Integrating rural development and biodiversity conservation in Central Romania

Abstract

SUMMARYUnlike most parts of the European Union (EU), Southern Transylvania (Central Romania) is characterized by an exceptionally high level of farmland biodiversity. This results from traditional small-scale farming methods that have maintained extensive areas of high nature value farmland. Following the post-socialist transition, Southern Transylvania faces serious challenges such as under-employment and rural population decline, which put traditional farming at risk. With Romania's accession to the EU in 2007, Southern Transylvania became part of a complex multi-level governance system that in principle provides mechanisms to balance biodiversity conservation and rural development. To this end, the most important instruments are the 'Natura 2000' network of protected areas and EU rural development policy. Structured questionnaires and semi-structured interviews with town hall representatives from 30 villages in Southern Transylvania and local EU experts revealed that EU policies are often poorly aligned with local conditions. To date, the implementation of EU rural development policy is strongly focused on economic development, with biodiversity conservation being of little concern. Moreover, relevant EU funding opportunities are poorly communicated. Bridging organizations should be strengthened to foster the implementation of a rural development strategy that integrates local needs and biodiversity conservation.

Bio-cultural refugia—Safeguarding diversity of practices for food security and biodiversity

“…Because they are not recognized as important, the Common Agricultural Policy threatens biocultural refugia in Europe (Mikulcak et al, 2013). An ongoing and accelerating generational amnesia of traditional practices and experiences in agricultural landscapes accelerates the erosion of biodiversity and regulating ecosystem services.…”

A holistic approach to studying social-ecological systems and its application to southern Transylvania

“…In this respect, national governments need to be able to anticipate and buffer potentially negative impacts and to build societal capacities to capitalize on the opportunities provided by change. Both national and sub-national governments in Romania, for example, currently appear to favor economic growth in the farming sector over the support of smallholder farmers and nature conservation (Mikulcak et al 2013). Potentially useful EU policies for rural development are not used to their full potential (Mikulcak et al 2013), and weak governmental agencies and illenforced legislation support the exploitation of Romania's natural capital (Nichiforel andSchanz 2011, Knorn et al 2012).…”

“…Both national and sub-national governments in Romania, for example, currently appear to favor economic growth in the farming sector over the support of smallholder farmers and nature conservation (Mikulcak et al 2013). Potentially useful EU policies for rural development are not used to their full potential (Mikulcak et al 2013), and weak governmental agencies and illenforced legislation support the exploitation of Romania's natural capital (Nichiforel andSchanz 2011, Knorn et al 2012). In contrast to existing conditions, sustainable development could be positively influenced, for example, by more effective downward delegation of government authority to competent local actors (Folke et al 2005, Ostrom 2009), which might be more responsive to local needs and aspirations (Crook and Sverrisson 2001).…”

“…Such "bridging organizations" Moser 2000, Olsson et al 2007) serve to increase transparency in policy making and facilitate information transfer, both from higher to lower levels of administration and to other potentially interested parties (Olsson et al 2007, Berkes 2009). For example, in Transylvania, some local organizations assist farmers in acquiring EU rural development funding and in marketing their products (Mikulcak et al 2013), support the maintenance of cultural heritage, or inform people about legal issues around recently created conservation areas. Bridging organizations can also help to foster trust, lower the costs of conflict resolution and collaboration, and increase community cohesion, and thus, support the development of social capital (Folke et al 2005).…”

“…The collapse of Romania's communist regime in 1989, in combination with the general breakdown of socialism in Eastern Europe, led to a substantial reorganization of institutions, economies, and societies, with far-reaching social-ecological consequences, including mass emigration (especially of ethnic Saxons, but also Romanians), farmland abandonment, and changing land-use patterns stemming from the privatization of land (Ioffe et al 2004, Lerman et al 2004, Rozelle and Swinnen 2004, Kuemmerle et al 2009, Baumann et al 2011. Moreover, Romania's 2007 accession to the European Union (EU), as well as ongoing globalization, continue to alter the socioeconomic and institutional fabric of http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol19/iss4/art32/ the region, threatening both social and natural capital (Dobre 2009, Gorton et al 2009, Mikulcak et al 2013. Navigating the rapid and fundamental changes taking place in southern Transylvania poses major challenges to local stakeholders and provides both risks and opportunities for sustainable development (Fischer et al 2012b).…”