Inception phase | PANORAMA

Product Refinement and Testing

After the training was completed and the tour itineraries were designed, community members at Cuc Phuong National Park and Van Long Nature Reserve were ready to put their newly acquired skills to the test.

Instead of hosting familisation trips with tour operators, organising pilot excursions with real visitors would create more meaningful and practical impacts for the communities. By hosting these pilot excursions, community members would have the opportunity to be exposed to different markets and to be able to practise their activities in real-life circumstances.

In that sense, two immersive itineraries were proposed, targeting both international and domestic audiences residing in Hanoi who are incentivised to pay a 50% package rate as a donation for the communities in the protected areas and contribute to their development.

As the local champions are mostly new to tourism, it takes time for them to get used to the concept, understand what community tourism really means and start learning basic skills to welcome tourists. Even when the tour itineraries were designed and looked good on paper, it does not mean that the tour is ready for the market. Bringing in tour operators in this early stage can do more harm than good. Therefore, test trips allowed product feedback and skill improvement before introducing them to the market.

In Van Long, the visitors were impressed with the hospitality of the local people, and appreciated the training provided to the local communities by the Project. Alongside the highlights, some improvements were also pointed out. For instance, additional or feasible experiences can be expanded when the local hosts are more familiar with welcoming guests; or the timing and route of the boat ride can be adapted depending on the season and visitors.

In Cuc Phuong, Khanh villagers have been welcoming guests trekking from the Bong centre of the Park for a long time. Therefore, it took them little time to be able to organise the new experience, which is the cooking class in combination with a hiking experience. As the itinerary was designed to reduce the reliance of the village on the Park’s tourism, the route where the hiking and vegetable picking is conducted lies outside of the Park’s territory.

Inception phase

Implementation

Local

Encouragement of Product Ownership

During the training, many exercises were designed for the local community’s engagement. This is also a good way to get information from local people about their community. One of the exercises in tour itinerary development training encouraged participants to plan a full-day tour incorporating remarkable landscapes and food within their local area. However, it must be noted that the participants might have different views on what ‘remarkable’ or ‘beautiful’ is.
Training workshops also offered a good opportunity to identify ‘local champions’ who willingly initiate the delivery of tourism services and products within their communities. An assessment of infrastructure conditions and strengths / unique features was conducted to see how their stories feed into the overall theme / routes of the itineraries (majority of which was built upon the inputs of the training participants).
Not only the excursion activity but the storytelling was also important in delivering / conveying the message to customers. The training participants / ‘local champions’ were asked to create an outline of what they want to introduce to the guests.
Complete tour itineraries were adjusted, finalised and ready for testing.

The initially designed itineraries feature both conservation work of the PA and the community. However, the residents' knowledge of the conservation side was not sufficient for tour guidance. Therefore, the focus was shifted to the community aspect of the tour itineraries. This approach allows visitors to learn about the life of local communities in harmony with nature in the PAs while highlighting the conservation work at the grassroots level. The community members are also more confident in telling their own story from their perspective.

Most participants were still hesitant to engage in tourism initiatives without initial support in finance. In this case, having local champions who proactively showed their interest in initiating something new in the community really helped. Oftentimes, they might already have other livelihood tools, or the household’s finances are taken care of by their children or their spouse. It is those local champions who will play an important role in defining / shaping tourism in their community and being an example for other community members.

Inception phase

Implementation

Local

Contextualised training content

The project was designed with predefined training content in 3 topics: (i) Health & Safety; (ii) Itinerary and Product Development; (iii) Marketing & Promotion, intended for community tourism entrepreneurs, individuals interested in working in tourism in the PAs and buffer zones, PA management and other personnel involved in PA management.
After conducting a baseline survey to understand the general local context and main actors in the community, the pre-designed training content was contextualised to fit with the main audience of the training workshops.
- Different stakeholders have incompatible learning ability. Therefore, the training content was simplified with separated content for communities and for households / individuals who want to dive deeper in the topics.
- Contextualisation also helps in bringing the knowledge closer to the participants.
- As young people go to work in the daytime, most participants of the training workshops were middle-aged. A conventional training method, which is one-way communication, does not work in this case. A facilitation planning in detail was made to make sure everyone feels engaged in the training. Some methods which were used include: group discussion, resource mapping, small games with scores and prizes, etc.

Local community members are introduced to community tourism, have an overview of basic skills needed to develop community tourism in the context of protected areas. For those who do not plan to engage in tourism soon, the training provides a perspective for community development so that they can confidently raise concerns about their community’s well-being and benefits if there is a private investor coming in the community.

When it comes to training in the community, a more interactive approach to create two-way dialogues and dynamics is needed. It was clearly observed that when given more chances to talk and a safe space to speak their mind, people are more likely to engage and take ownership of their initiatives. For example, when asked to map out their community’s resources available to offer tourists, one of the villages drew a map of their community with a clear vision of who-offers-what. Additionally, although the next step was not part of the training nor required outcome, the same villagers actively came up with their own action plan to create a safe atmosphere for tourists to enjoy the village’s beauty.

Inception phase

Local

DISCUSS OH INTEGRATION

The adoption of the One Health approach in biodiversity-related projects requires an open and participatory discussion among all actors and stakeholders involved and affected by the project itself. The discussion will build on the results of project analysis, collaboratively planning how (principles) and where (gate entries) the One Health approach can be applied and identifying what (measures) can be done to ensure integration is optimal and relevant. The review team will lead the preparation of an action plan to ensure that fundamental factors (enabling conditions) are met and guide the operationalisation of the OH component at the human-animal-environment interface.

Engage a wide spectrum of actors and stakeholders in the discussion, ensuring the representation of different sectors and groups that are affected by the project
Promote an open dialogue among all actors, to promote exchange and integration between scientific and traditional knowledge

The integration of One Health in biodiversity-related projects can be a complex process. Three strategies can ease the task and support the review team in achieving the goal. The clarification of the One Health definition in the context of the specific project to ensure all actors share the same understanding of the approach and the value of its integration in the project. The identification of a narrow scope for the adoption of the OH approach within the project to test the capacity of the team in establishing new partnerships, working across disciplines, and creating initiatives that differ from their usual business. The engagement of external assessors, experts in the operationalisation of One Health, to support the team through the collaborative process to identify the opportunities of collaboration at the biodiversity-health nexus.

EXPLORE ENABLING CONDITIONS

Enabling conditions determine the success of the OH integration in the project. Their accomplishment is necessary to create a suitable environment for sustainable and optimal collaborations and activities. The enabling conditions identified in the framework include a conducive political environment that encourages government and non-state actors across all relevant organisational levels to willingly collaborate; infrastructure, tools and processes that ease the sharing of data and enable the co-design of multisectoral interventions at the human-animal-environment interface; a detailed stakeholder mapping that allows the identification of strengths and potentials across different actors and promotes the establishment of valuable collaboration; and a meaningful investment that sustains the application of the One Health approach in new or existing project.

Conduct a thorough analysis of the policy context in the country of intervention, to identify government and non-state initiatives that support OH operationalisation
Analyse the infrastructures and assets already available in the project that can ease the collaboration and communication with other sectors and initiatives

The failure to meet the enabling conditions does not automatically disqualify a project to include a One Health approach. However, it may hinder the actual operationalisation of the integration within the project. Small scale initiatives that require a limited investment may represent a viable option to pilot the integration of One Health at the biodiversity-health nexus even when not all enabling conditions are met. The initiatives will help the generation of evidence and support the case of One Health among policymakers and investors, eventually boosting the enabling conditions for future interventions.

LEVERAGE MEASURES

Measures are interventions or activities that are already implemented in the project and can allow building a One Health component within its scope. They enable the operationalisation of the One Health integration in an optimal and relevant way. The framework identifies eight measures, including Education and Awareness, Policy Development, Capacity Development, Collaborative Platforms, Community Engagement, Information Sharing, Surveillance and Early Warning, and Research.

Refer to the provided definitions of each measure to ensure a correct understanding of its meaning in reference to the analysis framework
Review the project simply by looking for the gate entries and avoid jumping to quick conclusions regarding the adoption of the One Health approach

The measures proposed in the analysis framework are commonly found in biodiversity and conservation projects. The challenge here is to leverage them to allow the integration of the One Health approach in the project. The activity or component can be re-designed and re-planned working across sectors and adding the perspectives of different disciplines and actors. The transformed and integrated measure will increase its value and lead to bigger impacts at the biodiversity-health nexus.

IDENTIFY GATE ENTRIES

Gate entries are thematic areas in which the project conducts activities or actions that have the potential to link into a OH approach. They represent real opportunities to integrate and transform project goals and One Health goals into a common goal. At the biodiversity-health nexus, the framework identifies five main key gate entries: Emerging Infectious Diseases and Zoonoses, Agriculture Production and Food Safety, Climate Change and Risk Reduction, Wildlife Trade and Consumption, and Biodiversity Conservation (including Nature-Based Solutions, Protected Areas, and Wildlife Management).

Refer to the provided definitions of gate entries to ensure a correct understanding of their meaning in reference to the analysis framework

There may be more than one gate entry to the biodiversity-health nexus in the same project. However, it is recommended to focus only on one gate entry to initiate the integration of the OH approach. The process requires efforts and resources to establish new partnerships, co-design new project components, and put in place measures and infrastructures to allow the communication, collaboration, coordination and capacity building across sectors and disciplines. A narrow focus can ease the process and increase the rate of success. Evidence generated in small-scale initiatives can eventually support their replication at a wider scale and inform the development of policies on the operationalisation of One Health in biodiversity-related projects.

QUICK SCAN OF THE PROJECT

The first step of the analysis is to assess if the project is applying one or more OH principles within its scope of work. Seven OH principles, adapted from the literature, are used in the framework (i.e., multisectoral, transdisciplinary, participation, prevention, decentralisation, evidence-based, multi-scalar). Not all principles in the framework have equal value, with the multisectoral principle considered an essential component in the proposed tool. The reason for this is that the basis of One Health is the collaboration among different sectors. The framework allows multisectoral collaborations at any level, for example where an MoU has been signed between ministries, or at community level through the joint effort of village health workers, animal health volunteers and rangers.

Refer to the provided definitions of each principle to ensure a correct understanding of its meaning in reference to the analysis framework
Review the project simply by looking for the mere application of principles and avoid jumping to quick conclusions regarding the adoption of the One Health approach

A quick scan of the project gives insight into the project’s current state. If the project already applies one or more OH principles, there are immediate opportunities to design and plan a One Health component within its scope of work. However, failure to apply even a single principle does not prevent the One Health approach to be implemented, nor does it imply that the framework analysis has to stop. The quick scan of the project will help to clarify what principles need to be explored and included to successfully implement a One Health approach.

FORM A REVIEW TEAM

Once formed, a review team will lead the analysis of the project and the potential integration of the One Health approach. It is key to initiate a discussion across sectors, identify opportunities of collaboration among stakeholders, and enable the co-design of One Health components that align with and push the project goals towards a holistic approach to the biodiversity-health nexus. The review team is multidisciplinary and should be made up of all the project owners, including institutional and development partners.

Multidisciplinary composition of the review team, including experts from different sectors (e.g., conservation, animal health, human health, education, social science)
Transdisciplinary composition of the review team, including experts from different levels of intervention and with different roles (e.g., researchers, policymakers, service providers, community members)

External assessors can greatly contribute and amplify the outcomes of the project analysis at the biodiversity-health nexus. They can guide the project team through the analysis process providing a fresh and independent perspective to the project analysis. External assessors should have some sort of experience in multisectoral collaborations and One Health to guide the review team in the project analysis and identification of opportunities to integrate a more holistic approach.

ALIGNMENT OF FUND-FOR-EMPLOYMENT MECHANISM

San Juan del Abiseo Community

Richard Bazán

After the socialization and validation of the plan, the following steps are taken:

Execution of the Plan:
- Meetings to prepare the budget for each work (with quotations). These included the formation of work teams, preparation and signing of lists of workers, letters of commitment (with agreement on a fixed payment) and schedules within the project's timeframe.
FundManagement Process: The fund was distributed to the participating communities in the 2 PAs, covering the following expenditure categories:
- Purchase of community materials. Using the "Affidavit" tool for the economic payment received by the community members providing these materials.
- Purchase of construction materials (not available in the community). For this purpose, the payment vouchers were considered as means of verification, together with a Materials Delivery Record.
- Payment of local labor: a distinctive element of this mechanism that made it possible to recognize the time and effort of each inhabitant in the construction that their own community identified in their plan. To achieve this, the following tools were designed:
  - Letters of commitment, with the workday of each settler.
  - Work follow-up card, with the control of the time worked by each inhabitant.

Affidavit of receipt of payment.

The limited access to other sources of local income (labor vulnerability) allowed the involvement of people around the identified works. In addition, the openness of the beneficiary communities was key to the sustained development of each project.

In some communities, the participation of their local and community authorities was key, giving legitimacy to the works. It should be noted that during this process, neither children nor adolescents (members of the participating families) were involved in the work.

The works developed thanks to the Fund-for-Employment mechanism had to be in line with a tourism product vision; that is, in addition to benefiting the community (in terms of usability), they had to fit in with the tourism experience proposals developed for each community. The articulating and permanent monitoring role of the Field Officers ensured that the works were carried out within the estimated deadlines, under the principles of transparency, flexibility and assertive communication.

Within each community, a "Master Builder" was chosen to guide the quality of the work performed; in addition, the project provided information and reference models for the implementation of the works.

The transfer of materials was a major challenge, due to the abrupt weather changes suffered by both PAs, as a result of global warming and the instability of rainfall. Prevention and permanent communication were the keys to overcoming this obstacle.