Building block 4 – Cooperation between NOCs and local nature conservation organisations as a prerequisite for success

The IOC requires that all Olympic Forest Network projects “be developed and implemented in collaboration with the relevant experts and authorities.” All six projects that are currently part of the Network not only take this requirement into account but establish it as a corner stone of their implementation.

For example, the Papua New Guinea project involves a partnership between the NOC, local communities, the National Fisheries Authority, and the Conservation and Environment Protection Authority. The Slovenian project is partnered with the Slovenian State Forestry Company; the Spanish with the Ministry of the Environment and the Federation of Spanish Municipalities; while the Portuguese project has the technical support of the governmental Institute for Nature and Forest Conservation (ICNF) and the Abramud e Sentido Verde association. 

Requiring partnerships between NOCs and environment experts ensures that projects running under the Olympic Forest Network are as relevant and effective as can be with regards to nature conservation. Partnering with local experts and organisations also ensures that the Network can have meaningful impact not only on the environment, but also on the local communities where projects are run. Moreover, it facilitates local interest in, and ownership of, environmental work. 

  • Criteria set by the IOC requiring NOC-led projects seeking to be a part of the Olympic Forest Network “to be developed and implemented in collaboration with relevant experts and authorities”.
  • Local organisations’ environmental knowledge and expertise.
  • Interest of local environmental organisations in the (communications and engagement) potential of the Olympic Movement.

Providing basic standards and guidelines helped the NOCs find the right partners and (business) solutions locally. Thanks to this local approach, NOCs could be guided by national/local experts to find the best solution in terms of added value for ecosystems and local communities.

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. 
Build a binational Great Lakes protected areas network

There are over 650 coastal and freshwater protected areas representing over 40 agencies in the Great Lakes. Prior to the Great Lakes Protected Areas Network (GLPAN) establishment in 2019 there was no forum or network that supported a direct dialogue or collaboration across protected and conserved areas in the Great Lakes. 

Members of the GLPAN are individuals or representatives from agencies that carry out professional activities related to Great Lakes conservation and/or protected areas management. Members are generally senior positions that can contribute expert knowledge, relevant information, and capacity to achieve GLPAN objectives, including: 

  • Contribute to the conservation and protection of the Great Lakes coast and lake ecosystems through a collaborative network of people and places; 
  • Provide a platform for enhancing communication and knowledge exchange across Great Lakes protected and conserved areas;
  • Build partnerships and support projects of interest to the GLPAN membership; 
  • Raise awareness and appreciation of Great Lakes protected and conserved areas with the public and other domestic and binational conservation initiatives; and, 
  • Serve as a regional hub for the North American Marine Protected Areas Network (NAMPAN). 
  • GLPAN membership has chosen to remain voluntary and unfunded. While there is an organizational structure and purpose, the informal nature supports collegiality and flexibility.    
  • The network is not competing with other protected area networks in the Great Lakes, the members essentially recognized and filled a need.
  • The Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement (including Lake Partnerships) is a platform that GLPAN can engage with and if necessary, use to advance initiatives and interests.
  • The pandemic normalized and equipped people to attend virtual video meetings. 
  • Early in its formation, members collectively worked on a GIS Story Map "Great Lakes, Great Protected Areas". This not on provided an experience and opportunity to collaborate but helped GLPAN to define its identity.
  • Some members feel the informal context creates a more open space for dialogue and sharing without the formalities sometimes associated with representing one's agency in an international forum (there is machinery for that sort of work if need be).
  • Scheduled meetings (quarterly) with invited speakers helps to maintain the interest and drive of GLPAN. 

 

Review - identify fire issues and options for change

Once we have established a Community Wildfire Management Team we review their local wildfire issues and identify options for change using a range of participatory methods. Our aim is to build an understanding of how and why fires start within each community and the positive and negative impacts of fires started for different reasons, and in different areas. We recommend interviewing various people including members of the Community Wildfire Management Team, other village leaders and elders, women, youth, and local authorities.

When we understand the causes and impact of wildfire we then conduct community mapping to spatially determine: 

  • where fires are most likely to be lit and why;
  • potential firebreaks or control lines within the landscape;
  • location of water sources;
  • location of access roads and tracks;
  • priority areas for protection (e.g. high value forest and restoration areas); and
  • the ability of local community members to control fires both through pre-suppression and suppression measures.

These fire maps helped each community implement measures to prevent, detect, and effectively respond to wildfire.

A successful review of wildfire issues requires:

  • The completion of Building Block 1 - Community and Government Engagement before undertaking the review process.
  • Gaining a wide range of perspectives about wildfire within each community, as communities will have different drivers, responses, and attitudes to wildfire.
  • Understanding why wildfires occur, particularly if they are lit to benefit some people, is crucial in managing their damaging impacts.

In reviewing the causes and consequences of wildfire on the Tonle Sap Lake we learnt that:

  • Wildfire is caused by people, and most are deliberately lit.
  • Hot, dry weather is a significant driver of wildfire. And wind is the major factor in spreading fire.
  • In communities without fire suppression equipment rainfall is the main factor in extinguishing fires.
  • We recommend printing and prominently displaying each community’s annual CBFiM plan so that it serves as a constant reminder of wildfire management and planned activities.

 

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. First, we seek advice from local government authorities on which communities have the necessary capacity to take part in CBFiM. We then meet with community leaders to gain their support, before engaging with Women’s Saving’s Groups who can provide financial support. 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.

In engaging communities and Government we have learnt that:

  • As community leaders such as CFi and CPA Committee members tend to be older men we encourage diversifying the Community Wildfire Management Team through engaging women and younger people.
  • Women have an important role to play as they traditionally manage household finances and can remind the fire management group about fire season preparedness.
  • Younger members, whilst often difficult to engage, bring greater energy to the hard physical work of fire suppression.
  • Gaining the early support of local government helps integrate them into the community management plan which can be codeveloped through engagement at both the District and Provincial levels of government.
  • Continuous government support is maintained through frequent meetings of the Fisheries Coordination Team which brings communities and government together to discuss fisheries issues including wildfire.
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).

  • Stakeholder consultation and urban EbA measures selection process were conducted with active participation of relevant stakeholders (public and private) from local to provincial levels, aiming at awareness raising on urban EbA concepts, bringing together stakeholder views and perceptions, ensuring local relevance of the selected measures and involvement of stakeholders in the implementation process. Thus it brings a 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
Involving the private sector

The private sector has a profound role to play in catalyzing and accelerating the transition to an inclusive sustainable blue economy (ISBE).  There has, however, been minimal private sector engagement in ISBE matters. Our Blue Future has developed a private sector engagement strategy, which focuses on effective ways to engage the private sector and the benefits they can gain.  

 

The private sector is driven by opportunities, value creation, financial risk, operational risks, and regulatory risks. Our Blue Future offers the private sector opportunities through Innovation Teams to mobilize resources, a showcase platform, a collective voice for advocacy, an innovation testing ground, matchmaking with other partners, a sense of community, and the chance to build a legacy.

  • Having a clear framework, structures, and forms developed on how to engage the private sector is essential to ensure all partners have equal participation rights.
  • Honest dialogue and building a common understanding between partners help foster collaboration and alignment of goals to avoid the notion that private sector partners have more influence over decisions within the multi-stakeholder initiative.

  •  Building interest and partnerships by highlighting the benefits of collaboration beyond economic benefits is essential.

  • Defining roles and responsibilities of private sector partners helps establish clarity and ensures that each partner contributes their unique expertise and resources to the collaboration.

  • Pre-screening potential partners to ensure productive partnerships, which involves assessing their capabilities, values, and alignment with the objectives of the initiative.

  • Clustering private sector partners into different sectors based on their interests has been useful, such as through OBF’s Innovation Teams. This clustering approach enables focused collaboration within specific industries or areas, fostering synergies and maximizing impact.

Create awareness and engage the Aquapesca staff in establishing a more gender-inclusive environment

A rapid assessment enabled us to intricately outline the methodological workflow for our collaboration with the company Aquapesca. This workflow began with the formation of the Change Makers Group, working in close tandem with the MUVA team to grasp the methodologies necessary for ensuring the sustainability of our approach within the organization. The Change Makers Group was entrusted with the responsibility of spearheading processes within the organization, ultimately becoming champions of inclusion and gender equality, working in conjunction with colleagues and leadership. Following the group's inception, leadership training was conducted to create awareness and generate initial ideas regarding the areas of focus for action plans with new practices and policies for the company. Subsequently, the Change Makers Group was trained, building capacity for them to facilitate the approval of these plans and mobilize working groups dedicated to each area of work. 

  • Engagement of the CEO and other executive leadership members
  • Motivation of young people selected to participate in the Change Makers Groups and to lead the process as part of their skills development in career progression
  • The time of staff engagement should be well forecasted at the beginning of the project to guarantee availability and to not overburden them.
  • Communicate the needs of the company leadership about the team’s availability and resources.