PROTECTING TURKEY’S BIODIVERSITY BY

USING THE FRAMEWORK FOR STRATEGIC

SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT

IREM UNAY

MSc Sustainability, Entrepreneurship And Design

BRUNEL UNIVERSITY
September 2015
 Irem Unay 1438842

BURSİYER ve PROGRAMA AİT BİLGİ FORMU

Adı-Soyadı İrem Unay

Referans No. JM- 805 Sözleşme No. TR2011/0136.17-03/805
Başvuru Yaptığı Sektör Üniversite
Başvuru esnasında Bursiyerin
İstanbul Teknik Üniversitesi
Bağlı Olduğu Kurum
Bursiyerin Bağlı Olduğu Kurumun
İstanbul
İli
Başvuru esnasında Bursiyerin
Yüksek Lisans Öğrencisi
Bağlı Olduğu Kurumdaki Unvanı
Çalıştığı AB Müktesebat Başlığı Çevre ve İklim Değişikliği
Öğrenim Gördüğü Ülke İngiltere
Şehir Londra
Yabancı Dil İngilizce
Üniversite Brunel Üniversitesi
Fakülte Hayat Bilimleri
Bölüm Çevre
Program Adı Sürdürülebilirlik, Girişimcilik ve Tasarım (MSc)
Programın Başlangıç/Bitiş
15 Eylül 2014/ 18 Eylül 2015
Tarihleri
Öğrenim Süresi 12 ay
Tez/Araştırma Çalışmasının Stratejik Sürdürülebilir Kalkınma Formülü’nü Kullanarak
Başlığı Türkiye’nin Biyoçeşitliliğini Korumak
Danışmanının Adı/Soyadı Prof. John Sumpter

Danışmanının E-posta Adresi john.sumpter@brunel.ac.uk

ii
 Irem Unay 1438842

SCHOLAR AND PROGRAMME INFORMATION FORM

Name/Surname İrem Unay

Reference No. JM- 805 Contract No. TR2011/0136.17-03/805
Applied From University
Institution of the Date of
Istanbul Technical University
Application
City of the Institution on the Date
Istanbul
of Application
Title Masters Student
Related EU Acquis Chapter Environment and Climate Change
Country of Host Institution England
City of Host Institution London
Language of the Programme English
Name of the Host Institution Brunel University
Faculty Life Sciences
Department Environment
Name of the Programme MSc. Sustainability, Entrepreneurship and Design
Start/End Dates of the Programme September 15th 2014/ September 18th 2015
Duration of the Programme 12 Months
Protecting Turkey’s Biodiversity by Using the Framework For
Title of the Dissertation
Strategic Sustainable Development
Name of the Advisor Prof. John Sumpter

E-mail of the Advisor john.sumpter@brunel.ac.uk

iii
 Irem Unay 1438842

THESIS/RESEARCH REPORT APPROVAL PAGE

I have examined the dissertation/research report entitled

PROTECTING TURKEY’S BIODIVERSITY BY USING THE FRAMEWORK FOR
STRATEGIC SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
presented by
IREM UNAY
and hereby certify that it is worthy of acceptance.

../../20..
PROF. JOHN SUMPTER

BRUNEL UNIVERSITY

iv
 Irem Unay 1438842

DECLARATION of OWN WORK

I declare that this thesis entitled `Protecting Turkey’s Biodiversity by Using the Framework for
Strategic Sustainable Development` is entirely my work and that where material could be construed
as the work of others, it is fully cited and referenced, and/or with appropriate acknowledgement
given.

Signature:

Name of Student: Irem Unay

Name of Supervisor: Professor John Sumpter

v
 Irem Unay 1438842

ÖZET

Türkiye biyoçeşitliliği korumak açısından stratejik bir öneme sahiptir, çünkü olağanüstü tahribata
maruz kalan, ender yoğunlukta endemik türlere sahip bir ülkedir. Biyoçeşitliliği korumak ülke için
de oldukça kritik bir öneme sahiptir çünkü biyoçeşitlilik insan yaşamı için hayati önem taşıyan
ekosistem servislerinin ve ekonominin sürdürülebilirliği açısından vazgeçilmezdir. Türkiye’nin
biyoçeşitliliğini korumak adına bu çalışma Stratejik Sürdürülebilir Kalkınma (FSSD) Formülü’nü
devletin stratejik karar verme mekanizmasına uygulamaktadır. Temel olarak bu çalışma beş
adımdan oluşan bu formulü Türkiye’nin şu anki mevcut durumununu anlamak ve sürdürülebilirlik
prensipleri çerçevesinde biyoçeşitliliğin korunması için vazgeçilmez olan aksiyonları sunmak
amacıyla kullanmaktadır. Bu çalışma literatur taraması yoluyla Türk sosyo-ekolojik sisteminin
komponentlerini ve eksikliklerini incelemektedir, ve sonunda fonlama, biyoçeşitliliğin izlenmesi ve
hukuki çerçevede kapatılması gereken açıklar olduğunu göstermektedir. Ayrıca, bu çalışma Türk
vatandaşlarının biyoçeşitlilik konusundaki ilgisini ve farkındalığını ölçmek için bir anket de
içermektedir. Bu anketin sonucunda vatandaşların çoğunluğunun biyoçeşitlilik problemleri
konusunda bilgiye sahip olduğu, fakat çoğunlukla bu konuda harekete geçmedikleri
gözlemlenmektedir. FSSD’yi izleyerek, bu araştırma sosyal ve ekolojik sürdürülebilirlik prensipleri
dahilinde Türkiye için başarının tanımını yapmaktadır ve şimdiki sistemi, ve biyoçeşitliliği korumak
için var olan aksiyonları değerlendirmektedir. Aynı zamanda, baska stratejilerle birlikte, Ekolojik
Ağ Stratejisi’nin ek aksiyonlar olarak benimsenmesini önermektedir. Daha sonra, FSSD’yi
Türkiye’nin biyoçeşitliliğinin korunmasına uygulamak için kullanılabilecek olan ABCD planlama
aracını tanımlamaktadır. Bu araştırma ABCD’nin, sürdürülebilirlik prensiplerinden geçmişe dönme
tekniğini (backcasting) kullanarak büyük resmi görmek ve sürdürülebilir biyoçeşitlilik için gerekli
aksiyonları öncelik sırasına sokmak konularında, efektif bir planlama aracı olduğunu
göstermektedir.

vi
 Irem Unay 1438842

ABSTRACT

Turkey can be considered as a strategic area for global biodiversity conservation, because it
contains exceptional concentrations of endemic species that are gravely threatened with loss of
habitat. The protection of biodiversity is also critical for the country in terms of the viability of
ecosystem services and the economy, which are crucial for sustainability of human life. In order to
protect Turkey’s biodiversity, this study applies the Framework for Strategic Sustainable
Development (FSSD) into the government’s strategic decision-making. As its basis, this study uses
this five-level framework to discover the current situation in Turkey and to recommend essential
actions for effective biodiversity conservation within the frame of sustainability principles. This
research examines the current components of the Turkish socio-ecological system and gaps for
biodiversity protection by literature review, and finds that there are gaps that need to be filled in
funding, monitoring and legal framework. The study also involves a survey to measure the
awareness and interest level of Turkish people for biodiversity, the results of which suggest that
even if the majority of the public is aware of the biodiversity problems, they mostly do not act on it.
Following the framework, this study defines success within the ecological and social sustainability
principles to evaluate the current system and the existing strategic actions for biodiversity
conservation in Turkey. It suggests utilizing Ecological Networks strategy, among others, as
additional actions for Turkey to adopt. Then it defines the ABCD as a planning tool for Turkey to
implement the FSSD into biodiversity conservation. This study shows that ABCD can be effective
for planning, by backcasting from the sustainability principles to see the full picture and prioritising
the actions that are indispensable to move towards a sustainable biodiversity.

vii
 Irem Unay 1438842

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I hereby would like to express my deepest gratitude for my supervisor Prof. John Sumpter for his
endless support and encouragement during my research. I truly feel privileged to be able to benefit
from his invaluable expertise about biodiversity and his guidance, which helped me form the main
ideas of the entire thesis and put them in an order. He constantly encouraged me to think in a higher
level and pushing myself beyond my limits, which gave me a priceless mind-set for a lifetime. I
cannot thank enough for that reason; it was a great pleasure for me to interact with him.

I would like to thank Dr. Edwin Routledge who also helped me generate ideas about the structure of
my thesis with his expert opinions. It was an honour for me to be a part of this comprehensive and
unique course that he initiated. I would also like to acknowledge the Jean Monnet Scholarship
Programme of the European Union that has made studying at this programme possible for me. In
addition, I would like to offer special thanks to Dr. Karl-Henrik Robèrt, the founder of The Natural
Step, for his patient and detailed answers to my questions, and wise guidance that helped me greatly
to apply the Framework for Strategic Sustainable Development to my thesis.

I also appreciate the unwavering support from my beloved family and dear friends in every step of
my thesis, which gave me strength. I would especially like to thank my parents Fatma Unay, Fikret
Unay, my sister Ipek Bal, for their love and continuous encouragement which helped me stay in
focus to finish my dissertation.

viii
Irem Unay 1438842

ix
 Irem Unay 1438842

TABLE of CONTENTS

Bursiyer Ve Programa Ait Bilgi Formu ii

Scholar And Programme Information Form iii
Thesis/Research Report Approval Page iv
Declaration of Own Work v
Özet vi
Abstract vii
Acknowledgements viii
Table of Contents ix
List of Tables and Illustrations xi
Glossary xiii
Abbreviations xv
1 Introduction 1
1.1 What is biodiversity? 1
1.2 Sustainability Challenges for Biodiversity 1
1.3 Strategic Sustainable Development (SSD) 3
1.3.1 Framework for Strategic Sustainable Development (FSSD) 3
1.3.2 Sustainability Principles (SPs) 4
1.3.3 ABCD Strategic Planning Process 4
1.4 Aims and Objectives 5
1.4.1 Research Questions 5
2 Methodology 6
2.1 Research Design 6
2.2 FSSD as a Conceptual Framework7
2.3 Information Gathering Methods 8
2.3.1 Literature Review 8
2.3.1.1 Validity of Literature Review 8
2.3.2 Survey 9
2.3.2.1 Validity of Survey 9
3 FSSD Analysis of The Current Situation in Turkey 10
3.1 Systems Level 10
3.1.1 Why Should Turkish Government Be Interested in Protecting Biodiversity? 10
3.1.1.1 Economic Importance of Biodiversity in Turkey 11
3.1.1.2 The Areas in Turkey that are Worth Conserving 12

x
 Irem Unay 1438842
3.1.2 Legal Framework for Biodiversity Conservation 15
3.1.2.1 Ex-Situ Conservation 15
3.1.2.2 In-Situ Conservation 15
3.1.3 Monitoring Biodiversity in Turkey 17
3.1.4 Financing Biodiversity Protection in Turkey 18
3.1.4.1 Financing in the EU Accession Period 18
3.1.5 Education and Awareness About Biodiversity in Turkey 19
3.1.5.1 Survey Results 20
3.1.6 Stakeholders 26
3.2 Success Level 27
3.2.1 Definition of Success According to SPs 27
3.2.2 The Current Vision of Turkey for Biodiversity Protection 28
3.3 Strategic Level 28
3.3.1 Evaluation of the Current Situation 29
3.3.2 Global Strategies for Biodiversity Protection 30
3.3.2.1 Suggested Strategies for Turkey 33
3.4 Actions Level 36
3.5 Tools Level 37
3.5.1 ABCD Strategic Tool for Application of FSSD for Biodiversity Protection in Turkey 37
3.5.1.1 Step A- Vision 37
3.5.1.2 Step B- Baseline Assessment 38
3.5.1.3 Step C- Necessary Actions to Reach the Vision 38
3.5.1.4 Step D- Prioritisation of the Actions 39
4 Discussion 40
4.1 Responses to Research Questions 40
4.1.1 Application of FSSD to Protection of Biodiversity in Turkey 40
4.1.2 The Current Situation of Biodiversity Conservation in Turkey 41
4.1.3 Level of Interest and Awareness of Turkish People 42
4.1.4 Prioritisation of the Actions for Biodiversity Conservation 42
4.2 Limitations and Suggested Way Forward 43
5 Conclusion 44
References 45
Appendices 52

xi
 Irem Unay 1438842

LIST of TABLES and ILLUSTRATIONS

List of Tables

3.1 Biodiversity’s ecosystem functions 11

3.2 The importance of Turkish ecosystems’ diversity, threats upon them and gaps in their protection
14
3.3 The protected areas of Turkey 16
3.4 The stakeholders that have a role to play in maintaining biological diversity in Turkey 26
3.5 The SWOT analysis of the current situation of Turkey’s biodiversity 29
B. Laws and regulations for biodiversity protection in Turkey 54
C. Gap analysis of Turkish National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan 56
D. An assessment of the alignment between the actions of NBSAP and the SPs 57
E. Compilation of the strategic goals that are applicable to protection of Turkey’s biodiversity 64

List of Figures

1.1. The funnel metaphor shows the systematic decline in options for society 2
1.2. Sustainable development for the society in the funnel metaphor 2
1.3. Framework for strategic sustainable development 3
1.4. The ABCD planning process 4
2.1. Interaction model for research design 6
3.1 The three global biodiversity hotspots that cover Turkey 12
3.2 The 144 IPAs that have been identified in Turkey 31
3.3 Important bird areas in Turkey 31
3.4 Turkey’s ecoregions 32
3.5 The nine biodiversity hotspots in Turkey 32
3.6 Turkey’s key biodiversity areas 33
3.7 Turkey’s current protected areas 33
3.8 Generation of green corridors for the viability of wildlife 34

xii
 Irem Unay 1438842
3.9 The components of ecological networks 35
A. The survey questions designed to measure awareness and interest for biodiversity in Turkey 52

List of Graphs

3.1 The variation in the total area of protected areas of Turkey between 1958 and 2014 16
3.2 Familiarity of the Turkish people with the word ‘Biodiversity’ 20
3.3 The education level of the people who are familiar with the word ‘Biodiversity’ 20
3.4 The adequacy of the Turkish education system in biodiversity protection 21
3.5 The weighted average of interest on biodiversity in Turkey 21
3.6 Difference between interest rates in biodiversity according to hometown of the respondents 22
3.7 Percentage of the respondents who has taken personal action in order to protect biodiversity 22
3.8 The differences between interest rate of the people who did, and the people who did not, take
personal action in order to protect biodiversity 23
3.9 Comparison between the importance of social, economic and environmental issues in Turkey 23
3.10 Importance of environmental issues according to males and females 24
3.11 Percentage of contentedness of the respondents with Turkey’s environmental quality 24
3.12 Opinions of the respondents about Turkey’s progress in environmental issues 24
3.13 Relation between education level and opinion on Turkey’s environmental progress 25
3.14 The respondents’ opinion about the Turkish government’s effectiveness for biodiversity
protection 25

xiii
 Irem Unay 1438842

GLOSSARY

ABCD Planning Process: “A four-step process generated to implement the FSSD.” (Robert et al,
2012, p.173)
Backcasting: “A planning method where planners first build a vision of success in the future, and
then question what needs to be done today to reach this vision.”
Biosphere: “The surface area from the upper limits of the atmosphere to the lower layers of the
soil.” (Robert et al, 2012, p.174)
Complex System: “A system that is constituted of a relatively large number of parts that interact in
complex ways, which sometimes produces unpredictable behaviour.” (Robert et al, 2012, p.175)
Five Level Framework: “A conceptual framework that consists of five distinct, interrelated levels
and that aids in analysis, decision-making, and planning in complex systems.” (Robert et al, 2012,
178)
Fauna: “The animals of a particular region, habitat, or geological period.” (Oxford Dictionaries,
2015)
Flora: “The plants of a particular region, habitat, or geological period.” (Oxford Dictionaries,
2015)
Framework for Strategic Sustainable Development: “The application of the Five Level
Framework for planning in complex systems to a planning with sustainability as the desired
outcome.”
Funnel Metaphor: “A worldview that recognises that current unsustainability problems that are
connected in complex ways are due to systematic errors in societal design, and are systematically
weakening social and ecological fabric that civilization depends.” (Robert et al, 2012, p.178)
Human Society: “The physical infrastructure that humans have created to meet individual and
collective needs” (Robert et al, 2012, p.179)
Precautionary Approach: “Lack of scientific certainty is no reason to postpone action to avoid
potentially serious or irreversible harm to the environment.” (UNEP, 2015)
Socio-Ecological System: “The combined system that is made up of the biosphere, human society,
and their complex interactions.”
Strategic Goals: “Clear, measurable, and attainable objectives that serve as stepping-stones along
the organisation’s path towards achieving its overall vision.”

xiv
 Irem Unay 1438842

Strategic Guidelines: “Guidelines which are used to choose concrete actions as part of an overall
strategy to accomplish a goal.”
Strategic Plan: “The specific actions that an organisation chooses in order to move towards a goal,
often recorded in a written document.” (Robert et al, 2012, p.184)
Sustainable Society: “A society which could continue to develop without eroding its fundamental
life supporting systems, creating human well-being within ecological limits.”
Sustainable Development: “The active transformation from the current, globally unsustainable
society towards a sustainable society.” (Robert et al, 2012, p.185)
Zoological Diversity: Diversity of the animals of a particular region, habitat, or geological period.

xv
 Irem Unay 1438842

ABBREVIATIONS

CBD: Convention on Biological Diversity

EC: European Commission
EIA: Environmental Impact Assessment
EBA: Endemic Bird Areas
EU: European Union
FSSD: Framework for Strategic Sustainable Development
IBA: Important Bird Areas
IPA: Important Plant Areas
IUCN: International Union for Conservation of Nature
MoEF1: Ministry of Environment and Forestry (now closed)
MoFWA: Ministry of Forest and Water Affairs
MoEU: Ministry of Environment and Urbanisation
MoCT: Ministry of Culture and Tourism
MoARA: Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs (now closed)
MoFAL: Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Livestock
NBSAP: National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan
NGO: Non-Governmental Organisation
NOAA, AVHRR: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration,
Advanced Very High Resolution Radiometer
OECD: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development
UNEP: United Nations Environment Programme
WAZA: World Association of Zoos and Aquariums
WCED: World Commission on Environment and Development
WWF: World Wildlife Fund

1
MoEF was divided into MoFWA and MoEU in 2011.
xvi
 Irem Unay 1438842

1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 What is Biodiversity?

Biodiversity, or biological diversity, is a technical term that captures diversity of the whole living
world, from genes to individual species, through plant and animal communities and entire biomes
(Defra, 2010). In other words, biodiversity represents genes, species, and ecosystems, which are the
structural elements that are nestled within each other, and their ecological functions, in an area
(Cepel, 1997; Ozcelik, 2006).

Biodiversity provides the building blocks for our ecosystems to function, which provide us with a
wide range of goods and services that support our economic and social well-being (Defra, 2011).
For example, these include food, fresh water and clean air, along with protection from natural
disasters, regulation of climate, and purification of water or pollination of crops. Moreover,
biodiversity offers important cultural services, which enrich our lives (Defra, 2011; Cepel, 1996). In
that perspective, biodiversity can be considered as a significant strategic resource of economic and
political affairs (Demir, 2013).

1.2 Sustainability Challenges for Biodiversity

Despite all the uncovered evidence about its importance, biodiversity is under serious threat (Defra,
2011), as human beings seem to be determined on destroying ecosystems and species at an ever-
increasing rate (Cepel, 1996; Lawton, 2015; Topcu, 2012). The planet Earth is now experiencing
the sixth great extinction event, which is significant, because it is the first great extinction caused by
a species: the Homo sapiens (Steffen et al., 2004). Today, the effects of the changes caused by men
can be felt by nearly 17,000 species of plants and animals that are face-to-face with extinction
(Kucuk and Erturk, 2013). This threat of the mass extinction of the species was recognised several
decades ago; however, since then, the best efforts have hardly done more than slow the pace of the
accelerating damage (Myers, 2003). More than a decade after Myers (2003) made this point,
Professor Sir John Lawton (2015) explains that biodiversity loss is still getting worse, not better;
pollution in the oceans is rising; the planet seems to be running out of fresh water and its soils are
degrading at an alarming rate.
Essentially, the effects and total resource needs of human society were extremely small for most of
human history. Nevertheless, since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution, society has been
1
 Irem Unay 1438842

growing in size and technological power, causing an ever-growing impact on the biosphere, to the
point that the ecosystems services that society depends on are being degraded in ways that cannot
be sustained (Robert et al., 2012). This study demonstrates this sustainability challenge with a
funnel metaphor (Figure 1.1).

Figure 1.1. The funnel metaphor shows the systematic decline in options for society

The funnel metaphor shows our unsustainable society entering a funnel, which represents the
continuously degrading socio-ecological system with its steadily narrowing walls. The declining
capacity and resources may generate unknown conditions that can no longer sustain humanity
(Robèrt, 2000). Thus, in order to avoid the unforeseen consequences of hitting the closing walls, the
goal should be to make it to the opening of the funnel, where society can reach socio-ecological
sustainability. To achieve this, a strategic mission should be adopted to eliminate unsustainable
systematic errors and stabilise the resources available to support humanity (Figure 1.2). Once
society has reached that goal, it might become restorative by repairing past damage to biodiversity
(Robert et al., 2012).

Figure 1.2. Sustainable development for the society in the funnel metaphor

2
 Irem Unay 1438842

1.3 Strategic Sustainable Development (SSD)

In order to move towards a sustainable society (Figure 1.2), the first definition of sustainable
development was presented in the Brundtland Report by WCED:
A
“Humanity has the ability to make development sustainable to ensure that it meets the
needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet
their own needs.” (Brundtland, 1987, p.16)

strategic approach to this definition can be achieved through understanding of sustainability, which
is based on science-based principles, and backcasting from these principles. This approach can be
applied through a framework, FSSD, which is developed for strategic sustainable development
(Robert et al., 2002).

1.3.1 Framework for Strategic Sustainable Development (FSSD)

Natural physical systems are extremely complex and hard to predict (TNS, 2015). In order to make
sense of a complex system and move towards sustainability, the FSSD was developed, by applying
the Five Level Framework, which can be used for solving any intricate problem, to achieve strategic
sustainable development (Figure 1.3) (Robert et al., 2012; Waldron et al., 2008).

Figure 1.3. Framework for strategic sustainable development (Waldron et al., 2008; Robert et al, 2002)

3
 Irem Unay 1438842

1.3.2 Sustainability Principles (SPs)

According to Broman et al. (2000), all ecological and societal sustainability problems can be
accredited to violation of at least one of the principles below:

“In a sustainable society, nature is not subject to systematically increasing:

SP I) Concentrations of substances extracted from the Earth’s crust

SP II) Concentrations of substances produced by society
SP III) Degradation by physical means” (Robert et al., 2012, p.51);

In addition, in that society, “people are not subject to systematic barriers to”:

SP IV) Integrity, Influence, Competence, Impartiality, and Meaning (Missimer,

2013)

4
 Irem Unay 1438842

These SPs are designed for backcasting from success, and together they provide a frame for
sustainability (Broman et al., 2000). The set of SPs are general, science-based, concrete, necessary
and sufficient for sustainability, and non-overlapping, which allows them to be universally
applicable (Ny, 2009).

1.3.3 ABCD Strategic Planning Process

ABCD is a four-step planning tool that provides systematic, step-by-step guidance for the
implementation of FSSD for any complex issue by backcasting from basic SPs (Broman et al.,
2000; Ny, 2009). The first step (A) is to understand the system conditions and to define the vision
of a sustainable future in compliance with the SPs. The second step (B) is to assess the current
situation with regard to SPs. The third step (C) is to design actions to lead to the desired future
vision. The final step (D) is to prioritise and implement the proposed actions in the third step
(Robèrt et al., 2012).

Figure 1.4. The ABCD Planning Process (Robèrt et al., 2013)

1.4 Aims and Objectives

The purpose of this research is to explore how FSSD can be used as strategic guidance in order to
protect the biodiversity of Turkey, which is a unique country in terms of biological diversity
because of its geographical position (Waldron et al., 2013). This research explores the current
situation of biodiversity protection in Turkey in order to determine the gaps, and identify conditions
that are not in line with the sustainability principles. In this perspective, it also examines the
perception and knowledge of the Turkish people about biodiversity, in order to provide insight
about public opinion on the topic. Because, as Tisdell et al. (2007) mention, in order to adopt a
strategy for biodiversity protection, it is important that the public supports the required actions.

This study is a first in terms of application of a universal framework to biodiversity protection,

which is important because strategic prioritisation of actions cannot be done without application of

5
 Irem Unay 1438842

a framework because of the complexity of the issue (Fournier et al., 2010). By using this
framework, the ultimate aim is to provide strategic guidance to develop prioritised concrete actions
to move towards sustainability while still having a healthy biodiversity in Turkey.

1.4.1 Research Questions

This study intends to answer the following main research question:

What recommendations can be made to the Turkish government for effective biodiversity
protection?

Thus, it aims to answer the following questions in order to address the main research question:

 What does FSSD reveal when applied to protection of biodiversity in Turkey?

 What is the current situation of biodiversity conservation in Turkey?
 What is the level of interest and awareness of Turkish people about this matter?
 How should the actions be prioritised in order to best protect biodiversity?

2 METHODOLOGY

2.1 Research Design

This research relies on data gathering from both qualitative and quantitative methods. Thus, it is
guided by an interactive mixed method research design, as suggested by Maxwell and Loomis
(2003). This research design uses a more flexible concept than traditional linear methods, and
suggests continuous reflection on the research process and results. The suggested methodology
evolves from start to end, by forming compatible and interacting components, which effectively
work together (Figure 2.1).

Conceptual
Goals Framework
6
Research
Questions
 Irem Unay 1438842

Figure 2.1. Interaction model for research design (Darker shaded arrows show the most important relationships between
components) (Maxwell and Loomis, 2003)

In this research design model, the ‘Research Questions’ and ‘Goals’ components were presented in
the Introduction of this thesis. As a ‘Conceptual Framework’ this study uses FSSD, to answer the
related research questions and to use its five levels as a structure to arrange the findings. Moreover,
as ‘Methods’, this study uses literature review and surveying that address the research questions,
and it questions the findings for ‘Validity’.

This particular model was chosen because it lets the user go back and forth between the components
in a systematic way, in order to minimize the errors by validating each step and continuously
considering the research questions (Maxwell, 2005).

2.2 FSSD as a Conceptual Framework

The Conceptual Framework in the research design indicates a theory that will guide the research
(Maxwell and Loomis, 2003). As mentioned in the Introduction, the FSSD is a strategic instrument
that facilitates developing a structured plan in any complex system (Robèrt et al. 2002). This study
uses the FSSD as the conceptual framework, since biodiversity protection is a highly complex
problem (Bartowski et al., 2015; Handmer et al., 2001).

In this study, the five levels of the framework (figure 1.3) form a structure to arrange and analyse
the findings from the literature review and the survey, as shown below:

 Systems level overviews the current situation with biodiversity in Turkey and the interactions
with it and society, in order to gain a broad understanding of the socio-ecological system, by
examining the literature and the survey findings.

7
 Irem Unay 1438842

 Success level outlines the current vision of Turkey for biodiversity protection. It also defines the
SPs, in order to create a success definition to stop the unsustainable actions that are currently
threatening biodiversity in Turkey.

 Strategic level uses a backcasting approach, by first envisioning the desired future, and then
planning to get there from the baseline. In order to analyse the current situation, this study uses
SWOT analysis and considers the SP violations of the system. This study also embraces the
global strategies to protect biodiversity and suggests a strategy for Turkey.

 Actions level critically examines Turkey’s existing biodiversity conservation actions according
to SPs and determines the gaps that are hindering their implementation.

 Tools Level identifies the ABCD Strategic Planning tool, which facilitates the application of the
FSSD in biodiversity protection in Turkey. The ABCD planning process demonstrates the
findings of the research in a clear way and give guidelines to conduct a strategic plan with
concrete actions, which are prioritised according to their (1) direction, (2) flexibility and (3)
potential for return on investment for biodiversity protection in Turkey.

2.3 Information Gathering Methods

In order to gather information to answer the research questions, this study utilizes both qualitative
and quantitative methods.

2.3.1 Literature Review

The literature review of this study forms the background information on biodiversity protection in
Turkey. To be able to reach the main goal, which is to make suggestions to the Turkish government
about biodiversity protection, first, it was crucial to identify the current situation (about legislation,
financing, monitoring, education and awareness) in Turkey regarding biodiversity, and the global
strategies and actions. Moreover, it was necessary to define the ecological, economic and social
importance of biodiversity.

8
 Irem Unay 1438842

It is important to note that the sources were searched in both English and Turkish languages. As
Sekercioglu et al. (2011) points out, academic research is very limited and current information
about Turkey’s biodiversity lacks translation into other languages. The author used books, journal
and newspaper articles, papers, reports, websites, and grey literature as resources. To collect the
information, database searches via Brunel University’s e-library services, Internet and library
searches and the course literature were used.

2.3.1.1 Validity of Literature Review

Apart from the grey literature that has been used because of the limited data on Turkey’s
biodiversity, the validity of the literature review was kept high because of the diversity of the
resources. However, it is possible that there are some biases in the data collected from Turkish
government’s sources about biodiversity protection. The validity of data about Turkey’s
biodiversity could also be out-dated and different from reality because it is known that the
monitoring activities are progressing slowly in Turkey (OECD, 2008; Milli Parklar, 2014).

2.3.2 Survey

The author designed an online survey (see Appendix-A), which targets Turkish people of all ages
and education levels. The purpose of this survey is to answer the research question ‘What is the
level of interest and awareness of Turkish people about biodiversity in Turkey?’. Out of a total of
thirteen questions, five of them are demographic questions, designed to distinguish the groups of
people to facilitate the analysis of the data. The survey was mainly distributed through the author’s
social media accounts and e-mail groups randomly to reach as many Turkish people as possible. In
addition, the author approached persons directly in the streets of Turkey. As a result, 503 answers
were collected online, and by surveying in person, a further 49 answers were gathered. According to
TUIK (2015), the number of the population of Turkish people that are above 10 years old, who can
be considered as eligible to participate in this survey, is 65,085,743. As stated in NSS (2015), with
the sample size of 552 people, the margin of error is 4.17% at a 95% confidence level, when a
normal standard distribution is used. To interpret the collected responses and compare the findings,

9
 Irem Unay 1438842

the responses were summarised and visualised. Moreover, by using Excel’s data analysis tool, one-
way analysis of variance (ANOVA) tests were executed in order to understand overall relationships
of the responses between different groups, to determine if they are statistically significant.

2.3.1.1 Validity of Survey

The survey can be considered as statistically significant because of the high total sample size and
the diversity of respondents. However, the biggest limitation of this survey is the uneven
distribution of the demographic groups. For example, nearly half of the respondents are in the 25-34
age interval, whereas only 5 per cent of them are 17 or younger. This inequality is not surprising
because the author mostly reached the respondents that are on the same age range as her, which is
25-34. However, this situation may mislead the data analysis. Furthermore, there is a possibility that
some questions turned out to be leading the respondent, producing a situation where the same
answer is given by an extremely high percentage of the respondents. Moreover, this study relies on
the assumption that respondents gave their answers truthfully, correctly and with their own will.

3 FSSD ANALYSIS of THE CURRENT SITUATION IN TURKEY

This section of the study delivers the results of the literature review and the quantitative survey,
which together are used to answer the research questions. This study applies FSSD to biodiversity
protection in Turkey, in order to simplify planning and prioritise actions for Turkey to move towards
the goal of “a sustainable society in the biosphere” (Waldron et al., 2008, p.9). To be able to make
recommendations to reach sustainability, this research explores the current situation of biodiversity
protection in Turkey through five levels of FSSD.

3.1 Systems Level

10
 Irem Unay 1438842

At the systems level, this study aims to understand and define the functions and the assumptions in
the socio-ecological system. The scope of the system comprises ecological diversity and its
relations with society in the boundaries of Turkey. To understand the system, the importance of
biodiversity, the ecological conservation status of Turkey, and the key stakeholders are analysed.

3.1.1 Why Should Turkish Government Be Interested in Protecting Biodiversity?

There are several reasons for Turkey to protect its biodiversity. Biodiversity is important in terms of
its social benefits, such as ecological heritage, cultural diversity, ethical and spiritual values, as well
as its economic benefits (MoFWA, 2014). It is known that a healthy natural environment sustains
society’s well-being, health and economy (Defra, 2010). For example, the World Health
Organisation estimates that 60% of people depend on plants for their general health status (WHO,
2015). Furthermore, biodiversity is crucial for the sustainable economic development of ecotourism
(Kahraman et al., 2012). Moreover, biodiversity plays a critical role in all of the functions of the
ecosystem services, which are shown in Table 3.1 (de Groot et al., 2002). These services are
fundamental for the current and future wealth of a country, and the degradation of them shows that
the society is living unsustainably (Defra, 2010).

Regulating Services Supporting Services Production Services Cultural Services

- Regulation of
atmospheric gases
- Climate regulation
- Food regulation
- Water supply and
regulation
- Waste control and
regulation
- Soil formation
- Erosion prevention
- Biological control
- Pollination
- Shelter function
- Biological diversity value
- Endemic diversity value
- Protection value
- Food supply value
- Raw materials value
- Genetic resources
- Medical resources
- Decorative resources
- Use in traditional
medicine value
- Use in biotechnology
value
- Trading value
- Aesthetical
information
- Recreation
- Artistic and spiritual
values
- Cultural and historical
values
- Use for science and
education

Table 3.1 Biodiversity’s ecosystem functions (de Groot et al., 2002; Chivian and Berstein, 2010)

It is known that most of these services are associated with increased diversity of species (Hooper et
al., 2005). However, 39% of terrestrial and marine species, and 76% of fresh-water species have
already declined in the last 40 years (WWF International, 2014). At these rates of extinction, society

11
 Irem Unay 1438842

will not even understand most of the species’ roles in ecosystems before they disappear. Thus, in
order not to lose the ecosystem services, a precautionary approach for biodiversity protection is
undeniably essential (Defra, 2010).

3.1.1.1 Economic Importance of Biodiversity in Turkey

Along with its life-sustaining ecosystem services, biodiversity also represent an astronomical
economic value (Sekercioglu et al., 2010; EC; 2011). The global economic value of biodiversity is
2.9 trillion USD in a year, which is 40% of the global economy, and Turkey contributes
significantly to this value with more than 10,000 plant species and a 34.4% endemism ratio (Demir,
2009). On the other hand, the ecosystem services such as soil formation, waste control, cleaning
water and air, food cycle, solar energy absorption, and hydrological cycles are directly connected to
biodiversity, and have an estimated cost of 33 trillion USD (Kahraman et al., 2012). Furthermore, in
Turkey, 20 million rural people depend on the cultural and commercial value of biodiversity. For
example, Turkey is the world’s second largest honey producer, which contributes Turkey’s
economy around 1 billion USD yearly (Sekercioglu et al., 2011). Additionally, the medical and
cosmetic plants, aromatic and culinary herbs, vegetables, mushrooms and fruit are being used for
commercial purposes in Turkey. The OECD (2008) shows that Turkey ranks third, behind China
and India, as an exporter of such plants.

3.1.1.2 The Areas in Turkey that are Worth Conserving

Turkey is situated on the nexus of the continents of Asia and Europe, and is encircled by three seas
(Kucuk and Erturk, 2013). Turkey has seven geographical climates and each of them has a different
ecological diversity. Its unique geographical position, climatic differences and high ecosystem
diversity grant Turkey with surprisingly high endemism and tremendous genetic floral and faunal
diversity, similar to a small continent of its own (Sekercioglu et al., 2011; Gross, 2013; Kahraman
et al., 2012). Turkey hosts approximately 10,000 native plant species, of which 34.4% are endemic;
and 80,000 fauna species, which includes 4,000 endemic species out of 19,000 invertebrates, and
123 endemic species out of 1,500 vertebrates (MoFWA, 2013; Gross, 2013). Furthermore, there are
five micro-genetic centres, which contain important genetic resources, for sustainability of many
species in the World (Atik et al., 2010).

12
 Irem Unay 1438842

Turkey is almost completely covered by three of the 34 global biodiversity hotspots (Figure 3.1)
(Sekercioglu et al., 2011), where there are “exceptional concentrations of endemic species that are
undergoing exceptional loss of habitat” (Myers et al., 2000, p. 853). In order to reduce mass
extinction globally, Myers (2003) argues that society should give more priority to protect hotspot
areas. However, despite its importance, Turkey ranked 133rd out of 177 countries in terms of
biodiversity and habitat conservation in 2014
Figure 3.1 The three global biodiversity hotspots that
cover Turkey (Conservation International, 2015) (Yale University EPI, 2015). Consequently,
the floral and faunal species are vulnerable
and declining in Turkey because of pressures such as urbanisation, industrialisation, tourism and
degradation (Kucuk and Erturk, 2013).

In the literature, many other strategies are described and discussed, which could be used to
determine the areas of Turkey that should be preserved. They are going to be mentioned in the
Strategic Level of this study. According to
Ture and Bocuk (2010), determining the
priority areas and documenting the basic
patterns of biodiversity should be the first
steps for conservation studies. Therefore, the
following table (Table 3.2) shows Turkish
ecosystems’ biodiversity and studies their importance, the threats upon them, and gaps in their
protection.

13

Habitats Importance
- Cover 35% of Turkey’s total surface area
(MoEF, 2014).
Agriculture
Lands
- Cover 8.1 million ha of Anatolia, and are most
common in the Mediterranean region (MoEF,
2014).
Shrub-lands - Host approximately 5,000 plant species, of
which 30% are endemic (Sekercioglu et al.,
2011).
- Cover 21.2 million ha, which is 27% of
Turkey’s total surface area.
Plain or
- Mostly established for protection of cultural
mountain
heritage or unique areas (MoEF, 2014).
Steppes
- Cover 27.3% of Anatolia (21 million ha)
(Sekercioglu et al., 2011), while 2000 years ago,
this number was equal to 70-75% of Anatolia
(Kiziroglu, 2001).
- Offer high genetic sources and habitats for a
Forests great number of endemic plant species,
important birds and large mammal species and
other wildlife elements.
- Act as a shelter for mammals that are in
danger of extinction (Kucuk and Erturk, 2013).
Mountains - Four major mountain belts and several smaller
ranges and volcanic mountains that have a
Threats
- Soil and water contamination problem in connection with
the use of chemical fertilizers.
- Irrigation
- Erosion
- Land usage (MoEF, 2014).
Habitat loss (Sekercioglu et al., 2011)
- Loss of terrestrial communities, such as Maquis and
phrygana shrub-lands, which are among Turkey’s most
threatened species.
- Luxury development projects, such as summer homes and
golf courses.
Overgrazing and erosion (Sekercioglu et al., 2011)
- Loss of 90% of Turkey’s rooted climax vegetation, which
causes severe to moderate erosion across 90% of grasslands.
- Loss of 1.4 billion tons of soil to erosion every year.
- Doubling of Anatolian erosion rates in the 20th century and
increase of erosion to more than 86% of total land.
Deforestation and the Section 2/B of the forest law
- ‘Degraded’ classification of half of Turkey’s current forest
area (10.4 million ha) due to over-exploitation, despite the
reforestation projects
Forest fires
Erosion
Residential development
Agriculture
Pollution
Introduced species (Sekercioglu et al., 2011)
Overgrazing (Sekercioglu et al., 2011)
- Grazing of livestock herds, which are taken to high mountain
Irem Unay 1438842
Gaps in Conservation
- Non-existence of an effective system for the in-situ
conservation of agricultural genetic diversity.
- Need for strengthening the infrastructure for ex-situ
conservation.
- Insufficient financial resources.
- The lack of comprehensive knowledge about the
functions of agricultural ecosystems.
- Lack of study showing the relationship between
natural species and pollinators.
- Non-existence of national parks in areas with
predominantly steppe vegetation.
- Non-existence of a protection status on
Mediterranean shrub-lands, which are typically
classified in management plans as ‘degraded forest’
or ’forest soil’ (MoEF, 2014).
- Lack of coordination between the governmental
bodies
- Insufficient number of alternative income generating
programmes
- Dependency of people living in and around forests
on agricultural and forestry products (MoEF, 2014).
- Insufficiency of de jure protection on Turkey’s
forest area.
- Permit to legal logging in 45% of protected forest
areas.
- Section 2/B of the Forest Law, which allows the
government to convert degraded forest areas to other
uses and sell them to private owners.
- Lack of enforcement on range land grazing
regulations across Turkey.
14
 Irem Unay 1438842

special importance for agro-biodiversity exist pastures in spring and summer. - Lack of studies on Turkey’s mountain habitats
in Turkey (Sekercioglu et al., 2011). Erosion (Sekercioglu et al., 2011).
- Rich in water resources (Kucuk and Erturk, 2013) Increasing tourism impacts
and foster important ecosystems for plant and
vertebrate diversity and high rates of
endemism.
- Provide critical passageways for the bird
migration routes.

- 107 major rivers (9 of them are more than 500
km in length) and 26 main drainage basins,
minimum 500 large wetlands (covering 2.2
million ha) exist in Turkey.
- International significance of 135 wetlands.
- High levels of threatened endemic species and
genetic diversity of Turkey’s rivers.
Rivers and - The wetlands across Anatolia provide the best
wetlands places to observe large vertebrates.
- Turkey’s greatest concentration of threatened
endemic Mediterranean freshwater fish species
is housed by the Asi River (Sekercioglu et al.,
2011).
- Turkey’s wetlands lie on one of the three
principal bird migration routes (Waldron et al.,
2013).
Dams, water diversions and hydro power plants
- Declaration of Minister of Environment and Forestry that his
job is to build dams.
- The plan to dam nearly all of Turkey’s running waters by
2023
Wetland loss and degradation
- Loss of at least 1.3 million ha of Turkey’s historic wetlands
over the past 60 years for malaria control or creating
agricultural lands.
Exceedingly high sedimentation rates
Pollution and eutrophication
Overexploitation
Destruction of vegetation by livestock or local people
Agricultural use of fertile deltas (Sekercioglu et al., 2011)
- Direct and indirect population pressures on water
resources.
- The urgent need to build a detailed inventory and a
progressive modelling, by which the adverse
changes in the ecosystem can be demonstrated
(MoEF, 2014).
- Non-existence of a comprehensive database or
inventory of Turkish wetlands.
- Modification of the Wetland Law in 2010 to exclude
rivers and other riparian areas, which removes
obstacles to the construction of hydroelectric
facilities.
- Need of urgent ecological restoration of many of the
Turkey’s wetlands for their inhabitants (Sekercioglu et
al., 2011).

15

- Turkey is surrounded by seas on three sides
(Black Sea, Mediterranean Sea and Aegean
Sea) that host mostly threatened 3,000 plants
and animal species and 2,150 alga
species (MoEF, 2007).
- The Earth’s largest anoxic-sulfidic water body
and the only known active undersea river exist
in Black Sea.
- The Mediterranean has the richest
biodiversity.
- Existence of highly special coastal
Coasts and ecosystems, such as dunes, caves, deltas,
Marine Areas lagoons, marshes and calcareous terraces in
Aegean Sea (Kucuk and Erturk, 2013).
- Sea grasses are key marine biogenic species in
Turkey (Sekercioglu et al., 2011).
Table 3.2 The importance of Turkish ecosystems’ diversity, threats upon them and gaps in their protection
Pollution (Sekercioglu et al., 2011)
- Industrial discharge of heavy metals and mining pollution in
Black Sea coast and Marmara Sea.
- Decline of the fish species in Marmara Sea, from over 100
species in the 1960s to tens of species today.
- Potential threat of the nuclear plant that is being constructed
in a seismically active area.
Residential and touristic development (especially in Aegean and
Mediterranean coasts)
- Concurrence of the nesting period of a threatened turtle
species and the peak tourist activity.
- Illegal sand removal from beaches, mostly for local hotel
construction.
Introduced exotic species
- Invasion of the shallow waters in Mediterranean coast by
species from the Red Sea.
- Introduction of at least 25 additional freshwater fish and
invertebrate species by fisheries and local fisherman.
Habitat degradation and overexploitation
- Human interference to the Black Sea’s coast shelves that
resulted almost complete destruction of the sea bottom
communities (Bat et al., 2011).
- Decline of fish species in Black Sea from 26 to 10-15 in 25
years.
Irem Unay 1438842
- The lack of political will and support
- Insufficient capacity to take action due to
institutional weakness
- The lack of financial, human and technical resources
- The lack of cooperation with the international
fishing and marine sciences committees
- Disintegration of the biological diversity issues with
other sectors and lack of common understanding.
- Need for regulatory actions to protect the sea caves
of Turkey and conserve the organisms in those
caves.
- Need for establishment of conservation and
utilization models.
- Lack of inventory on fishing technology and fishing
gears at regional and at the national levels (MoEF,
2014).
16
 Irem Unay 1438842

3.1.2 Legal Framework for Biodiversity Conservation

In order to prevent biodiversity depletion, Turkey is taking precautions by in-situ and ex-situ
conservation activities (MoEF, 2007).

3.1.2.1 Ex-Situ Conservation

Ex-situ conservation means conservation of the genetic material by artificial means, outside of their
natural habitat. Ex-situ conservation is achieved through establishing gene banks, seed banks, zoos,
botanical gardens, etc., and taking related measures to ensure long-term viability of species (CBD,
2015). In Turkey, this is practiced by field gene banks, which mainly collect fruit species.
Additionally, the National Gene Banks classify, document and conserve seeds, leguminous plants,
fodder plants, vegetables, fruit, and other wild plant species of economic importance, such as
medical, aromatic and decorative plants (MoEF, 2007). There are also private institutions such as
Osman Tosun Gene Bank, which has 11,000 seeds samples (Kahraman et al., 2012). Moreover,
some universities’ research departments are also engaged in similar activities. For example, Ankara,
Atatürk and Çukurova Universities and other universities with a Faculty of Agriculture have their
own Gene Banks. Furthermore, Aegean and Istanbul University have their own Botanical Gardens
(MoEF, 2007).

Furthermore, there are 26 licensed zoos in Turkey (Milliparklar.gov.tr, 2014). However, they are
mostly focused on tourism rather than the quality of animals’ lives (Ozen, 2015; Tapkan, 2014).
Tapkan (2014) adds that there are 131 globally endangered animal species in Turkey according to
IUCN data; yet, only a minority of them are included in conservation projects in zoos. For an
effective conservation, (Ozen, 2015) suggests for the Zoos or Aquariums in Turkey to join the
global associations, such as WAZA, which aims to protect the zoological diversity by providing the
institutions with guidelines and education.

3.1.2.2 In-Situ Conservation

In-situ conservation means preservation of the species in their own natural ecosystems by
recognizing the society’s dependence on the natural environment for survival (MoEF, 2007). In
Turkey, in-situ conservation areas were first determined in the 1950s, and they have been very
slowly expanding, until collectively they reached 4% of the total land area in 2000. Then the
protected areas increased at an accelerated rate, especially between 2004 and 2006, and again after

17
 Irem Unay 1438842

2010, to reach 7.24% at the end of 2012 (Milliparklar.gov.tr, 2014). MoFWA (2014) indicates that
this percentage peaked at 10.11% (6,951,788 ha) in 2013. However, in 2014, the total protected area
had dropped to 5,196,915 ha (Graph 3.1).
8 000 000
7 000 000
6 000 000
Protected Areas (ha)

5 000 000 5,196,915

4 000 000
3 000 000
2 000 000
1 000 000

Graph 3.1 The variation in the total area of protected areas of Turkey between 1958 and 2014 (Milliparklar.gov.tr,
2014)

The protected areas, and the legislations that protect them, are summarised as follows:

IUCN
Type of Protected Area No Protected by Categor Area (ha) Extent
y

Nature conservation areas 31 Law on National Parks (MoFWA) I 64,208

National parks 40 Law on National Parks (MoFWA) II 814,762
Natural monuments 112 Law on National Parks (MoFWA) III 6,683
Nature Parks 192 Law on National Parks (MoFWA) V 96, 963
Wildlife reserve areas 80 Law on Terrestrial Hunting (MoFWA) 1,192,794
Conservation forests 55 Law on Forest (MoFWA) 250,317
Genetic conservation areas 257 Law on Forest (MoFWA) 40,014 National
Seed stands (in-situ) 351 Law on Forest (MoFWA) 45,232
Seed Orchard (ex-situ) 179 Law on Forest (MoFWA) 1328.1
Honey forests 200 Law on Forest (MoFWA) 30,140
City forests 128 Law on Forest (MoFWA) 9,946
Natural sites 127 Law on Conservation of Cultural and -
3 Natural Heritage (MoEU)

Specially protected areas 16 Law on Environment (MoEU) IV 2,460,041 Regional

Ramsar sites 14 Ramsar Convention by-Law on 184,487

Conservation of Wetlands (MoFWA)
Biosphere reserve 1 Law on National Parks & - Global
Law on Forest (MoFWA)
World heritage sites 11 UNESCO (MoCT) -

Table 3.3 The protected areas of Turkey (Kucuk and Erturk, 2013; MoFWA, 2014; OECD, 2008) The details of all the
laws and regulations for site and species protection in Turkey can be seen in Appendix-B

18
 Irem Unay 1438842

About 1.2% of these areas are strictly protected under IUCN categories I and II, and 1.6% of them
are in IUCN categories III and IV (Kucuk and Erturk, 2013; OECD, 2008).
Sekercioglu et al. (2011) note that since 2006, even though an increase can be observed in the total
protected area, the areas with the highest level of strict protection have decreased, and could be
completely eradicated in the future. Now, the remaining areas that were once protected from mining
and land use changes are being opened to extraction and dam construction. Additionally, OECD
(2008) indicates that illegal construction occur in some protected areas, even in national parks.
Sekercioglu et al. (2011a) list the reasons of this erosion in environmental conservation efforts and
laws as bureaucratic difficulties, overlapping fragments, and conflict between governmental
institutions that are responsible for nature conservation. Besides, limited communication,
cooperation and coordination among these institutions are worsening the situation.

3.1.3 Monitoring Biodiversity in Turkey

In Turkey, MoFWA is the responsible authority for monitoring and controlling biodiversity,
whereas local authorities regularly monitor the aspects that affect biodiversity, such as pollution and
eutrophication. In order to monitor climate change, Turkey uses meteorological data and air quality
parameters. On the other hand, land changes and degradation throughout the country are monitored
via a Central Remote Monitoring System (GIS) (MoEF, 2014). Furthermore, Karabulut (2006)
mentions that the vegetation conditions of ecosystems in Turkey can be monitored by the NOAA
AVHRR satellite information system.

Furthermore, Turkey is currently carrying out a new project involving a systematic and
comprehensive inventory of Turkish biodiversity, which is planned to be finished in 2018. The
project is a first in terms of national and regional monitoring of biodiversity by developing
indicators. However, there are challenges to developing indicators and implementing the
systematized monitoring programme, such as (MoEF, 2014):

 The lack of accessible available information,

 The poor level of the available scientific and traditional studies,
 The shortage of financial, human and technical resources,
 The inconsistencies in the national databases because of the lack of coordination and
cooperation between institutions.

19
 Irem Unay 1438842

3.1.4 Financing Biodiversity Protection in Turkey

Turkey’s expenditure for environmental protection has increased steadily and doubled over ten
years to be 2,625.14 million EUR in 2013 (Eurostat, 2015; OECD, 2008). Currently, Turkey spends
1.2% of the total GDP on the environment (TUIK, 2015a). A large part of this investment is
devoted for national park management, with 30% financed through extra budgetary sources, such as
entrance fees, rentals and sales, and two thirds came from government funds (OECD, 2008). On the
other hand, it is important to note that the environmental activities employed 65,124 people in 2013,
and supplied around 7,890.58 million USD income in total (TUIK, 2015a).

However, MoEF (2007) mentions that the resources are still insufficient and are being used
ineffectively. Meanwhile, economic incentives are needed in the areas of monitoring, research and
development, rehabilitation, the sustainable use of meadows and irrigation methods, and the
compensation of treatment facility costs. However, there are some constraints to the implementation
of incentives for sustainability of biological diversity, such as lack of financial, human and technical
resources, and the shortage of policies and legislation dedicated to that purpose (MoEF, 2014).

Turkey is dependent on foreign financing for biodiversity protection, such as the World Bank,
Global Environment Facility, and the EU (OECD, 2008). Nevertheless, Turkey is one of the 20
worst countries in the World for biodiversity protection funding, receiving only 13.5 million USD
yearly between 2001 and 2008. Fortunately, in 2012 and 2013, the conservation budget increased,
which made Turkey jump up the rankings from 113th to 87th out of 128 countries analysed (Waldron
et al., 2013).

3.1.4.1. Financing in the EU Accession Period

Turkey is a candidate country for EU membership. For the EU accession process, the environmental
policy represents one of the most complex and costly challenges. Turkey needs around 60 billion
EUR to fully implement over 300 different pieces of legislation, and rapidly changing requirements.
For nature protection, EU membership requires interventions with technical assistance in the fields
of ecosystem health and biodiversity, and infrastructure investments for protected areas and Natura
2000 sites. Furthermore,

20
 Irem Unay 1438842

Turkey needs to increase resilience of vulnerable natural sites, reduce land degradation and support
sustainable urbanisation.
In 2007-2013, the EU provided help to align Turkish legislation with that of the EU and contributed
to necessary investments in environment and climate change sector. However, high levels of
investment and grants are needed in this sector to ensure financial viability. Thus, different
International Funding Institutions are active in this field (EC, 2014). Additionally, between 2014
and 2020, The EU will allocate 4,453.9 million EUR to Turkey through the Instrument for Pre-
accession Assistance. The ‘Environment and Climate Action’ is one of the priority sectors for
funding in this period (EC, 2015).

3.1.5 Education and Awareness about Biodiversity in Turkey

In Turkey, the subjects that cover biodiversity start from primary degree of programmes (Okur et
al., 2011). However, it was discovered that the knowledge at secondary level is higher than primary
education, because the biodiversity notion starts to be mentioned at the 9th grade syllabus (Celikkol
and Soran, 2012). Nevertheless, even though secondary school students have a desire to protect the
biodiversity, they still do not know how to do so (Tankus and Soran, 2012). That is why Kilic et al.
(2012) emphasise that the education system should include the effects of individual behaviour on
biodiversity by emphasising the significance of taking an active role with the NGOs. Furthermore,
Basti et al. (2010) mention that the students that live in the cities are far less familiar with plant and
animal species than the students that live in the countryside, even though their education level about
biodiversity is higher. In the developed countries, in order to raise familiarity with nature, the most
common technique for teaching biodiversity is visiting natural history museums and parks, whereas
in Turkey, traditional teaching methods, such as narration and question-answer, are mostly used. It
has been widely argued that traditional methods are ineffective and do not focus on students (Okur
et al., 2011), and the only way to raise awareness and develop a knowledge base in children is
through student motivation (Ertan, 2015). Hence, many of the studies about biodiversity education
recommend active, visual and tangible teaching methods, such as co-operational learning, role-play
and field trips (Basti et al., 2010; Ertan, 2015; Kilic et al., 2012; Okur et al., 2011; Okur-Berberoglu
et al., 2014).

Apart from schools, the NGOs are important in education and raising awareness as well. For
example, the NGO ‘Environment Foundation of Turkey’ has introduced the ideas of sustainable
development and conservation of biodiversity to Turkey, along with several new environmental
concepts, by using researches and publications (Kiziroglu, 2007).

21
 Irem Unay 1438842

3.1.5.1 Survey Results

This part of the study aims to answer the research question ‘What is the level of interest and
awareness of Turkish people about biodiversity protection?’ by analysing the results of a survey,
which was conducted with 552 randomly chosen Turkish people. The respondents were categorised
under their gender, age, birthplace, education level and subject area groups (see Appendix-A), in
order to make a statistical analysis. A summary of the key points arising from the analysis of the
results of the survey questions can be seen below:

1- Are you familiar with the word 'biodiversity'?

Answered: 545, Skipped: 7

76.15% 23.85% Yes

No

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Graph 3.2 Familiarity of the Turkish people with the word ‘Biodiversity’

As a response to the question, 76.15% of the participants claimed that they are familiar with the
word ‘biodiversity’. Furthermore, when the education level of the people who are familiar with
biodiversity is considered, it can be seen that, in ‘less than high school’ level, the familiarity with
biodiversity is statistically less significant (p<0.05) than other education levels (Graph 3.3).
100
90 21.62% 22.27% 24.14%
80
Percent of Familiarity

70 55.56%
60
50 Not Familiar
40 78.38% 77.73% 75.86% Familiar
30
20 44.44%
10
0
Less than High High School De- Bachelor's Degree Post-Graduate Degree
School Degree gree Education Level

Graph 3.3 The education level of the people who are familiar with the word ‘Biodiversity’

22
 Irem Unay 1438842

On the other hand, a subtle but statistically significant (p<0.01) relationship between age groups
and familiarity with the word biodiversity can also be observed. Particularly, while 51.9% of the
participants in ‘17 or younger’ age group state that they are familiar with the term; this number
jumps to 88.9% in the ‘18-24’ age group. Considering that the ‘18-24’ age group mostly consists of
people who have a bachelor degree (48.15%), or a high school degree (37.04%), it can be concluded
that high schools and universities play a big role in introducing the term ‘biodiversity’ to people.

2- Do you think that the Turkish education system gives enough emphasis to 'biodiversity
protection'?
Answered: 541, Skipped: 11

2.23 97,87% Yes

No

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Graph 3.4 The adequacy of the Turkish education system in biodiversity protection

A remarkable percentage (97.87%) of the respondents think that the education system is not
adequate for biodiversity protection.

3- How do you rate your interest in biodiversity?

Answered: 551, Skipped: 1

Interest Rate 5.79

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Graph 3.5 The weighted average of interest on biodiversity in Turkey

On average, the interest of the Turkish people is 5.79 out of 10 for biodiversity. Furthermore,
according to the results, the respondents who are coming from the countryside tend to be more
interested in biodiversity compared to the respondents coming from the city (Graph 3.6).

23
 Irem Unay 1438842
Graph 3.6 Difference between interest rates (mean +/- SEM) in biodiversity according to hometown of the respondents.

Countryside
n=19
7.22 *

City
n= 530
5.72

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Interest Rate

ANOVA test, *=p<0.05

4- Have you ever taken personal action in order to protect biodiversity? (Including supporting
NGOs)
Answered: 543, Skipped: 9

36.46% 63.54% Yes

No

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Graph 3.7 Percentage of the respondents who has taken personal action in order to protect biodiversity

The majority of the respondents (63.54%) claimed that they have never taken personal action in
order to protect biodiversity. This may once more show that Turkish people lack an interest in
biodiversity issues, because there is a clear significant relation between personal action and interest
rate in biodiversity, which can be observed from graph below:

24
 Irem Unay 1438842

****

Graph 3.8 The differences between interest rate (mean +/- SEM) of the people who did, and the people who did not,
take personal action in order to protect biodiversity. ANOVA test, ****=p<0.0001

Moreover, it is statistically significant (p<0.01) that the respondents involved in scientific areas are
1.69 times more likely to take personal action than the people within the social subject areas.

5- Please rate the importance of the following matters in Turkey according to you.
Answered: 547, Skipped: 5

Environmental Issues 8.42

Economic Issues 8.63

Social Issues 8.78

7.5 8 8.5 9 9.5 10

Graph 3.9 Comparison between the importance of social, economic and environmental issues in Turkey

Even though there is a small difference between the results, it can be observed that, according to the
public, environmental issues are the least important, when compared to economic and social issues
in Turkey (Graph 3.9).

In gender groups, females tend to consider environmental issues slightly more important than males
do. This difference can be observed in the following graph:

25
 Irem Unay 1438842

Importance of Environment 10.000

9.000 ***

8.000

7.000
8.64
7.98
6.000
n=323 n=214
5.000
Female Male
Gender

Graph 3.10 Importance of environmental issues (mean +/- SEM) according to males and females. ANOVA test,
***=p<0.001

6- Are you content with Turkey's environmental quality?

Answered: 544, Skipped: 8

11.76% 88.24% Yes

No

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Graph 3.11 Percentage of contentedness of the respondents with Turkey’s environmental quality

A high percentage of the respondents (88.24%) stated that they are not happy with Turkey’s
environmental quality. There was no significant statistical relation between the demographics (e.g.
age) and this result.

7- How do you think Turkey is progressing regarding environmental issues?

Answered: 543, Skipped: 9

Getting better
7.55% 25.78% 66.67%
Around the same
Getting worse

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Graph 3.12 Opinions of the respondents about Turkey’s progress in environmental issues

26
 Irem Unay 1438842

While the majority of the respondents (66.67%) think that environmental issues are getting worse,
only 7.55% of those that who answered stated that Turkey is progressing. Meanwhile, 25.78% of
the respondents indicated that they cannot observe any changes. The opinion on Turkey’s
environmental progress has a subtle but statistically significant relationship (p<0.001) with the
education level of the respondents. As can be seen on the graph below, as the education level gets
higher, the opinion about environmental progress gets worse.

100
90
80 33%
Percent of People

70 56% 66%
60 74%
50 39% Getting Worse
40 About the Same
30 30% Getting Better
20 26%
10 28% 23%
14% 8%
0 3
Less than High High School Degree Bachelor's Degree Post-Graduate De-
School Degree gree
Education Level
Graph 3.13 Relation between education level and opinion on Turkey’s environmental progress

8- Please rate the Turkish government's level of effectiveness for biodiversity protection in
your opinion.
Answered: 551, Skipped: 1

Government's Effec-
tiveness 2.5

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Graph 3.14 The respondents’ opinion about the Turkish government’s effectiveness for biodiversity protection

According to the public’s opinion, on average, the government’s effectiveness for biodiversity
protection is only 2.5 in a scale from 1 to 10. The demographic groups do not show statistically
significant differences, and tend to agree that the government’s level of effectiveness for
biodiversity protection is very low.

27
 Irem Unay 1438842

3.1.6 Stakeholders

The stakeholders below are players that affect, or get affected by, biodiversity conservation. They
are extracted from the reports and literature, which refer to them as actors in biodiversity protection
(Table 3.4).

Institutions Relevant due

Implementing Institutions Institutions Developing Macro- Other Stakeholders
to Their Activities
Level Plans and Programmes

Ministries of: Ministries of: Ministries of: - European Union

- Forestry and Water Affairs - Foreign Affairs - Energy and Natural - Chambers of
- Environment and Urbanisation - National Defence Resources Profession
- Agriculture and Livestock - Finance - Transport - NGOs
- Culture and Tourism - Public Works and - Consultants
Prime ministry State Personnel
- Interior Affairs (Turkish Coast Housing - Public
Directorate
Guard Command) - Industry and Trade
- National Education Under secretariat of State Planning
Organisation
Under secretariat of Maritime
Affairs Under secretariat of Treasury

Under secretariat of Custom Under secretariat of Foreign Trade

Local Authorities The Higher Education Committee

Turkish Patent Institute

Universities

Table 3.4 The stakeholders that have a role to play in maintaining biological diversity in Turkey (MoEF, 2007; Kucuk
and Erturk, 2013; OECD, 2008)

It is important to note that the Turkish government is a very powerful stakeholder, as MoFWA is
the responsible institution for the conservation and sustainable management of biodiversity and
natural resources of Turkey (Kucuk and Erturk, 2013). In addition, the local public is an undeniably
important stakeholder, as it is not easy, nor sustainable, to take measures without including local
people into conservation plans (O’Riordan and Stoll-Kleemann, 2002). Furthermore, NGOs play a
huge role in biodiversity protection in Turkey as well (Sekercioglu et al., 2011). However, only a
small number of them are working on protection of biodiversity (Gross, 2012), and there are only
approximately 50 professionals with sufficient education and experience within them, which is less
than one in a million of the total population. Moreover, the public support is very weak, which
leaves most of the NGOs understaffed and dependent on international funding (Sekercioglu et al.,
2011).

3.2 Success Level

28
 Irem Unay 1438842

Success level of this study defines the systems conditions for socio-ecological sustainability and
outlines the vision of Turkey for biodiversity protection.

3.2.1 Definition of Success According to SPs

Robert et al. (2012) define success as stopping the unsustainable actions that are threatening the
socio-ecological system to move towards sustainability. For this study, success can be defined as a
vision, which answers ‘What does success look like, when the unsustainable actions that destroy
Turkey’s biodiversity are removed?’

In order to stop the unsustainable actions and move strategically towards sustainability without
hitting the walls of the funnel (see description of the funnel metaphors in the Introduction Chapter),
the Turkish government should integrate the SPs to its actions (Broman et al., 2000), by striving to:

SP I) …eliminating the society’s contribution to “systematic increases on concentrations of

substances extracted from the Earth’s crust”
SP II) …eliminate the society’s contribution to “systematic increases in concentrations of produced
substances”
SP III) …eliminate the society’s contribution to “systematic physical degradation of nature” (Robert
et al., 2012, p. 54)
SP IV) …eliminate the society’s contribution to the “undermining of people’s capacities to meet
their needs”, by not being subject to systematic barriers to:

 Integrity: by not exposing people to “direct harm; physically, mentally or emotionally”

 Influence: by not hindering people from “participating in shaping the social systems they are
part of”
 Competence: by not hindering people from “developing competence, learning and
developing individually and together”
 Impartiality: by not exposing people to “impartial and unequal treatment”
 Meaning: by not hindering people from “different forms of meaning-making at the
individual and collective level” (Missimer et al., 2014)

3.2.2 The Current Vision of Turkey for Biodiversity Protection

29
 Irem Unay 1438842

The vision sets out the starting point for a strategic planning. This study outlines the existing visions
and long-term goals of Turkey about biodiversity protection, which are derived from the national
reports as following:

“…To create a society that lives as part of nature that values biological diversity, that does not
consume more than what nature is capable of replacing, and that leaves to future generations
a nature rich in biological diversity.” (MoEF, 2007, p.12).

“By 2050, biodiversity is valued, conserved, restored and wisely used, maintaining ecosystem
“…To ensure economic and social development while increasing the sensitivity and awareness
services, sustaining a healthy planet and delivering benefits essential for all people.”
of the public about nature conservation in order to meet the needs of the future generations.”
(Ministry of Development, 2013, p.137)

In 2010, Turkey adopted the ‘AICHI Biodiversity Targets’ for the period between 2011 and 2020 in
the UN Biodiversity Convention. In this convention, the vision that Turkey has agreed upon is
(CBD International, 2015):

Moreover, as a candidate country for EU membership, the 2050 vision of the EU for biodiversity
protection is relevant for Turkey as well, which is described as follows:

“By 205
valued a
contribu
caused

3.3 Strategic Level

The strategic level is based on the backcasting approach, which enables this study to place Turkey’s
biodiversity in the future, and then use the vision of success to look back at the current situation.
Subsequently, this level requires listing the possible actions that could lead Turkey into the defined
success from the current situation. Then, it defines a strategic guideline to prioritise the necessary
actions that should be undertaken in short, medium and long term. However, the details of actions
and preparing a strategic guideline are explained in the ‘Step C’ and ‘Step D’ of the Tools Level

30
 Irem Unay 1438842

(Chapter 3.5) of this study, respectively.

3.3.1 Evaluation of the Current Situation

Considering the success definition, this study identifies current internal and external strengths and
challenges to maintaining Turkey’s biodiversity, by making a SWOT analysis (Table 3.5), in order
to summarise current reality in Turkey. Then, it points out some of the main sustainability
problems, which are the SP violations. The following SWOT analysis focuses on some of the most
important threats and opportunities, and Turkey’s own strengths and weaknesses in biodiversity
protection.

Strengths Weaknesses (See Appendix-C)

- Turkey’s unique geographical position
and ecosystems diversity
- Globally important genetic resources
(MoFWA, 2012)
- Globally important biological diversity
and endemism
- Economic advantages of plant diversity
(Uyanik et al., 2013)
- Insufficient number of qualified personnel
- Insufficient, unbalanced and ineffective use of financial resources
- The infrastructure needs, especially for determination of genetic
resources, their protection and recording
- Legislation gaps in implementation and sanctuary deficiencies,
biosafety, utilization of genetic resources and benefit sharing,
alien species, micro-organisms, steppe conservation zones, and
coastal and marine conservation zones
- Lack of cooperation and coordination between institutes is
significant, especially in the case of biosafety and genetic
resources (MoEF, 2007)
- Gaps in education, monitoring and financing (Chapter 3.1)

Opportunities
- Turkey’s biodiversity protection funding
is on the rise (Waldron et al., 2013)
- Possibility to get international and private
grants and funding to protect Turkey’s
globally important biodiversity
(Sekercioglu et al., 2011; OECD, 2008)
Threats
- Economic policies
- Unplanned and intensive industrialisation
- Unplanned and intensive urbanisation
- Soil erosion and degradation of habitats
- Climate change
- Bush fires
- Wrong mining activities
- Non-existence of meadow rehabilitation and usage for farming
purposes (MoEF, 2007)
- Pollution
- Invasive species
- Uncontrolled tourism activities
- Illegal hunting, plant collections and cutting of forest
- Over-exploitation and over-grazing (Kucuk and Erturk, 2013)
- Dam construction and diversion plans for the rivers
- Nuclear plant construction in a seismically active area
(Sekercioglu et al., 2011)
- Exponentially rising population (TUIK, 2015; McKee, 2015)
- Dependency on fossil fuels (Ministry of Development, 2012)

Table 3.5 The SWOT analysis of the current situation of Turkey’s biodiversity
When the current threats to Turkey’s biodiversity are examined, it can be said that at least one of the
SP violations could be observed for all of them. For example, Turkey is a country that is dependent

31
 Irem Unay 1438842

on fossil fuels (Ministry of Development, 2012), which is violating SP I. The industrial discharges
are clear violations of SP II (Sekercoglu et al., 2011). Over-exploitation and over-grazing, bush
fires, and invasive species are violations of SP III. O’Riordan and Stoll-Kleemann (2002) point out
poverty as violation of SP III and SP IV, by defining it as an outcome of environmental degradation
as well as a cause of it. According to OECD (2014), Turkey has the third highest level of income
inequality and the third highest level of relative poverty in the OECD.

Additionally, McKee (2004) defines population growth as a serious threat to the limited resources
of nature and societal services, which violates SP I, II, III and IV. According to Williams (2012),
more than one fifth of the World’s population is living in the biodiversity hotspots, which only
covers 2.3% of the Earth’s land surface. As a country almost entirely covered by three hotspots,
Turkey is also a highly populated country with 77,695,904 habitants, and this number is expected to
reach around 100 million by 2050 (TUIK, 2015). Mckee (2004) claims that it is necessary to abate
the population in order to conserve biodiversity; while Williams (2012a) thinks that the factors that
are covered by SP IV, such as education, economic development, and different cultures, might play
a bigger role than the number of people in biodiversity conservation. It is known that, in the
protected areas of Turkey, local people are logging and hunting illegally, because their lives depend
on it (MoEF, 2007), and this situation could be reversed by educating, empowering and including
the local people in the conservation plans (O’Riordan and Stoll-Kleemann, 2002). Thus, it can be
said that the social principles (SP IV) should be considered as seriously as the ecological measures
when planning for biodiversity conservation.

3.3.2 Global Strategies for Biodiversity Conservation

In this section, the study lists the application of some global strategies for biodiversity protection in
Turkey in order to emphasise the importance of Turkey’s biodiversity.

It is known that there is a scarcity of time and funding for nature conservation. Therefore, biologists
need to find the optimum solution that would provide benefits the greatest from the investments
(Eken,2006).

Consequently, they have developed many strategies in order to prioritise and guide the biodiversity

32
 Irem Unay 1438842

conservation assessments. Some of the strategies are listed as following:

1-Important Plant Areas (IPAs):

Figure 3.2 The 144 IPAs that have been identified in Turkey, which cover 13% of Turkey’s total area (Plantlife
International, 2015)

IPAs are identified as the landscapes that have the highest botanical importance. Turkey has an
outstanding flora because it falls into three floristic regions (Euro Siberian, Mediterranean and
Irano-Turanian), and is the meeting place of the floras of Europe and Asia (Plantlife International,
2015).

2- Important and Endemic Bird Areas:

Figure 3.3 Important Bird Areas in Turkey (Birdlife International, 2015)

Important Bird Areas (IBAs) can be considered as the minimum areas essential to ensure the long-
term viability of naturally occurring bird populations. The most important places for conservation of
birds are the Endemic Bird Areas, which contain nearly all of the world’s restricted-range bird
species (EBAs) (Birdlife International, 2015).

3- Biodiversity Eco-regions:
1. Balkan mixed forests
2. Aegean and Western Turkey sclerophyllous and mixed
forests
33
3. Anatolian conifer and deciduous mixed forests
4. Euxine-Colchic deciduous forests
5. Northern Anatolian conifer and deciduous forests
 Irem Unay 1438842

Figure 3.4 Turkey’s ecoregions (WWF, 2015)

The Biodiversity Eco-regions strategy provides a blueprint for biodiversity conservation by

offering a scientific global ranking of the Earth's most biologically exceptional habitats. These
eco-regions were chosen based on the species richness, endemism, taxonomic uniqueness,
extraordinary ecological or evolutionary occurrences, and global rarity of the habitats (Olson,
2001). These eco-regions can be ranked by:

 Threats to biodiversity
 The status of their natural habitats and species
 Degree of protection (WWF, 2015).

4- Nine Biodiversity Hotspots in Turkey:

Figure 3.5 The nine biodiversity hotspots in Turkey (WWF, 2015)

In 1999, the WWF selected nine regions in Turkey, which are exceptionally essential to preserve,
among the 100 environmental regions in Europe. However, recently many of them are threatened
either by construction or energy projects that government is leading (Hurriyetdailynews.com, 2014).

5- Key Biodiversity Areas (KBAs):

34
 Irem Unay 1438842

Figure 3.6 Turkey’s key biodiversity areas, covering 26% of Turkey’s total surface area (Eken et al., 2006)

In Turkey, the NGO ‘Doga Dernegi’ defined 305 internationally important KBAs, which are built
on two main principles: vulnerability and irreplaceability. According to Eken et al. (2006),
respectively 22 and 46 of them are classified as ‘very urgent’ and ‘urgent’ for conservation action,
and 100 KBAs are classified as ‘conservation dependant’. Unfortunately, over the past ten years,
only two sites’ conservation status has improved, while 125 sites have partially lost their natural
integrity.

In the literature, there are many more strategies for biodiversity conservation, such as defining
global biodiversity hotspots (see Chapter 3.1.1.2), Ramsar Wetlands of International Importance,
Important Sites for Freshwater Biodiversity, Conservation International’s Terrestrial Biodiversity
Hotspots, and Coral Reef Biodiversity Hotspots etc., which need developing strategies to best
protect them.

3.3.2.1 Suggested Strategies for Turkey

Considering that Turkey’s current protected areas do not cover all the identified areas requiring
conservation in the strategies described above (Figure 3.7), it can be said that it may not be socially
and economically viable to expand the natural park areas by taking all those strategies into
consideration.

Figure 3.7 Turkey’s current protected areas (Milliparklar.gov.tr, 2014).

However, the existing parks are too isolated and small for survival of many species. Therefore,

35
 Irem Unay 1438842

Sekercioglu et al. (2011) and Gross (2012) suggest creation of wildlife corridors via reforestation
and rehabilitation of habitats between the isolated parks. They recommend creation of a network of
protection areas between the important but isolated areas that harbour large mammal populations
with the forests on the northern and southern mountains. Sekercioglu et al. (2011) indicate that this
network would benefit both biodiversity protection and sustainable development of rural areas, and
may reduce the consequences of climate change. Meanwhile, it is important to note that MoFWA
accepted the generation of wildlife corridors that will connect northern forest blocks to forests in
Georgia, as an action plan between 2014 and 2018 (MoFWA, 2015).

Figure 3.8 Generation of green corridors for the viability of wildlife (MoFWA, 2015)

On the other hand, Defra (2010) argues that recreating large expanses of continuous natural habitat
is usually not a very feasible option. Thus, it suggests an alternative approach, which is an
ecological network of high-quality ‘core sites’ connected by ‘buffer zones’, ‘wildlife corridors’ and
smaller sites that can act as ‘stepping stones’ in a ‘sustainable use area’ (Figure 3.8), which would
allow the species, or at least their genes, to move between them. The explanations of the suggested
components of an ecological network are listed as following:

Core areas contain rare or important habitats that support wildlife or provide the ecosystem
services, similar to existing national parks. In general, these areas have the highest concentrations of
species or support rare species.
Corridors and ‘stepping stones’ are spaces that enable species to travel between the core areas to
feed, disperse, migrate or reproduce. These connections need not be linear and continuous, as
number of small sites may act as ‘stepping stones’ to also allow species to move across certain core
areas. Similarly, a landscape that consists of patches and passages between sites can be an effective
ecological corridor as well.

36
 Irem Unay 1438842

Restoration areas are often situated to restore or create new high quality core areas in order to
rebuild ecological functions and species populations.
Buffer zones closely surround the network components mentioned above to protect them from
adverse impacts from the enclosing environment.
Sustainable use areas help make the area outside the network more permeable and less hostile to
wildlife by focusing on the sustainable use of resources, economic activities, and the conservation
of ecosystem services (Bennett and Mulongoy, 2006; Defra, 2010).

Figure 3.9 The components of Ecological Networks (Defra, 2010)

In order for the ecological network system to work, it must have clear aims and a vision to engage
stakeholders; because local stakeholder engagement (e.g. land owners) is critical. In order to include
local people in the benefits of the network, it is recommended to establish a flexible and multi-
functional use of the network. Moreover, it is important that the sites are chosen based on sound
evidence, to ensure the right sites are included to support species and habitats, and the entire
network components should be protected effectively. Finally, it is critical to find proper funding for
the ecological network (ECNC, 2009).

37
 Irem Unay 1438842

3.4 Actions Level

The actions level is about putting concrete actions into stepwise programs that move the situation
towards sustainability (Ny, 2009). In Turkey’s National Biodiversity Protection Strategy and Action
Plan (NBSAP), 150 actions were developed (Appendix-D), with a time schedule to be executed
between 2008 and 2017 (MoEF, 2007). However, these actions are still to be adopted by the
government (EC, 2014a). The possible reasons for the delay in the implementation are shown in the
‘Weaknesses’ section in the SWOT analysis.
When the NBSAP is examined, it can be seen that it encompass comprehensive and goal-oriented
actions for the protection of agriculture, forests, steppes, mountains, rivers, wetlands, and marine
and coastal ecosystems, and it determines the social measures that need to be taken for biodiversity
protection. In the Appendix-D, this study assessed these actions with respect to the SPs, in order to
determine if they all move towards the success definition, as FSSD planning requires. As a result,
39 actions did not seem to associate with the SPs, while 15 actions partially relate with them (see
the actions marked with ‘*’ in the Appendix-D). However, they are necessary actions to close the
gaps of knowledge in the Systems Level of the FSSD, such as monitoring and identification of
species in the ecosystems. Hence, they would eventually help to understand the system better, in
order to define concrete actions.

In addition to Turkey’s existing strategy, this study recommends the Ecological Networks Strategy
for the protection areas of Turkey, which requires the execution of the following actions that comply
with SPIII:

 Improve the quality of current sites by better habitat management.

 Increase the size of current wildlife sites.
 Create new sites.
 Enhance connections between, or join up, core sites either through physical corridors, or
through ‘stepping stones’.
 Reduce the pressures on wildlife by improving the wider environment, including through
buffering wildlife sites (Brotherton, 2011).

It also requires inclusion of the local people by distributing benefits of the multifunctional network
equally, which serves the SPIV (ECNC, 2009).

38
 Irem Unay 1438842

3.5 Tools Level

There are various tools and concepts that could be used with the FSSD, which could serve as
(Robert et al., 2012, p.56):

 Strategic tools to understand how the actions can be chosen to move towards sustainability,
 Systems tools that make measurements in the system to monitor damages or improvements,
 Capacity tools that could help people learn about sustainability.

This study demonstrates the ABCD as a strategic tool, which is a formalised method for applying
FSSD.

3.5.1 ABCD Strategic Tool for Application of FSSD for Biodiversity Protection in
Turkey

The ABCD strategic tool is a four-step process (see figure 1.4) that acts as a check-list for planning.
This process is most effective when it involves a team with the representatives of the stakeholders
(see Table 3.4), and when it is integrated into routine meetings, which would foster a feeling of
responsibility within the team to work together for biodiversity conservation (Robert et al., 2012).
The four steps of ABCD are outlined below:

3.5.1.1 Step A - Vision

Step A indicates the System and Success Level of the FSSD. It helps outlining the socio-ecological
system and the sustainability challenges, and builds a vision for a sustainable society that complies
with the SPs (Robert et al., 2012).

The vision should contain strategic goals (see Appendix-E), core purpose and value statements,
which are constrained by principles of sustainability (Meisterheim, 2014). Even though Turkey has
visions for biodiversity protection (see Chapter 3.2), the development of a new vision is essential
for application of FSSD, by considering these aspects. In order to create the vision, the team should
address how to integrate the current values and goals of Turkey into biodiversity protection.

39
 Irem Unay 1438842

3.5.1.2 Step B - Baseline Assessment

Step B investigates the current reality of the system through the lens of the SPs (Meisterheim,
2014). In this stage, the team should reveal how Turkey currently contributes to violations of SPs in
biodiversity protection. In addition, it should also explore the ways in which Turkey is already
directly or indirectly contributing to compliance with the SPs. In order to find Turkey’s
contributions to SP violations, the following guidelines might be helpful:

 SPI: Listing the actions that are dependent on fossil fuels and also list mined materials that are
scarce in the nature but that might substantially leak into the environment.
 SPII: Listing the substances that are persistent and foreign to nature, and which are likely to
spread and systematically increase in concentration in the biosphere.
 SPIII: List the activities that mismanage and degrade productive parts of nature.
 SPIV: List the economic or ecological activities that systematically weaken society’s integrity,
influence, competence, impartiality, and meaning (Robert et al., 2012; Missimer, 2013).

This study provides a short baseline analysis in Chapter 3.3.1. However, FSSD requires a more
comprehensive analysis that takes into consideration all the activities in Turkey that misalign with
the SPs for biodiversity protection.

3.5.1.3 Step C- Necessary Actions to Reach the Vision

Step C requires brainstorming a list of possible actions that could eliminate the organization’s
misalignment with the SPs, to move Turkey towards the vision of a well protected biodiversity. This
list may consist of feasible short or medium term actions and larger goals, which may seem
unrealistic for the time being (Meisterheim, 2014).

Even though Turkey already has comprehensive actions for biodiversity protection in NBSAP, it is
highly possible that they will need to be updated or altered regarding the findings in Step A and Step
B.

40
 Irem Unay 1438842

3.5.1.4 Step D - Prioritisation of the Actions

Step D answers the research question ‘How should the actions be prioritised in order to best protect
biodiversity?’ It defines a strategic guideline for the brainstormed actions, by prioritising them
according to the minimum three prioritisation questions, as below:

“1. Does this action proceed in the right direction with respect to the SPs?
2. Does this action provide a stepping stone (e.g. flexible platform) for future improvement?
3. Is this action likely to produce a sufficient return on investment (e.g. financial, political,
social and cultural returns) to further catalyse the process?” (Robért et al., 2002)

Other than these questions, there are many other prioritisation criteria, such as: socio- ecological
impacts of the actions, urgency and visibility of the issues, and the effectiveness of the possible
solutions (Robert et al., 2012, p.65). Even though the actions of NBSAP are set on a schedule, it is
stated that they are not prioritised considering the country’s needs (MoEF, 2007). Thus, in
Appendix-D, this study examines these actions with the first prioritisation question according to
their relations with the SPs, and skips the other two questions because they require intellectual
discussion between the stakeholders. Therefore, this study recommends a collective work for
prioritisation of the actions defined in Step C, by asking each action the minimum three questions
above.

41
 Irem Unay 1438842

4 DISCUSSION

This section discusses the findings from the FSSD analysis of the current situation regarding
conservation of biodiversity in Turkey under each research question, and provides recommendations
for biodiversity protection to strategically move towards sustainability. Subsequently, it reflects
upon the limitations of the research and presents the areas for potential further research.

4.1 Responses to Research Questions

4.1.1 Application of FSSD to Protection of Biodiversity in Turkey

In the EC (2011) report, it is officially articulated that a framework is needed in the implementation
of biodiversity conservation. Based on this information, this study asks ‘What does FSSD reveal
when applied to protection of biodiversity in Turkey?’

This study is a first in terms of application of a framework for biodiversity conservation in Turkey.
Therefore, first, it was essential to find out the current state of biodiversity and Turkey’s approach
to biodiversity problems. The FSSD was used as a conceptual framework in order to develop a
structured plan to understand the current situation. By examining biodiversity conservation in
Turkey in five levels of FSSD, this study was able to focus on the key points, which are normally
hard to see because of the complexity of the issue.

The study defined the importance of biodiversity for sustainable development and Turkey’s policies
and instruments to protect its biodiversity in the System Level. In the Success Level, the success
definition was described according to SPs and the existing relevant visions were compiled for
sustainability of biodiversity in Turkey. In the Strategic Level, the study demonstrated some global
strategies for protection areas in Turkey and the Ecological Networks Strategy was recommended
as the most feasible approach. The Actions Level observed the current action strategy of Turkey
(NBSAP) for its accordance to the SPs. Finally, the Tools Level explained the ABCD Strategic
Planning tool in order to guide the Turkish government to prioritise actions and initiatives for
biodiversity protection.
In this perspective, the application of FSSD provided this study with a solid baseline analysis,
covering the essential points in the protection of biodiversity in Turkey. It was seen that in order to

42
 Irem Unay 1438842

protect biodiversity, the action plan should include the all the SPs that Turkey is violating. For
example, according to FSSD, the social SP violations such as rising population, education and
inequality of income are important parts that construct the basis of the biodiversity problem for
Turkey and they should not be overlooked. Furthermore, as recommended in the Results Section of
the study, it is necessary for Turkey to close its gaps, especially in finance, monitoring and
education. Moreover, defining a common vision that encompasses strategic goals and purpose,
within the constraints of all the SPs, is necessary. Following this, Turkey should redefine its actions
considering its new vision to prioritise them with the strategic guidelines of FSSD. In order to
achieve these, devoted work of a team containing all relevant stakeholders is crucial.

4.1.2 The Current Situation of Biodiversity Conservation in Turkey

As mentioned before, the question ‘What is the current situation of biodiversity conservation in
Turkey?’ was asked in order to be able to make recommendations for future biodiversity
conservation in Turkey. According to the results, Turkey has outstanding concentrations of endemic
species that are undergoing exceptional loss of habitat, which makes the country a globally
important biodiversity area. However, the conservation studies are very weak and apparently, there
are many gaps in the legal framework, monitoring, education and financing for biodiversity
conservation. In order to take precautions, and close the gaps, Turkey is dependent on foreign
financing. Turkey needs to focus on the propagation of the importance of its biodiversity, such as
the significance of its wetlands for bird migrations, in order to benefit from international initiatives
and funding schemes. Moreover, inclusion of all the stakeholders need to be increased and income-
generating opportunities should be developed for conservation projects.

In terms of taking actions, it is known that Turkey has not yet applied its biodiversity protection
strategy, which was developed in 2007. However, MoFWA made a revision of the strategy in May
2015 and examined the accuracy of the strategy (Milliparklar.gov.tr, 2015), which may show that
Turkey will speed up its actions in the upcoming years. Moreover, Turkey also accepted the wildlife
corridors project for the northern forests, which shows that there is a possibility for Turkey to
consider the ecological networks project that connects and improves the protected areas.

4.1.3 Level of Interest and Awareness of Turkish People

43
 Irem Unay 1438842

This study asks ‘What is the level of interest and awareness of Turkish people about this matter?’
because it is crucial to have the public’s support for biodiversity conservation measures.

In the literature, there are not many studies on biodiversity education in Turkey. The existing
articles mostly agree on the lack of active teaching methods, which are very important for pupils to
grasp the biodiversity issue. It has been found that, even if the students that live in the rural areas
are more knowledgeable about biodiversity, they do not recognise the floral and faunal species as
well as the students from the countryside. Moreover, the students in Turkey tend to not know how
to support biodiversity. Thus, it is recommended to add visual and tangible teaching methods,
which could introduce the species and ecosystems and teach how to protect them.

Additionally, the survey results of this study show that most of the Turkish people think that the
education system is not adequate for biodiversity protection. The survey accords with the literature
on the knowledge that the familiarity of the people sharply increases on the 9th grade (first year of
high school), because this is when the students are introduced with the term. Then, familiarity rises
with the education level. It is worthy to note that Turkish people generally lack interest and
accordingly, a majority of people did not take any action to conserve biodiversity. Moreover, the
environmental issues are the least important comparing to social and economic problems. However,
a very high percentage of the people are not happy with the environmental quality of Turkey and
most of them, especially the ones with higher education, think that things are getting worse. The
most interesting part of the survey is the accordance of the public on their government’s
incompetence on biodiversity protection, which they consider needs to be taken more seriously by
the government.

4.1.4 Prioritisation of the Actions for Biodiversity Conservation

The key question of this study is ‘How should the actions be prioritised in order to best protect
biodiversity?’, because it is a challenge to define strategic actions and prioritise them in a complex
system.

This study offers to use the ABCD strategic planning tool in order to implement FSSD and
prioritise the necessary actions. The author conducted a partial prioritisation analysis of the actions
in NBSAP by assessing them according to SPs. However, in order to make a complete
prioritisation, the actions should be assessed according to their flexibility and return of investments
as well. Nevertheless, it was not possible for this study because of the lack of time and resources,

44
 Irem Unay 1438842

and also considering that the results would only be accurate if made by a team with experts and
stakeholders. Thus, this study recommends a complete ABCD analysis be made by a team, in order
to identify the prioritised actions that would bring Turkey towards a sustainable biodiversity vision.

4.2 Limitations and Suggested Way Forward

This study applies FSSD to the current situation of Turkey and gives recommendations to the
Turkish government about biodiversity conservation. The biggest limitations of this study were time
and word-limitation constraints. However, this research could be used as a basis for many other
studies, which could actually conduct the FSSD for biodiversity protection through ABCD planning
for Turkey, by working with the government, the NGOs and other important stakeholders.

Additionally, as mentioned before, because of the limitations of time and resources, the
demographics of the people who responded to the survey were not distributed equally. Thus, in any
new research, a similar study can be executed while making sure of diversity of the respondents.
Moreover, considering the importance of the public’s view on this matter, in the future studies,
qualitative analysis could be conducted in order to understand, for example, the reason why they do
not find the Turkish education system effective or why do they think that environmental conditions
are getting worse.

Finally, while researching for this study, as Sekercioglu et al. (2011) indicates, it was realised that
there are not many studies which demonstrate the importance of Turkey’s biodiversity to an
international academic audience, because most of them are only available in the Turkish language.
This is a serious limitation of, perhaps not this study, but Turkey’s publicity, which could eventually
bring funding to protect the globally important areas. Thus, this study recommends encouraging the
academicians to make effort to introduce Turkey’s biodiversity in international platforms such as
scientific journals that focus on biodiversity and conservation.

5 CONCLUSION

45
 Irem Unay 1438842

It is essential to protect biodiversity, because it supports the ecosystems that provide goods and
services that sustain all life on this planet, including human life. This study considers biodiversity as
one of the main components of sustainable development (Uyanık et al., 2012; Okur-Berberoglu et
al., 2014), and applies a framework for strategic sustainable development for its protection, by
focusing particularly on Turkey’s biodiversity, which is extremely rich and unique. As a result, it
was found that there is a need for fundamental changes in the way society lives in Turkey. The
problems such as a rapidly rising population, lack of education, urbanization and pollution are
affecting ecological and social sustainability, which directly or indirectly cause the loss of
biodiversity. The framework FSSD helped to detect these problems using the SPs, and provided a
strategic guideline to overcome these problems effectively. This study also made a recommendation
for creating ecological networks of protected areas. Moreover, the author points out the need for
application of FSSD with a team of experts and stakeholders, and reconsider all its five steps by
making extensive analyses with the help of the ABCD tool. In this plan, the suggested ‘ecological
networks’ could be taken as a possible strategic action to be prioritised for sustainability.

To conclude, this research is a baseline analysis of the biodiversity conservation status and needs
and a guidance of application of FSSD to biodiversity of Turkey. The author hopes that this
guidance will be used by researchers and the Turkish government for an effective conservation plan
and its implementation for the sustainability of biodiversity in Turkey, which is worth conserving.

46
 Irem Unay 1438842

REFERENCES

Atik, A., Oztekin, M. and Erkoc, F. (2010). Biodiversity and Examples of Endemic Plants in Turkey. Gazi Egitim
Fakultesi Dergisi, 30(1).

Bartkowski, B., Lienhoop, N. and Hansjürgens, B. (2015). Capturing the complexity of biodiversity: A critical review
of economic valuation studies of biological diversity. Ecological Economics, 113, pp.1-14.

Bastı, K.; Dogan, N.; Bahar, M.; Nartgun, Z. (2010). 4th, 5th and 6th Grade Students' Awareness on Biodiversity, Bolu:
Turkish Ministry of Education.

Bat, L., Sezgin, M., Satilmis, H., Sahin, F., Ustun, F., Ozdemir, Z. and Baki, O. (2011). Biological Diversity of the
Turkish Black Sea Coast. Turkish Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences, 11, pp.683-692.

Bennett, G. and Mulongoy, K. (2006). Review of Experience with Ecological Networks, Corridors and Buffer Zones.
Montreal: Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity.

Birdlife International, (2015). Sites - Important Bird and Biodiversity Areas (IBAs). [online] Available at:
http://www.birdlife.org/datazone/site [Accessed 30 Aug. 2015].

Broman, G., Holmberg, J. and Robert, K. (2000). Simplicity Without Reduction: Thinking Upstream Towards the
Sustainable Society. Interfaces, 30(3), pp.13-25.

Brotherton, P. (2011). Making Space for Nature. Countryside Matters, [online] (1), pp.50-56. Available at:
http://www.clintondevon.com/_assets/flippingbook/Issue%201%20for%20web/index.html#1 [Accessed 4 Sep. 2015].

Brundtland, G. (1987). Our Common Future-Call for Action. Envir. Conserv., [online] 14(04), p.291. Available at:
http://www.un-documents.net/our-common-future.pdf.

CBD International, (2015). Aichi Biodiversity Targets. [online] Available at: https://www.cbd.int/sp/targets/ [Accessed
3 Sep. 2015].

CBD (2015). The National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan. [online] Available at:
http://ttps://www.cbd.int/doc/world/tr/tr-nbsap-01-p1-en.pdf [Accessed 26 Aug. 2015].

Celikkol, N. Z., & Soran, H. (2012). The biodiversity knowledge and attitudes of secondary school students. X.National
Science and Mathematics Conference, 27- 30 June 2012, Nigde, Turkey.

Cepel, N. (1997). 'The Importance and Protection of Biodiversity'. Istanbul: TEMA Publications. (In Turkish).

Conservation International, (2015). Biodiversity Hotspots. [online] Available at:

http://www.conservation.org/search/pages/results.aspx?k=hotspots [Accessed 2 Jul. 2015].

47
 Irem Unay 1438842
Defra, (2010). A Review of England's Wildlife Sites and Ecological Network. Making Space for Nature. York: Secretary
of State, the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs.

Defra, (2011). Biodiversity 2020: A Strategy for England's Wildlife and Ecosystem Services. London: Department for
Environment, Food and Rural Affairs.

de Groot, R., Wilson, M. and Boumans, R. (2002). A typology for the classification, description and valuation of
ecosystem functions, goods and services. Ecological Economics, 41(3), pp.393-408.

Demir, A. (2013). A Rising Value in the Sustainable Development; The Turkey Assessment in terms of Biodiversity.
İstanbul Ticaret Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Dergisi, 12(24), pp.67-74.

EC, (2011). Our life insurance, our natural capital: an EU biodiversity strategy to 2020. Communication From The
Commission To The European Parliament, The Council, The Economic And Social Committee And The Committee Of
The Regions. Brussels: European Commission.

EC, (2014). Instrument for Pre-Accession Assistance: Indicative Strategy Paper for Turkey (2014-2020). [online]
Available at: http://ec.europa.eu/enlargement/pdf/key_documents/2014/20140919-csp-turkey.pdf [Accessed 5 Jul.
2015].

EC, (2014a). Turkey 2014 Progress Report. Enlargement Strategy and Main Challenges 2014-15. Brussels: European
Commission.

EC, (2015). European Neighbourhood Policy and Enlargement Negotiations - Turkey - financial assistance under IPA
II - European Commission. [online] Available at:
http://ec.europa.eu/enlargement/instruments/funding-by-country/turkey/index_en.htm [Accessed 2 Jul. 2015].

ECNC, (2009). Guidelines for involving stakeholders in the implementation of ecological networks. Making the
connection!. Tilburg: ECNC–European Centre for Nature Conservation.

Eken, G., Ataol, M., Bekir, S. and Gokcen, A. (2006). Turkey’s Important Nature Zones. Ankara: Doga Dernegi. (In
Turkish).

Erten, S. (2015). Sample Course Material for Biodiversity and Sustainable Education. International Journal of
Education in Mathematics, Science and Technology, 3(2), pp.155-161.

Eurostat, (2015). Environmental protection expenditure in Europe - detailed data. [online] Available at:
http://appsso.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/nui/show.do?dataset=env_ac_exp1r2&lang=en [Accessed 2 Jul. 2015].

Fournier, N., Good, S., herkenrath, P. and Mees, C. (2010). Assessment of the EU Biodiversity Action Plan as a tool for.
Biodiversity Knowledge Base. European Commission.

Gross, M. (2012). Turkey’s biodiversity at the crossroads. Current Biology, 22(16), p.1543.

Handmer, J., Norton, T. and Dovers, S. (2001). Ecology, uncertainty, and policy. Harlow, England: Prentice Hall.

48
 Irem Unay 1438842

Hooper, D., Chapin, F., Ewel, J., Hector, A., Inchausti, P., Lavorel, S., Lawton, J., Lodge, D., Loreau, M., Naeem, S.,
Schmid, B., Setälä, H., Symstad, A., Vandermeer, J. and Wardle, D. (2005). Effects Of Biodiversity On Ecosystem
Functioning: A Consensus Of Current Knowledge. Ecological Monographs, 75(1), pp.3-35.

Hurriyetdailynews.com, (2014). GREEN - Turkey’s nine environmental ‘hotspots’. [online] Available at:
http://www.hurriyetdailynews.com/turkeys-nine-environmental-hotspots.aspx?
pageID=238&nID=69042&NewsCatID=340 [Accessed 2 Jul. 2015].

Kahraman, A., Onder, M. and Ceyhan, E. (2012). The Importance of Bioconservation and Biodiversity in Turkey.
IJBBB, pp.95-99.

Karabulut, M. (2006). An Examination and Monitoring Vegetation Conditions in Turkey Using NOAA AVHRR Data.
Coğrafi Bilimler Dergisi, 4(1), pp.29-42. (In Turkish).

Kilic, D., Dervisoglu, S., Kasap, M. (2012). The effect of youth’s personal and group efficacy beliefs on their
commitment to protect species. Journal of Research in Education and Teaching, 1(2), pp.289- 294.

Kiziroglu, I. (2007). Education and Research on Environmental Awareness in Turkey. CLEAN – Soil, Air, Water, 35(6),
pp.534-536.

Kucuk, M. and Erturk, E. (2013). Biodiversity and Protected Areas in Turkey. Sains Malaysiana, 42(10), pp.1455-1460.

Lawton, J. (2015). What’s past is prologue. NERC- Planet Earth Magazine, p.17.

Maxwell, J. A., & Loomis, D. M. (2003). Mixed methods design: An alternative approach. In A. Tashakkori & C.
Teddlie (Eds.), Handbook of mixed methods in social & behavioral research (pp. 241–271). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

McKee, J. (2004). Forecasting global biodiversity threats associated with human population growth. Biological
Conservation, 115(1), pp.161-164.

Meisterheim, T. (2014). ABCD Guidelines. [Lecture to Msc. Sustainability, Entrepreneurship and Design], IE5701:
Introduction to Strategic Sustainable Development. Brunel University. 26 September.

Milliparklar.gov.tr, (2014). Statistics: Nature Protection and National Parks General Management. [online] Available at:
http://www.milliparklar.gov.tr/Anasayfa/istatistik.aspx?sflang=tr [Accessed 6 Jul. 2015].

Milliparklar.gov.tr, (2014a). Licensed Zoos in Turkey. [online] Available at:

http://www.milliparklar.gov.tr/yabanhayati/hayvanlarikoruma/r_hayvanat_b.doc [Accessed 13 Sep. 2015].
Milliparklar.gov.tr, (2015). Documents for Revision of National Biodiversity Protection Strategy and Action Plan.
[online] Available at: http://www.milliparklar.gov.tr/anasayfa/haberduyuru/duyurular/15-05-05/Ulusal_Biyolojik_
%C3%87e%C5%9Fitlilik_Stratejisi_ve_Eylem_Plan%C4%B1_De%C4%9Ferlendirme_Toplant%C4%B1s%C4%B1_i
%C3%A7in_Belgeler.aspx?sflang=tr [Accessed 6 Sep. 2015]. (In Turkish).

49
 Irem Unay 1438842
Ministry of Development, (2012). Turkey's Sustainable Development Report. Claiming the Future. Ankara: Ministry of
Development.

Ministry of Development, (2013). Tenth Development Plan 2014-2018. [online] Ankara: Turkish Ministry of
Development. Available at: http://www.kalkinma.gov.tr/Lists/Kalknma%20Planlar/Attachments/12/Onuncu%20Kalk
%C4%B1nma%20Plan%C4%B1.pdf [Accessed 5 Jul. 2015]. (In Turkish).

Missimer, M. (2013). The Social Dimension of Strategic Sustainable Development. Ph.D. Blekinge Institute of
Technology.

Missimer, M., Broman, G. and Robert, K. (2014). A first evaluation of working with the elaborated social dimension of
the Framework for Strategic Sustainable Development. Lessons from the field. Blekinge Institute of Technology.

MoEF, (2007). The National Biological Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan. National Focal Point of Convention on
Biological Diversity. [online] Ankara: Republic of Turkey. Available at: https://www.cbd.int/doc/world/tr/tr-nbsap-v2-
en.pdf [Accessed 28 May 2015].

MoFWA, (2012). Biodiversity Monitoring and Assessment Report. Ankara: Ministry of Forestry and Water Affairs,
Nature Conservation and Nature Parks General Management. (In Turkish).

MoFWA, (2013). Monitoring and Evaluating the Biodiversity. [online] Ankara: Ministry of Forestry and Water Affairs.
Available at: http://www.milliparklar.gov.tr [Accessed 1 Jul. 2015].

MoFWA, (2014). UN Convention of Biological Diversity. Fifth National Report. Ministry of Forestry and Water
Affairs.

MoFWA, (2015). Green Corridors for Wildlife. [online] Available at:

http://www.ormansu.gov.tr/osb/haberduyuru/guncelhaber/15-08-22/Yaban_Hayvanlar%C4%B1_
%C4%B0%C3%A7in_Ye%C5%9Fil_Koridor.aspx?sflang=tr [Accessed 5 Sep. 2015]. (In Turkish).

Myers, N., Mittermeler, R., Mittermeler, C., Fonseca, G. and Kent, J. (2000). Biodiversity Hotspots for Conservation
Priorities. Nature, 403, pp.853-858.

Myers, N. (2003). Biodiversity Hotspots Revisited. BioScience, 53(10), p.916.

NSS, (2015). National Statistical Service - Sample Size Calculator. [online] Nss.gov.au. Available at:
http://www.nss.gov.au/nss/home.nsf/pages/Sample+size+calculator?OpenDocument [Accessed 16 Aug. 2015].

Ny, H. (2009). Strategic Life-cycle Modelling and Simulation for Sustainable Product Innovation. PIE, 6(3), p.216.

OECD, (2008). OECD Environmental Performance Reviews: Turkey 2008. [online] Available at: http://www.oecd-
ilibrary.org.ezproxy.brunel.ac.uk/docserver/download/9708081e.pdf?
expires=1432821917&id=id&accname=oid006420&checksum=5B7B2BAFD0FF938C2D8691AFB9B23FAA
[Accessed 28 May 2015].

50
 Irem Unay 1438842
OECD, (2014). TURKEY OECD Social Indicators. Society at a Glance 2014 Highlights. [online] OECD. Available at:
http://www.oecd.org/turkey/OECD-SocietyAtaGlance20142014-Highlights-Turkey.pdf [Accessed 1 Sep. 2015].

Okur, E., Ozdilek, S. and Sahin, C. (2011). The Common Methods Used In Biodiversity Education By Primary School
Teachers (Çanakkale, Turkey). Journal of Theory and Practice in Education, 7(1), pp.142-159.

Okur-Berberoglu, E.; Yalcin- Ozdilek, S.; Sonmez, B.; Olgun, S. (2014). International Journal of Biology
Education. Theatre and Sea Turtles: An Intervention in Biodiversity Education, 3(1), pp.25-40.

Olson, D., Dinerstein, E., Wikramanayake, E., Burgess, N., Powell, G., Underwood, E., D'amico, J., Itoua, I., Strand,
H., Morrison, J., Loucks, C., Allnutt, T., Ricketts, T., Kura, Y., Lamoreux, J., Wettengel, W., Hedao, P. and Kassem, K.
(2001). Terrestrial Ecoregions of the World: A New Map of Life on Earth. BioScience, 51(11), p.933.

O'Riordan, T. and Stoll-Kleemann, S. (2002). Biodiversity, sustainability, and human communities. Cambridge, UK:
Cambridge University Press.

Oxford Dictionaries, (2015). English - definition of English in English from the Oxford dictionary. [online] Available at:
http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english [Accessed 13 Sep. 2015].

Ozcelik, R. (2006). Studies on Biodiversity and Their Reflections on Turkish Forestry. Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi
Orman Fakultesi Dergisi, 2(1302-7085), pp.23-36. (In Turkish).

Ozen, A. (2015). Global Importance of Zoo and Aquarium Associations in terms of Zoological Diversity Protection.
Dumlupınar University. (In Turkish).

Plantlife International, (2015). Turkey | Europe | IPA identification projects around the world | Important Plant Areas |
Our international projects | Welcome to Plantlife International. [online] Available at:
http://www.plantlife.org.uk/international/wild_plants/IPA/other_ipa_projects_worldwide/europe/turkey-1/ [Accessed 30
Aug. 2015].

Robèrt, K. (2000). Tools and concepts for sustainable development, how do they relate to a general framework for
sustainable development, and to each other?. Journal of Cleaner Production, 8(3), pp.243-254.

Robèrt, Karl-Henrik, B. Schmidt-Bleek, J. Aloisi de Larderel, G. Basile, J. L. Jansen, R. Kuehr, P. Price Thomas, M.
Suzuki, P. Hawken, and M. Wackernagel. (2002). Strategic sustainable development - selection, design and synergies of
applied tools. Journal of Cleaner Production 10, no. 3: 197-214.

Robert, K., Broman, G., Waldron, D., Ny, H., Byggeth, S., Cook, D., Oldmark, J., Basile, G., Haraldsson, H.,
MacDonald, J., Moore, B., Connell, T. and Missimer, M. (2012). Sustainability Handbook. Lund: Studentlitteratur AB.

Şekercioğlu, Ç., Anderson, S., Akçay, E., Bilgin, R., Can, Ö., Semiz, G., Tavşanoğlu, Ç., Yokeş, M., Soyumert, A.,
İpekdal, K., Sağlam, İ., Yücel, M. and Nüzhet Dalfes, H. (2011). Turkey’s globally important biodiversity in crisis.
Biological Conservation, 144(12), pp.2752-2769.

51
 Irem Unay 1438842
Sekercioglu, C., Anderson, S., Akcay, E. and Bilgin, R. (2011a). Turkey's Rich Natural Heritage Under Assault.
Science, 334(6063), pp.1637-1639.

Steffen, W., Sanderson, A., Tyson, P., Jager, J., Matson, P., Moore, B., Oldfield, F., Richardson, K., Shellnhuber, H.,
Turner, B. and Wasson, R. (2015). Global Change and the Earth System: A Planet Under Pressure. [ebook] Springer.
Available at: http://www.igbp.net/download/18.56b5e28e137d8d8c09380001694/1376383141875/
Springer+IGBP+Synthesis+Steffen+et+al+%282004%29_web.pdf [Accessed 14 Aug. 2015].

Tankus, M., Soran, H. (2012). The examining of the perception, belief, and behaviour tendency of secondary school
students toward the wetland protection. National Science and Mathematics Conference, 27- 30. June 2012, Nigde,
Turkey.

Tapkan, D. (2015). The Zoos in Our Country. Cumhuriyet Newspaper. [online] Available at:
http://www.cumhuriyet.com.tr/haber/turkiye/45795/Ulkemizdeki_hayvanat_bahceleri.html [Accessed 10 Sep. 2015].
(In Turkish).

Tisdell, C., Nantha, H. and Wilson, C. (2007). Biodiversity conservation and public support for sustainable wildlife
harvesting: A case study. International Journal of Biodiversity Science, Ecosystems Services & Management, 3(3),
pp.129-144.

TNS, (2015). What is Backcasting | The Natural Step. [online] Available at:
http://www.thenaturalstep.org/sustainability/backcasting/ [Accessed 15 Aug. 2015].

Topcu, F. (2012). Convention On Biological Diversity: From Negotiation To Implementation. Marmara Avrupa
Araştirmalari Dergisi, 20(1), pp.57-97. (In Turkish).

TUIK, (2015). Turkish Statistical Institute, Population, 2014. [online] Tuik.gov.tr. Available at:
http://www.tuik.gov.tr/PreHaberBultenleri.do?id=18616 [Accessed 16 Aug. 2015].

TÜİK, (2015a). Turkish Statistical Institute, Income and Employment Statistics, 2013. [online] Tuik.gov.tr. Available at:
http://www.tuik.gov.tr/PreHaberBultenleri.do?id=18863 [Accessed 1 Jul. 2015].

Türe, C. and Böcük, H. (2010). Distribution patterns of threatened endemic plants in Turkey: A quantitative approach
for conservation. Journal for Nature Conservation, 18(4), pp.296-303.

UNEP, (2015). Rio Declaration - Rio Declaration on Environment and Development - United Nations Environment
Programme (UNEP). [online] Available at: http://www.unep.org/Documents.Multilingual/Default.asp?
documentid=78&articleid=1163 [Accessed 13 Sep. 2015].

Uyanik, M., Kara, M. and Gurbuz, B. (2012). Biodiversity’s Importance in Sustainable Development. Turk Bilimsel
Derlemeler Dergisi, 5(2), pp.125-127. (In Turkish).

Uzun, F. and Keles, O. (2012). The Effects of Nature Education Project on the Environmental Awareness and Behavior.
Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 46, pp.2912-2916.

52
 Irem Unay 1438842

Waldron, D., Robert, K., Pong, L., McKay, M., Dyer, G., Blume, R., Khaleeli, R. and Cornell, T. (2008). Guide to the
Framework for Strategic Sustainable Development. Strategic Leadership towards Sustainability, Blekinge Institute of
Technology.

Waldron, A., Sekercioglu, C., Miller, D., Mooers, A., Roberts, J. and Gittleman, J. (2013). Turkey's Biodiversity
Funding on the Rise. Science, 341(6151), pp.1173-1173.

Williams, J. (2012). Humans and biodiversity: population and demographic trends in the hotspots. Popul Environ,
34(4), pp.510-523.

Williams, J. (2012a). Helping People and Preserving Biodiversity Hotspots. [online] New Security Beat. Available at:
http://www.newsecuritybeat.org/2012/03/john-williams-helping-people-and-preserving-biodiversity-hotspots/
[Accessed 2 Sep. 2015].

WWF International, (2014). Living Planet Report. Switzerland: World Wide Fund For Nature.

WWF, (2015). About Global Ecoregions. [online] Available at:

http://wwf.panda.org/about_our_earth/ecoregions/about/#sthash.CSAk0hnW.dpuf [Accessed 4 Jul. 2015].

Yale University EPI, (2015). Turkey 2014 Environmental Performance Index Results. [online] Available at:
http://epi.yale.edu/epi/country-profile/turkey [Accessed 24 Aug. 2015].

APPENDICES

53
 Irem Unay 1438842

Appendix-A: Survey Design (see Chapter 3.1.5.1)

54
 Irem Unay 1438842

Figure A. The survey questions designed to measure awareness and interest for biodiversity in Turkey

55

Appendix-B: The laws and regulations for species and site protection in Turkey
(see Chapter 3.1.2.2)
Law on National Parks (2873 -
09.08.1983)
Law for the Protection of
Cultural and Natural Assets
(2863 - 23.07.1983)
Decree-Law Establishing the
Special Environmental
Protection Agency (383 -
19.10.1989)
Terrestrial Hunting Law (4915-
01.07.2003)
The Regulation for the
Protection of Wetlands
Law on Aquatic Products (1380-
04.04.1971)
The Forest Law (6831-
31.08.1956)
The Regulation on the Collection,
Production and Exportation of
Natural Flower Bulbs
The Regulation for
Implementing the Convention on
International Trade in
Endangered
Species of Wild Fauna and Flora
The Law for the Protection of
Animals (5199- 24.06.2004)
The Agiculture Regulation
The Regulation Concerning the
Collection, Protection and
Utilization of Plant Genetic
Resources
The Regulation Concerning the
Protection of Animal Gene
Resources
The Animal Improvement Law
(4631-28.02.2001)
Irem Unay 1438842
It provides for the designation of national parks, nature parks, natural monuments and
nature conservation sites with national and international value and for their
conservation, development and management without spoiling their characteristics.
Natural sites are designated according to this Law. It sets forth definitions related to
movable and immovable cultural and natural assets requiring conservation and
regulates the actions and activities to be carried out.
This Decree-Law establishes the Special Environmental Protection Agency to take all
measures for protecting the environmental assets of areas designated or to be
designated as “Special Environmental Protection (SEP) Zone” and solving their
existing environmental problems, to determine the principles of conservation and use
for such areas, to make their development plans, to revise existing plans of every scale
and planning decisions and to approve them acting on its own initiative.
Wildlife protection and generation areas are established in accordance with this Law.
This Law includes provisions concerning the conservation and development of game
and wild animals together with their natural habitats for sustainable hunting and
wildlife management, the control of their hunting, the regulation
of hunting, the utilization of hunting resources in such a way as to benefit the national
economy, and cooperation with relevant public and private legal entities.
Prepared with a view in particular to implementing the Convention on Wetlands of
International Importance, Especially as
Waterfowl Habitat (the Ramsar Convention), this Regulation sets forth the principles
for the protection and development of all wetlands, having or not having international
importance, and for cooperation and coordination between agencies involved in this
area.
This Law includes basic provisions concerning the conservation, hunting, production,
marketing, health and control of aquatic living things found in seas and inland waters,
and other provisions concerning procedures, principles, prohibitions, restrictions,
obligations and measures in other issues such as harmful and polluting substances
prohibited from being discharged in production areas.
It states principles concerning forest management such as the planning, operation and
conservation of forests. Protection forests, gene protection forests and seed stands are
designated under this Law.
It sets forth principles concerning the collection from the wild, production, growing
and storing of and domestic and foreign trade in seeds, bulbs or other parts of natural
bulbous flowers without destroying and depleting their population.
It sets forth procedures and principles for the control of international trade in fauna and
flora species covered by the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species
of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) to ensure their sustainable use.
It aims to ensure animal welfare and proper treatment of animals, to protect them in the
best manner from pain, suffering and cruelty, and to prevent all kinds of ill-treatment
against them.
The aims of this Regulation are to set forth basic principles concerning apiculture,
research, the identification, protection and improvement of gene resources, the
formation of new lines for bee-raising, the imports and exports of breeding material,
and the commercial raising of queen bees, to determine and disseminate the criteria to
be required for artificial insemination in beekeeping enterprises, and to take measures
for the protection of bee health.
For the purpose of protecting and developing Turkey’s plant genetic resources, this
Regulation sets forth principles concerning their survey, their collection and the
protection, conservation, production, replacement, characterization, assessment,
documentation and exchange of collected material. The National Gene Bank and
Herbarium has been established under this Regulation, which also covers the issue of
permits for research on plant genetic resources.
It sets forth procedures and principles concerning the determination of the genotypical
and phenotypical characteristics of Turkey’s animal gene resources, their breeding for
conservation, and the recording and conservation of those characteristics.
This Law provides for all types of animal production and activities to render such
production more effective, for improvement efforts to increase the productivity of
animals raised for racing, competition or business, for protecting the gene resources of
domestic and wild animals, for making animal production more efficient and
56

The Law for the Protection of
Improver’s Rights Concerning
New Plant Varieties (5042-
08.01.2004)
The Seed-Raising Law (5553-
31.10.2006)
The Pastures Law (4342-
25.02.1998) and the Pastures
Regulation
The Coastal Law (3621/3830-
04.04.1990)
The Agriculture Law (5488-
18.04.2006)
The Soil Protection and Land
Use Law (5403-03.07.2005)
The Law on National
Mobilization for Afforestation
and Erosion Control (4122-
23.07.1995)
and the Regulation on
Afforestation
The Organic Farming Law
(5262-01.12.2004) and Regulation
The Regulation on Good
Agricultural Practices
The Regulation Concerning the
Protection and Use of
Agricultural Land
Table B. Laws and regulations for biodiversity protection in Turkey (MoEF, 2007)
Irem Unay 1438842
competitive, for activities relating to these matters, for the keeping of pedigree records,
for the improvement of animal races, for the raising of breeding animals in healthy and
hygienic conditions and their transfer to producers free from diseases, and for their
protection.
The aim of this Law is to encourage the development of plant varieties and to ensure
the conservation of new varieties and of improver’s rights. This Law covers all plant
species.
It replaced Law 308 of 21.08.1963 on the
Registration and Certification of Seeds in order to improve quality and yield in crop
production, to provide quality assurance for seeds, to make provisions concerning seed
production and trade, and to implement the necessary actions for the restructuring and
development of the seed-raising sector.
They were put into force with the aim of ensuring the use of pastures, summer quarters,
winter quarters, grazing areas and meadows in accordance with rules to be set, carrying
out their maintenance and improvement, increasing and sustaining their productivity,
continuously supervising their use, and changing their purpose of use when required.
It sets forth principles for the conservation of sea, natural and artificial lake and river
coasts and of the coastal strips that are under their influence and an extension of them,
considering their cultural and natural characteristics, and for their use for public
benefit.
It includes procedures and principles for determining the goals, scopes and subjects of
agricultural policies, defining the goals and principles of agricultural support policies
and the basic support programmes, determining the market regulations, financing and
administrative structure related to the implementation of these programmes, and
making the legislative and administrative arrangements related to the priority research
and development programmes to be implemented in the agricultural sector. It includes
the conservation and development of natural and biological resources among the goals
of agricultural policies and charges the MARA with the duty of conducting research
for the conservation and development of biological diversity, genetic resources and
ecosystems.
It sets forth procedures and principles to ensure the conservation and development of
soil by preventing its loss and degradation through natural or artificial ways and the
planned use of land in accordance with the principle of sustainable development with
priority for the environment.
They specify principles and procedures concerning the activities of afforestation and
erosion control to be undertaken by governmental agencies and natural and legal
persons in order to enhance the forest area and forest wealth, to restore and improve
the balance between soil, water and plants, and to protect environmental values. The
Regulation sets forth principles concerning the activities of afforestation, erosion
control, pasture improvement, tree improvement, seed production, nursery and energy
forest establishment, development and restoration to be undertaken in accordance with
the provisions of Forest Law 6381.
They were put into force with the aims of protecting the ecological balance, conducting
activities of organic farming, and regulating, developing and spreading organic
agricultural production and marketing.
It was put into force with the aims of conducting agricultural production not harmful to
the environment and to human and animal health, protecting natural resources, and
ensuring traceability and sustainability in agriculture and food safety.
This Regulation sets forth procedures and principles related to ensuring the
conservation of agricultural land and its use in accordance with its intended purpose,
and the exceptional cases in which such land may be used for non-agricultural
purposes.
57
 Irem Unay 1438842

Appendix-C: Gap Analysis in Implementation of Turkish Biodiversity Strategies

(see Chapter 3.3.1)

Table C. Gap analysis of Turkish National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan (MoEF, 2007)

58

Appendix-D: The Listed Actions of NBSAP According to Their Objectives and Their Assessment in Order to See the
Sustainability Principles that the Actions are Complying to (see Chapter 3.4 and Chapter 3.5.1.4)
OBJECTIVES
1.1. In order to determine and
monitor any changes in ecosystems,
species and genetic diversity, to
develop and implement biological
diversity inventory and monitoring
methods and programmes, by
considering rapid assessment
methods and biological diversity
indicators, as well
1.2. To include the less-represented
ecosystems, species and genetic
diversity centres into protected areas
of both terrestrial and aquatic
ecosystems, and to achieve an
effective protected area management
1.3. To prevent or minimize as far as
possible any pressures on and threats
to biological diversity
Irem Unay 1438842
Relevant
ACTIONS
SPs
1.1.1. The preparing and putting into practice a plan to compile inventory, data and collection of invertebrates (especially insects), micro-organisms and fungi *
1.1.2. The preparing and putting into practice a macro-level inventory plan for biological diversity in order to have an interrelated and coordinated works *
1.1.3. The identification of reliable and economic biological diversity inventory methods and technologies *
1.1.4. Correlation between biological diversity inventory studies and the researches on soil, climate and other issues *
1.1.5. The development and use of biological diversity indicators which are expressive, scientifically justifiable, practical and ecosystem-based *
1.1.6. The development and implementation of programmes for the monitoring of the ecosystems, species and populations which are under pressure and of the *
functional relations within ecosystems
1.1.7. In order to identify, classify and store the collected samples scientifically, the strengthening of academic institutions’ capacity and the achievement of an *
effective sharing of the data and information obtained by those institutions
1.1.8. The periodical update of red lists relating to Turkey’s species which are either endangered or under threat *
1.2.1. The identification and conservation of the unique and sensitive mountain ecosystems, of other biological diversity hot points and the species in those *, SPIII
ecosystems in particular the species under threat
1.2.2. The increasing of efforts to protect biological diversity in inland water ecosystems by establishing protection status for the species and ecosystems at risk, SPIII
endemic species, sensitive breeding areas and representative ecosystems
1.2.3. The designation of special areas in the steppe ecosystems which are especially important for biological diversity and/or are specifically under threat, and SPIII
establishing protection status for these areas
1.2.4. The establishment and maintenance of marine and coastal protected areas which are managed efficiently and are ecology-based SPIII
1.2.5. The development of policies and taking regulatory actions which will support the designation and management of the protected areas consulting with the SPIII, SPIV
related stakeholders, and devising inventories, plans, monitoring programmes and taking other appropriate measures in that regard
1.2.6. The maintenance of the integrity of the protected areas and minimizing the impacts of human activities on the biological diversity within and around the SPIII, SPIV
protected areas by exchanging views with land owners, local authorities and the related bodies
1.2.7. The training of the staff from governmental agencies who may involve with the management of the protected areas in order to enable them to analyse SPIV
scientific data and relate that data with plans and policies
1.3.1. The development of special conservation measures by giving priority to the ecosystems that are either sensitive or under threat or endangered, to the SPIII
classification categories which have the least number of studies and have an economic value, to the areas with high level diversity, and to the areas that are most
harmed from both rural and urban development and the human based damages
1.3.2. Increasing the efforts to identify and to eliminate or decrease to an acceptable level the cumulative environmental changes caused by human impacts in SPI,II,III
ecosystems, species and genetic diversity
1.3.3. The development of rehabilitation programmes, techniques and technologies for the species either endangered or under threat, or for the degraded ecosystems, SPIII
using such objective criteria as the ecological and habitat needs of the species at risk, and the implementation of the above and evaluation of their success
1.3.4. Taking appropriate legal and institutional measures, including the improvement of human resources, for the identification of the alien species that are SPIII, SPIV
introduces or most probably will be introduced into Turkey, the prevention of the introduction of invasive alien species, the determination of any possible adverse
impacts of them on biological diversity and the elimination and control of those impacts
1.3.5. Increasing the effectiveness of the legal sanctions for the control of the entry/exit of the GMO’s to Turkey, and the establishment of inspection standards and SPII, SPIII
59

2.1. To establish harmony among
legal, administrative and institutional
regulations and applications having
relevance to the conservation of
biological diversity and sustainable
use of its components
2.2 To develop and put into practice
the ecosystem-based planning and
management systems for the
purposes of the biological diversity
conservation and the sustainable use
of biological resources
2.3 To raise public awareness and
sensitivity concerning the
conservation and sustainable use of
biological diversity
3.1 To identify, record, protect and
Irem Unay 1438842
other related mechanisms including risk assessment and management
1.3.6. Devising plans to prevent the environmental disasters and to take urgent measures in situations in which great risks to biological diversity might occur SPIII
1.3.7. The identification of the impacts of climate change on biological diversity, the monitoring of those impacts, and taking measures to protect the most affected *,SPI,SPII,
ecosystems and species SPIII,SPIV
2.1.1. The identification of any inharmoniousness between biological diversity related legislation and other regulatory measures to eradicate authority chaos and *
repetitions and to fill the gaps, and taking actions to harmonize them
2.1.2. Reviewing important sector policies and programmes such as agriculture, water, energy, trade and initiating attempts to set up ecologic, economic, social and SPIII, SPIV
cultural objectives agreeing with each other
2.1.3. Making arrangements to include the issues of biological diversity conservation and the sustainable use of natural resources into the selection and evaluation SPIII,SPIV
criteria of development projects
2.1.4. The development and the implementation of appropriate socio-economic policies and incentives as a way of biological diversity conservation, the sustainable SPIII, SPIV
use of biological resources and the development of new sustainable use patterns for biological resources
2.1.5. The examination of the effects of the recommended biological diversity conservation policies and programmes on economic actions and taking measures SPIII, SPIV
which will enhance their positive effects on the economy, on one hand, and will minimize their adverse effects on it, on the other hand
2.1.6. The search, development and use of alternative management tools to urge the integration of the Biological Diversity Strategy and Action Plan with SPIII, SPIV
development plans and for the integration of social, cultural and economic targets with nature conservation targets and for the sustainable and rational use of water
resources
2.2.1. The examination and modelling of the benefits, functions and components of ecosystems *
2.2.2. Rising the knowledge about the species, the status of their populations, their genetic diversities and ecological relationships by way of scientific studies in SPIV
order to develop an ecosystem-based planning and management
2.2.3. Searching new and sustainable usage patterns for economic applications relevant with biological resources SPIV
2.2.4. The development of methods and technologies which support the sustainable use of biological resources and the removal or minimizing of the adverse SPIII, SPIV
impacts of resource use on biological diversity
2.2.5. The development of methods for the prevention of the release into the nature of substances which are harmful to ecosystems, species and genetic resources or SPI,SPII,
the release of those substances in amounts harmful to them, and the support of the attempts towards this SPIII,SPIV
2.2.6. Taking measures to guarantee the sustainable harvesting and collection of the wild flora and fauna species and to minimize the adverse impacts of harvest on SPIII
the other species, and the implementation of those measures
2.2.7. The development of programmes to encourage more effective involvement of the private sector in the efforts for the sustainable use of biological resources SPIII,SPIV
2.2.8. The development and putting into practice of training and awareness programmes for policy-makers, land owners, runners, resource managers and other SPIV
parties interested in the management, improvement and use of biological resources to provide them with the current information as well as the information on
methods and technologies
2.2.9. Increasing knowledge level of public staff about Turkey’s biological diversity and raising their awareness concerning species conservation, as well as the SPIV
training of them about statistical data analysis and evaluation areas
2.3.1. The inclusion of the subjects and texts on biological diversity conservation and the sustainable use of biological resources into the national education curricula SPIV
2.3.2. The evaluation and monitoring of the knowledge and awareness level of public about biological diversity conservation and the sustainable use of biological SPIV
resources in order to be able to devise and target efficient education and awareness programmes
2.3.3. The enhancement of coordination and effectiveness of education and information programmes by strengthening the relationships among education SPIV
institutions, governmental agencies, private land owners, non-governmental organizations and business and industrial sectors
2.3.4. The dissemination of the education materials urging those measures that can be taken to prevent or reduce the adverse impacts on ecosystem and biological SPIV
resources
3.1.1. The identification and recording of plant genetic diversity in particular the target species and local varieties specified in the National Plan on in-situ *, SPIII
60

manage the components of genetic
diversity which have importance in
terms of biological diversity,
agriculture, food and economic value
3.2 To control access to genetic
resources and guarantee the sharing
of the benefits arising out of the
utilization of these resources with
Turkey
4.1 To identify, protect and monitor
the biological diversity elements
which have importance for
agricultural biological diversity
4.2 To develop management
applications and technologies as well
as policies which support the positive
impacts of agriculture on biological
diversity, on one hand, and minimize
its adverse impacts, on the other
hand, and to increase yield from
agricultural ecosystems and its
capability to sustain as a source of
livelihood
4.3. To prevent or minimize as far as
possible any pressures on and threats
to agricultural biological diversity
which come from the genetically
modified organisms (GMO’s) and the
alien species
Irem Unay 1438842
Conservation of Plant Genetic Diversity of Turkey and for the purposes of optimum protection and economic utilization of genetic resources
3.1.2. The putting into practice the required programmes for the in-situ conservation and management of herbaceous and ligneous plants’ genetic diversity, taking SPIII
also into account the National Plan on in-situ Conservation of Plant Genetic Diversity of Turkey
3.1.3. The ex-situ conservation and recording of herbaceous and ligneous plant genetic diversity and the establishment of a national botanic garden and seed and SPIII
clone gene banks and maintaining the existing ones
3.1.4. The identification and recording of the genetic diversity of both the terrestrial and aquatic fauna species *
3.1.5. The putting into practice programmes for the in-situ conservation and management of the terrestrial and aquatic fauna species which have importance in terms SPIII
of biological diversity, agriculture, food and economic value
3.1.6. The establishment of gene banks for the terrestrial and aquatic fauna species which have importance in terms of biological diversity, agriculture, food and SPIII
economic value
3.2.1. Determination and putting into practice the measures to prevent any unauthorized and uncontrolled gathering and illegal export (bio-smuggling) of biological SPIII
resources
3.2.2. Taking measures to prevent the unauthorized gathering of biological resources from the nature SPIII
3.2.3. The determination of and putting into practice the mechanisms for the collection, recording and protection of traditional knowledge, for the joint application SPIII, SPIV
of any innovation and practices related to traditional knowledge with owners of such information, and for the equitable
sharing of the benefits from traditional knowledge
3.2.4. Searching and development of national tools by which the sharing of the benefits from the use of the genetic resources coming from foreign countries with the SPIV
origin country as well of the benefits arising out of the utilization of the genetic resources going to foreign countries with Turkey is guaranteed, and the
establishment of cooperation at the international level for this
4.1.1. The identification of both micro- and macro-organisms in soil biota *
4.1.2. Devising a programme for the identification, monitoring, conservation, improvement and sustainable use of pollinator diversity in both agricultural and related *
ecosystems, and putting to work the programme
4.1.3. The identification of the threatened species and their distribution in agricultural ecosystems, and the scheduled monitoring of them *
4.1.4. The identification of indicator species for the monitoring of agricultural biological diversity *
4.2.1. The development of methods and measures for the reduction of the impact of excessive and wrong agricultural inputs on the beneficial populations and for SPIII
more effective agricultural input use, and the implementation of those methods and measures
4.2.2. The development of technologies for the conservation and sustainable use of agricultural biological diversity and/or the adaptation of the existing ones to the SPIII
Country’s conditions
4.2.3. The promotion of researches and education programmes for the raising of awareness and increasing the knowledge level about the goods and services of SPIV
agricultural biological diversity and for the expansion of the sustainable agricultural practices which reduce soil erosion as well as water, soil and air pollution
4.2.4. The integration of the measures for the conservation of soil biological diversity, which plays an important role in maintaining agricultural ecosystems, with SPIII
land and soil management practices
4.2.5. The promotion of the involvement of agricultural producers with the management plans which support biological diversity conservation and the sustainable SPIV
use of biological resources
4.2.6. The maintenance, adjustment and improvement of economic incentives for the sustainable use of biological resources and the conservation of biological SPIV
diversity
4.3.1. The promotion of researches with a view to unveiling methods for and approaches to the determination of the possible adverse impacts of GMO’s on SPII,SPIII
biological diversity
4.3.2. Setting up a national biosafety information management and monitoring system, which will allow the follow-up and determination of any GMO’s entry to SPII, SPIII
Turkey
4.3.3. The enhancement of the required legal, institutional and technical capacity for the regulation, control and monitoring of the activities related with GMO’s and SPII,SPIII
products thereof
4.3.4. The development and promotion of researches for the determination of the effects of alien species on the natural species and the methods for the prevention of SPIII
such adverse effects
61

4.4. To ensure conservation and
sustainable use of genetic resources
which have actual and potential
values for food and agriculture; and
to ensure the fair and equitable
sharing of the benefits from the
utilization of genetic resources
5.1. To fill the information gaps
concerning steppe biological diversity
5.2. To identify ecological, physical
and social processes such as grazing,
drought, desertification, aridity,
salinity, flood, fires, tourism,
agricultural transformation or
abandonment which have adverse
impacts on the biological
diversity of steppe ecosystems and
mainly on the ecosystem structure
and function, and to take measures
regarding the above
5.3. To establish mechanisms and
frameworks in order to support the
fair and equitable sharing of the
benefits from the utilization of the
genetic resources
of steppe areas
6.1. To develop and put into practice
the monitoring programmes for
better evaluation of the status and
tendency of forest biological diversity
Irem Unay 1438842
4.3.5. The collection of information about the invasive alien species which are introduced or most probably will enter to Turkey, and the monitoring of those species *, SPIII
4.4.1. The strengthening of technical, institutional and financial capacity, including human resources and infrastructure need, for the identification and recording of *
flora and fauna genetic resources
4.4.2. The establishment of land gene banks to support the ex-situ and in-situ conservation and sustainable use of flora and fauna genetic resources SPIII
4.4.3. The enhancement of the capacity of genetics laboratories to take fingerprints of flora and fauna genetic resources and recording of them, and building a SPIII
national flora and fauna genetic resources database
4.4.4. Setting up and enforcement of the legal and institutional system to guarantee the sharing with Turkey of the benefits from the use of genetic resources SPIV
provided by Turkey to other countries
4.4.5. The identification and operation of the mechanisms which will allow the collection, maintenance and use of traditional knowledge *, SPIV
4.4.6. The conservation of fauna, flora and microbiological genetic resources which play fundamental role in agriculture, by giving priority to the genetic materials SPIII
under threat
5.1.1. The education of people specialized at taxonomy, ecology and genetic areas to be able to build up a steppe biological diversity inventory with the cooperation SPIV
of education and research institutions, and the organization of those people so that a systematized work can be done
5.1.2. The identification of steppe areas and the special areas which have special importance for biological diversity and/or are especially under threat in steppes and *
the mapping of them using GIS
5.1.3. The identification of the state of the existing species in steppe ecosystems, the determination of the threats to the existing species and habitats, and the update *
of the red lists of the endangered species
5.2.1. Building grazing systems based on researches on the carrying capacity of meadows, the rehabilitation of the degraded meadows, and the creation of additional SPIII
fodder sources
5.2.2. The determination and implementation of economic measures that promote the sustainable use of steppe ecosystems SPIII,SPIV
5.2.3. The collection of steppe biological diversity data and information of different sources and institutions together and then the transfer of them to biological SPIII, SPIV
diversity information management system, and devising management plans based on the analysis of the data obtained
5.2.4. The dissemination of research results by means of both printed and visual tools in such a way as to make them understandable and useable by decision- SPIV
makers, users and other stakeholders
5.2.5. The development of mechanisms for cultivation, controlled production and harvesting of the species which are found in the natural flora and have a high SPIII
economic value and which are either sensitive or endangered or under threat
5.2.6. The identification of the species that are at risk and whose populations have been decreased, and re-introduction of such species’ populations in their own *, SPIII
ecosystems
5.2.7. The determination of the species that are supposed to become extinct according to the different climate change scenarios including the rise in temperature, the *, SPIII
change in precipitation pattern, and the preservation of the seeds of such species in gene banks
5.2.8. Development of facilitative definitions to determine steppe areas in cadastral surveys *
5.2.9. Filling the regulatory gaps regarding the micro-organisms and the protected steppe areas SPIII
5.3.1. The determination of the genetic diversity of the species that are found in steppe ecosystems and are of Turkish origin applying molecular methods, and *
keeping the records of those species
5.3.2. The identification of Turkey’s microbiologic diversity, as well as the establishment of a national microbiologic culture collection centre and the use of it both *, SPIII
industrially and scientifically
5.3.3. Promotion of the use of new methods in addition to the traditional ones in order to provide more data on the diversity of micro-organisms, their functional SPIII,SPIV
roles in ecosystems and potential economic use
6.1.1. The update of the information on the species which are found in forest ecosystems and which are either sensitive or under threat or endangered, and the *
transfer of the information so updated to the central biological diversity information management system
6.1.2. The identification of forest ecosystems that are under pressure and the classification of them by the degree of threat to them *
6.1.3. The monitoring of the ecosystems, species and populations that are under pressure in a programme integrating biotic and abiotic parameters *
62

6.2. To establish appropriate
mechanisms for more effective
conservation and sustainable use of
forest biological diversity
7.1. To effectively implement
biological and ecological inventories,
monitoring programmes and
classification systems
7.2. To establish appropriate
mechanisms for the conservation and
sustainable use of sensitive mountain
ecosystems
8.1. To strength technical and
institutional capacity for the
conservation and sustainable use of
inland waters biological diversity
8.2. To take actions for the
conservation and sustainability of
inland waters biological diversity and
reduce threats to it
Irem Unay 1438842
6.1.4. Making research results and the information obtained from the monitoring programme available to decision-makers, users and other stakeholders so that the SPIV
status and tendencies of forest biological diversity can be better evaluated
6.2.1. The strengthening of the administrative and logistic infrastructure for the designation of new protected areas in forest ecosystems starting from the priority SPIII
ecosystems and hot points, and for the finalization of the management plans of the existing protected areas and their
effective management
6.2.2. The training of General Directorate of Forestry staff in the areas comprising ecosystem based management, sustainable use, inventory methods, monitoring, SPIV
data management, multidisciplinary researches, the management of the protected areas, the environmental education,
the environmental impact assessment, and emergency planning
6.2.3. The classification of forest growing areas by the way of mapping and determining forest yield, identifying ecological factors and designating forest growing SPIII
units
6.2.4. The integration and implementation of forest management plans and application rules to support the sustainable use of forest ecosystems and the conservation SPIII
of biological diversity
6.2.5. The promotion of the researches which demonstrate the ecological relationships between species and habitats in forest ecosystems to support the SPIII
implementation of the programmes for the in-situ conservation of herbaceous and woody plants’ genetic diversity
7.1.1. The identification of sensitive mountain ecosystems and the species that are under threat in those ecosystems *
7.1.2. The identification and recording of the genetic resources that are found in mountain ecosystems and that have importance for genetic diversity *
7.1.3. The identification of the indicator species which will be used for the monitoring of mountain ecosystems *
7.1.4. The development of information and methods for the evaluation and monitoring of the state of mountain biological diversity and its tendencies *
7.1.5. The mapping of biotopes and the use of GIS methods to establish an ecosystem-based planning and management of mountain ecosystems *
7.2.1. The identification of the adverse impacts of the key threats to mountain biological diversity like climate change and the determination of measures either to *, SPIII
prevent or to mitigate such impacts
7.2.2. The development and implementation of appropriate socio-economic policies and incentives to support sustainable use of mountain ecosystems and of the SPIII, SPIV
biological resources of those ecosystems, in particular the high plateaus
7.2.3. The development and putting into practice of programmes to restore the degraded mountain ecosystems, to protect the natural dynamic processes, and to SPIII
maintain biological diversity
7.2.4. The establishment of regulatory and institutional mechanism to protect mountain biological diversity and its different ecosystems pursuing a holistic approach SPIII
7.2.5. The identification of the population size of hunting animals, the determination of their habitats and devising management plans *
8.1.1. The development and implementation of training and awareness programmes for policymakers and target groups concerning the conservation and sustainable SPIV, SPIII
use of water resources and inland waters biological diversity
8.1.2. The determination and implementation of incentives for the establishment and operation of sewer system and wastewater treatment plants in the settlement SPIV, SPIII
areas close to the sensitive inland water ecosystems and for the expansion of the irrigation methods which ensure the
sustainable use of water resources
8.1.3. The completion of the inventory data on inland waters biological diversity, the identification of indicator species, and devising a joint monitoring programme *
with favourable cost upon the analysis of the ecosystem monitoring methods
8.2.1. The identification of the threats to species diversity and the endangered species in inland waters ecosystems, and taking measures either to prevent or to *, SPIII
reduce those threats
8.2.2. The design of superstructures over rivers in such a way as not to block the migration of fishes SPIII
8.2.3. The development and implementation of integrated land and catchment/watershed/river basin management strategies SPIII
8.2.4. The identification of the reasons of unintentional introduction of alien species, and the submission of solution proposals *, SPIII
8.2.5. Setting up a national database which will help the identification of the introduction of any potential harmful alien species and allow the foreseeing of them in *
advance and promoting the efforts to allow access to the international databases in order to be able to devise methods for control and prevention
63

9.1. To strengthen necessary
administrative, legal, institutional
and technical capacity for the
identification, monitoring,
conservation and sustainable
use of coastal and marine biological
diversity
9.2. To fill the information gaps
concerning coastal and marine
biological diversity, to identify and
put under conservation the areas and
species which have importance for
biological diversity and are under
threat, and to develop and
implement monitoring programmes
9.3. To combat against the threats to
coastal and marine biological
diversity
10.1 To establish coordination among
the relevant institutions as regards
the conservation and sustainable use
of biodiversity
Irem Unay 1438842
8.2.6. The elimination or lowering to an acceptable level of the adverse impacts of alien species introduced by fisheries harvest projects, fish farms, development SPIII
programmes and the transfer of waters and species between basins
8.2.7. The reviewing of laws and regulations concerning the introduction of alien species in ecosystems SPIII
9.1.1. The employment of the sufficient number of experts who have appropriate qualifications in the areas of research, application, control, GIS, modelling, SPIV, SPIII
mapping and genetics in the institutions and organizations concerned with coastal and marine ecosystems
9.1.2. The promotion of research and development activities regarding the conservation and sustainable use of coastal and marine biological diversity SPIII
9.1.3. The determination and the implementation of incentive measures which promote the creation of new income-generating resources for those communities who SPIV, SPIII
might be affected from the conservation and sustainable use of coastal and marine biological diversity
9.1.4. The identification of the equipment needs of research vessels, remote sensing and GIS as well as genetics laboratories, and the establishment of the tools with *
which those needs can be met
9.1.5. The reviewing of the regulations and practices which affect the conservation and sustainable use of coastal and marine biological diversity and establishing SPIII
harmony between them and the conservation and sustainable use principles, and the introduction of regulations which will allow the devising of coastal master plans
9.2.1. The identification of biological diversity in Turkey’s islands and the conservation of the areas which have importance for biological diversity and are under *
threat
9.2.2. The preparation of a list of the endangered species in Turkey’s seas, the transfer of the list to the database, as well as the preparation and implementation of *
conservation plans
9.2.3. The demonstration of sea grass distribution in Turkey’s seas, the mapping of them using GIS, and devising a conservation action plan *
9.2.4. The identification of the environmental indicators to monitor and evaluate coastal and marine biological diversity, and the monitoring of them setting up a *
monitoring programme
9.2.5. The identification and the conservation of the genetic diversity of the living things in Turkey’s seas and coastal areas *
9.2.6. The identification of the areas which have importance for biological diversity so that marine and coastal protected areas are designated *, SPIII
9.2.7. The development of regional cooperation tools with a view to protecting and utilizing in a sustainable manner marine ecosystems and living resources beyond SPIII
national jurisdiction, and the establishment of joint regional rules and criteria for the designation of the protected areas in the international seas and for the
management of them
9.3.1. Development and implementation of appropriate policy tools and strategies for an integrated marine and coastal area management SPIII
9.3.2. The identification of the sensitive areas and the threats to them, and taking protection measures in marine and coastal areas *, SPIII
9.3.3. The identification and monitoring of the impacts of climate change in Turkey’s seas using remote sensing methods *
9.3.4. The restocking of the species at risk in coastal and marine ecosystems by means of aquaculture SPIII
9.3.5. The examination of the impacts of alien species on marine biological diversity and taking measures to prevent any adverse impacts *, SPIII
9.3.6. The promotion of the use of appropriate fishing gears and techniques and the implementation of training programmes which will allow the elimination or SPIII, SPIV
lowering to an acceptable level of the adverse impacts of fishery on populations, species, habitats and ecosystems
10.1.1. The formation of a coordination committee for the establishment of relations and coordination between the implementation processes of the National SPIV
Biological Diversity Strategy, sector strategies or the other related national initiatives like national plans
10.1.2. The formation of an technical committee, which consist of the representatives from the concerned institutions and organizations, for the planning and SPIV
carrying out of the activities related to the implementation, monitoring and evaluation of NBSAP
10.1.3. The formation of working groups on thematic and cross-cutting issues, in an effort to support the studies of the technical committee SPIV
10.1.4. Recruiting the sufficient number of qualified technical staff including biologists, agricultural engineers, forestry engineers, fisheries engineers, landscaping SPIV
architectures and staff from other fields needed in both the central and provincial administrations of the related Ministries in order to be able to do researches and
undertake implementation, monitoring, control and conduct land surveys for the purposes of achieving the NBSAP’s targets
10.1.5. The enhancement of human resources and technical equipment for the development of methods and technologies which support the sustainable use of SPIV
biological resources and the removal or minimizing of the adverse impacts of resource use on biological diversity
10.1.6. Taking measures to strengthen the coordination and cooperation among universities, governmental agencies and institutions, gene banks, museums, zoos, SPIV
aquariums, botanic gardens, non-governmental organizations, private sector organizations and other organizations
64

10.2. To achieve the integrity and
sustainability of financial structure
for the identification, conservation
and sustainable use of biological
diversity
Table D. An assessment of the alignment between the actions of NBSAP (MoEF, 2007) and the SPs (*= The action is not relevant with the SPs, however necessary for completion
of the Systems Level of the FSSD)
Irem Unay 1438842
10.1.7. For the purposes of the establishment of relations among biological diversity databases and the sharing of research and monitoring results so that they can be SPIV, SPIII
implemented by decision makers, users and other stakeholders, the establishment and maintenance of a central biological diversity information management system
which will allow the faster analysis and dissemination of both biological and biophysical data and in which qualified staff will be employed in the areas of
information management systems, GIS, modelling, mapping and database
10.1.8. Taking appropriate actions to enable the transfer of the results, data and information from the activities and projects which are either financed by the *
government or are implemented under the guarantee of the government to the Central Biological Diversity Information Management System
10.1.9. Taking appropriate measures, including the education of people in the areas of the environmental law, international conventions and international politics on SPIV
the environment, with a view to assuring effective involvement with the processes of the development and implementation of an international policy on the
biological diversity-related issues
10.2.1. Devising NBSAP implementation plans and the determination of the required budgetary resources to the process *
10.2.2. Based on the implementation plans and the their budgets, the provision of the financial resources needed for the implementation of NBSAP *
10.2.3. With regard to budgetary needs of all the concerned institutions and organizations for the activities and projects related to the identification, conservation and *
sustainable use of biological diversity, taking measures to be able to pursue an approach, which will be agreeing with the NBSAP priorities and the implementation
plans and will be holistic, and the provision of information to the domestic resource suppliers on the existence and applicability of NBSAP
10.2.4. Taking measures to be able to pursue an approach, which will be agreeing with the NBSAP priorities and the implementation plans and will be holistic, to *, SPIV
the intended activities and projects for the identification, conservation and sustainable use of biological diversity on foreign grants or loans, and to enable the project
owners to provide information to those responsible for NBSAP
65
 Irem Unay 1438842

Appendix-E: Strategic Goals for Turkey’s Biodiversity Protection (see Chapter

3.5.1.1)

NBSAP 1. To identify, protect and monitor biological diversity components which have importance for Turkey
Strategic 2. To use biological diversity components in a sustainable manner by applying the methods and at a level
Goals for fitting to their renewal capacity by taking the future generations’ needs into account
2008-2017 3. To identify, protect and benefit the components of genetic diversity, including the traditional
knowledge, which have importance for Turkey
4. To identify, protect and monitor the components of biological diversity which have importance for
agricultural biological diversity; to protect genetic resources which have actual and potential values for
food and agriculture, and to ensure the sustainable use of such resources; and to ensure the fair and
equitable sharing of the benefits arising out of the utilization of genetic resources
5. To protect steppe biological diversity, to ensure the sustainable use of its components, as well as to
ensure the fair and equitable sharing of the benefits from the utilization of genetic resources; and to
combat against the loss of steppe biological diversity and the socioeconomic results of that}
6. To establish an effective monitoring, management and coordination system for the conservation of
forest biological diversity and the sustainable use of its components
7. To establish an effective monitoring, management and coordination system for the conservation and
sustainable use of mountain biological diversity, together with its different ecosystems, pursuing a
holistic approach
8. To develop and implement effective methods for the conservation of inland waters biological diversity,
the maintenance of ecological functions of inland waters ecosystems, and the sustainable use of these
ecosystems
9. To develop and implement effective methods for the conservation of coastal and marine biological
diversity, the maintenance of ecological functions provided by coastal and marine ecosystems, and the
sustainable use of these ecosystems
10. To establish a mechanism for the implementation of the Biological Diversity Strategy and Action Plan
and the follow-up of implementation and reporting (MoEF, 2007)

EU Strategic 1. Fully implement the birds and habitats directives

Goals for 2. Maintain and restore ecosystems and their services
2011-2020 3. Increase the contribution of agriculture and forestry to maintaining and enhancing biodiversity
4. Ensure the sustainable use of fisheries resources
5. Combat invasive alien species
6. Help avert global biodiversity loss (EC, 2011)

National 1. Eliminating of the ambiguity and insufficiency in environmental management,

Development 2. Strengthening the control mechanisms,
Plan Strategic 3. Increasing the role of the private sector, local governments and NGOs,
Goals for 4. Measuring the value of the natural resources and ecosystem services for policy-making and
2014-2018 implementation processes,
5. Dissemination of the practices for raising the awareness for sustainable consumption,
6. Ensuring identification, protection, sustainable use, development and monitoring of the biodiversity
(which is important for agriculture, forestry, food and medicine industries),
7. Supporting new business areas, research and development that are environmentally friendly and that
provide economic growth (Ministry of Development, 2013).

AICHI 1. Address the underlying causes of biodiversity loss by mainstreaming biodiversity across government
Strategic and society
Goals for 2. Reduce the direct pressures on biodiversity and promote sustainable use
2011-2020 3. To improve the status of biodiversity by safeguarding ecosystems, species and genetic diversity
4. Enhance the benefits to all from biodiversity and ecosystem services
5. Enhance implementation through participatory planning, knowledge management and capacity building
(CBD International, 2015).

Table E. Compilation of the strategic goals that are applicable to protection of Turkey’s biodiversity

66