Building block 2 – Establishing principles for admitting National Olympic Committees’ projects to the Olympic Forest network

The IOC’s Executive Board approved several principles that NOCs would have to meet to join the Olympic Forest Network.

To have their project included in the Network, an NOC is required to submit details for the IOC’s review and approval, based on these specific criteria/principles. The review process is coordinated together with environmental experts who provide their feedback to the NOC and have the possibility to carry out field visit whenever relevant.

Projects are required to:

  • Contribute to enhancing climate and nature protection and resilience;
  • Support and be delivered in partnership with local communities;
  • Be developed and implemented in collaboration with the relevant experts and authorities; and
  • Have a long-term maintenance plan in place.

These principles help guide NOCs in the creation of their projects and ensure that all projects that are part of the Network are contribution to climate action and nature protection. The principles also ensure that projects possess certain characteristics and collaborative structures that are to ensure local impact and projects’ long-term viability.

  • Knowledge and understanding of factors that are important for designing and implementing successful nature restoration projects.
  • IOC’s practical experience with the implementation of the Olympic Forest project.
  • Collaboration between sport and nature conservation experts.

Having principles “on paper” does not automatically mean that they will be perfectly implemented and adhered to by the NOCs from the very beginning. 

The application process to this initiative is a learning and improvement path where NOCs, under the guidance of the IOC and of environmental experts, can be guided to ultimately comply with all the requirements of the initiative and to create and implement high quality projects with tangible added value and shared benefits for the ecosystems and the local communities.

Building block 1 – Using an existing initiative (the Olympic Forest) as a blueprint for National Olympic Commit-tees to initiate their own nature restoration projects.

The IOC’s Olympic Forest project – a reforestation initiative launched in Mali and Senegal – generated interest from National Olympic Committees, who expressed their wishes to take action against climate change and to implement similar projects in their own countries.

Following this interest, the IOC launched the Olympic Forest Network, where NOCs could build on the original Olympic Forest project by designing and implementing their own initiatives to restore existing forests, wildlife corridors, coastal watersheds, and ecosystems, as well as implement regenerative agriculture projects.

The Network builds on, and expands, the IOC’s Olympic Forest initiative, helping to profile Olympic Movement’s work that contributes to fighting climate change and conserving nature. It recognises local projects delivered by NOCs according to best practices and within the IOC’s framework. The IOC provides support to NOCs (guidance, technical advice for the application to the network, workshops, webinars and in some cases funding), receives their projects and assesses them using specific criteria. Thanks to its offices located worldwide, IUCN helps the IOC in providing technical feedback about the projects, carrying out field visits and reviewing the technical documentation provided by the NOCs.

 

  • The IOC’s initial design and implementation of a reforestation project
  • National Olympic Committees’ interest in environmental work
  • The original implementing organisation’s (i.e. IOC) desire to expand its original project and support the organisations driving these secondary projects
  • The collaborative spirit encouraged by the Olympic Movement and facilitated by the IOC’s organisational structure (NOCs as constituents of the Olympic Movement under the leadership of the IOC)
  • Good communication between the IOC and NOCs

The establishment of clear guidelines and criteria for this type of initiative is essential to avoid the multiplication of low-quality projects with low added value and benefits for nature conservation and local communities. Leading by example in this field helps to drive the Olympic Movement into proper planning and proper allocation.

Stand on existing binational platforms

Three binational (Canada-United States) commissions play a role in the protection and restoration of the Great Lakes, including the Great Lakes Commission (GLC), Great Lakes Fishery Commission (GLFC), and International Joint Commission (IJC). More specific to the Great Lakes, the work of the IJC is supported through the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement (GLWQA). While none of these commissions explicitly represents and advances an agenda related to protected and conserved area (PCA) networks, they share goals and have capacities that can support such networks. 

To this end, the Great Lakes Protected Areas Network (GLPAN) continues to find opportunities to profile PCAs, meet its network ambitions, and address conservation issues by standing on these platforms. In particular, the GLWQA has specific Annexes addressing the priority issues which are also of importance to PCAs, such as Habitat and Species, Climate Change, Aquatic Invasive Species, Science, and Lakewide Management. Engaging with the GLWQA is an effective means to address conservation at scale and represents a significant return on investment given the capacity and collaborative support partners bring. More specifically, "Lakewide Action and Management Plans" (5 year rotation on each of the 5 Great Lakes) and "Cooperative Science and Monitoring Initiatives" are two GLWQA initiatives that PCAs and PCA networks can lever and contribute to help advance conservation efforts.    

  • There are members on GLPAN who either work for a respective Commission or are actively involved in GLWQA committees. 
  • The efforts of the GLWQA and GLFC on issues such as aquatic invasive species, climate change, habitat and species, and water quality are collaborative in nature and implemented at a scale.  
  • While other platforms/forums may be involved in protection and restoration, PCAs may need to be prepared to express their own issues and concerns, that is, don't assume others will represent.
  • There are agencies working on Great Lakes protection and restoration space at a policy-level and welcome the opportunity to practice in a place-based manner with PCAs. 
Community and Government Engagement

First, we identify a suitable community – one that is threatened by fire and has the will to address the problem, and ideally has an established community group. On the Tonle Sap Lake we have worked with Community Fishery Organizations (CFi’s), Community Protected Area Organizations (CPA’s), and Villages to implement CBFiM. Engaging a formal community organization with a recognized structure has several advantages, including recognized community leadership, management capacity, financial resources such as bank accounts, and recognition by the local authorities. From this we develop the community wildfire management team which should be integrated with both the Village and Commune authorities. The community wildfire management team forms the basis of CBFiM.

Successful establishment of CBFiM requires a committed community with sufficient management capacity and the support of local authorities. The presence of an established community group such as a Community Fishery or Community Protected Area, whilst not essential, provides a structure upon which CBFiM can be adapted and built. Strong support from the local authorities at the Village, Commune and District levels are also essential to success.

Community leaders such as CFi and CPA Committee members tend to be older men and we encourage diversifying the Community Wildfire Management Team through engaging women and younger people. Women traditionally manage household finances and can remind the fire management group about fire season preparedness. Younger members bring greater energy to the hard physical work of fire suppression.

Scoping Mission and Preliminary Study to Identify and Select Potential Urban EbA Measures in Dong Hoi City

In order to identify the most feasable urban EbA measures with the highest potential to pilot in Dong Hoi city, the first step was to carry out a scoping mission and a preliminary study to collect and analyse data to provide a scientific basis for the consultation process. The objective was to provide a detailed review and analysis of previous studies and information gathered through structured stakeholder engagement via interviews, focus group discussions and stakeholder consultations for a participatory selection of pilot measures with relevant partners. 

The scoping mission and the preliminary study were conducted to provide further insight into the specific vulnerabilities and the possible adaptation responses for Dong Hoi city. The findings were used to identify a short list of urban EbA measures as well as any outstanding knowledge gaps and/or information needs for the next steps. 

A multi-stakeholder engagement event was held to promote an open dialogue between stakeholders to discuss key issues related to climate impacts and local vulnerabilities. This knowledge exchange among key stakeholders strengthened relationships among key partners, enhanced partners’ understanding of urban EbA measures as well as generated knowledge to fill information and data gaps identified in the preliminary study.

Selection Process
Analysis: The identification, development and assessment of the selected urban EbA measures was based on a functionalistic approach in which the cause and effect of the main hazards compiled during the preliminary assessment and the scoping mission provided the basis for the revision of final measures. These measures, based on the causes of the key problems and their linkages to current and future climate hazards, were meant to take into account short-term and long-term considerations as much as possible.

Selection: The selection criteria were based on the Friends of Ecosystem-based Adaptation (FEBA) Assessment Framework for EbA Quality Standards. It was used in a participatory selection exercise during the second multi-stakeholder event and during consultation with key partners. The use of the framework provided a scientific and transparent selection process, based on an internationally endorsed tool.

The final measures, based on this selection process, was defined as: 1) Cau Rao EbA River Park (water retention areas), 2) Rain Gardens (green wall and green roof) and 3) Water Flow Management (SUDS).

  • Good cooperation, engagement and a learning attitude from local authorities and stakeholders for the topics and their willingness to change, making the urban EbA selection exercise more interesting and practical
  • Deep understanding of challenges, needs and expectations of key stakeholders towards climate change adaptation measures for their sector development and provision of useful advice 
  • Exchange and dialogue between relevant stakeholders and involvement in shared discussions on their roles, mandates and cooperation in their daily work to enhance sector resilience 
  • Leading role of key stakeholders in selection and decision processes
  • Awareness raising of provincial partners about climate change adaptation and urban EbA through their integration in the process of data collection, focused group discussions, stakeholder consultations and the selection process 
  • Early involvement of key partners and the private sector into participatory processes to enhance their ownership of the process and the selected urban EbA measures
  • Facilitation of communication and cooperation between different government entities and the private sector in the processes to ensure a successful implementation in the next phase
Educating users about how to respect and behave responsibly in nature

As well as providing useful information about the surrounding natural area (e.g. trails, routes) and relevant information about this (e.g. routes’ terrain, length, degree of difficulty, changes in altitude), the trail centres also educate users on how to behave in nature. Codes of conduct educate users about how to respect nature while enjoying their sport/activity in a natural environment. For example, centres may provide information about how to respect nature when walking, running, or cycling on the local tracks, trails, and routes.

 

Some centres also provide information about the natural and cultural history on the routes, increasing users’ awareness of their natural environment.

  • Sharing information and best practice on how to behave responsibly and respectfully when in nature  
  • Clear information and explanations as to why it is important to behave responsibly and respectfully in nature 
  • Clear, effective, and easily accessibly communication channels through which information can be disseminated. The centres can act as hubs and physical spaces where information can be displayed (e.g. notice boards)
  • Establishing minimum criteria that required trail centres to provide users with information about the local area and activities that can be practiced there, encouraged trail centres to act as information hubs, informing users about the local natural environment, outdoor activities, and how to respect nature whilst enjoying outdoor sporting activities.
  • Providing information about activities such as walking, running, and cycling trails (i.e. length, difficulty, the type of terrain) encourages people to undertake activities in designated areas and limits encroachment into fragile or stressed natural areas.
  • Trail centres can signpost people less familiar with nature as to where to go, what to do, but also how to behave responsibly toward nature and why it is important to do so.
Increasing and improving access to natural spaces and outdoor sporting activities

The Trail Centres act as physical spaces that increase and improve access to physical activities in nature, contributing to physical and mental well-being.

 

Their carefully chosen locations in proximity to nature (forests, water, and trails) help establish freely accessible, round-the-clock meeting places and start-points for outdoor sporting activities. As some are located close to urban areas, they also provide a gateway from urban to natural environments. 

 

Their combination as an all-in-one clubhouse, provider of service facilities, and meeting and training space, makes them ideal sites for local sports associations to use, as well as un-affiliated groups or individuals. This provides a space for socialising within, and between, sports and promotes relationship-building amongst users and with local sports associations.

 

Providing access to service facilities participation in outdoor sports activities (e.g. bicycle pumps and cleaning stations; covered training space; functional training equipment (stairs, monkey bars, TRX, etc.); storage space for equipment; and changing rooms/showers/toilets). As sites for borrowing equipment (e.g. map and compass, roller skis, SUP boards, etc.), the centres also encourage people to try new activities in nature in an affordable manner. 

  • The choice of location: trail centres must be near natural environments conducive to outdoor activities. Building them on the outskirts of urban areas, yet still close to nature, provides ideal gateways to nature. Analysis of recreational opportunities, infrastructure, terrain, etc. helps determine ideal locations.
  • Correctly determining the functions and services to be provided by the trail centres to best-meet users’ needs.
  • Organising workshops with stakeholders allowed these to discuss and determine user needs as well as which functions trail centres needed to provide to accommodate these needs. This shaped the trail centres’ different designs and helped to determine the core facilities that centres had to provide, as well as the additional facilities specific to community needs or interests.
  • Participatory workshops also ensured that trail centres provided access to activities and areas that could be appealing to users – both to those practicing outdoor activities as well as to those who might be interested in discovering new nature-based outdoor activities. 
  • Choosing to locate some centres near urban areas was also important for improving urban populations’ access to nature.
  • Providing information about activities such as walking, running, and cycling trails (i.e. length, difficulty, the type of terrain, etc.) is helpful for encouraging people to undertake nature-based sporting activities, particularly those who may be less familiar with the local area or a specific activity.
Cross-sectorial cooperation and participatory approach to planning and design

The trail centre project was built on cross-sectorial cooperation. The five trail centres that are being built have all been developed and built in close collaboration with stakeholders across different sectors. These included the local municipalities where the centres would be built, the local sports associations who would be using the sites, local citizens and would-be users, as well as other interested parties. 

The participatory approach included holding 4 to 5 workshops with stakeholders to understand user needs, ideas, etc. This both enabled and ensured dialogue between the architects involved in the planning and design processes of the trail centres and the users/interested parties. Dialogue with architects also ensured that the buildings’ aesthetics, as well as functions, met stakeholders’ wishes.

The activities provided, or facilitated, by the trail centres were developed in collaboration with the local actors and associations. A participatory approach to planning also gives the users and local community a greater sense of ownership and helps ensure a sense of community between actors and across their respective sports.

Additionally, the development of the minimum criteria for determining the location and functions of the trail centres arose through cross-sectorial collaboration between project members.

  • Holding numerous workshops with stakeholders across planning and design stages ensures consistent collaboration across sectors.
  • Workshops with users facilitates greater understanding of user needs, opinions, and ideas which can positively influence the planning and design of trail centres. This can ultimately help determine the success of the trail centre in catering to user needs as well as the local community’s satisfaction with the end product.
  • Holding workshops with stakeholders helped architects and those delivering the project to understand user needs and helped inform the functions that trail centres should provide for their users. Workshops acted as a space where stakeholders could share ideas and voice their opinions, ultimately ensuring that centres could best meet local communities’ and users’ needs.
  • Organising multiple workshops ensured that there was consistent dialogue and idea sharing between parties throughout the design and development stages of trail centres.
  • A participatory approach to planning and design also enabled stakeholders to voice their opinions regarding the aesthetics of trail centres, an often-contentious topic that is crucial to the overall success of infrastructure projects.
Establishing minimum criteria for the location, design, and functions of the trail centres, and the information that they must provide to users

To ensure the success of trail centres, the project members developed a number of minimum criteria for the location and design of the trail centres. Criteria was also established regarding the minimum service functions that the trail centres need to accommodate as well as the information that centres need to present. 

 

Minimum criteria:

  • located at the centre of a varied range of trails, routes, and tracks that are preferably marked
  • situated in an interesting park area, terrain, landscape or natural area
  • information about e.g. the routes’ terrain, length, degree of difficulty, changes in altitude
  • parking spaces
  • a common room that all sports associations can use
  • a covered area for e.g. gatherings, warm-up stretches, abdominal exercises
  • a good range of relevant service functions

 

Each of the centres that have been, or are being, developed adhere to these minimum criteria. They are all located in or near natural environments that provide access to different outdoor sporting activities. Core service functions are integral to the architectural designs of each centre. 

  • Communication with local partners to understand user needs and determine core design functions.
  • Clear vision: Project members established core purposes of trail centres
    • Increasing social coexistence and understanding across different user-groups
    • Developing all-in-one facilities that meet different user-group needs
    • Increasing participation in, and accessibility of, nature-based sports/exercise
    • Increasing awareness of, and interest in, the nature that underpins their activities
    • Inspiring others to establish high-quality trail centres based on the above goals
  • Cross-sectorial collaboration is crucial for determining what criteria is deemed necessary for successful centres, as well as to better understand user needs.
  • Establishing minimum criteria for trail centres ensures that these will accommodate and fulfil the service functions that are required and desired by users – critical for informing the architectural design of the centres.
  • Determining minimum criteria also ensures that trail centres are situated in natural areas that provide opportunities for diverse outdoor activities. This guarantees that trail centres are located in the most suitable natural environments and in areas where many activities can be practiced. In some cases, it also provides opportunities to bridge the gap between urban and natural environments and facilitates access to nature for urban populations.
  • Requiring trail centres to share information about their surrounding areas ensures that users have easy access to information relating to their outdoor activities as well as the best-practices and codes of conduct that one must adhere to whilst participating in outdoor nature-based activities.
Developing the Regional Ocean Governance Strategy through a co-creation process

The ROGS Support Team supported a diverse WIO ROGS Task Force, involving state and non-state representatives from various sectors and organisations. This inclusive forum facilitated stakeholder dialogue and collaboration, with members providing inputs directly to the ROGS and expanding regional contributions by inviting stakeholders from their networks. The Task Force, along with key stakeholders, contributed strategic and technical insights to the ROGS through Technical Dialogues and regional events.


The Collective Leadership Institute (CLI) supported the Task Force through in-person workshops and online sessions  to enhance collective leadership and collaboration. An experienced ocean governance advisor, Mr. Kieran Kelleher, played a key role in formulating strategy questions and compiling ROGS content.


The inclusive and participatory approach aimed to foster ownership, improving the quality, feasibility and credibility of the ROGS. If adopted at the next Nairobi Convention Conference of Parties, this ownership is expected to boost the strategy's implementation.

 

  • Clear process and goal outlined in the process architecture for drafting the ROGS together

  • Participant interest and openness for individual and collective contribution

  • Capacity development and process stewardship prioritized by CLI, emphasizing authentic participation, trust-building, and co-creation

  • Technical dialogues led by the Task Force, engaging sector-specific stakeholders and experts for a shared understanding and optimal policy recommendations

  • Weekly online meetings of the ROGS Support Team, organized by CLI to ensure a high-quality process

  • Need to assign clear roles within the process including someone who drives the process forwards according to set timelines

  • Both process leadership and technical leadership

  • Consideration of financing and resourcing as an integral part of the ROGS