Engaging and educating community members to ensure they understood the project, its benefits, and actively supported its implementation. This involved clear communication of project goals, addressing concerns, and fostering a sense of ownership among the community. Public participation was facilitated through monthly meetings in Kamungi Conservancy (KC) to create awareness on the benefits of the 10% Fence Plan, hazards, and overall project objectives. These meetings served as a platform for open dialogue, where community members could voice their concerns, ask questions, and provide input. Additionally, the meetings were designed to disseminate crucial information about the project, including how the fences would mitigate human-wildlife conflict, protect crops and livestock, and improve overall community safety. Educational sessions within these meetings focused on practical aspects of the 10% Fence Plan, such as maintenance and repair techniques, as well as broader conservation principles. This consistent engagement ensured that the community remained informed, involved, and supportive of the project's goals.
Community Meetings and Educational Workshops: Regular meetings were organized in Kamungi Conservancy to discuss the project, gather input, and build consensus. Workshops on the importance of conservation, human-wildlife conflict mitigation, and the specific benefits of the 10% Fence Plan were conducted, using visual aids and local languages to enhance understanding.
Stakeholder Involvement: Local leaders, traditional elders, conservation groups, and government officials were involved to endorse the project and build trust within the community.
Inclusive Participation: Special efforts were made to include marginalized groups such as women and youth in the meetings and decision-making processes, ensuring that the entire community's perspectives and needs were considered.
Feedback Mechanisms: Channels were established for community members to provide feedback and report issues related to the fences, ensuring ongoing dialogue and responsiveness to community concerns.
Local Champions: Local champions were identified and supported, who advocated for the project within the community, helping to sustain momentum and community engagement. The local champions incuded past beneficiaries of the 10% Fence plans.
Effective communication and transparency were key to gaining community trust and support.
Addressing community concerns promptly helped build trust and fostered a cooperative spirit.
Continuous engagement and feedback mechanisms helped address ongoing concerns and improve project implementation.
Involving local leaders and champions fostered a sense of ownership and responsibility within the community, enhancing long-term support for the project.
Inclusivity in participation ensured that the needs and perspectives of all community members, including marginalized groups, were addressed, leading to more comprehensive and sustainable outcomes.
Regular monitoring and adapting strategies based on community feedback allowed for more effective and responsive project management.
Empowering local champions provided ongoing advocacy and support for the project, ensuring sustainability beyond initial implementation.
Organizing HWC educational workshops not only increased awareness but also equipped the community with practical skills for fence maintenance and wildlife conflict mitigation.
The local community was consulted into the spatial planning process. The process involved holding big workshops for local community and inviting several interest groups, especially those of livestock owners, tourism workers, and hunting enthusiasts. The purpose was 2 main things; 1) to collect local data and knowledge into the planning product and more importantly to build a sense of ownership and belonging of the local community to the potential planning product.
Data from various sources were collectively integrated and put into a spatial prioritization and optimization algorithm based on targets stemming out from the Primary Management objectives of the Reser. This Algorithm is known as MARXAN working under a process termed as simulated annealing.
The resulting planning product is then shared back to the local community and other stakeholders including governmental and non governmental entities to collect thier feedback to further tweak the product for maximum sustainability.
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.
Linking SOUV, World Heritage values and attributes
Hilly landscape in the High Coast.
Erik Engelro
To be able to write a joint management plan, we need to agree on what we have to manage. A shared understanding of the key values and attributes is crucial. An important step for us was to facilitate meetings that brought the national geological surveys in both Sweden and Finland together so they could discuss land uplift and ice age traces and consider the site in its totality. These discussions gave important insight on the geological attributes of the site.
To get a clear overview of the key values of the property, excerpts from the SOUV for High Coast/Kvarken Archipelago were analysed and grouped together as seven key values. Attributes were listed for each key heritage value. This process gave a clear connection between the SOUV in the everyday work with WH management. It makes the abstract concept of World Heritage more tangibly associated to its management.
The analysis of the SOUV required involving professionals from different disciplines and getting them to discuss about what makes the WHS special.
This step was first explored in the Climate Vulnerability Index (CVI) Assessment that was carried out at the site. The work done in the CVI project was crucial to linking SOUV, values and attributes together and it has been described in a separate PANORAMA solution (link below)
As a part of the CVI process we assessed the current condition and recent trend for the excerpts from our SOUV. This was done in a workshop with participants from both countries. The assessment helps in prioritization in WH management.
In a transnational or serial WHS is it important to get specialists from different fields and different parts of the property to work together. We´ve learned that it is of great value to assess current condition and recent trend for WH values together with other stakeholders and specialists, as controversial results may raise many questions and perhaps skepticism. It is good to be able to show that the results are based on systematic work taking different views into consideration. And because of this broad base we know we can trust our results and conclusions.
It was easy to list the most important attributes in the periodic reporting 2023, but that wouldn´t have been the case if the periodic reporting would have been prior to the work we´ve done with SOUV, values and attributes. A clear and structured overview of values and attributes, and a better understanding of our SOUV is also helpful in interpretation, communication, and monitoring.
Accessible information is also beneficial for people working with planning and permits in the area.
