Chesapeake Bay Program Decision Framework Implementation CBP reasons for implementing the decision framework • Adaptive management – clear demonstration/documentation of consistent, comprehensive use • Accountability – full.
Download ReportTranscript Chesapeake Bay Program Decision Framework Implementation CBP reasons for implementing the decision framework • Adaptive management – clear demonstration/documentation of consistent, comprehensive use • Accountability – full.
Chesapeake Bay Program Decision Framework Implementation CBP reasons for implementing the decision framework • Adaptive management – clear demonstration/documentation of consistent, comprehensive use • Accountability – full documentation of CBP activities: • • • • what why how time-bound expectations CBP Decision Framework 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. goals – clear articulation factors affecting attainment current efforts and gaps strategies – detailed and justified monitoring – outputs and outcomes assessment – time-bound with identified uncertainties 7. adaptive management plan GIT Goal Bay fisheries 1. Sustainable Fisheries blue crab oyster blue catfish Bay habitats fish passage 2. Habitat SAV wetlands stream Bay WQ TMDL agriculture 3. Water Quality stormwater wastewater trading milestones forestry 4. Healthy Watersheds Bay watersheds tracking communication Bay stewardship 5. Fostering Stewardship conservation corps public access land conservation education 6. Enhancing Partnership CBP management decision framework goal factors Decision Framework steps efforts strategy monitor gaps assess manage adaptively DF Implementation Outcomes GIT/workgroup • • • significant effort to implement operational clarity transparency and accountability CBP management • • identifying coordination opportunities clarifying decision points Future program design • framing management issues and partner roles GIT/Workgroup Benefits 1. goal articulation – clearer understanding of intent – transparency/accountability 2. factor analysis – practicality of goals – identification of “missed” factors 3. effort/gap analysis – coordination opportunities within CBP GIT/Workgroup Benefits 4. strategy development – enhanced internal and external coordination – focused scope of activities 5. monitoring – improved design for performance assessment – coordination opportunities within CBP 6. performance assessment – changed posture for future evaluations – enhanced alternatives analysis 7. manage adaptively CBP Management Benefits • consistent and comprehensive documentation of program activities • identification of coordination needs & opportunities across GITs – strategy links – monitoring coordination • clarification of CBP decision points CBP decision points • GIT level – strategy development – strategy performance assessment and revision • Program management level – cross goal/strategy coordination – program resource allocation needs/priorities – DF implementation effectiveness • Program direction level – CBP scope and structure DF Implementation Outcomes GIT/workgroup • • • significant effort to implement operational clarity transparency and accountability CBP management • • identifying coordination opportunities clarifying decision points Future program design • framing management issues and partner roles Future Program Design • Review/synthesis of current goals – EC approved goals and commitments – presently there are 27 goals identified by GITs – they cover: • • • • • • fisheries water quality habitat watersheds stewardship CBP governance • What is missing? Future Program Design • What can and should be accomplished in managing the Chesapeake Bay system? – given what is known about • • • • current conditions system trajectory (natural and human) ecosystem service capacity and values management efficacies Future Program Design • Program structure – Who needs to be participating in the program to accomplish the desired outcomes? • decision framework implementation is highlighting the essential distinctions between – GIT purview and abilities – partnership/program purview and abilities – individual partners or stakeholders interests and actions Future Program Design • Program evaluation – What assessments are needed to monitor and manage the program? • monitoring parameters and indicators • performance expectations – At what levels do assessments need to occur? • individual intervention assessments (outputs) • goal attainment evaluations (outcomes) • program performance (effectiveness) Future Program Design • Characteristics of any future agreement – Should the agreement be based on: • explicit environmental outcomes – only shared objectives – only trans-jurisdictional outcomes – all desired outcomes • partnership structure – balance of federal and state governments – representation across agencies – representation of stakeholders (includes NGOs) • governance/decision process – allows for evolving management goals