Planning phase | PANORAMA

An economically viable Nature-based Solution

A cost effectiveness assessment of the planned intervention and an options appraisal was undertaken during the planning phase. The proposed options were assessed on their costs and benefits, technical viability and environmental outcomes. This allowed for comparison of alternatives and selection of the solution that would provide the greatest environmental, social and economic benefits. Economic benefits derived from the Nature-based Solution, include around GBP 91.7 in economic benefits (including GBP 13.5 million in environmental benefits). The coastal realignment contributed to the protection of more than 300 residential and commercial properties as well as infrastructure. An estimated 22,000 people visit the area annually supporting the local economy.

The availability of baseline data, time for thorough planning and gaining the support from the local community affected by the intervention for the chosen option were all essential. Local community support was particularly critical to ensure acceptance of the proposed solution as well as to ensure its long-term success.

Understanding the options available to make an informed and evidence-based decision on the most viable option was a key success factor. While not considered at the start of the intervention, local businesses turned out to benefit substantially from the increased attractiveness of the area for recreational and touristic purposes. Thus, highlighting the socio-economic benefits for the local community can further generate support for a Nature-based Solution project.

Effectively addressing societal challenges

In 2009, a vision exercise that involved local communities, government representatives and statutory organisations highlighted disaster risk reduction, especially flooding, as a major challenge. Coastal flood events have been increasing in frequency in the area and caused significant damage to public and private property. The vision exercise enabled discussions around two key questions: (1) Imagining that it is 2019, what is it about the recreational aspects and management of the site that you are proudest of?, and (2) What were the big dilemmas that you had to think about? The results of this exercise and the subsequent inclusive and participatory processes, informed design decisions and the exploration of multiple benefits. Environmental assessment data of flood events, flood risk mapping and modelling confirmed flooding as the main societal challenge. Impacts of climate change were found to be an exacerbating factor. The mapping and modelling was done in line with Government best practice and enabled assessment of the flood risk to nearby communities.

The consultation and participation of beneficiaries and affected individuals was a key ingredient for understanding the drivers and possible responses to the societal challenge that are most appropriate in the given context.

Inclusive governance and collaboration with a wide range of stakeholders ensured effective assessment of societal challenges and priorities in the given context, increased understanding and acceptability of the proposed solution and enabled effective planning, implementation and maintenance/management of the Nature-based Solution intervention, with a possibility for creative problem-solving. Key lessons from the Medmerry experience relate to the need for flexibility of the approach when engaging with stakeholders, the need for active, inclusive and participatory processes at all stages of the intervention and awareness raising of the most important issues as well as clear communication of objectives.

Planning phase

Local

Subnational

Collaborative Partnerships

Workshop participants

CPSG Australasia

The process of responding to the mass mortality event, from the initial discovery of turtle carcasses through to eventual reintroduction of captive bred juveniles to the wild, was done through collaboration between government authorities, researchers, in situ and ex situ conservation managers, and local people who were personally invested in the turtles’ wellbeing. The communities living around the Bellinger River derive pride from the species endemic to their corner of the world, and their concern and participation as citizen scientists played a large role in raising awareness and ensuring resources were directed to the turtles. The government authorities were the central facilitators of the response, seeking out expertise across many sectors to ensure a comprehensive analysis was done.

The CPSG principle of neutral facilitation creates a collaborative and open-minded space to address conservation challenges. While the stakeholders involved in the response and workshop were from different sectors with their own motivations, the unifying end goal of developing a conservation plan that address all the risks the Bellinger River Snapping Turtle was facing was able to bridge those differences.

Conservation plans are often limited by the information on which they are based. By engaging with a larger scope of stakeholders, diverse and previously unconsidered perspectives can be captured in the planning process. This ensures all risks are considered, generating a more comprehensive and well-rounded management plan and a comprehensive foundation for long-term survival in the wild.

Documentation and dissemination of results

Local

One Plan Approach

Developed by IUCN CPSG, the One Plan Approach (OPA) is a method of species management that develops a conservation plan with input from all stakeholders involved with both in situ and ex situ populations of the species. This brings together conservation managers: field biologists, researchers and wildlife managers who monitor wild populations, and zoo and aquarium personnel who manage various ex situ populations. Experts, researchers, decision-makers, and stakeholder representatives were brought together for a workshop, hosted by neutral CPSG facilitators, to carry out a species status review, a disease risk analysis, and develop a conservation management plan.

The One Plan Approach (OPA) is a coordinated conservation planning process that seeks consensus decisions by multiple stakeholders in the best interests of the threatened species. The most relevant information regarding the species and disease risks was gathered and shared prior to the workshop. By establishing a mutually respectful, collaborative environment CPSG facilitators enabled workshop participants to work effectively to develop integrated short- and long-term plans for the species.

The conservation planning principles and steps developed by the CPSG over 40 years guided a successful One Plan Approach to conservation of the Bellinger River Snapping Turtle following the 2015 mass mortality event. By approaching the challenge through a systems-based One Health lens, (encompassing interactions between animal, human, and environmental health), a plan that captured and developed mitigating strategies for the broad range of threats facing the turtles was developed. The inclusion of diverse and relevant stakeholders from the beginning of the process ensured the plan was based on the most current knowledge and widely accepted and implemented.

Documentation and dissemination of results

Local

CPSG Planning Principles

CPSG One Plan Approach

Technology for Wildlife Surveillance Data Collection, Sharing and Management

Ranger using SMART cell-phone based technology

WCS

SMART for Health reporting and response cycle

WCS

WildHealthTech: WildHealthNet develops and employs innovative, appropriate, and user-friendly technologies for surveillance. With proven, globally distributed, open-source software (e.g., SMART for Health) and hardware like handheld cell phone devices for data collection and diagnostics, WildHealthNet supports effective and timely communication of data for improved reporting of wildlife health and rapid response.

- Cell-phone network accessibility and cell phone provision

- Human personnel to monitor network and data at the central level

- Access to a server

- Diagnostic capacity for safely testing wildlife samples for pathogens of concern (Point-of-care for some pathogens; in-country laboratories; regional laboratory networks, and agreements to support rapid and biosecure export, testing, and data sharing)

- Technical and analytical support

- Financing to enable technical support and capacity development for data platforms and data analysis

- Early detection of wildlife morbidity and mortality events facilitates a timely and appropriate response to disease threats; the inability to detect and identify the causes of mortality events is a major limitation in the protection of wildlife, livestock, and public health.

- Employing an already proven open-source and cell-phone-based technology through the Spatial Monitoring and Reporting Tool (SMART) platform used by rangers in close to 1,000 biodiverse sites across the world, leverages an unprecedented network of globally distributed boots-on-the-ground and eyes-in-the-field that can act as sentinels for unusual events in remote areas.

SMART for Wildlife Health Surveillance

Supporting Skills Development for Surveillance and Monitoring of Wildlife Disease

Ranger training in Cambodia

WCS

WildHealthSkills: WildHealthNet conducts capacity bridging and building with in-person and virtual trainings for all actors in the network, from field-based rangers to laboratory techs to national coordinators. The goal is to develop and share science-based protocols and best practices, and implement strong curricula so that each actor is empowered to fully participate.

- Long term financial support for technical expertise and input

- Government and local stakeholder awareness of the links between wildlife health and human health and well-being

- Government and local stakeholder interest and engagement in capacity development for wildlife surveillance and wildlife health monitoring

- Adequate human personnel without too much turnover, in order to maintain network

A foundational understanding of the links between wildlife/ environmental health and human and domestic animal health and well-being ensures better interest and buy-in for One Health competency training such as wildlife surveillance. Stakeholder-specific trainings (e.g. Event detection and reporting for forest rangers; Necropsy and pathology for laboratory staff/ veterinarians; Sample collection and handling for rangers & confiscation teams; Technology for network coordinator and rangers), multi-lingual training packages, with core competencies and evaluation tools enable broader reach and buy-in for capacity building and maintenance and continued expansion of the surveillance network national, regionally and globally.

Documentation and dissemination of results

Multi-sectoral network building for monitoring wildlife diseases for One Health

Co-development meetings for wildlife health national strategy in Lao PDR

WCS

- WildHealthBuild: Building partnerships and breaking down silos across the human health, animal health, and environment/ wildlife sectors is an essential first step in planning and implementing wildlife surveillance for One Health intelligence, improving coordinated result sharing and response and the likelihood that networks and sustainable and used to guide science-based policy and disease control mechanisms going forward.

- Long-term funding from international donors

- Support and buy-in from national government actors at local, provincial, and national levels

- Support and buy-in from central government across human health, animal health, and wildlife/ environmental sectors

Convening regular multi-sectoral meetings for open discourse on the challenges and opportunities to monitoring and management of disease at the wildlife-human-livestock interface, and improving communications and trust between and across sectors, is critical in the joint development of functional, long-term wildlife surveillance networks for One Health intelligence, and adoption of associated policies. This takes considerable time and a sustained effort, often, unfortunately, outside of the normal funding cycles of donor agencies.

Documentation and dissemination of results

4 Interpretation of the assessment results

Automatically the results are generated by the IMET and are easily interpreted. IMET contains several data visualization tools, based on an embedded statistical analyses. As soon as the assessment is completed, scores and bar-charts are displayed. Aspects which need attention are coloured along a colour and percentage scale. This makes it very simple ans easy to allocate resources to where they are most needed.

Clear identification of priorities to focus future management, funding and resources.

Praise of the current management of resources. Even though the PAs have only around 16% of the resources i.e. personnel, materials and financing that is estimated to be required, they are achieving almost 50% in terms of outputs.

In January 2022 the national director of the environment of Cabo Verde attended an online meeting to discuss our project and findings.

IMET highlighted the problems faced by the PA management team – e.g. the lack of employees. There are just three people employed to manage 14 protected areas which is beyond human capacity and really emphasised need to employ more people. 93% of the total operating budget for RNT was provided by the NGOs, and only 5.6% was provided by the government. Understanding these input aspects allows the planning of a sustainable approach to management through the implementation of eco-tourism which could provide a stable and constant income in the long-term.

We realised that there are no baseline data for the two PAs and so we do not know if pressures such as tourism or climate change are having a negative impact on the PAs as there is nothing to compare future values to. In order for the PAs to be sustainably managed, an understanding of the resources, features and ecosystems present is needed to see if any changes are occurring.

The process also highlighted the importance of the roles of the NGOs and their contribution in terms of financial, personnel and material resources.

Planning phase

Inception phase

Documentation and dissemination of results

Local

3 Identifying sources of data

During the online and in person trainings a google drive was made where participants could upload various laws, policies and documents to aid the process. This made everything accessible to everyone and so all stakeholders could learn as little or as much as they wanted. Bertille showed everyone where to find the management plans and regulations for the protected areas. The responsibility to find specific data to present to the group was divided up and assigned to each participant.

All participants were taught how to find information including laws and objectives and where they originate. E.g. Aichi targets.
All participants shared their knowledge with each other, it was a huge capacity building exercise.

When originally we believed that some data did not exist, during the process and by gathering incdividuals we were able to fill a lot of the knowledge gaps.
All participants would be able to repeat the process without the guidance of a trainer in the future. Bertille provided the tools and guidance to allow all participants to gain the knowledge and decision-making abilities to replicate this process in the future. In theory this would allow any one of the participants to conduct the analysis on the same reserves in the future or on one of the other 47 PAs present within Cabo Verde. The skills and knowledge has been transferred to all 18 participants through this evaluation process.

Planning phase

Inception phase

Local

2 Training and coaching

In preparation of the evaluation, all participants were invited to and took part in two online meetings with Bertille Mayen, an IMET expert (also called an IMET coach), who taught everyone what is IMET and what the project hoped to achieve. During these online meetings she requested that all documentation relating to the PAs would be made readily available to her and to the other participants prior to the workshop.

A total of 18 people participated in the IMET training workshop. This included many different organisations and brought together people from various backgrounds with different interests.

All participants, downloaded the IMET software and experimented with using it to become familiar with the program before the in person workshop. Additional guidance and online meetings were offered by Bertille for anyone who had technical difficulties. Participants included local scientists, local town council members, local police, Masters student, members from local and international NGOs, PA manager, community member, tourism development technician and two translators.

All participants were given the opportunity to learn new skills and gain new knowledge.

It allowed community members to express their fears and their hopes in a safe and controlled environment and offer them a chance to provide solutions.

An exchange of knowledge and a deeper understanding of the issues and how to address them.

Creation of a channel of communication between members the local community and the Director of Environment in the capital.

The importance of sharing information and data and making it accessible to all interested parties.
It is critical to allow contrasting opinions and visions to be heard and use them to create ideas for change.
All participants could learn that each stakeholder had something valuable to offer to the process.

Planning phase

Local