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. 

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.

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.

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.    

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.

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).

A situation analysis provides background information upon which community capacity building efforts are based. First, we conduct a rapid SWOT analysis of a Community Fishery (CFi) and its associated community. The SWOT analysis compiles basic information about each community and examines CFi structure and function. The strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats faced by each community are addressed in a group discussion among the implementation team and a small number of community representatives. The Climate Vulnerability Analysis builds a picture of each community’s unique climate change challenges, particularly those associated with their Community Fish Conservation Areas. 
We use the SWOT analysis to determine if a community is suitable for further engagement and if so, we conduct a detailed situation analysis which delves deeper into a CFi’s characteristics and challenges. This allows us to decide whether we partner with a community, and if so, the results help us develop a suitable approach to working with them. The situation analysis is also used to determine women’s involvement in community fisheries – we then build on this information to increase their participation as we implement further building blocks. The Climate Vulnerability Analysis is the fire step in our extensive partnership with a community.

As Community Fisheries operate under a government mandate engaging the local authorities - especially the Fisheries Administration Cantonment and local Commune officials - is critical to the success of any engagement with a CFi. Local authorities need to understand, and support, Conservation International’s engagement with a CFi. First, we meet with the Fisheries Administration at national and local levels, presenting our programme, and identifying potentially suitable CFi’s. These meetings build relationships with senior government officials and obtain information such as local contacts within potential CFi’s. Having established high level support we contact local authorities such as the commune and in briefing them of our approach gain an appreciation of each CFi’s current status, challenges and opportunities.

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.

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.