Legitimate closed-cycle reptile farming is a relatively new phenomenon. Many Vietnamese reptile farmers were subsistence farmers who shifted over to reptile farming by modifying traditional poultry- and pig-type systems. The trade in wild caught reptiles was rife up until the early 2000s, and laundering through so-called ‘reptile farms’ was commonplace. However, as technological knowhow advanced, legal and policy frameworks were established by the Vietnamese government to permit the establishment of legitimate reptile farms. Many of these farms remain small-scale and operate within the informal sector, but governance mechanisms and appropriate institutional capacity have been able to establish successful structural and functional outcomes in terms of legality, animal welfare, transparency, and environmental sustainability. Reptile farming in Vietnam is regulated by the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development. Farms must be registered to and supervised by Provincial Forest Protection Departments (PFPD). PFPDs inspect facilities on a regular basis. Permits and certificates are issued to verify responsible sourcing practices (e.g., captive bred) in compliance with the law.
Consolidation and unification amongst stakeholders has strengthened institutional capacity. This has been complemented by support from key government departments and international organisations. Stakeholders include existing reptile farmers, national bodies responsible for wildlife conservation, agriculture/aquaculture, food standards and trade, and international organisations such as IUCN, CITES, and ITC.
Cooperation between small-scale farmers can be challenging. Willingness to participate and collaborate can be sporadic. Public perceptions of informal sector products linked to the wildlife trade can be negative. Multi-stakeholder engagement – top-down and bottom-up – is important.
The expected benefits of the coastal realignment were documented in the planning phase and baselines established. These informed the ongoing monitoring of impacts. Immediately after project completion, a 5-year monitoring programme was implemented. Annual reports summarised findings and lessons learned, which were shared and discussed with local stakeholders, external consultants, academia and risk management authorities in south England. Approaches to project planning and implementation were adjusted as needed. For instance, the approach applied to engaging the local community was adapted based on early experiences and analysis of challenges and barriers.
The involvement of specialist groups and experts to address specific challenges, such as habitat conservation, the preservation of archaeological findings, etc. proved essential to monitor results, minimise impacts on project implementation timelines and to resolve stakeholder concerns.
Continuous and regular monitoring was essential and the use of novel techniques (e.g. satellite imagery) and various approaches offered valuable insights on the complexity of processes in the intervention site. A clear monitoring plan that linked findings to project objectives and measures of success provided data on the impact of the intervention.
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.
The expected impacts on the ecosystems in the intervention areas were captured in an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA). This included a mapping of any risks to biodiversity during construction and implementation of appropriate mitigation measures. For instance, water voles were translocated prior to the start of the works. A focus on biodiversity protection resulted in the creation of around 300 hectares of coastal habitat and a network of freshwater habitats as well as the enhancement of regulatory services, including for climate, water, natural hazards and erosion regulation as well as water purification and waste treatment. Further, the intervention contributed to an increase of saltmarsh plants, breeding bird populations, invertebrate abundance, marine mollusc species, water voles, reptiles and fish diversity.
Baseline data on biodiversity (through ecological surveys) was gathered as well as biodiversity outcomes benchmarked and identified during the 5-year monitoring period now continued by the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSBP), who manages most of the project area since 2013 as a nature reserve as part of a 99 year lease. Monitoring methods included bird surveys, vegetation and habitat mapping exercises (including by using satellites), an invertebrate survey and sampling, surveys of reptiles, fish surveys, etc.
Evidence-based assessments of the state of the ecosystem prior to the start of the intervention enabled the identification of clear and measurable biodiversity outcomes and benchmarks. They also supported periodic monitoring and assessments to avoid adverse impacts and take appropriate measures in response to enhance ecosystems, species and ecological processes.
The project placed particular emphasis on stakeholder engagement and participation of local communities in all phases of the project. This included proactively providing information about the benefits of the coastal realignment, gaining widespread support for the intervention and seeking community views and inputs. A comprehensive stakeholder analysis allowed a mapping of how to best engage with the different stakeholders. This was documented in a stakeholder engagement plan. To facilitate regular engagement, representatives from stakeholders and community groups were nominated by their community to become members of a Medmerry Stakeholder Advisory Group.
A Medmerry Stakeholder Advisory Group was established, made up of key individuals of the local community, including Parish Councils, local businesses and residents most affected by the coastal realignment. The Advisory Group helped shape the design of the project and met regularly to discuss any issues and concerns. The group also shaped many of the design aspects of the intervention.
The active and intentional involvement of the local community and subsequent support generated, contributed significantly to the success of the Nature-based Solution. This transparent and structured engagement throughout the project and in decision-making processes – starting with the design stage – helped to address concerns, to build trust and to create ownership. Balancing the needs and wants of a diverse range of stakeholders is not easy. We worked hard to make clear what is within scope for discussion and what limits are in place, i.e. price or significant impacts to time. Setting a boundary allowed targeted and realistic solutions to become a greater focus of the conversation.
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.
Long-term partnerships with the government and NGOs
Since establishment, CTPH has cultivated strong partnerships with government and other stakeholders, including other NGOs and the private sector. This ensures that CTPH’s work is in line with government priorities and strategies, is supported by the Government and aligns with other stakeholders. This was particularly important during the COVID-19 pandemic when the Government of Uganda instituted a strict ‘no movement’ lockdown to minimise spread of infection. Recognising that CTPH’s work is critical to the survival of Uganda’s mountain gorillas and the livelihoods dependent on them, the Government granted CTPH special permission to continue its One Health activities.
CTPH’s advocacy activities are more successful due to the ongoing close working relationship that CTPH maintains with government institutions. This includes calling for park rangers and other conservation personnel to be amongst the priority groups for COVID-19 vaccination, primarily because of their close contact with Uganda’s endangered great apes which are highly susceptible to human respiratory diseases and because their survival is not only critical for biodiversity conservation but also for the Ugandan economy. CTPH also successfully advocated for the adoption of more stringent great ape viewing guidelines.
Routine communication and dialogue with relevant government personnel and departments as well as NGO and CBO partners
Regular and early stakeholder engagement that extended to academia and the private sector
Respect for CTPH and Gorilla Conservation Coffee amongst government departments, NGOs, tour operators and other private sector stakeholders as well as research institutions
Engaging stakeholders early, during project design and planning stages, is mutually beneficial and helps to ensure projects align with government and organisational strategic directions and priorities
Acknowledging government and other stakeholder support and input in external communication maintains trust
Joint proposal development helps to align priorities and allow for easier scale up and lesson learning
Before the COVID-19 pandemic, students from the University of Kent and Ohio University conducted research with CTPH on the impacts of mitigation measures to avoid disease transmission to great apes and on the willingness of the National Park’s visitors to comply with these measures. Their findings were published in 2018 and 2020 and have been instrumental in convincing the Ugandan government to adopt sanitary measures in the Parks for tourists and management staff, while reassuring the Uganda Wildlife Authority that this decision wouldn’t impact the number of visitors coming to the park.
CTPH also conducts routine research to monitor the health of the mountain gorilla population, focusing on those which stray out of the forest into communal land most often or those that have been habituated for gorilla tourism and, as such, are more likely to come into contact with human infections. This routine health monitoring and research is conducted by observing for clinical signs and collecting gorilla faecal samples (non-invasively, from gorilla night nests) each day and analysing the samples for pathogens, particularly those of zoonotic significance. By doing so, CTPH has developed an early warning system for any concerning infections and can address these as needed in a timely manner.
Willingness of the health monitoring team and researchers to conduct the studies
Mutual interest in the outcome of the research study
Government and Uganda Wildlife Authority’s (UWA) support of the research, aided by good working relationships between CTPH, UWA and other government departments
Current context of the COVID-19 pandemic leant relevance and urgency to the findings and encouraged rapid adoption of safer Great Ape viewing guidelines, in line with the findings
Working closely with relevant government institutions enables more effective conservation efforts
Involving academia in conservation projects through long-term partnerships allows for obtaining timely results on key issues for decision-making
Evidence based research lends legitimacy to advocacy actions
