Continuity in cooperation
  • Our transnational cooperation was largely based on personal contacts and larger efforts were dependent on external funding. The work for the preparation of the joint management plan has allowed us to structure the transnational cooperation and formalize it. All these measures will contribute to a more sustainable and long-term cooperation that isn´t so dependent on personal connections. 
  • Now we have a better explanation of the tasks and organization of the transnational cooperation group, and we also included all municipalities in the area in the group.  
  • An expert panel will help in management questions considering protection of World Heritage values and give valuable input to both site managers and the transnational cooperation group.
  • Personnel from different levels in the management authorities in both countries will meet regularly, and this is written into the management plan.   

The transnational cooperation group agreed to meet more frequently while working on the management plan. We had many discussions and workshops about the mission and constitution of the group, and we have also discussed the transnational management with organizations not directly involved in it. Transnational cooperation has to be important for the involved organizations and there has to be a will to invest in it. 

  • This kind of work takes time. By building cooperation over time, it is possible to move on from learning from each other to solving challenges together. 
  • Cooperation can be very vulnerable if it is based on specific persons and personal connections, for example when persons in our cooperation group have changed and a new representative from the same organization did not have the chance to learn about the work from their predecessors. That´s why it is important to form routines for transferring knowledge within the involved organizations. 
  • Another challenge is to find the right level of representation, to get persons involved who have both knowledge and right to make decisions. When involving many different organizations, it isn´t always possible to reach consensus in different matters, but the strength of the cooperation is in the discussions and in asking questions.
  • Another part of the success is that all work with the management plan (except the CVI project) was done as a part of our regular work. All things learned stays in the organizations when no short-time project staff have been participating. It took a long time, but it was worth it.
Haenggung Village Cooperative Association

The local residents who were previously excluded from the various cultural tourism activities and festivals centering on the World Heritage property started to independently host village activities and built up their capacities for delivering and managing events. 

The initial residents group started to participate in the operations of the Suwon Heritage Night Walks in 2017 as traffic control staff. As the number of festivals that were hosted to celebrate Suwon Hwaseong as World Heritage increased, such as the Hwaseong by Night, World Heritage Festival, and Media Art Shows, the number of jobs available for the residents also increased. 

The Haenggung Village Cooperative Association was established on 31 May 2021 and it consists of 46 members. The main line of work is creating content and activities for visitors. 
The association is composed of 4 sub-groups each named “jigi”, which in the Korean language means friends: 

  • Haenggungjigi, who focuses on providing event support, information, sanitation and the operation of activities; 
  • Donghaengjigi, a group that creates the content and stories of the village tours; 
  • Surajigi that promotes and shares research and education on food; 
  • Cheongnyeonjigi, the group that monitors and conducts evaluations of activities. 

It was key to create jobs that could best optimize the capacities of the local residents. The division of work between members of Haenggungjigi, Donghaengjigi, Surajigi and Cheongnyeonjigi was fundamental to organize the work. 

Lastly, all residents participating in these activities had to complete a mandatory training.

Through the cooperative association that based itself on the experience of creating village activities, diverse jobs that could be directly linked to the capacities of the local residents were set up. These included positions such as event operation staff, information officers, cooks, and conducting baseline research. This made a big transition as the residents who were previously neither part of nor benefitting from the festivals could now directly be involved and be paid for their contributions. 

The mandatory training for the residents who wanted to participate increased the overall capacities of the local residents and boosted their understanding of World Heritage, local values and  the importance of local participation. 

Haenggung Village Cooperative Association

The local residents who were previously excluded from the various cultural tourism activities and festivals centering on the World Heritage property started to independently host village activities and built up their capacities for delivering and managing events. 

The initial residents group started to participate in the operations of the Suwon Heritage Night Walks in 2017 as traffic control staff. As the number of festivals that were hosted to celebrate Suwon Hwaseong as World Heritage increased, such as the Hwaseong by Night, World Heritage Festival, and Media Art Shows, the number of jobs available for the residents also increased. 

The Haenggung Village Cooperative Association was established on 31 May 2021 and it consists of 46 members. The main line of work is creating content and activities for visitors. 
The association is composed of 4 sub-groups each named “jigi”, which in the Korean language means friends: 

  • Haenggungjigi, who focuses on providing event support, information, sanitation and the operation of activities; 
  • Donghaengjigi, a group that creates the content and stories of the village tours; 
  • Surajigi that promotes and shares research and education on food; 
  • Cheongnyeonjigi, the group that monitors and conducts evaluations of activities. 

It was key to create jobs that could best optimize the capacities of the local residents. The division of work between members of Haenggungjigi, Donghaengjigi, Surajigi and Cheongnyeonjigi was fundamental to organize the work. 

Lastly, all residents participating in these activities had to complete a mandatory training.

Through the cooperative association that based itself on the experience of creating village activities, diverse jobs that could be directly linked to the capacities of the local residents were set up. These included positions such as event operation staff, information officers, cooks, and conducting baseline research. This made a big transition as the residents who were previously neither part of nor benefitting from the festivals could now directly be involved and be paid for their contributions. 

The mandatory training for the residents who wanted to participate increased the overall capacities of the local residents and boosted their understanding of World Heritage, local values and  the importance of local participation. 

Review

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.

Building Block 1 - Community and Government Engagement needs to be completed before undertaking the review process. It is important to gain as wide a range of perspectives on wildfire as possible when reviewing each community. All communities will have different drivers, responses, and attitudes to wildfire. Understanding why fires occur, particularly if they are lit to benefit some people, is crucial in managing wildfire’s damaging impacts.

We identified seven causes of wildfire on the Tonle Sap: 

  1. wildlife hunting (turtles and honey collection); 
  2. clearing vegetation for fishing gear; 
  3. clearing vegetation to facilitate access;
  4. clearing land for crops (rice and vegetables); 
  5. clearing and managing land for grazing; 
  6. cooking fires; and
  7. cigarettes.

All were caused by people and the first six were deliberate. Hot and dry weather is a significant driver of wildfire, wind is a major factor in fire spreading. And 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.

Data collection, reflexion, and adaptation for sustainability with relevant partners

The data collection and ongoing monitoring of the project's achievements were carried out by a dedicated Monitoring, Evaluation, and Learning (MEL) team. This team, external to MUVA, conducted in-depth interviews, focus group discussions, and periodic analysis of each action plan at baseline, midline, and final stages. This systematic approach allowed for comprehensive data collection, culminating in a reflection meeting at the end of the initiative. Facilitated by a senior facilitator, results were presented to the MUVA, Aquapesca, and Pro Azul teams. The meeting provided an opportunity for teams to extract key learnings and formulate a path for scaling and sustaining the initiative.

  • Budget for an external MEL team allocated for the project
  • Aquapesca availability to engage in the MEL data collection process
  • As the project is highly innovative and tailored, some of the success indicators are developed during the definition of action plans. Consequently, the MEL team's involvement in mentoring sessions allowed for the creation of indicators aligned with actions and the periodic monitoring of results. This approach promoted motivation and agility in the execution of plans by observing the progress of the initiative.
Developing the Regional Ocean Governance Strategy through a co-creation process

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.

 

  • Clear process and goal outlined in the process architecture for drafting the ROGS together

  • Participant interest and openness for individual and collective contribution

  • Capacity development and process stewardship prioritized by CLI, emphasizing authentic participation, trust-building, and co-creation

  • Technical dialogues led by the Task Force, engaging sector-specific stakeholders and experts for a shared understanding and optimal policy recommendations

  • Weekly online meetings of the ROGS Support Team, organized by CLI to ensure a high-quality process

  • Need to assign clear roles within the process including someone who drives the process forwards according to set timelines

  • Both process leadership and technical leadership

  • Consideration of financing and resourcing as an integral part of the ROGS

Political will and mandate to develop a Regional Ocean Governance Strategy

Political leaders of the WIO countries have recognised that cooperation among regional organisations and across sectors, including greater engagement of the private sector and civil society, is required to address growing regional challenges such as marine and coastal conservation, marine plastic pollution, climate change, response to disasters like oil spills or cyclones etc.


A series of successive policy processes, including the 2015 call by African Union (AU) for the development of an African Regional Ocean Governance Strategy through the Cairo Declaration of the African Ministerial Conference on the Environment (AMCEN), the 2017 Libreville Declaration of AMCEN, and a baseline study on WIO Ocean Governance, led to the mandate for the development of WIO’s Regional Ocean Governance Strategy at the 2021 Conference of Parties to the Nairobi Convention (NC) (Decision CP.10/5). In response, the Nairobi Convention Secretariat convened a Support Team to help guide a participatory development of the WIO ROGS by working with representatives of the NC Contracting Parties, the AU, the WIO’s Regional Economic Communities (RECs), the Indian Ocean Commission, private sector and civil society actors in a Regional Ocean Governance Strategy Task Force.

  • Having a high-level political mandate is an important success factor for engaging in a multi-stakeholder, participatory process for regional strategy development

  • Selection  of Task Force members by countries, the AU and the RECS, and thus country participation in the creation of the strategy

  • Financial support from regionally endorsed projects and partners

  • Coordinating and covening ability of the NCS

  • Long process leading to the adoption of the decision in 2021 and protracted preparation period due to the wide scope and diversity of sectors and themes

  • Coordination of such a regional and political process requires continuous capacities on all sides and a strong will to participate actively

  • Continuity and a long-term process for developing and implementing strategy needs to exist before the start of the process

  • Ability to frame questions and issues in a form leading to consensus through technical dialogues

  • Effective feedback to the TF on consensus positions

Policy Dialogues or Workshops

A dialogue or workshop with governmental stakeholders to present case studies or solutions that could be incorporated into national policies.

An ongoing collaboration with the national government and close communication about various project updates that are beneficial for policy.

Conducting panel discussions or FGD has been shown to facilitate dialogues between the public and private sectors. Such discussions are important for information accessibility to the private sector, while also influencing policies that are not resistant to project goals.

 

For instance, the carbon market workshop was significant in elaborating the Ministry of Environment and Forestry (MoEF) plan on the Indonesian Carbon Market. Elaborating projects such as the biogas initiative early on is necessary to ensure smooth implementation once the policies are ready.

3. Action planning based on the outcome of the SAGE assessment

Development of an action plan after the SAGE process was very crucial as it ensured that recommendations provided in the SAGE process were addressed in a systematic and targeted manner whereby key stakeholders who participated in the SAGE process were also engaged in the action planning process hence, they drew the roadmap for implementation of those recommendations.

 

In addition, recommendations which came out of the SAGE process informed Honeyguide on areas of priority in designing WMA governance capacity building programs.

 

The overall successful preparation of an action plan after the SAGE process required the following;

  • A clear understanding of the assessment findings and recommendations provided
  • Clear goals and objectives to be achieved
  • Strong leadership and coordination with key stakeholders
  • Adequate resources
  • Willingness and commitment from all key stakeholders.

Overall success of the action planning phase based on the outcome of SAGE process provided an opportunity to learn important lessons related to;

  • Keen selection and active engagement of key stakeholders in the planning process
  • Thorough understanding of the local context
  • Effective prioritization and goal setting by all key stakeholders
  • Inclusiveness of all key stakeholders in adequate resource mobilization

These lessons learned can be used as a good source of information to future development planning and programming organs of the WMA and can help to ensure that development interventions are effective, inclusive, and sustainable over the long term.

Decision-making based on Community Engagement

CHICOP closely collaborates with representatives from neighboring communities, facilitated through regular village meetings and the establishment of an MPA advisory committee. The park actively engages with the local communities to gather their feedback and incorporate it into the planning and decision-making processes for adaptive management planning and implementation. A recurring 10-year management plan provides the bedrock for the Chumbe project (now in its 3rd iteration). Feedback to planning is collected through in-person interviews and meetings, ensuring open and transparent communication channels with the local communities. Moreover, by providing extensive employment opportunities for the local communities (both on the island, and through supporting a range of off-island enterprises that contribute to island operations, such as sustainable agricultural products, organic soap production and the like), Chumbe fosters mutual benefits, sustainable livelihoods, and ensures strong representation of local community considerations in all aspects of management.

  • Collecting opinions through regular meetings with the villagers and engaging in discussion with local authorities, such as the Ministry of Blue Economy and Fisheries and the Department of Forestry, is a key factor for success in ensuring the protection of the island’s biodiversity.
  • The privately managed governance model adopted by the island brought significant advantages in management without generating conflicts of interest among different stakeholders or changes in priorities by the government.

The successful conservation of Chumbe Island would not be possible without the active involvement, engagement, and support of local communities. The direct contribution and willingness to participate are critical factors for success. It is important to foster an open and inclusive environment where different voices can be heard, and mutual understanding can be built. By actively engaging with and listening to the local communities, a strong sense of ownership and collaboration can be fostered, leading to more effective and equitable conservation efforts