**5. Discussion**

As interconnections in the landscape increasingly become a matter of research [2], as well as an appropriate spatial unit for the implementation of socio-ecological-systems [8,9] and sustainable development goals [66], this study aims to answer the question "what can we learn from the concept of UNESCO Biosphere Reserves and their implementation in landscape governance and management?" The analytical framework applied in this study defines stakeholder participation and cooperation as a "parenthesis" or necessary mechanism to advance conservation and sustainable development in a landscape. We also understand stakeholder cooperation as the basis for the planning and implementation of any conservation and development activity, especially at the interfaces of such activities. Moreover, as synthesized from the literature [3,12,42], governance, adaptive management, as well as information, communication, and capacity building are key analytical categories for sustainable landscape development. This study reveals the biosphere reserve practices and mechanisms that are useful for landscape governance and management. However, it also highlights the practical limitations of implementing the biosphere reserve concept. Below, we discuss the lessons learned with regard to the specific characteristics inherent to the concept of biosphere reserves.

#### *5.1. Identifying and Engaging Relevant Stakeholders as a Condition for Social Acceptance and Sustainability*

To gain the acceptance and support of local communities within a designated area, our findings show the importance of including relevant stakeholders in the processes for initiating, establishing, and managing a biosphere reserve. Clear participation opportunities and transparent governance structures are important to create trust between a biosphere reserve and its constituency. While this practice gives biosphere reserve managemen<sup>t</sup> greater legitimacy among local communities, it can also lead to better informed, and thus more e ffective, decisions for interlinking conservation and development in a given area. Thus, stakeholder engagemen<sup>t</sup> is regarded as one of the main priorities by the four biosphere reserves investigated. The literature on landscape governance confirms that the participation of multiple stakeholders in decision making is key for successful cooperation across all sectors of a landscape [12,41]. In this context, the identification and mobilization of relevant stakeholder groups is considered a key factor for successful stakeholder involvement to achieve an "optimal, not maximal" [55] level of participation. This connects to Sayer et al.'s [3] findings on the importance of recognizing that all stakeholders are impacted by landscape processes, although the "e fficient pursuit of negotiated solutions may involve only a subset of stakeholders".

#### *5.2. E*ff*ective Communication of Potential Benefits and Trade-O*ff*s*

Without being su fficiently informed and convinced of the potential benefits that may arise from a landscape approach, local stakeholders might continue to proceed with sectoral and unsustainable practices of natural resource use [12,16]. To inform local stakeholders of the potential benefits and inevitable trade-o ffs concerning land-use practices, all biosphere reserve managers interviewed for this article highlighted the importance of continuously sensitizing local communities through, for example, direct consultations, capacity-building workshops, or demonstration projects. The latter have proven to be especially e ffective tools for convincing local communities to possibly change their land-use practices to gain long-term oriented and sustainable benefits (e.g., in the field of ecological agriculture or tourism).

However, the analysis shows that it is important for stakeholders to obtain a true assessment of the outcomes of a suggested landscape approach and develop realistic perceptions of the necessary trade-o ffs and contributions. A landscape designation of an area, especially when it comes with an internationally recognized label, might easily lead to overly high aspirations for local income generation through conservation projects, such as in the form of (eco-)tourism growth or international funding. If these aspirations are not met, disenchantment amongs<sup>t</sup> stakeholders could result in non-compliance with landscape-based conservation activities [16]. Therefore, managemen<sup>t</sup> needs to clearly outline the necessary behavioral changes that a landscape approach demands and promote realistic expectations towards development outlooks and livelihood improvements.

#### *5.3. Flexibility of Governance Structures*

Another key lesson that can be drawn from this analysis is that the governance provisions of a landscape approach need to be flexible enough to adapt to specific regional, national, and local factors. Other authors confirm this observation and highlight the need for the contextualization of any landscape governance system [3,12,41]. As shown by the findings in Section 4, the flexible biosphere reserve concept agrees with the notion of a "multi-level and cross-sectoral [governance] structure that benefits from the integration of internal traditional knowledge and external institutional and financial support" [12].

The four investigated biosphere reserves are organized and managed under di fferent governance approaches: as an NGO (Vhembe Biosphere Reserve), as public associations (Mono Biosphere Reserve), through a conservation trust fund (Mount Mulanje Biosphere Reserve), or through a local collective form of community resource managemen<sup>t</sup> (Lake Bosomtwe Biosphere Reserve). These, at least to some extent, fundamentally di fferent institutional managemen<sup>t</sup> structures emerge from the specific political contexts in their respective countries and local administrative hierarchies.

However, these approaches, except for the Lake Bosomtwe CREMA, share the characteristic that their executive body alone has no administrative sanctioning power to enforce its decisions. On the one hand, their authority relies on their credibility among local communities and their traditional leaders. This credibility can, among other solutions, be strengthened through co-managemen<sup>t</sup> agreements, benefit-sharing models [25], and intensive consultation processes. On the other hand, as they are inherent to the biosphere reserve concept, biosphere reserve authorities rely on their relationship and adequate inclusion in regional or national administrative authorities (e.g., the provincial governmen<sup>t</sup> or national ministry). Based on our findings described in Section 4, while formal independence from administrative authorities can weaken the executive power of a landscape approach and restrict its access to public funding, this independence can also strengthen the credibility of such authorities as politically independent institutions vis-à-vis their local constituencies and might ease access to external funding, such as through cooperation with international donors.

#### *5.4. E*ff*ective Management Needs Coherent Concepts*

The managemen<sup>t</sup> body of a biosphere reserve is the executive arm of the decision-making board and responsible for implementing its decisions, monitoring its compliance with zonation principles, and engaging with stakeholders. All investigated biosphere reserves highlight the role of short-term external shocks (e.g., floods, droughts) and changing socio–economic and ecological environments in shaping their managemen<sup>t</sup> practices. Di fferent forms of "adaptive collaborative management" [3] are, therefore, applied in the investigated biosphere reserves, although financial and sta ff capacities may limit the opportunities for adjustments in their managemen<sup>t</sup> and continual learning practices. The results demonstrate that to enhance managemen<sup>t</sup> capacities, applications for funding are a central task of biosphere reserve managemen<sup>t</sup> to develop a diverse funding portfolio. The adoption, implementation, and constant adaptation of a comprehensive managemen<sup>t</sup> plan and a corresponding business plan were identified as a prerequisite for a more coherent funding approach. Moreover, coordination and partnerships with local organizations that pursue similar goals in the landscape are proven to generate synergy and indirectly increase capacity.

#### *5.5. Zonation as a Tool for Managing the 'Multifunctionality' of a Landscape*

The zonation concept is the central tool of a biosphere reserve to balance economic development and conservation within a designated area. Simultaneously, zonation can also be one of the area's most contested features, as it spatially restricts land use for certain purposes. The application of the zonation approach in the investigated biosphere reserves, however, shows that it can be an e ffective tool to manage the "multifunctionality" [3] of a landscape and to address the associated trade-o ffs "in a spatially explicit and ecosystem-driven manner that reconciles stakeholders' multiple needs, preferences and aspirations" [3]. However, to achieve positive outcomes, the zonation approach has to be the result of an intensive negotiation process with a ffected stakeholders; it needs to reconcile the targets of a biosphere reserve with pre-existing development plans and land-use practices and to address the dynamics of land use practices in a landscape over time.

The integration into pre-existing land-management schemes and traditional approaches among the investigated biosphere reserves shows that the zonation concept does not have to be in conflict with pre-existing spatial practices. Rather, designation as a UNESCO Biosphere Reserve can up-scale previously integrated managemen<sup>t</sup> e fforts and achieve higher visibility for the designated area. Simultaneously, a biosphere reserve can also be integrated into existing local forms of resource management, like with Lake Bosomtwe Biosphere Reserve. Conversely, alternative natural resource managemen<sup>t</sup> approaches (e.g., CBNRM) or schemes can form a part of, and help upgrade managemen<sup>t</sup> efforts in, a larger landscape.

However, the case studies also showed that conflicting land-use aspirations of di fferent stakeholders inevitably exist throughout a landscape. To identify and reconcile these conflicts may become a central task of landscape managemen<sup>t</sup> [3,6,10]. Involving relevant stakeholders early in the zonation process was shown to be a viable approach to reach a common understanding for the zonation scheme. The case study findings demonstrate that stakeholder involvement should be context sensitive to convincingly a ffirm the value of a landscape concept. For example, the landscape concept could be explained with a model or (existing) demonstration projects. In this way, stakeholders could better understand the interrelated impacts (e.g., conservation and wildlife recovery in a certain area may foster economic benefits in another area through (eco-)tourism).

Lastly, analysis of the four cases revealed that the temporal dynamics of land use demands are as important as the di fferent spatial land-use practices in a landscape at a given time. Changing economic and ecological demands can, however, necessitate the reconsideration of a zonation scheme. In this case, in the context of biosphere reserves, UNESCO's periodic review process can help support the participative re-zoning of the relevant landscape.

#### *5.6. Strengthening Stakeholder Capacities and the Role of Partnerships, Research Collaboration, and International Networks*

To participate in landscape-oriented activities and accept diverse restrictions and aspirations within the same area, stakeholders need to be provided with the necessary knowledge and gain certain skills to engage in sustainable livelihood and conservation activities. As described above, biosphere reserve managemen<sup>t</sup> addresses these issues, such as by o ffering sensitization workshops and implementing demonstration projects. However, although the need to strengthen stakeholders' capacities is consistently recognized [55], a lack of financial and human resources places severe limitations on capacity building. In this regard, incorporating local educational institutions as major stakeholders in landscape managemen<sup>t</sup> to accommodate both training and research needs was shown to generate positive outcomes. Applied research results can further inform precise landscape planning or catalyze suitable innovations that may be integrated into educational material and thus again contribute to capacity building [67].

Funding from various sources is an important prerequisite to facilitate landscape management. As discussed, partnerships with organizations or companies operating within the area or the country may provide access to financial resources [55]. The biosphere reserve designation itself is no guarantee for funding, as no direct financial support is associated with the designation. However, as a member of the WNBR and its associated international recognition, the opportunities increase to participate in internationally funded programs or projects. Partnerships among biosphere reserves in the network worldwide may provide additional opportunities for contacts to fund their organizations. Hence, for any given landscape, partnerships or memberships with related or a ffiliated entities can lead to material and immaterial gains. In practical terms, these can include thematic exchanges for mutual challenges, sta ff visits, or joint projects, which might contribute to facilitating both the managemen<sup>t</sup> and stakeholder communities within a landscape. Moreover, such networking can o ffer access to further partners and support, such as through private sector companies or donor agencies. The same holds true for establishing (international) research cooperation, which, as shown by the investigations, can provide external funding, expertise, and international prestige to a designated area as a "model region for sustainable development".

## **6. Concluding Remarks**

The results of this study sugges<sup>t</sup> that the governance and managemen<sup>t</sup> features and tools of the UNESCO Biosphere Reserves that developed over the last 40+ years are of significant relevance for existing and emerging landscape approaches in Africa. In particular, this study shows that the following characteristics of biosphere reserves provide useful elements for landscape governance and management: (1) a flexible, content-specific governance approach; (2) e fforts to connect the environmental and developmental sectors across a landscape; (3) the biosphere reserves' structural frameworks for managemen<sup>t</sup> and planning; (4) a focus on capacity development and mutual learning among stakeholders; (5) landscape zonation as a tool to manage the multifunctionality of a landscape; and (6) stakeholder engagemen<sup>t</sup> as an overarching condition. This study also indicates that experiences with other natural resource managemen<sup>t</sup> schemes, which have integrated conservation and sustainable development in Africa since the 1990s, o ffer valuable insight into further developing the landscape approach.

In this context, given the relative novelty of analyzing biosphere reserves under the analytical lens of the landscape approach, and due to the limited scope of this study, further research on this topic will be necessary. Moreover, additional analyses and discussions on di fferent landscape governance and managemen<sup>t</sup> approaches and practices in Africa would generally contribute to better understanding the factors and conditions for best practices and drawing more wide-ranging conclusions on the successful implementation of the landscape approach.

**Author Contributions:** Work on the article's conceptualization, methodology, investigation, analysis, drafting, reviewing, and editing were equally shared among the two authors. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript

**Funding:** This research received no external funding.

**Acknowledgments:** This article builds upon the authors' collaboration in research and development projects to support the advancement of UNESCO's MAB program and the development of biosphere reserves in Africa. These projects were carried out by the German Federal Agency for Nature Conservation with different African and international partner organizations between 2006 and 2019 and were funded by the German Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation, and Nuclear Safety. We sincerely thank the four anonymous interview partners from Mount Mulanje Biosphere Reserve in Malawi, Vhembe Biosphere Reserve in South Africa, Lake Bosomtwe Biosphere Reserve in Ghana, and Mono Biosphere Reserve in Benin and Togo for frankly sharing their knowledge, expertise, and experiences on biosphere reserves. We are also grateful to the four anonymous reviewers who, through their very valuable comments, encouraged us to significantly improve the manuscript.

**Conflicts of Interest:** The authors declare no conflict of interest.
