Transcript Document

Management Effectiveness
of Protected Areas
Marc Hockings
School of Natural and Rural Systems Management
University of Queensland
Vice Chair (Management Effectiveness), IUCN World
Commission on Protected Areas
Durban, August 2003
WHY IS MANAGEMENT
EFFECTIVENESS AN ISSUE?
• Protected areas are critical for in-situ
conservation
• Most protected areas are subject to multiple
serious threats and many are degraded
• 1992 review of protected areas found that three
of the five most common threats were
management deficiencies rather than direct
impacts on resources
Inadequate funds
X
X
Pollution
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Encroachment
X
X
Poaching/illegal harvesting
X
X
X
Absence of political will
X
X
X
Inadequate legislation, policy or
administrative arrangements
Overharvesting (eg. Timber,
wildlife, water)
X
X
% of regions reporting threat
X
South America
X
Caribbean
X
Central Amercia
X
North America
Inadequate staff nos.& training
Pacific
Northern Eurasia
X
Antarctica/New Zealand
Europe
X
Australia
N. Africa and Middle East
X
South & SE Asia
Sub-Saharan Africa
X
Habitat destruction or alteration
East Asia
Marine
X
Threat
X
X
X
X
X
X
79
X
X
79
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
71
X
X
X
X
65
X
X
X
65
X
X
X
57
X
57
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
57
X
X
X
X
57
WHY IS MANAGEMENT
EFFECTIVENESS AN ISSUE?
• Protected areas are critical for in-situ
conservation
• Most protected areas are subject to multiple
serious threats and many are degraded
• 1992 review of protected areas found that three
of the five most common threats were
management deficiencies rather than direct
impacts on resources
• The 1992 World Parks Congress identified
effective management as one of four major
protected area issues of global concern
WHY ASSESS MANAGEMENT
EFFECTIVENESS?
• Promote adaptive management
• Improve quality of reporting (promote accountability)
• Improve project planning by sharing lessons learnt
• Identify protected areas at risk
• Identify priorities for project and funding support
• Facilitate advocacy to improve management
A short (and incomplete) history of
Management Effectiveness Evaluation
• First raised at Bali WPC 1983
• Call for action at Caracas WPC 1992
• Independent systems development (Parks in Peril,
WWF/CATIE, TNC and others, various park
management agencies)
– 3 basic approaches
• scoring or rating of management
• monitoring systems (mostly biological)
• project evaluation
• WCPA Working Group 1996 and Task Force 1998
Process used to develop WCPA
Framework
• Working group established with WCPA in 1996
• Draft framework developed in 1997
• Task Force established in 1998 with broad regional and organisational
representation
• Partnership with IUCN/WWF Forest Innovations project
• Workshops in Costa Rica, UK, Bangkok
• Pilot studies
• Networks and consultation in various fora
• Review within WCPA
• Publication and launch of guidelines at World Conservation Congress
in Amman
The WCPA Framework
and Guidelines
COMPONENTS OF
MANAGEMENT EFFECTIVENESS
Three aspects are of interest:
• the appropriateness of PA design;
• the appropriateness of management
systems and processes; and
• the extent to which the protected area/
system is achieving objectives for
which it was established.
Evaluation and the management cycle
WCPA ASSESSMENT FRAMEWORK
Elements
of
evaluation
Context Planning
Inputs
Process Outputs Outcomes
Where are
we now?
Where do we
want to be?
What do we
need?
How do we
go about it?
What were
the results?
What did we
achieve?
Criteria
Significance
Threats
Vulnerability
National
policy
Engagement
of Partners
PA legislation
and policy
PA system design
Reserve design
Management
planning
Resourcing of
agency
Resourcing of
site
Suitability of
management
processes
Results of
management
actions
Services and
products
Impacts: effects
of management
in relation to
objectives
Focus of
evaluation
Status
Appropriateness
Economy
Efficiency
Effectiveness
Effectiveness
Appropriateness
LEVELS OF ASSESSMENT
Context
Level 1
Level 2
Level 3
Planning
Inputs
Processes
Outputs
Outcomes
HIERARCHY OF PROTECTED AREA ASSESSMENT
WCPA Protected Area Assessment Framework
An overall structure and some principles
Assessments of protected area systems
(e.g. WWF Rapid Assessment)
Assessments of protected areas
(e.g. IUCN-CIDA Russian project)
Detailed monitoring of individual PAs
(e.g. World Heritage Enhancing our Heritage project)
GUIDELINES
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Participatory
Well-founded, transparent, comprehensible
Clearly defined management objectives and criteria for judging performance
Focused on most important issues and threats
Consider all elements (context, design, inputs, process, outputs and outcomes)
Cover social, environmental and management aspects
Capable of showing change over time (trends)
Identify what is outside manager’s control
Should facilitate prioritisation of conservation effort
Include clear recommendations for improvement
Based on sound and appropriate social and environmental science
Include both quantitative and qualitative information
Thank You