Subnational | PANORAMA

Central America

South America

Monitoring Fish Landings by Coastal Communities

Jorge

Jiménez

Insertion in the community

Participatory methodologies to collect information

South America

Communication as a tool for local governance in the Gulf of Tribugá

Jorge

Jiménez

Participatory methodologies

Technology transfer

Insertion in the community

Written public submissions during the planning

Some of the thousands of public submissions received and waiting to be scanned (note some submissions included maps and lots of additional supporting data).

During the first phase of public comment, large maps were provided free to the public; this submission used the map to mark areas of interest to the submittee. Other submissions choose to cross-hatch the entire map, claiming they fished the entire area.

One of the A3 submission forms used in the 2nd phase of public comment; this format proved much easier to code than the original maps and submission forms and helped many of those who made submissions to provide more useful comments.

Given that GBRMPA had previously never received so many public submissions (> 10,190 in the 1st phase and 21,500 in the 2nd phase commenting on the draft zoning plan), the following multi-stage process was used to analyse all the submissions:

Contact details from each submission were recorded in a database, a unique identification number was assigned, and an acknowledgment card was sent to whoever made the submission.
All submissions were individually scanned and the electronic files were saved into an Oracle submissions database.
Trained GBRMPA staff analysed each submission using a coding framework consisting of keywords for a range of themes and attributes. The framework was developed from a stratified random sample of submissions based on place of origin and sector. The database linked the scanned PDF with the relevant contact details and analytical information (i.e. keywords)
A search and retrieve ability based on the keywords enabled planners to search and retrieve PDFs of specific submissions or to run various queries of all the information in the submissions.
Many submissions involved spatial information, including some 5,800 maps in the formal submission phases; these maps were digitized or scanned.

The legislation outlines a comprehensive process for community participation in the planning process. The fact that the locals were ‘familiar’ with two phases of public participation and written submissions from previous experiences with GBR planning processes did assist this most recent planning process. Many groups assisted by submitting joint submissions. Consistency of analysis across the analytical team was ensured by the team leader checking a sample of the analysed submissions.

The analysis method must consider the substance of submissions rather than the number of times a comment is made. The submission process is not a numbers game but more about the quality of any argument that is made.
In the first public phase, many open questions on the submission form led to long rambling answers; these proved hard to code, as were the large maps that were also distributed.
The 2nd phase was more effective as a simple two page A3 size submission form asked more specific questions. Not everyone used the submission form, but it did make scanning and coding easier.
Many pro-forma submissions were received; easy to code but not helpful.
Linking spatial information with a qualitative coding system in the GIS was important.
Coding was based on seven key themes and a range of sub-themes, allowing a detailed analysis of each submission and all information provided.
Public feedback is important to demonstrate that all comments were considered.

Managing, Analysing and Presenting Public Submissions in the GBR

Report on the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Zoning Plan 2003

Oceania

Public participation to strengthen and legitimize planning processes

Jon C.

Day

Written public submissions during the planning

Assessing the views of those who don’t want to get involved

Correcting misinformation and unrealistic expectations

Ongoing/continuing public engagement during the planning

Targeted educational material

Engaging politicians and champions throughout the planning

Oceania

Public participation to strengthen and legitimize planning processes

Jon C.

Day

Written public submissions during the planning

Assessing the views of those who don’t want to get involved

Correcting misinformation and unrealistic expectations

Ongoing/continuing public engagement during the planning

Targeted educational material

Engaging politicians and champions throughout the planning

Oceania

Public participation to strengthen and legitimize planning processes

Jon C.

Day

Written public submissions during the planning

Assessing the views of those who don’t want to get involved

Correcting misinformation and unrealistic expectations

Ongoing/continuing public engagement during the planning

Targeted educational material

Engaging politicians and champions throughout the planning

Understanding the issue and working with the PA management.

SGNP is possibly the most visited protected area anywhere in the world. The average annual visitation is more than 1 million people. Our problem at hand was to transform this visitation into popular public support for SGNP. The figures speak for themselves, and I set out to convince the forest department that if we are able to engage with the visitors in a detailed manner, our problem would easily be solved. We put together an active Facebook page for SGNP and a website (government agency) to start this Out reach campaign. We also produced popular, high quality publications on various biodiversity related topics and handouts for enhancing user experience (in multiple languages). Because of the vibrant social media presence, we were able to build a public following of about 20,000 people till now and so created a bandwidth for our outreach. The website is a means to utilize the internet to start online data collection and transactions. With these things in place it was relatively easy for the forest department to go ahead and implement further actions.

1. Understanding of the functioning and mentality of a government agency and work to their skill sets, rather than forcing your priorities. 2. Visualise your solution as an upward engaging structure and start working on the basics.

- At least in India, the mandate of the forest department (PA management) is to protect and manage the area. Education, outreach, tourism are so to say not their mandates and are looked upon as additional burdens. It was very important for me to demonstrate how this particular approach was going to help them do their job in a better way. Only then was the process smooth and up-scaling was possible. The ownership of the process has to lie with the PA management. I prefer working as a volunteer, just facilitating the solution. I think this is very important as it prevents any financial ambiguity.

Planning phase

Subnational

SGNP Facebook page

SGNP official website

A financing scheme through vessel registration and licensing

Fishing vessels are required to be “registered” as a fishing vessel before they can obtain a fishing vessel license. The Department of Surface Transport issues a vessel registration document, on the basis of a letter of support from the DFO, containing vessel name and other specifications. Subsequently, the local government’s fisheries department, specifically the DFO, needs to be approached to obtain a fishing vessel license. Upon evaluation that the vessel is duly registered, DFO issues a fishing license for the specific vessel, and a District alpha numeric code and number are attributed to it, for example TEM – 1001.

Local governments’ willingness and thorough conduct
A financial system and audit trail
Staff to undertake the work
Outreach and local buy-in

In more urban areas with large concentrations of fishing vessels, it was easier for district officers to license vessels and achieve higher numbers / revenues. Where there were numerous landing sites spread out over a large area, the effort became more costly and time intensive.
BMUs have been co-opted in some districts to undertake the licensing and registration based on a cost recovery basis, however, these are still developing concepts for Tanzania and beyond the current scope of this solution.
District authorities collected improved revenues in most districts compared to the previous registration period (between 20 and 600% increase, see project report for detail) as boat owners licensed and registered IUU fishing vessels, and fishers registered themselves to took out licenses to fish.
Financial resources from licensing revenues to the local fisheries organisations have increased on a year by year basis as an initial result of the pilot project.

Implementation

Local

Subnational

Cable tie tags for licensing fishing vessels

Color coded (small plastic zip-lock cable tie) tags are attached to licensed fishing vessels in a pilot approach to determine their identification effectiveness, using two colors per district: one purple for registration on a long duration tag with alpha numeric number, and one orange for the annual fishing vessel license.

Local government political leadership, as well as local department, approval and buy-in
National government approval and buy-in for project
Community sensitization, approval and buy-in
Staff to deploy the tags
Seed funding to purchase the equipment
Fisheries officers and local community-based structures can visually determine if a vessel is legal and has paid the relevant fees for a particular district; licensed fishing vessels can be identified with 100% confidence on the landing site

Robust tools are required to operate in sometimes harsh oceanic conditions. This holds especially for electrical equipment.
Local BMUs know the timing and whereabouts of (legal and illegal) boats. It is therefore essential to obtain their cooperation and support.
Tags cannot be copied easily, minimizing unauthorized or illegal tagging / delinquent vessels.

Implementation

Local

Subnational