectmanagement & OOPP).

The framework for the planning is the time schedule of the course (see time schedule).
Meeting dates can be seen as deadlines for the assignment components.

The project plan has to be approved by the supervisor (see time schedule: fixing projectplans).



2.Problem analysis

A well-structured problem analysis is fundamental for an innovative design. The analysis
should be scientifically sound and problem relevant. You can use methods and models you
have learned earlier, like system analysis and/or chain perspective.

For a structured problem analysis and development of options (next step) you can also use
methodologies like Strategic Environmental Analysis (SEAN) and Objective Oriented Project
Planning (OOPP). OOPP will be introduced by Pita Verweij (see Draft project plan above).
For further reading see:

http://www.snvworld.org/cds/rgMRD/rural-development/strategic-environment-analysis.htm

http://www.snvworld.org/cds/rgMRD/rural-development/oopp_1.htm



3. Options

To develop a plan (design) for a sustainable multifunctional bioenergy plantation, you need
options: possible solutions for selected problems, new technologies, possible (new) functions,
possible combinations of functions, a concept of sustainability.

Options for functions and combinations of functions can be found in Londo 2002. Other
options can be found in literature or on the web. The challenge is to find your own options. Be
creative and innovative!

Conditional is the function of biodiversity conservation. Is CBNRM an option?

For the evaluation of (combinations of) functions different methodologies can be used, such
as multi-criteria-analysis.


Moreover we will introduce as a new skill the SWOT-analysis as a first step in making an
MCA. SWOT analysis is a technique to analyse an organisation or project/plan (or even a
career). The analysis shows the Strengths and Weaknesses of the project, and the
Opportunities and Threats of the environment of the project. Strengths and Opportunities can
help the project to achieve its goals, Weaknesses and Threats may be harmful for achieving
goals. After analysing the SWOT a strategy can be developed to convert weaknesses into
strengths and threats into opportunities.

SWOT-analysis can be used to evaluate different (combinations of) options, but also to
evaluate the final design. And it can be used to evaluate the plans of other groups. (See time
schedule: SWOT analysis & MCA). SWOT-analysis can help to find criteria for the MCA,
which is a more quantified methodology for evaluating plan options.



4. Design

In this meeting you present a (first) draft of your plan/design. It is the construction of the
sustainable multifunctional bio-energy plantation. It contains the principles and methods used.
It describes the aims of the plan and the strategies to reach them. It defines your view on
sustainability, and shows your selection of functions. It can be presented on a map with a
spatial lay-out. It explains why this is the best combination of functions, the best design for
the bio-energy plantation. It discusses why this is a good solution for the problems of bio-
energy production compared to other possible solutions. For this you can make use of SWOT
and MCA.

The design should be innovative, see box.







5. More drafts

There are some more meetings possible to discuss drafts of chapters or other parts of the final
report, discussed earlier or not yet discussed (introduction, implementation, monitoring and
evaluation etc)



6. Final draft



7. Handing in report



8. Presentation

In the last plenary meeting the groups will present their results and discuss them. Rules for the
presentation will follow.



9. Evaluation

Projects and course will be evaluated.



Innovation is ‘making something new’. Or it is the ‘successful exploitation of new ideas’.
“Industrial innovation includes the technical, design, manufacturing, management and
commercial activities involved in the marketing of a new (or improved) product or the
first commercial use of a new (or improved) process or equipment.”(Freeman)

Innovation types are of an incremental, radical or transformation nature and concern
product, service or process.

Innovation is mostly not a ‘breakthrough’, nor an isolated activity or a linear process.

Instead, innovation is mostly an incremental, complex process of an evolutionary kind.



Harro van Lente, 2004.




Assessment criteria assignment 2:

. report content (50%): structure, approach, design, innovative character

. report form (30%): style, language, editing, references, tables and figures

. presentation (10%): structure, content, form

. process (10%): organisation and planning, autonomy, initiative and dedication


Some references assignment 2: biobased economy

Buddenhagen, Ch.E., Ch. Chimera & P. Clifford, 2009. Assessing biofuel crop invaseveness:
a case study. PLoS ONE 4(4): e5261.

Dam, Jinke van, 2009. Sustainability of bioenergy chains: the result is in the details. Thesis
Universiteit Utrecht (chapters 2 and 7)

http://igitur-archive.library.uu.nl/dissertations/2009-0504-200337/dam.pdf

Danielsen, F., et al., 2008. Biofuel plantations on forested lands: double jeopoardy for
biodiversity and climate. Conservation Biology 23,2: 348-358.

Dornburg, Veronika, 2004. Multi-functional biomass systems. Thesis Universiteit Utrecht.

http://igitur-archive.library.uu.nl/dissertations/2004-1207-114735/index.htm

Dornburg, Veronika et al., 2008. Biomass Assessment: Assessment of globale biomass
potentials and their links to food, water, biodiversity, energy demand and economy. Main
report and supporting document. WAB, MNP, Bilthoven (chapter 5 of supporting document)

http://www.pbl.nl/en/publications/2008/Assessment_of_global_biomass_potentials_MainReport.html

http://www.pbl.nl/en/publications/2008/Assessment_of_global_biomass_potentials_SupportingDocument.html

Gerbens-Leenes, P.W., A.Y. Hoekstra, Th. van der Meer, 2009. The water footprint of energy
from biomass: a quantitative assessment and consequences of an increasing share of bio-
energy in energy supply. Ecological Econics 68: 1052-1060.

Hoefnagels, Ric, Veronika Dornburg, Andre Faaij, Martin Basse, 2009. Analysis of the
economic impact of large-scale deployment of biomass resources for energy and materials in
the Netherlands. Macro-economics biobased synthesis report. Copernicus Instituut, Utrecht.

http://www.lei.wur.nl/NR/rdonlyres/0DBD8687-E80A-4A48-A835-
08A2300AB376/82298/00_Macroeconomics_biobased_synthesisreport.pdf

Hoeven, Diederik van der (red.), 2009. Bio-based economy in Nederland. EnergieTransitie
Platform Groen Grondstoffen, Sittard. http://www.senternovem.nl/mmfiles/Bio-
based%20economy%20in%20Nederland%20-%20Macro-
economische%20verkenning_tcm24-298861.pdf

Lewandowski, I., J.M.O., Scurlock, E. Lindvall, M. Christou, 2003. The development and
current status of perennial rhizomatous grasses as energy crops in the US and Europe.
Biomass & Bioenergy 25: 335-361.

LNV, 2007. Overheidsvisie op de bio-based economy in de energietransitie. Den Haag.

Londo, Marc, 2002. Energy farming in multiple land use. Thesis Universiteit Utrecht.
(chapters 2, 3, 5, 6)

http://igitur-archive.library.uu.nl/dissertations/2002-0716-112357/inhoud.htm

NEN, 2009. Sustainability criteria for biomass for energy purposes. NTA 8080 English draft
CEN TC 383.

Smeets, Edward, 2008. Possibilities and limitations for sustainable bioenergy production
systems. Thesis Universiteit Utrecht. (chapters 2, 4, 7)

http://igitur-archive.library.uu.nl/dissertations/2008-0717-200447/smeets.pdf


4. Guiding lectures

Community-based Natural Resources Management (CBNRM).
Dr Pita Verweij, Department of STS Utrecht University
Pita will give an introduction to the concept and show some of its applications.

See Assignment 1.

Dr Frank van Laerhoven, Environmental sciences Utrecht University
Frank will do a forest management simulation game and introduce the problem of
management of common pool resources



Projectmanagement and OOPP
Dr Pita Verweij
Starting with the management cycle (see p. 13) Pita explains the structure and function of
Objective Oriented Project Planning (OOPP). It is a tool to analyse and solve problems in a
systematic way, following a number of steps leading to the construction of a problem tree and
an objective tree. OOPP could be used at the heart of the second assignment.



Projectplan and logframe
Dr Jos Dekker, STS, and MSc Sander van Andel, IUCN
The start of the project in the second assignment is the making of a project plan. The logframe
is a part of the project plan. It is a tool to systematically describe the objectives/purposes,
desired/required results and activities (to achieve the results) of the project. Sander van Andel
will show its application by the IUCN.



Science-policy interface
Dr Jos Dekker
Most scientific support for NRM develops in a science-policy interface. Jos Dekker will tell
about the structure and functioning of this science-policy interface. What are the opportunities
and what the risks for scientists operating in this science-policy interface? What are their
responsibilities in this field?



The problem of objectivity, impartiality and scientific integrity
Dr Jos Dekker
The roots of STS go back to the seventies of last century, when the (lack of) responsibility of
scientists was criticized because the application of scientific knowledge caused a lot of
problems, for example the use of pesticides. The task of Science & Society departments was
to learn students about the social responsibility of scientists.

In the science-policy interface the scientist who is working for governmental institutions,
companies and ngo's meets values and standards that differ from academic ones. Important
scientific standards for him/her are objectivity, impartiality and scientific integrity. These
values are sometimes challenged when working for a commercial, political or interest
organisation. These institutions want support, not just facts.

In this workshop we will discuss one or more articles with case studies about this problem.



SWOT-analysis and MCA
Dr Jos Dekker
To evaluate different options or plan alternatives SWOT analysis and MCA are useful tools.
SWOT means Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats of an option or plan. An
MCA is a more quantitiative evaluation method. In this lecture especially the SWOT will be
explained. MCA has already been introduced in the Principles course.




Principles of NRM
Dr Pita Verweij
In this lecture Pita Verweij will discuss principles for designing successful natural resources
management. Especially regarding common-pool natural resources. This lecture may inspire
your search for the design of a successful and sustainable multifunctional sea reserve.



Bio-based economy
Dr Pita Verweij: Bio-energy production and biodiversity
Dr. Jinke van Dam (STS): biomass production in Europe, potentials and risks
Ir. Janske van Eijck (STS): Jatropha production in Africa
Dr. Martin Junginger (STS): potentials of biomass to reduce GHG emissions.