National | PANORAMA

Identifying the problem: Conducting economic instead of financial analysis

Chapada dos Veadeiros National Park

Thiago Beraldo

Agencies that manage national parks are accustomed to producing financial reports which deal with direct income and costs (including gate fees, concessions, resource royalties, etc.). However, this perspective fails to consider the wider economic effects of protected areas (PA), including their monetary value and the employment they generate for regional economies, which often amounts to many times the direct costs of running the park.

Brazil manages a system of 334 federal PAs in a total of 170 million hectares. Despite the enormous size of the PAs system along with its important biodiversity, the associated budget has not been fully substantiated in Brazil. Additionally, it was still ambiguous with respect to the impact and value added of tourism via visitors’ spending due to lack of empirical research. Therefore, the purpose was to estimate the economic impacts of tourism in the federal system of PAs of Brazil.

Economic impact analysis describes the interrelationships between economic sectors. For example, visitors spend money in PAs and gateway communities, and their expenditures create and support local economic activity.

Economic Analysis demonstrates the contribution of PAs to national and local economies through visitor spending on accommodation, transport, goods and services during their visit, indirect supply-chain spending, economic activity induced by the presence of the park, and park operations themselves.

PAs provide value in many forms, including ecosystem services, biodiversity conservation, human enjoyment, and conventional activity. This tool measures the contribution of parks to national and local economies through visitor spending on accommodation, transport, goods and services during their visit, indirect supply-chain spending, economic activity induced by the presence of the park, and park operations themselves.

Narrow financial analyses significantly under-value parks in the eyes of decision-makers, businesses, the media and the general public, compared to the larger economy stimulated by tourism expenditure.

To estimate the full value of parks and to raise greater public support, several countries have begun conducting economic analyses of wider park-related spending. These include for example the USA, , Canada, Australia,, Finland, Namibia, South Africa, and the study case here, Brazil.

Planning phase

National

Apoyo de instituciones y organizaciones de base con presencia en el territorio

La coordinación del proyecto ha venido conformando una alianza con gobiernos locales, centros de investigación y organizaciones de base con presencia específica en cada una de las cuencas del proyecto para asegurar una comunicación directa con los productores y otros actores del territorio. Gracias a la red de ONGs locales, se ha producido un mayor impacto en los talleres de presentación de información y resultados a los productores y a hacer una traducción eficaz de los diagnósticos a la realidad en campo. Ejemplos de este apoyo en el territorio incluyen: i) el manejo de intereses diferentes y de potenciales conflictos entre actores en el PN Cofre de Perote; ii) creación de sinergias por parte de las instituciones a nivel de gobierno, a través de sus programas de asistencia social, de subsidios, dirigidos a ciertos lugares que coinciden con el proyecto; iii) establecimiento de líneas de trabajo coordinadas desde nivel gobierno, desde ANP hasta las OSC; iv) coalición entre OSC podían tener más impacto en el territorio, reducir costos; aprovechar las diferentes capacidades de los diferentes actores y potenciar el impacto de las acciones.

Una red de ONGs suficientemente experimentadas para poder ofrecer capacitación práctica a los productores;
Usar los niveles existentes de organización de las comunidades y productores, y las autoridades locales sobre los cuales construir las iniciativas, p. ej. asambleas ejidales, cooperativas pesqueras, unidades rurales de producción, etc.
Fortalecer un sentido compartido de identidad y pertenencia entre productores, comunidades y autoridades locales;

Ha sido clave contar con una red de organizaciones de la sociedad civil que colaboran en el proyecto y desarrollan buenas practicas en el territorio, y han ayudado en tener un mayor impacto en los talleres en donde se ha presentado la información a los productores.
Es esencial tener un buen manejo y coordinación de la red de ONGs para el desarrollo de capacidades de los diferentes actores en el territorio;
Cada cuenca es diferente, por ello, contar con OSC y ONG como “socios” del proyecto, ha permitido tener una representación directa en los territorios y poder adaptar mejor los talleres y comunidades de aprendizaje de acuerdo a las caracteristicas de cada comunidad o región;

Gobernanza y arreglos inter-instituciones a diferentes niveles

Para la creación y desarrollo de los PAMIC, diversas instancias de gobierno pertenecientes al sector ambiental unieron esfuerzos y diseñaron un proyecto muy vanguardista e innovador que surge de la sincronía de tres instituciones de gobierno federal y de un fondo privado. El INECC coordina la construcción de los planes (PAMIC); la CONANP consolida la gestión y operación en ANPs, y la CONAFOR implementa el esquema de Pago por Servicios Ambientales (PSA) del fondo de biodiversidad. Por su parte, el FMCN contribuye con su experiencia en el manejo de esquemas de financiamiento; mediante dichos arreglos interinstitucionales, se formaron dos fondos más para detonar efectos. Además, el diseño de gobernanza y coordinación interinstitucional incluye un Comité Técnico del Proyecto que supervisa y dirige la operación del C6; una Unidad Coordinadora del Proyecto y dos Unidades Regionales de Proyecto, las cuales tienen la responsabilidad de la coordinación diaria en temas técnicos y logísticos. Este diseño de coordinación interinstitucional es parte esencial para generar mayores alcances en el ordenamiento del territorio buscando impactos colectivos.

Trabajo muy coordinado entre las instituciones con una visión clara sobre el uso de los instrumentos de financiamiento y gestión;
Interés de las instituciones por participar y contribuir con su experiencia y el apoyo que ellas brindan a través de sus programas de asistencia social, de subsidios, dirigidos a ciertos lugares;
Recursos financieros e institucionales suficientes.

Los esfuerzos de coordinación interinstitucional se vieron beneficiados por la creación de un esquema de gobernanza policéntrica, entre niveles y actores.Dicho esquema, respaldado por acuerdos formales entre las instituciones participantes, ha establecido de manera transparente las “reglas del juego” para todos los demás actores involucrados en el proyecto a nivel regional y local.Este aspecto de formalidad institucional ha derivado, en la práctica, en un instrumento de planeación muy dinámico que fortalece la toma de decisiones y que ayuda a cada actor, desde el nivel en donde está trabajando, a aprovechar los diversos elementos de planeación y de manejo del territorio. Así también, se ha visto que incrementa la confianza de las instituciones en los procesos territoriales a escala local. Por ejemplo, al mejorar las decisiones de las instancias gubernamentales para aterrizar recursos de sus programas. CONAFOR inició ya este camino incluyendo en sus criterios de prelación,favoreciendo a aquellas zonas que cuentan un PAMIC. Este criterio es tener capital para esquemas de conservación.

Strengthening water governance and leadership for adaptation

Recorriendo los manglares (comunidad Garita Palmera)

IUCN @ Paul Aragón

Comunidad de Garita Palmera

IUCN @ Paul Aragón

There are several governance challenges in río Paz, such as institutional weak presence and weak institutional coordination which drives to the mismanagement of the river and the coastal ecosystems.

IUCN, UNES and local communities proposed a buiding block to ensure the full implementation of the solution. The process implies strenthening and articulation of governance local structurers by:

- identification of leaders

- social awareness

- consolidation of local groups such as the Istatén Association, the Aguacate Microbasin Committee, women's groups and water boards.

Governance structures develop integral operative working plans, that respond to local needs and improve socio-political and advocacy capacities. The advocacy seeks to (i) persuade the Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources (MARN) to establish sanctions for those who incur in prohibited fishing practices, and to demand greater responsibility in the use of water and management of liquid waste by the sugar industry; and (ii) request the Ministry of Agriculture (MAG) to monitor the water use of this industry (i.e. the permits extended) and to introduce water rates that are proportional to the volume used. The case has already been brought forth to the Environmental Court and is waiting for a resolution.

Presence and trust of the local partner NGO, UNES in the project region.
Collaborative and facilitative approach with communities - as partners instead of beneficiaries.
Learning from communities
Strengthening of local groups. Local groups have been key actors in the work of identifying community problems, and then planning and implementing the solutions through collective actions.

For ecosystem restoration practices to be successful and sustainble, they must be accompanied by advocacy and dissemination actions that reinforce these EbA initiatives. These actions are particularly necessary in the lower basin of the Paz River, due to the existance of the environmental conflicts in the territory around water and the variety of actors involved.
Organizing an advocacy agenda is a powerful tool for communities, especially if it contains specific proposals that aim to achieve the implementation of existing environmental regulations.
Stakeholders need permanent negotiation spaces for ensuring continuous dialogue on natural resources.

Implementation

Documentation and dissemination of results

Local

National

Comunidades de Ahuachapán Sur lanzan recuperación de la microcuenca El Aguacate

Comunidades trabajando por la protección del manglar de Garita Palmera

Limpieza de canales en la microcuenca El Aguacate

Multidimensional governance for adaptation of water resources

Miembros del Comité de Agua Los Alvarados

Plan Trifinio @ Miguel Arévalo

Miembros del Comité Comunitario Binacional de la Subcuenca del Río Sumpul

Plan Trifinio @ Miguel Arévalo

Estructura del Comité Comunitario Binacional de la Subcuenca del Río Sumpul

IUCN

Esquema de gobernanza en múltiples niveles

IUCN

Multilevel and multisectorial governance for adaptation implies working at multiple levels and with differente sectors. It requires creating connections for better articulation between territorial actors.

In the upper part of the Sumpul River sub-basin, this entailed working closely with grassroots (community-based) organizations to develop bottom up water resource management. This was done supporting the conformation of Water Committees linked with Community Development Associations (ADESCOs), the Municipalities and the Binational Community Committee.

The capacities of 4 Water Committees and their supply systems were strengthened and were thereafter formalized under municipal governance.

Moreover, and following the multilevel governance approach, the Binational Community Committe was strengthened throught restructuring advice, trainings, new management tools, and greater links with municipal governments. This Committee is now leading community water issues to prevent conflicts around water use.

Honduras legal framework (General Water Law) that defines different water basin governance structures; and in El Salvador the regulation of the ADESCO Water Committees, with a public health mandate.
The existence of the Binational Committee was key, since work did not start from scratch, but rather focused on their strengthening and restructuring, respectively.
The articulation of project and organization efforts across a territory is fundamental (e.g. between IUCN and Plan Trifinio)

The strengthening of existing local and community structures is vital, as these have the ability to sustain the progress and changes achieved in the territory, despite the alternation of local authorities.
The ADESCOs and the Binational Community Committee undertake important mediation tasks, since the management of water resources can generate conflicts due to the diversity of interests that converge on this issue.
The articulation of project efforts across a territory is fundamental (e.g. between the AVE and BRIDGE projects) to achieve greater impacts and efficiencies, through coordinated project agendas.
The BRIDGE project in the Goascorán River basin (El Salvador-Honduras) left the following lesson learnt that is also relevant in this case: "Water diplomacy does not necessarily follow a straight path. Effective strategies need to incorporate multiple dimensions and a phased approach, interconnecting existing and emerging structures in the basin."

Relanzamiento del Comité Binacional en Foro “Cambio Climático y Gobernanza del …

Gobernanza hídrica en la sub-cuenca del río Sumpul

Achieving multidimensional governance for adaptation

Encuentro de Gobiernos Locales frente al Cambio Climático

IUCN

Reunión con ADITICA, una asociación indígena

IUCN @ Elías Cruz

Membership of the Binational Commission of the Sixaola River Basin (CBCRS)

IUCN

Esquema de gobernanza en múltiples niveles

IUCN

The Binational Commission of the Sixaola River Basin (CBCRS) functioned as a multidimensional (multisectoral and multilevel) governance platform for the basin. The CBCRS brings together representatives from different levels of government and sectors (including indigenous peoples and the local private sector of both countries) but needed to attain more effective vertical and horizontal integration. The preparation of the Strategic Plan for Transboundary Territorial Development (2017-2021) had the effect of fostering inter-institutional and inter-sectoral coordination and cooperation, forging dialogues on national frameworks and local needs, and promoting EbA.

At the local level Eba measures such as agricultural diversification with integral farms and reforestation actions were implemented. The aim was beyond individual impacts, to scale up lessons to the basin scale, such as:

the CBCRS´s project portfolio
the coordination of binational activities, such as Agrobiodiversity Fairs.
the Biological Corridor Association of producers, which facilitated the exchange of experiences and peer-to-peer contacts (producers, municipalities)

The prior existence of the CBCRS (since 2009), covered under the Cooperation Agreement for Border Development between Costa Rica and Panama, was a key enabling factor, since the purpose of this binational structure (achieving greater transboundary coordination and leadership for good governance and the integral development of the basin) was fully consistent with the objective of improving adaptation capacities to climate change impacts in the basin.

Multidimensional governance is a central part of adaptive capacity. It is based on vertical integration of different stakeholders (local, subnational, national, regional), through the creation and/or strengthening of institutions where entities of multiple levels participate. It is combined with horizontal integration of sectoral authorities (public, private, civil society) in order to reduce isolated approaches in management and decision making, and allow mutual benefits and synergies between sectors and their adaptation needs to be identified.
In adaptation, inclusion of municipalities is vital, since they have a mandate in territorial management, but also responsibilities in the implementation of national adaptation policies and programs (e.g. NDCs, NAPs).
Peer exchanges (such as meetings between local governments) are an effective mean to awaken interest in the "natural solutions" offered by ecosystems.
The articulation of project efforts across a territory is fundamental (e.g. between AVE and BRIDGE in Sixaola) in order to achieve greater impact through a coordinated work agenda.

Reglamento de la Comisión Binacional de la Cuenca del Río Sixaola (CBCRS)

Plan Estratégico de la CBCRS (2017-2021)

Declaración de Gobiernos Locales frente al Cambio Climático

Panamá albergó Encuentro de Gobiernos Locales frente al Cambio Climático

La Comisión Binacional de la Cuenca del Río Sixaola se abre camino hacia su sos…

La CBCRS reúne a actores de la cuenca del Río Sixaola para propiciar la coordin…

Practical support and capacity building for local livelihood improvement

FHA support local farmers in beekeeping business through conservation agreements. They use generated income to feed their families and to buy wire to fence their pastures to prevent cows from entering the forest.

We support 10 local cooperatives in capacity building and improving their products; and three of them are supported in eco-tourism development. They use income to buy alternatives of what they were collecting from the forest.

10 of our 12 employees are from local villages. The income they earn helps them to improve their families’ livelihoods and also helps them, families and neighbors to change the attitudes towards the forest conservation.

Community need alternatives to the forest resources for the proected area conservation sustainability

FHA relies on small grants and our impressive achievements confirm that no matter how much money is invested, the message behind create a strong partnership that a factor for success. FHA uses conservation agreement and it does help local people to understand whay they should take aprt in conservation.

Implementation

Local

National

Securing support of local communities and other stakeholders

The active contribution from local community and the support of other stakeholders has been a critical element to the success of FHA’s effort to protect Gishwati forest, together with a clear perspective on each players’ responsibilities and duties. Also, this successfully influenced the government to upgrade this forest to a national park.

In conservation, local community involvement ans support are keys factor for the success. what needed is to organise them and allow them to act

Guiding local community to manage their natural resources by themselves is a strong factor for success. Our approach combines employing local people, supporting local community to protect the forest by themselves, community education and outreach, solving human-wildlife conflicts using conservation agreements and improving local livelihoods through community tourism development.

Documentation and dissemination of results

Local

National