构建中国国家公园体系路径中的挑战与机遇

著：（美）史蒂夫·麦库尔 译：彭钦一 校：庄优波

无论是在中国还是在其他国家，构建国家公园体系的路径都不是单一的，甚至单个国家公园的建立都可能有所不同。例如，在美国，黄石公园是经过长期的探索、评估和国会行动才成为国家公园的，而附近的大提顿国家公园在命名过程中则走了一条不同的道路。这些过程会因不同国家、不同时代特定的社会和政治背景而异。

尽管路径是多元的，但是在不同国家，国家公园体系所具有的意义是相似的。首先，国家公园体系能保护自然和文化遗产；其次，国家公园体系能将人们与这些珍贵遗产联系起来；最后，国家公园体系能够促进社会的繁荣，因为人们需要记住他们的根基才能够继续前进。

在本文中，笔者将阐释构建国家公园体系的3条主要路径：1）为什么需要国家公园体系，2）就保护的社会—生态系统而言，国家公园体系应当有什么特征，3）实现国家公园的愿景需要实施的具体行动。每一条路径都会受到不同国家特定社会文化特征的影响。

1 构建国家公园体系的多种路径The multiple pathways to build a national park system

2 “为什么”：体系的目标The “Why”: the system goal

3大提顿国家公园的莫尔顿谷仓The Moulton Barn in Grand Teton National Park

1 国家公园体系设计过程中的挑战

在某些方面，20世纪上半叶美国的情况和今天的中国非常相似。虽然，美国最早的国家公园在19世纪末便已经成立，但是直到1916年才由统一的管理机构进行全面的管理。在之后近45年的时间里，国家公园和国家纪念地的管理分散在包括美国军方在内的多个机构之中，导致了一系列脱节的政策和各不相同的管理理念，直到Stephen T. Mather（一位富有的商人，也是国家公园管理局第一任局长）提议成立一个机构进行统一管理。因此，国家公园管理局的成立旨在提供统一一致的管理措施以应对保护自然遗产面临的挑战。

无论是新成立的还是成熟的国家公园体系，都面临着来自两个层面的多个挑战。在国家层面，这些挑战主要涉及制定和实施与整个系统相关的政策，涉及门票和使用费征收、特许经营政策、冲突管理和开发程序等问题。在单个公园层面主要有3个挑战。 1）如何设计和管理国家公园，可能涉及道路和游步道建设，解说项目设计和游客管理等方面。2）如何保护国家公园，避免各种对其重要的生态和文化价值造成影响的威胁。这是一个重要的挑战，因为国家公园与周边区域密切联系，发生在国家公园周边的各种外力与过程可能会对公园的重要价值造成威胁。3）涉及公园管理和价值的可持续性问题。

2 构建体系的多种路径

构建国家公园体系需要时间和广泛宣传，以获取不仅来自管理者和专家，也包括普通大众和政策制定者的支持。笔者将用一张思维导图来展示构建体系涉及的主要路径（图1）。这张思维导图是关于这些路径的“心理模型”，也可以说是笔者看待世界的方式。在系统构建的基础上，建立控制和监控机制，即通过集中的政策和管理机制来实施，并对其进行监测评估，包括一些政策和程序，例如资金、实施次序、专业化管理人员的公务员制度以及组织架构设计等。

3种路径可以解决系统的实质性问题，帮助构建国家公园体系。笔者将以问题的角度对这3种路径进行考察。

首先应当强调“为什么”的问题（例如，国家公园体系的目的），其次是“怎么样（国家公园体系未来有哪些特征）”的问题，最后关注“做什么”，关注在面对特定挑战和机遇时，国家公园需要实施哪些政策和管理方面的行动。

在“为什么”部分，第一个值得探讨的问题涉及对国家公园体系的需求，需要解决社会对包括国家公园在内的自然保护地体系的需求。其次是对未来某个时间段国家公园体系建成状况的愿景。对愿景的陈述与目标相关，可采取类似“国家公园体系成功地保护了国家丰富多样的文化遗产”的陈述方式。第三部分强调对整个国家公园体系和单个公园的规划。

“怎么样”的问题涉及国家公园体系的特征，通常包括生态完整性，文化完整性，转变性的游客体验机会，社区发展和其他类似代表性、包容性等因素。

“做什么”的部分涉及应对挑战的具体行动。其中，首要的挑战便是组织者和管理者应当具备运转国家公园体系的必要能力。这些能力包括以下5个方面：1）规划和组织公园发展；2）保护公园免受威胁；3）与公园周边社区合作；4）形成管理理念；5）游客管理。

以上便是构建国家公园体系的3条路径。

现在中国的国家公园试点区是重要的尝试，不仅有利于在实践中检验思路，也将为这3种路径的设计与实施提供有价值的信息。一般而言，国家公园体系的建设过程并非一帆风顺，有时像攀登山峰，困难重重；有时如同行走在山谷中，闲庭信步。

值得一提的是，在探索过程中，我们的目标往往也在发展。当我们检验思路，并投入更多的精力时，我们的愿景也往往会随之改变。例如100多年前美国国家公园管理局刚刚建立的时候，它们的愿景与现在所提倡的已经有了一定的不同。在100多年前，美国国家公园管理局专注于保护风景价值高的区域，而现在其愿景强调保护生态系统与生态过程。愿景的重要价值在于其作为一个指南针，为我们指引前进的方向，帮助我们设置一系列原则，例如为游客提供转变性的体验机会、保护生态过程等，确保我们不偏离航线。

国家公园是一个系统。因此，为了应对挑战与机遇，多学科交融是不可或缺的，仅凭借一个学科已经无法解决复杂的问题。为了确保国家公园的管理能够实现指定的愿景，需要整合不同学科，通力合作。这种整合重在消除许多自然资源管理机构各自具有的“思维局限”（“silos” of thinking），带来不同文化、思想和学科的交融，在具备多元文化的中国，具有重要的意义。

最后，我们还需要系统性思维来指导国家公园的管理。Senge[1]将系统性思维定义为“一种识别整体的思维模式，重在建立物体之间关系而非探究单个物体，识别事物变化模式而非静止的单一印象”。因此，“整体”（即国家公园体系和单个国家公园的愿景）的建立应当成为首要任务，在这之后，再考虑各个部分应当如何去实现目标。这与建筑师的思考方式很类似：建筑师在与客户互动的过程中，首先确立建筑物的愿景（其目标与整体形象），之后各个部分（房间设计、暖通空调、流线、照明等）的设计都共同致力于实现这个愿景。

然而，需要强调的是，实现愿景的路径有很多，系统性思维是其中一种思考的方式。

国家公园的管理经验（教训）大部分来自对愿景的考虑不充分。我们往往习惯于对部分的思考，例如相较于食肉动物，对食草动物的偏爱等，黄石国家公园没有考虑狼在整个生态系统中的重要作用，缺乏对整个系统的认知，对狼进行清除，导致了麋鹿种群数量的迅速且不可持续的增长，进一步导致了植被的剧烈变化。

后文将会对每一种路径进行更详细的解释。

2.1 “为什么”：国家公园体系的愿景

“为什么”的问题与构建国家公园体系的需求有关，涉及需要实现什么以及在当前状态下有何欠缺。

在“为什么”的问题中，愿景是很重要的（图2），因为它与我们的最终目标和不同阶段的目标有关。愿景是对希冀的未来状态的描绘，是一个激动人心的宣言，也是对一系列超越现状的理想条件的渴求。

此外，“为什么”也需要考虑规划的方面。规划是一个复杂的过程，最终旨在制定相关的政策与程序，以实现系统的愿景[2]。

现如今，生态系统完整性已经作为国家公园体系的一个重要目标而被广泛接受，同时，在国家公园体系中，另外两个目标同样重要。其中之一是游客体验，这是人们前往国家公园游览的动力。这种体验通常集中于能够与突出的自然和文化环境互动的区域，使游客能够了解该国家或地区的遗产。当然，还有其他动力促使游客前往国家公园，例如逃离、释放压力、冒险、挑战等。但对国家公园的规划与管理而言，这些与自然和文化遗产的互动具有重要意义，既能够让游客了解和欣赏被保护的价值，促进更健康的生活方式，也能够为当地社区提供经济支撑。

中国具有独特的自然与文化遗产，在许多风景名胜区，自然和文化水乳交融，无法分割。因此，中国能够提供在其他国家的国家公园中并不常见的独特体验，向游客展示在几千年的时间里，人与自然是如何共生的。

在美国，这种文化和自然互动的一个典型案例位于美国怀俄明州的大提顿国家公园内。在19世纪末和20世纪初，有一小群人在此定居，尝试耕种这片土地。这个小社区如今已经废弃，但是他们的房子和谷仓保留了下来。这些建筑与它们的历史向我们阐释了这个美国落基山脉里的小农业社区为了成功而克服的困难。这些残留的建筑现在被保护起来，并成为吸引游客的景点。莫尔顿谷仓（Moulton Barn）是其中的一个建筑（图3），现在吸引了大量的游客，尤其是那些为了拍摄它坐落在提顿山脉前照片的摄影爱好者。

在其他国家公园里，也有一些类似的现象，例如美国科罗拉多州的梅萨维德国家公园，保存了1 000多年前阿纳萨齐或称为悬崖穴居文化的建筑遗存，这个文化的消失至今仍是人类学和考古学研究领域的谜题。中国的黄山也是这种文化和环境融合的典型案例之一。

国家公园的参观游览也会为附近的社区带来经济增长和活力。游客的支出是国家公园附近的居民和政府的重要收入来源。这些收入不仅能提升居民的生活水平，同时，如果这些收入被用于提升社区的应变能力，也能够实现更具调节能力的社区，为应对经济变化、天气变化甚至灾难等更大空间尺度的突发事件做好准备。

文化是不同国家决定各自不同的实现路径的关键因素。就中国而言，实现保护的路径一定要结合中国文化与环境。这是一个展示中国的文化与历史的绝佳机会，展示中国自然与文化遗产的统一与完整。

2.2 “怎么样”：构建体系的第2条路径是做出关于国家公园体系特征的重大决策

在美国，国家公园体系的设计与它的发展历史息息相关，且这个体系以一个相对机会主义和偶然的方式继续发展。在19世纪晚期和20世纪早期，决策主要涉及道路、特许经营和野生物种等方面，且只有当问题出现时，才会有相关的决策出现，而非通过规划的路径去解决。因此，管理者没有考虑食肉动物在整个生态系统中的地位，例如黄石国家公园中的狼就被灭绝了，而灰熊则往往满足了游客的好奇心，它们在国家公园的垃圾堆里翻找的场景成为游客夜晚的娱乐[3]①。直到20世纪90年代，人们才意识到狼群应当重返黄石，这个决定也反映了变化的文化价值观。

中国现在拥有大好的机会，在国家公园体系发展的早期就制定政策、程序和管理策略。同时，中国能够评估美国及其他国家在建立国家公园过程中所犯下的错误，并构建更一致合理的系统性管理理念。

4 “怎么样”：决定体系的特征The “How”: deciding how the system will look

5 另一个涉及“做什么”的路径Another pathway deals with the “What”

以国家公园体系的愿景为前提，政策制定者、管理者、学者和公众能够更好地讨论国家公园的特征。

虽然文化完整性、生态完整性和社区发展等概念在全世界的国家公园体系中占有重要的地位，但其他一些特征也很重要（图4）。国家公园能够为人们提供转变性的体验机会，让人发生改变。在了解自然和文化遗产的过程中，游客会受到影响；他们会受到启发，想要对这些遗产有进一步的了解；他们会变得更具有生态和文化意识。当游客体验到这些时，他们会将这些美好的回忆带回家，并通过他们的经历去影响更多潜在的游客。

其他一些特征包括代表性、包容性以及路径的文化决定性。代表性的概念意味着整个国家公园体系需要代表一个国家生态系统、景观甚至文化的多样性。包容性意味着国家公园体系的设计过程纳入国家的人民和不同的民族，且最终的结果反映出他们的价值观。举例来说，加拿大国家公园代表包括原住民在内的加拿大人民以及他们的价值观与行为规范，并与之息息相关。因此，尽管美国和加拿大彼此相邻，但是加拿大国家公园体系的设计与美国截然不同。值得一提的是，两个国家的路径并无对错之分，只是取决于每个国家所接受的与特定文化相关的理想愿景。

2.3 “做什么”：实施的行动

为了保证各个保护区域的价值，国家公园需要什么样的行动计划是一个重要的问题。能力建设、管理理念的落实，游客使用，社区影响，威胁应对和游客体验都是重要的议题（图5）。

因为每个国家公园都是独特的，而且与政府管理的其他项目截然不同，所以，就保护国家公园内的自然和文化遗产而言，管理理念的落实是一个最基本的内容。

一旦附近的区域被划为国家公园，社区将在经济、社会和文化等方面受到不同程度的影响。就经济方面的影响而言，国家公园能够帮助提升社区劳动者的收入，给劳动力提供晋升机会（更高薪金的工作），帮助社区建立抵抗风险的能力。无可否认的是，国家公园的划定导致畜牧、矿产或林业的退出，对某些区域也会造成一些消极的影响。当然，有时候也可以通过旅游业来消解这些消极的影响。

就文化方面的影响而言，国家公园将使社区与外界的思想有了更充分的接触，也可能给本地文化带来不利的影响。

例如，一栋废弃的建筑坐落在纳米比亚的纳米布沙漠世界遗产地的卡曼斯科小镇（图6）。这个被遗弃的社区是因金矿而兴起，当时纳米比亚还是德国的殖民地。在20世纪20年代，由于钻石的枯竭且周边地区并未发现钻石的踪迹，人们遗弃了这个社区。然而，时过境迁，因为老建筑与沙子完美的结合，现在这个场所受到了摄影爱好者的热捧。因此，这个被遗弃的社区也成为一个吸引游客的旅游景点，展示着人与自然的相互作用。

国家公园不能将自己与因其建立和管理而受到影响的社区隔绝开。因此，国家公园的管理者们需要预测这些影响的可能形式，并针对这些影响建立合作关系与相应的策略。

能力建设是国家公园面临的另一项重要任务。对于规划和管理而言，技术和组织的能力至关重要。国家公园的规划和管理涉及从领导力、政策规划到游步道维护的一系列技术。当然，这些技术并非一人所有，但每个国家公园都需要获得这些能力。

管理持续增长的游客使用和旅游业发展已经成为一项重要且棘手的内容。不仅影响了单个国家公园目标的实现，也影响了被称为“爱知目标”（Aichi Targets）的生物多样性公约中所阐释的目标[4]。在克罗地亚的普利特维湖国家公园（笔者在此工作过数年时间），游客已经成为一个特别重要的问题。由于拥挤的道路，游客对他们的体验并不满意。来到国家公园中的游客应当充满笑容，而非愁眉不展（图7）。

位于纳米比亚纳米布沙漠世界遗产地的一个经历了800年风雨的死去的森林展现了世界上最特别的自然特征（图8）。这样的体验与普利特维湖国家公园完全不同，因此也需要区别化的管理。

国家公园通常能够为游客提供转变性的、同时又令人难以忘怀的体验机会。例如，在横跨北极圈的加拿大奥尤提克（Auyuttiq）国家公园，由于在30km2的范围内仅有屈指可数的游客，游客在欣赏山脉和冰川构成的绝美景色的同时，可以充分享受独处的机会（图9）。而在中国，优美的自然风光往往与文化遗产交融在一起，提供了西方世界知之甚少的体验机会（图10）。

3 结论

总而言之，构建国家公园体系并非只有单一的路径。在发展策略中，多种路径将会同时作用。这些路径是不可分割的整体，且必须把它们各自视为整体中的一部分进行考虑。

对国家公园而言，愿景是必需的，这不仅有助于做出判断，也能够激励员工和游客，让他们认识到国家公园体系存在的原因。大提顿国家公园的壮丽山脉能够让游客们在夏天早上5:00起床，看着初升的太阳渐渐在山脉上洒下光芒，欣赏这难以置信的美景（图11）。

需要指出的是，管理系统的机构是由3个主要元素组成的，这些元素需要遵循不同的规律。首先是在一系列普遍的政策和程序指导下运行的一组相互关联的成分。其次，该系统由受过保护地管理训练的专业管理者和技术人员组成。第三是组织内部的信息交流渠道，能够实现自上而下的政策传达与自下而上的反馈。这是一种在官僚机构中常见的方式，政策传递到底层，由底层进行落实，再由底层的管理者向上提供反馈意见，确保总部能够正确判断这些政策在特定条件下的实际运作情况。

尽管游客数量和游客的消费是很重要的，但国家公园的管理仍需专注于为游客提供转变性的体验机会。此外，在规划和管理中，一系列理论上和实践中的技巧也是不可或缺的。

中国全新的国家公园体系拥有一个良机，通过前所未有的路径去实现这些可能性，使自然和文化遗产得以良好保护，提供优质的游客体验机会，并且促进当地经济增长。这是一个巨大的挑战，也是一个前所未有的机遇。

注释：

① 详见McCool在1983年关于美国国家公园管理的3次浪潮的讨论。

② 文中所有图片均由史蒂夫·麦库尔提供。

There is not a single pathway in building a national park system in China or in any other country. How for example, an area becomes a national park may vary from park to park. For example, in the U.S., Yellowstone became a national park only after a long history of exploration,assessment, and congressional action. Nearby Grand Teton National Park followed a different path in its designation process. These processes will vary by country and by the particular social and political context of the situation and the times.

Although pathways are multiple, what a new national park system provides among countries is held in common. First, a national park system provides opportunities to protect natural and cultural heritage. Second, it is important for the system to connect people with this heritage. And last but not the least, it is very important that societies flourish, because somehow people have to remember where they came from in order to move on to the future.

In this paper, I speak to the three major pathways to a national park system: 1) The “Why” of the a need for a national park system; 2) The “How”of the system, in terms of the social-ecological system it protects is characterized; 3) “What” actions are needed to meet the vision defined in the Why and in the “How”. Each pathway is followed depending on the social and cultural characteristics and influences of a particular country.

1 The Challenges in Designing a New National Park System

In some ways, the situation in the United States around the first part of the 20th century was very similar to today’s China. In the U.S., although national parks were initially designated beginning in the late 19th century, there was no singular administration providing overall stewardship until 1916. For nearly 45 years, national parks and monuments were administered by several agencies, including the U.S.Army. This resulted in a disjointed set of policies and differing philosophies of management. It was not until a wealthy businessman (Stephen T. Mather—who became the first Director of the National Park Service) proposed that all units be administered by a single agency. As a result, the National Park Service was created to provide uniform and consistent management direction in response to the challenges of protecting natural heritage.

A National Park System faces many challenges whether new or well established. These challenges occur at two levels. On the national level, the challenges deal primarily with developing and implementing policy for the system as a whole.These challenges are issues such as imposition of entrance and user fees, concessionaire policy,management of conflicts, or development processes.At the individual park level there are three main challenges. The first challenge is how to design and manage individual units. This may include items such as road and trail construction, design of interpretive programs, visitor management and so on. The second is how to protect the park from various threats to its significant ecological and cultural values. This is an important challenge since the park does not exist in isolation from forces and processes that happen around it. These could potentially threaten the very values for which it was established.The third challenge deals with questions about the sustainability of the park’s management and values.

2 Multiple Pathways to Build the System

Building a system takes time and understanding to develop support among not only managers and professionals but also the general public and key policy makers. I use a mind map to show the major pathways involved in building a system. A mind map is my “mental model” of these pathways, how I see the world you might say. My mind map of these pathways are shown in Figure 1. At the foundation of the system, there needs to be a sort of control and monitoring mechanism built, implemented and itself monitored through centralized policy and administration. This includes policies and procedures such as funding, establishment process, a civil service for professionalization of managers, the organizational design and so on.

To build the national park system, there are three pathways addressing the substantive aspect of the system. I pose these three pathways as questions, as it is often helpful to think in terms of questions.

The first we need to address is the question of “Why” (e.g., the purpose of the national park system), the second is the question of “How”(how will the park system “look” in the future” and the third focuses on the “what,” the policies and management actions the park system implements when confronted with particular challenges and opportunities.

The first question to be considered, the “Why”question, which deals with the “need”, that is what is the need for a national park system; what need does society have for a system of protected areas such as national parks? The second component is the vision, which is what we expect the conditions in the park system at some point in the future to “look” like. A vision statement is aspirational,such as the national parks “successfully protect the country’s diverse cultural heritage”. The third component addresses planning for both parks and the system as a whole.

The question of “How” deals with the characteristics of the national park system,which usually includes ecological integrity,cultural integrity, transformative experiences for visitors, community development and some other considerations such as representativeness, and inclusiveness.

Finally, the question of “What” is about the actions we take on the ground to deal with the challenges, the first among these is capability of the organization and managers to provide good stewardship of the national park system. This includes building capacity for: 1) planning and organizational development; 2) protection from threats; 3) working with communities near the park; 4) developing a philosophy for management;5) managing visitor use.

6 纳米比亚的纳米布沙海世界遗产地里的一座建筑A building in the Namib Sand Sea World Heritage Site in Namibia

7 普利特维湖拥挤的游客The crowded visitors in Plitvice Lakes

There are three of the pathways to building the national park system.

The current notion of China’s pilot projects for park management, for example, helps not only test ideas but will eventually provide valuable input into how the three pathways are designed and implemented. It is common experience that the pathways are not smooth: there are always some difficulties in traveling along these pathways just like climbing a mountain. Sometimes it is much easier like walking in a valley.

It is also important for us to recognize that as we learn, the destination may evolve. Where we want to go may change somewhat as we test ideas and decide they need more work. For example, in the United States, over a hundred years ago when the National Park Service was established, the vision was somewhat different than the National Park Service now advocates. At that time, it was focused on protecting areas of high scenic value,now the vision emphasizes protecting ecosystems and ecosystem processes. Still the vision serves as a compass, showing us the way while a set of principles, such as provide opportunities for transformative visitor experiences or protect ecosystem processes, serve as a gyroscope to ensure we continue toward our destination.

A national park is a system. Therefore,a variety of disciplines are needed to address challenges and opportunities. No one discipline can usually solve a problem. Different disciplines are needed to work integratively to ensure that management moves toward the vision. This integration focuses on removing the “silos” of thinking that characterize many natural resource agencies. It brings together various cultures, ideas and disciplines, something important in China as it holds many different cultures.

The final item we consider is systems thinking to guide management., systems thinking as defined by Senge[1]: “is a discipline for seeing wholes. It is a framework for seeing interrelationships rather than things, for seeing ‘patterns of change’ rather than static ‘snapshots’” . The “whole” (the vision for the system and individual parks) is identified first. Once that is identified, how the “parts” are going to meet that goal will be figured out. This is very similar to what an architect does: the architect, interacting with the client, defines a vision for a building (its purpose and overall look) is developed first. Then all the parts (room design, HVAC, access, lighting,etc) are designed to fit that vision.

However, it is important to stress that there are multiple pathways to achieve the vision and systems thinking is a way to consider these pathways.

8 纳米布沙海世界遗产地里的枯死森林Dead forest in Namib Sand Sea World Heritage Site

9 加拿大北极圈The Arctic of Canada

10 华山Mount Huashan

Much of our experience in park management results from failure to consider the vision. We have often thought about the parts, such a favoring herbivores over carnivores e.g., removal of wolves from the Yellowstone ecosystem, without considering the role of wolves in ecosystem.Without understanding the system, the removal of wolves led to high and unsustainable populations of elk, which then led to significant changes in vegetation.

The following is a more detailed discussion of each of these pathways.

2.1 The “Why”: The System Vision

The question of why deals with the need for a National Park System, what it is designed to achieve and what is missing under the current status.

In the question of “Why”, the vision is important, because it is about where we want to go,where do we want to be in a certain date (Fig. 2).It is a picture of the desired future. The vision is an aspirational statement, the destination, as set of desired conditions, which often are different from the current situation.

The “why” also considers planning, which can be a complex process that is ultimately designed to put in place policies and procedures to implement the system vision[2].

While it is widely accepted that Ecological Integrity is the principal goal of the new system,there are two other goals that are also important in most national park systems. One is the visitor experience. The experience is what motivates people to visit national parks. This experience is usually centered on the opportunity to interact with an outstanding natural or cultural environment to learn about that nation’s or region’s heritage.There are other motivations involved as well, such as escape, stress release, adventure, challenge and so on. This interaction with natural and cultural heritage is fundamental to national park planning and management.

Such interaction leads to many benefits,such as learning about and appreciating the values protected, an opportunity to enhance healthy lifestyles, and economic support to local communities.

China has a unique blend of natural and cultural heritage, and in many of its national scenic spots, nature and culture are so integrated it is difficult to consider them separate ideas. Thus,China has an outstanding opportunity to show visitors how people and nature have lived together over millennia, an experience not often preserved in a national park.

One example of this interaction is located within Grand Teton National Park in the state of Wyoming in the U.S. In the late 19th and early 20th centuries, a small group of people settled in what is now the park and attempted to farm that area.The small community is now abandoned, but their homes and barns remain. These buildings and their history demonstrate how difficult it is for a small agricultural community to be successful in the Rocky Mountains of the U.S. The buildings that remain are protected and have become a source of attraction to visitors. Figure 3 shows one of those buildings, the Moulton Barn, which now attracts many visitors, many to photograph it against the backdrop of the Teton Mountain Range.

There are examples in other national parks,such as in Mesa Verde National Park in the state of Colorado in the U.S. This national park preserves remnant architecture and buildings of the Anasazi or Cliff Dwellers culture that existed there until about 1 000 years ago. Its disappearance remains a major anthropological and archaeological question.Huashan in China is also one example of many sites where culture and environment interact as well.

Visitation to national parks also leads to opportunities to provide for economic growth and vitality to nearby communities. Visitor expenditures are income for people and governments near national parks. This income can raise the standard of living for citizens and lead to more resilient communities, that is communities that are better prepared for events occurring at larger spatial scales, like economic changes, weather and even disasters, assuming income is used to help build community resilience.

11 大提顿国家公园的日出景象Sunrise in Grand Teton National Park

Culture is a key factor that different pathways in different countries address in their own way. So as for China, the pathway to protection must go through China’s culture and environment There is a real opportunity to demonstrate China’s cultural history that involves integration of natural and culture heritage.

2.2 The “How”: Making Major Decisions about the Characteristics of the System is the Second Pathway

In the United States, the design of national park system is greatly influenced by its developmental history. The system proceeded to develop in a relatively opportunistic and haphazardly way. Late in the 19th and early in the 20th century,decisions were made about roads, concessions and wildlife as the issues arose, not necessarily in a planned way. Thus, predators, such as the wolves of Yellowstone National Park were extirpated, without consideration of their role in the ecosystem. Grizzly bears were often seen as curiosities, to provide visitors with evening enjoyment as they pawed their way through garbage dumps within the park[3]①.Then in the 1990s, people felt that wolves should be returned to Yellowstone, a decision reflecting changing cultural values and priorities.

However, in China, there is the opportunity to initiate policies, procedures and management strategies early in the development of its national park system China has the opportunity to assess the mistakes that were made in the U.S. and other countries and build more consistent and appropriate philosophies of management in a systematic way.

By developing a vision of what the parks might be, policy makers, managers, academics and publics have an opportunity to discuss the characteristics of the park, the “how” pathway.

The notions of cultural integrity, ecological integrity and community development are important in national park systems around the world. But other characteristics are significant as well (Fig. 4). Parks provide opportunities for transformative experiences for people. Transformative experiences are those that change people. Visitors are affected through learning about natural and cultural heritage; they are inspired to learn more about heritage; and they are empowered to become more ecologically and culturally literate. When visitors experience this kind of opportunity they bring home good memories,and they influence other potential visitors through their memories.

There are some other considerations such as representativeness, inclusiveness and a culturally defined pathway. The notion of representativeness means that the National Park System, as a whole,represents the variety of ecosystems and landscapes or even cultures that exist in a particular country. The notion of inclusiveness means that the peoples of a country and their diversity are included in helping design the system and their values are represented in the system. In Canada, for example, national parks are to be representative of and relevant to the people of Canada, their values and norms including First Nations. As the result, the way of designing the national park system in Canada is much different than in the United States, even though these two countries are very close to each other. It deserves stressing that neither of these countries is right or wrong, it just depends upon the particular cultural ideals embraced by each.

2.3 The “What”: The Actions Needed to be Implemented

The question of what actions are needed in a national park system is important in ensuring that the values contained in each unit are protected. As shown in the Figure 5, there are issues of capacity,application of a management philosophy, visitor use, community impact, protection from threats and visitor experiences.

Application of a management philosophy is one of the most fundamental items in terms of protecting the natural and cultural heritage of a national park, because a national park is unique and very different than other subjects of government administration.

Communities are impacted economically,socially and culturally by designation of a nearby area. As for impact on the economy, a national park helps enhancing labor income in the community,offering opportunities for vertical movement(upward into higher paying jobs) of the labor force,and building resilience. I recognize in making this statement, that a designation of a national park may also negatively impact some places through removal of a resource for livestock, mining or forestry. Sometimes these impacts are substituted through tourism.

As for impact on culture, it brings the community greater contact with other ideas, and this may have negative impacts on the local culture.

For example, Figure. 6, shows an abandoned building in the former town of Kolmanskop located within the Namib Sand Sea World Heritage Site in Namibia. This community is an abandoned gold mining community which was started in the era when Namibia was a colony of Germany.Because the diamonds ran out and there weren't any more diamonds left in the nearby area, the community was abandoned in the 1920s. However,now this place is very popular from a photographic perspective because of the combination of the old building and the sand inside them. Thus, an abandoned community can become an attraction to visitors, again demonstrating the interaction between humans and nature.

National parks cannot isolate themselves from the impacts that occur as a result of their designation and management, such as those on communities. Therefore, managers of national parks must anticipate what those impacts may be, and then build partnerships and strategies to address those impacts.

Building Capacity is another responsibility that national parks face. It is important to build the technical and organizational capacity to plan and manage. There is a wide variety of technical skills involved in managing and planning national parks, everything from leadership and policy planning to maintaining trails. Of course, all these competencies are not held by one person. Each park needs access to these competencies though.

Managing growing levels of visitor use and tourism development is increasingly problematic yet important in achieving not only individual park goals but contributes to achieving goals articulated by the Convention on Biological Diversity known as the “Aichi Targets”[4]. In Plitvice Lakes National Park in Croatia (where I worked for several years)visitor use is particularly problematic, as shown in Figure 7, where two visitors, the man and the woman, are not very happy with their experience because of the congested trail. We should want visitors to show smiles instead of frowns.

For example, as the Figure 8 shows, an 800 year old dead forest resides in the Namib Sand Sea World Heritage Site in Namibia, one of the outstanding natural features of the world. The experience here is completely different than in Plitvice Lakes National Park so that it has to be managed differently.

National parks often provide opportunities that are transformative, experiences that people will never forget. Another example is Auyuttiq National Park lying astride the Arctic Circle in Canada. Here visitors enjoy the outstanding views of mountains,glaciers and solitude knowing that there are only a few other visitors within 30 kilometers of this area(Fig. 9). At the same time, China contains beautiful natural features combined with cultural heritage providing opportunities that the Western world knows little about (Fig. 10).

3 Conclusion

In conclusion, there is no singular pathway to developing a national park system; there are multiple pathways that are synchronized in a developmental strategy. They are integrated and it is necessary to treat these pathways as part of a system.

The vision of the national park system is needed not only to help make choices but also to inspire the staff and visitors about why there is a national park system. For example, it is stunning mountains in Grand Teton National Park that make visitors get up early in the summer at 5 a.m.and watch the incredible sunrise by its reflection on these mountains (Fig. 11).

I note here that the organization that manages the system is composed of three major elements for which there are various pathways to follow First, there are a group of interrelated components operating under a set of common policies and procedures that guide their managements.Second, the system consists of an organization of professional managers and technicians whose professional training focuses on managing protected area. Third, there are communication systems within the organization that allow for downward flow of policies and upward flow of feedback. It is quite common in bureaucracies that the policy goes down to the bottom where it’s actually applied out in the field and then the managers of those places provide feedback upward so that the central office can judge how well that policy actually works in a given circumstance.

While number of visitors and expenditures are important, it’s the management that needs to focus on providing opportunities for a transformative experience. In addition, a variety of skills conceptually and practically are also needed in planning and management.

The new national park system of China has an outstanding opportunity to develop these opportunities in a way that the world has not seen, and in a way that protects natural and cultural heritage, builds opportunities for quality visitor experiences, and enhances local economic opportunity. A great challenge and immense opportunity.

Notes：

① See McCool 1983 for a discussion of the three waves of park management in the U.S.

② All figures credit: Stephen F. McCool.