Transcript Tracking Management Effectiveness in Multiple Sites Sue Stolton, Equilibrium, UK World Heritage Committee, Thirtieth Session, Vilnius, Lithuania.

Tracking Management
Effectiveness in Multiple Sites
Sue Stolton, Equilibrium, UK
World Heritage Committee, Thirtieth Session, Vilnius, Lithuania
• This presentation is about a simple
methodology – known as the Management
Effectiveness Tracking Tool - that has
been developed to track portfolios of sites
• In 15 minutes it has to be a simple
presentation
• But creating simple things can be complex
• I won’t be telling you about the years it
took to develop, test, review and revise
• Or give substantive detail of the results of
analysis using the tool
World Heritage Committee, Thirtieth Session, Vilnius, Lithuania
• I will be giving a brief description of the
Management Effectiveness Tracking Tool
• Say a little about how it has been used
• Give a short analysis comparing the
Tracking Tool with the Periodic Reporting
Section II
• Some suggestion about how it could be
adapted for WH use
World Heritage Committee, Thirtieth Session, Vilnius, Lithuania
The Management Effectiveness
Tracking Tool is ‘fit for purpose’
• Developed to assess agreed and clearly
articulated objectives
World Heritage Committee, Thirtieth Session, Vilnius, Lithuania
Original incentive for developing the Tracking Tool
World Bank/WWF Alliance for Forest
Conservation and Sustainable Use
Target: 75 million hectares of existing forest protected
areas under improved management to achieve
conservation and development outcomes by 2010
World Heritage Committee, Thirtieth Session, Vilnius, Lithuania
Management Effectiveness
Tracking Tool Objectives
• Tracking improvements in management to
achieve conservation and development
outcomes
• Harmonised reporting for multiple sites
• Relatively quick and easy to complete
• Based on expert knowledge available at site
• Easily understood by non-specialists
• Consistent with existing reporting systems
• Provides useful information for site managers
World Heritage Committee, Thirtieth Session, Vilnius, Lithuania
How has it been used?
• WWF’s portfolio of 200 forest protected areas
• World Bank’s portfolio of protected areas
• All Global Environment Facility protected areas
projects
• Adapted for marine and freshwater biomes
• Adapted for use in all protected areas in China
• Used in all Indian Tiger Reserves
• Used to improve management in private
reserves in South Africa and Namibia
World Heritage Committee, Thirtieth Session, Vilnius, Lithuania
What is the Tracking Tool?
1. Datasheet: contextual information including
objectives and threats
2. Questionnaire: 4 alternative text answers to
30 question and an associated score to
summarise progress
3. Associated text fields with each question:
recording justification for assessment, sources
used and steps to be taken to improve the
management issue
World Heritage Committee, Thirtieth Session, Vilnius, Lithuania
• Based on the management cycle of a site
• WCPA Framework for assessing management effectiveness
World Heritage Committee, Thirtieth Session, Vilnius, Lithuania
Section II: Period Reporting
Management Effectiveness Tracking Tool
(2) Justification for Inscription
Protected area objectives (4)
(3) Boundary and buffer zone
Protected area boundary demarcation (6)
(4) Authenticity and Integrity of the site
Protected area design (5)
(5) Management
Resource management (11)
(6) Protection
Legal status (1); Protected area regulations(2); Law enforcement (3)
(7) Management plans
Management plan (7); Regular work plan (8)
(8) Financial resources
Current budget (15); Security of budget (16); Management of budget
(17); Fees (26)
Staff numbers (12); Personnel management (13)
(9) Staffing levels (human resources)
(10) Expertise and Training in Conservation
and Management
(11) Visitors
Staff training (14)
(12) Scientific studies
Resource inventory (9); Research (10)
(13) Education, Information and Awareness
Education and awareness programme (20)
(14) Factors Affecting the Property (SoC)
Condition assessment (27); Access assessment (28)
(15) Monitoring
Monitoring and evaluation (30)
Specific World Heritage questions (16, 17, 18,
19)
Equipment (18); Maintenance of equipment (19); State and commercial
neighbours (21); Indigenous people (22); Local communities (23); Economic
benefit assessment (29)
Visitor facilities (24); Commercial tourism (25)
World Heritage Committee, Thirtieth Session, Vilnius, Lithuania
Two Tools: Shared Needs
15.01
Is there a formal monitoring program for the
site?
15.02
If yes, please describe it, indicating what factors
or variables are being monitored and by what
process.
Yes
Issue
Criteria
Score
30.
Monitoring
and
evaluation
Are
management
activities
monitored
against
performance?
There is no monitoring and evaluation in the
protected area
0
There is some ad hoc monitoring and
evaluation, but no overall strategy and/or no
regular collection of results
1
There is an agreed and implemented
monitoring and evaluation system but results
are not systematically used for management
2
A good monitoring and evaluation system
exists, is well implemented and used in
adaptive management
3
No
Comments
Next steps
World Heritage Committee, Thirtieth Session, Vilnius, Lithuania
11.03
Please briefly describe the visitor facilities at the site.
11.04
Are these facilities adequate?
11.05
If no, what facilities is the site in need of?
Yes
Issue
Criteria
24. Visitor
facilities
Are visitor
facilities (for
tourists,
pilgrims etc)
good enough?
There are no visitor facilities and services
0
Visitor facilities and services are
inappropriate for current levels of
visitation or are under construction
1
Visitor facilities and services are
adequate for current levels of visitation
but could be improved
2
Visitor facilities and services are excellent
for current levels of visitation
3
Outputs
Score
Comments
No
Next steps
World Heritage Committee, Thirtieth Session, Vilnius, Lithuania
Similarities
• WH: assess conservation status; focus on future
activities; strengthen co-operation
• TT: track/monitor progress of conservation targets;
plan portfolio interventions
• WH/TT: Overlap of questionnaire topics
World Heritage Committee, Thirtieth Session, Vilnius, Lithuania
Differences
• TT: based on internationally recognised structure
for reporting protected area management
effectiveness (WCPA Framework)
• TT: 30 questions plus data sheet
• WH: Natural and cultural site
• WH: 140 questions (nearly 500 over all regions)
World Heritage Committee, Thirtieth Session, Vilnius, Lithuania
Tracking Tool: Strengths
• Multiple choice allows for more consistent
analysis of answers over time
• Next steps section provides some guidance for
adaptive management
• Questions are specifically linked to achievement
of objectives
• Short and relatively quick to complete
• Standardised language thus easy to translate
World Heritage Committee, Thirtieth Session, Vilnius, Lithuania
Tracking Tool: Limitations
• Not an independent assessment
• Questions are not weighted
• Limited evaluation of outputs and outcomes
However good management is, if values continue to
decline, the objectives are not being met. Therefore
the question on condition assessment has
disproportionate importance.
World Heritage Committee, Thirtieth Session, Vilnius, Lithuania
Tracking Tool: Achievements
• Has grown from measuring one project’s targets
to many adaptations and global uptake
• Largest global data set of protected area
effectiveness information using one system
• Improving effectiveness from site to global level
World Heritage Committee, Thirtieth Session, Vilnius, Lithuania
Can the Tracking Tool be adapted
to fit the needs of WH reporting?
• Step 1: Clear objectives about what Periodic
Reporting can and cannot achieve
• Step 2: Adapt Tracking Tool to reflect WH
requirements and in particular cultural sites
• Step 3: Test revised Tracking Tool in key
cultural, natural and mixed sites
World Heritage Committee, Thirtieth Session, Vilnius, Lithuania
Cultural Challenges
• Challenge 1: sites are not managed by one
single management unit
• Challenge 2: sites fragmented sometimes over
large areas
World Heritage Committee, Thirtieth Session, Vilnius, Lithuania
The Tracking Tool is
available in English, French,
Spanish, Portuguese,
Chinese, Russian, Bahasa
Indonesia, Lao, Khmer,
Vietnamese and Mongolian
Download several
language version from:
http://www.panda.org
Second Meeting of the Reflection Year on World Heritage Periodic Reporting: 2-3 March 2006