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. 

The trail centre project was built on cross-sectorial cooperation. The five trail centres that are being built have all been developed and built in close collaboration with stakeholders across different sectors. These included the local municipalities where the centres would be built, the local sports associations who would be using the sites, local citizens and would-be users, as well as other interested parties. 

The participatory approach included holding 4 to 5 workshops with stakeholders to understand user needs, ideas, etc. This both enabled and ensured dialogue between the architects involved in the planning and design processes of the trail centres and the users/interested parties. Dialogue with architects also ensured that the buildings’ aesthetics, as well as functions, met stakeholders’ wishes.

The activities provided, or facilitated, by the trail centres were developed in collaboration with the local actors and associations. A participatory approach to planning also gives the users and local community a greater sense of ownership and helps ensure a sense of community between actors and across their respective sports.

Additionally, the development of the minimum criteria for determining the location and functions of the trail centres arose through cross-sectorial collaboration between project members.

To ensure the success of trail centres, the project members developed a number of minimum criteria for the location and design of the trail centres. Criteria was also established regarding the minimum service functions that the trail centres need to accommodate as well as the information that centres need to present. 

Minimum criteria:

• located at the centre of a varied range of trails, routes, and tracks that are preferably marked
• situated in an interesting park area, terrain, landscape or natural area
• information about e.g. the routes’ terrain, length, degree of difficulty, changes in altitude
• parking spaces
• a common room that all sports associations can use
• a covered area for e.g. gatherings, warm-up stretches, abdominal exercises
• a good range of relevant service functions

Each of the centres that have been, or are being, developed adhere to these minimum criteria. They are all located in or near natural environments that provide access to different outdoor sporting activities. Core service functions are integral to the architectural designs of each centre. 

The ROGS Support Team supported a diverse WIO ROGS Task Force, involving state and non-state representatives from various sectors and organisations. This inclusive forum facilitated stakeholder dialogue and collaboration, with members providing inputs directly to the ROGS and expanding regional contributions by inviting stakeholders from their networks. The Task Force, along with key stakeholders, contributed strategic and technical insights to the ROGS through Technical Dialogues and regional events.

The Collective Leadership Institute (CLI) supported the Task Force through in-person workshops and online sessions  to enhance collective leadership and collaboration. An experienced ocean governance advisor, Mr. Kieran Kelleher, played a key role in formulating strategy questions and compiling ROGS content.

The inclusive and participatory approach aimed to foster ownership, improving the quality, feasibility and credibility of the ROGS. If adopted at the next Nairobi Convention Conference of Parties, this ownership is expected to boost the strategy's implementation.

To develop a region-wide Information Management Strategy considering voices from across the region and different sectors, a participatory and representative Multi-Stakeholder Working Group (MSWG) of 24 persons composed of Nairobi Convention Contracting Parties and relevant stakeholders (incl. NGOs, universities, research institutions) in the region was established. The members of the MSWG have taken responsibility for designing and driving the IMS process within their organisations and with the broader stakeholder system, incl. organising and convening thematic stakeholder consultations.

The collective approach to developing the strategy values multi-stakeholder dialogue as key for co-developing a strategy informed by diverse voices and owned by a broad and representative set of stakeholders. Strategic partnerships to support the co-development of the Western Indian Ocean IMS are with the Collective Leadership Institute (CLI) and the Leibniz Centre for Tropical Marine Research (ZMT). With workshops and webinars, CLI helped build multi-stakeholder dialogue and collaboration capacity among members of the MSWG to enhance the quality, viability, and ownership of the IMS. ZMT supported the IMS development process with technical expertise and experience in drafting the IMS document.

A mandate from the Parties to the Nairobi Convention, adopted at the 10th Conference of Parties in 2021, forms the basis for co-designing an Information Management Strategy for the Western Indian Ocean. It was emphasised that the development should happen in a co-development process, recognising the fundamental role of the Nairobi Convention national focal points, involving national data centres and amplifying the role of national experts to a sustainable regional Information Management Strategy development and implementation in the long term.

The baseline refers to the projection of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions that would occur in a specific project area if no interventions or changes to current practices are implemented. This serves as a point of comparison to assess the effectiveness of the carbon project in reducing emissions.

Long-term sequestration refers to the practice of capturing, securing, and storing  greenhouse gas (GHG) or other forms of carbon from the atmosphere for an extended period of time, ideally indefinitely.

The goal of long-term sequestration is to mitigate the effects of climate change by reducing the levels of CO2 and other greenhouse gases in the atmosphere.

Double counting in carbon projects refers to a situation where a carbon credit is claimed by more than one entity, without producing any additional carbon benefit. In simple terms, it occurs when two parties claim the same carbon removal or emission reduction benefits. Double counting undermines the integrity of carbon offset programs and the fight against climate change as it distorts the actual emissions reductions or removals achieved. It essentially dilutes the value and effectiveness of carbon credits.