Inception phase | PANORAMA

Situational Analysis—National Context for enforcement of selected Protected Area

In order to develop your enforcement strategy there are key pieces of information that must be collated and understood. These include lay of the land (why is the protected area important, what are the natural assets that need protection), legal framework (what laws apply, what agencies are involved in protected area enforcement/management), and finally what do you want to focus on: enforcement goals.

Informed, capacitated people should be involved in the process. Enforcement goals need to be S.M.A.R.T (Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant, and Time-Bound), this can only happen if the context is correctly represented.

Context is key in the design of enforcement goals. Having a participatory process gets support and buy in from partner agencies and communities making enforcement “easier”.

Transfer of knowledge on new methods of ecological restoration through seeding

One of the main objectives of the project was to transfer the seed bombing method developed by XGraines, and adapting it to the material, human and knowledge resources available within tribal communities. This action required the implementation of several training workshops, following a preliminary phase of identification of all locally mobilizable resources. The experiments were carried out directly with the participants, who were able to contribute to the implementation of the method in a co-constructed process that could guarantee the proper appropriation of this technique. A main local referent was trained throughout the process and will be able to pass on this acquired knowledge in the future within the community.

The tribe's representatives' interest in experimentation and their good understanding of the project's objectives is one of the main factors that favoured the project. The selection of participants who were already engaged in ecological restoration actions before the project demonstrates their commitment and willingness to improve and develop techniques in a field (reforestation and production) that is familiar to them.

The transfer of knowledge and learning process required multiple workshops and work sessions.

Inception phase

Implementation

Local

Carrying out a shared diagnosis for the selection of plant species and trial site selection.

Native seeds collected by volunteers

Nicolas Rinck

Identification of target species by the botanist expert in the presence of project volunteers

Tristan Allignol

One of the prerequisites for action was to work with the project referents in the tribe to conduct an inventory of potential sites for seed planting trials, as well as to identify and select certain target plant species necessary for the process. This step involved mobilizing specific expertise in ecology and botany, also traditional knowledge, as well as putting in place a validation process by the different levels of local authorities involved.

Good communication with the local leaders in the tribes was a critical factor in completing this step. Project presentation ceremonies were held, followed by several field visits with ecological experts to list the range of possibilities and entrust the final choice of these trial sites to the local leaders. The project coordinators were flexible in adapting to the constraints of the location and human factors related to the desired modes of the organization by the local leaders.

Remain flexible in the implementation of solutions; remain attentive to local community referents in order to arrive at a shared and agreed diagnosis and validate project options that local partners have appropriated.

Planning phase

Inception phase

Local

Improved planning

IMET2 manager training

Sgt Ndione

The project's strategy was to promote the IMET2 tool and its use within Senegal's protected area network. All managers in the protected area network took part in the training session, to ensure that the tool was properly appropriated, followed by its implementation at site level. Following the participatory elaboration of the assessment results, a process of revision of the development and management plans incorporating the IMET recommendations was initiated.

In addition to the beneficiaries, the training included all the network's managers and community representatives, to have a greater impact on the number of people able to implement the tool in the field. The support provided by a coach for the data collection sessions reinforced the effectiveness of the tool's use in the field with the various stakeholders.

The availability of a coach at national level to accompany the exercise produced good results.

As lessons learned, we realized that the implementation of the IMET tool in the field is subject to the availability of financial resources.

The lesson learned is that the lack of resources allocated to PAs is a blocking factor to better integrate the tool into PA management.

Pre-filling is an important step in managing the time allocated to the assessment, as the work was more tedious at poorly prepared sites.

Strengthening the coach network within countries is more than necessary for a good appropriation of the tool, the availability of only one coach for the country made this exercise very tedious.

IMET reports serve as advocacy documents for donors, helping to boost PA funding and guide management decisions.

Inception phase

Local

rapport_atelier.pdf

Stakeholder engagement and collaboration

stakeholder meeting

Cecilia Banda

Enhancing governance and conservation in biodiversity protected area management requires robust stakeholder participation and collaboration by all the actors in the protected areas. This was key as the shared resources made it possible to accomplish the project implementation within the schedule and timeframe. This process also involved stakeholder analysis and their contribution to the governance of the site. Shared vision planning and established mechanism for continued coordination.

Good stakeholder participation, and support by the government and the traditional leadership. The participatory nature of the tool allows broader collective action planning and assessment.

Stakeholder participation helped to pull resources together and a joint action agreed and made implementation much easier. It requires proper planning and identification of key governance issues to be analyzed and acted upon. Usually, you would want to focus on those governance issues that are relevant such as gender equity, participation, and information sharing. The process became expensive especially the implementation of other activities due to a high number of stakeholders.

Information booklet for Mufunta GMA

Project blog

Site-level profile and governance gap analysis

stakeholder meeting

Cecilia Banda

Data Collection

Cecilia Banda

A brief site-level profile (baseline) was developed to assist in understanding the governance gaps and issues in the targeted protected areas. In this case, a SAGE too was identified to assist with a quick assessment of governance issues. This process also helped to identify key stakeholders relevant to the implementation of the project at the site level.

The community buy-in, and commitment from the government and other stakeholders made the process more participative. The use of the SAGE tool encouraged more interaction and contributed to the implementation of the project. The Technical staff and field-based teams were also always available to guide the process through.

The baseline survey to establish site level profile and governance gap analysis required cooperation and collaboration from other stakeholders, especially the traditional leadership and government. It is also a slow process and requires adequate planning and preparation.

Information booklet for Mumbwa

Project blog

The start towards the recovery of the micro-watershed

Representatives of the communities of Las Flores learning about the experience of the Junta de Agua de la microcuenca Las Balanzas.

GIZ/Fabiola Budde

Representatives of water boards on an exchange tour in the Rio Hondo micro-watershed in San Marcos de Ocotepeque.

GIZ/Fabiola Budde

The process of empowerment of the actors began with exchange tours organized by the Puca Community Foundation, the Forest Conservation Institute (ICF) and the municipality of Las Flores with advice from the PROCAMBIO project, implemented by GIZ.

These exchanges took place in the micro-watersheds of Las Balanzas (in the Güisayote Biological Reserve) and Río Hondo (in the municipality of San Marcos), both in the department of Ocotepeque, where a green fund and the Compensation Mechanism for Ecosystem-Water Services (MCSEH) have been implemented.

The communities were aware that it was necessary to start protecting the micro-watershed if they wanted to guarantee water supply.
Communication between the grassroots organizations and the municipal authorities and institutions present in the territory allowed for adequate coordination.

Knowing the experience of the water boards of the Las Balanzas and Rio Hondo micro-watersheds allowed us to identify how to solve the main challenges at the time of implementing the compensation mechanism and the green fund.
Inter-institutional coordination is key to ensure the participation of all organizations and actors involved in the process.

Planning phase

Inception phase

Local

Collaboration

Blue Parks relies heavily on collaborations with other conservation NGOs, communications and marketing professionals, government leaders, MPA managers, scientists, and local ocean champions. Growing the network of Blue Parks and amplifying the Blue Park standard for conservation effectiveness requires many partners.

Blue Parks has benefitted from the contributions of many partners. These collaborations have been made possible by a growing awareness that MPA coverage alone is not sufficient to safeguard biodiversity -- that we need to fully implement high quality MPAs in order to see conservation outcomes, and most MPAs are not yet well implemented.

These collaborations have also grown out of Marine Conservation Institute's long-standing history as a trusted partner among marine scientists, conservation organizations, and governments.

Nurturing collaborations across multiple sectors (government, NGO, academia) requires clear communication. We have found that regular, though not too frequent, outreach and communication with these partners keeps the collaborations active, and that these communications are most effective when they are designed for the audience, so we often send separate communications to partners in different sectors.

Documentation and dissemination of results

No blue print

A ‘local community’ represents a heterogeneous group of people, characterized by their ethnic origin, political orientation and shared history, defining (dynamic) power relationships between it`s members.

Each community possesses therefore a ‘social capital’ that can be described as its capacity to respond to an external intervention (e.g. a project).

A blue print approach would therefore not be suitable.

No ´One solution` for all approach on different sites.

From the project teams` perspective, it means that the same approach used to engage and work with different communities will not produce the same results and that a good understanding of the local power relationships and governance systems will help in adapting the approach to the local context.

Inception phase

Implementation

Local

Time & resources

Donors need to change the way they fund project and project implementers should not accept anymore 3-years projects that address complex systems.

Complex systems need time and resources to have a chance to be successful (an inception phase of 6 months is far too short to understand a new network of stakeholders).

Time & resources

Speficic skills (e.g., social sciences and humanities)

Time, specific skills and well sequenced application of mixed methodologies and dedicated means are necessary to build trust and mutual respect with local stakeholders before any concrete intervention can take place, but should not take too long to compromise stakeholders’ expectations.

Skipping the first steps, usually to respect a project timeline, is counterproductive and compromises outcomes (i.e. positive results beyond the lifetime of the project). This ‘inception phase’ is therefore necessary and needs to be negotiated with the donor, the consortium members and the final beneficiaries.

Inception phase

Local