A Comparison of Effectiveness of the Management of Conservation Areas of China and Indonesia

A Comparison of Effectiveness of the Management of Conservation Areas of China and Indonesia

Loading document ...
Loading page ...


Author(s): Arif Sulfiantono, M. Taufik Tri Hermawan, Maluyi

Download Full PDF Read Complete Article

655 1287 73-82 Volume 2 - Nov 2013


This study uses two methods of measuring the effectiveness of different management of protected areas, namely RAPPAM and METT. In this study compared the management of conservation areas between Merapi Volcano National Park, Indonesia and Beijing Songshan National Nature Reserve, China. The research was conducted by interviews and questionnaires with the manager and staff. The results revealed that Merapi Volcano NP and Songshan NNR have managed quite effectively. On RAPPAM methods, Merapi Volcano NP has management index of 0.63, and Songshan NNR 0.844. METT methods score for Merapi Volcano NP of 2.3, and Songshan NNR of 2.47. Those values are above the midpoint of the maximum value possible. RAPPAM and METT methods can be used simultaneously to capture the effectiveness of protected area management, as well as to determine the priority activities that need to be streamlined.


Protected areas, RAPPAM, METT, Songshan National Nature Reserve, Merapi Volcano National Park, Effectiveness


  1. Beijing Songshan NNR. 2012. About Beijing Songshan National Nature Reserve. From leaflet and website http://www.songshan.org.cn
  2. Bonham, Curan A., Sacayon, E., Tsi, Ernesto. 2008. Protecting Imperiled “Paper Parks”: Potential Lessons from the Sierra Chinaja, Guatemala. Biodivers Conserv. (2008) 17 : 1581 - 1593
  3. Bruner,. Aaron G, Gullison., Raymond E, Rice., Richard E, da Fonseca., Gustavo, A.B. 2001. Effectiveness of Park in Protecting Tropical Biodiversity. Science 291: 125-128. www.sciencemag.org SCIENCE VOL 291. January 5, 2001
  4. Burgess, Meryl. 2012. The Challenge in Conservation of Biodiversity: Regulation of National Parks in China and South Afrika in Comparison. Discussion Paper. Stellenbosch : Centre for Chinese Studies, Universiteit Stellenbosch University - South of Africa
  5. Dudley, N. (Editor). 2008. Guidelines for Applying Protected Area Management Categories. Switzerland: IUCN. x + 86pp.
  6. Dunggio, Iswan & Gunawan, Hendra. 2009. Telaah Sejarah Pengelolaan Taman Nasional di Indonesia. Journal of Forestry Policy Analysis, Indonesia, Vol.6 No. 1, April 2009, page: 43 – 56
  7. Ervin, J. 2003. WWF: Rapid Assessment and Prioritization of Protected Area Management (RAPPAM) Methodology. Switzerland: WWF (World Wildlife Fund) International
  8. Guthridge-Gould. 2010. 50 Years of Working for Protected Areas. A Brief History of IUCN World Commission on Protected Areas. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland. www.iucn.org
  9. Hermawan,Taufik, 2010, Laporan Efektivitas Pengelolaan Taman Nasional Gunung Merapi. Yogyakarta: Fakultas Kehutanan UGM. Tidak diterbitkan
  10. Hocking, Marc., Stolton. Sue., Leverington, Fiona,, Dudley, Nigel., Courrau, Jose., Valentine, Peter. 2006. Evaluating Effectiveness: A Framework for Assessing Management Effectiveness of Protected Areas 2nd edition. WCPA Best Practice Protected Areas Guidelines Series No. 14. UK: IUCN (International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources Reproduction)
  11. Jepson, Paul & Whittaker, Robert J. 2002. Histories of Protected Areas: Internationalisation of Conservationist Values and their Adoption in the Netherlands Indies (Indonesia). Environment and History 8 (2002): 129–72. UK: The White Horse Press, Cambridge
  12. Luan, Xiao-feng.,Zhou, Jian-hua., Zhou, Nan., Wu, Bo., Li, Di-qiang. 2009. Premininary Assessment on Management Effectiveness of Protected Area in Northeast China. Journal of Natural Resources. http://en.cnki.com.cn/Article_en/CJFDTOTAL-ZRZX200904002.htm
  13. Merapi Volcano National Park. 2011. Zoning of Merapi Volcano NP after Erupted in 2010. Yogyakarta: Merapi Volcano National Park. Not published
  14. Ministry of Forestry of Indonesia (MoF). 2011. Konservasi Keanekaragaman Hayati Indonesia. PPT of Workshop for Forest Ecosystem Controller, Ministry of Forestry of Indonesia, Bogor, December 5 -7, 2011
  15. Quan, Jia., Ouyang, Zhiyun., Xu, Weihua., Miao, Hong. 2011. Assessment of The Effectiveness of Nature Reserve Management in China. Journal of Biodivers Conserv (2011) 20: 779–792
  16. Santosa, A, Setyowati,AB, Sriyanto, A. 2008. Konservasi Indonesia, Sebuah Potret Pengelolaan & Kebijakan. Bogor: Pokja Kebijakan Konservasi
  17. Weihua, QIN. 2012. The Protected Areas in China. Paper of Conservation Biology Class in Beijing Forestry University. Not published
  18. WWF. 2007. Management Effectiveness Tracking Tool. Reporting Progress at Protected Area Sites: Second Edition. Switzerland: WWF (World Wildlife Fund) International
  19. WWF-Indonesia. 2010. Menilai Efektivitas Kawasan Konservasi Indonesia Tahun 2010. www.wwf.or.id
  20. Yang, Qingxia. 2011. Partnership for Facilitating Sustainable Protected Area Management: A Case Study of Jiuzhaigoy National Park in South-Western China. Thesis of Massey University, Palmerston North, New Zealand. Not published
  21. Xu, J., & Melick, D.R. 2007. Rethinking The Effectiveness of Public Protected Areas in South-Western China. Journal of Conservation Biology, Vol. 21, No. 2, page: 318-328
  22. Xu, Jiliang., Zhang, Zhengwang., Liu, Wenjing., McGowan, Philiph,JK. 2012. A Review and Assessment of Nature Reserve Policy in China: Advances, Challenges and Opportunities. Journal of Fauna & Flora International, Oryx, 46(4), 554–562, http://journals.cambridge.org

Cite this Article:

International Journal of Sciences is Open Access Journal.
This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) License.
Author(s) retain the copyrights of this article, though, publication rights are with Alkhaer Publications.

Search Articles

Issue June 2023

Volume 12, June 2023

Table of Contents

World-wide Delivery is FREE

Share this Issue with Friends:

Submit your Paper