session 1: introduction to management effectiveness session 2:

Management Effectiveness Training Seminar: Europarc 2008

Management effectiveness assessments – a tool for

maintaining high standards in protected area management

Sue Stolton, Equilibrium Research, UK


Session 1:

– Introduction to management effectiveness

Session 2:

– Sharing experiences: site, system and portfolio assessments

– Using a simple ME system – the METT

Session 3:

– Discussion, recommendations and how to find out more


Introduction to management effectiveness?


Presentation overview

• Management effectiveness: why we need to assess it

• WCPA Framework: a global approach to assessment

• Management effectiveness targets and experiences


‘…the assessment of how well a protected area is being managed – primarily the extent to which it is protecting values and achieving goals and objectives’

(WCPA, 2006)


1. Are we achieving our management aims or could we manage better?

2. How can we report how we are doing?3. How can we make sure we have the

resources we need?4. How can we build a supporting

constituency for our work?

Management Effectiveness a tool for managers


A little bit of history


• Issue of management effectiveness was first raised at Bali World Parks Congress (WPC) in 1983

• Further call for action at Caracas in 1992, where effective management was identified as one of four major protected area issues of global concern

• Independent systems developed during 1990s (Parks in Peril, WWF/CATIE, various park management agencies)


Developing the Framework

• WCPA Working Group 1996 and Task Force 1998

• Publication of WCPA Best Practice Guidelines in 2000

• Revised Best Practice Guidelines in 2006• 2008 Global Study on Management

Effectiveness


A wealth of experience has been developed

in undertaking assessments

the assessment of management effectiveness has many variables


Many types of assessment

• scale – assessment site level or over entire protected areas system/ region/biome/portfolio

• frequency – from a one-off study or monitoring and assessment carried out on a regular basis

• resources – organisational capacity, knowledge and enthusiasm

• adaptability – site specific, country/management authority specific, portfolio specific


Many Systems

Simple questionnaire approaches relying on

expert judgement

Complex data-driven approaches relying on

regular monitoring


Diversity but a need for consistency

• Need for appropriate evaluation standards• Avoid re-invention of “wheels”• Harmonisation of data to enable:

– Learning across sites/regions– Identification of common needs/challenges– Development of global and regional responses


The WCPA Framework


Framework publication• Defines terminology• Develops a framework of evaluation

criteria• Detailed advice on carrying out an

assessment and using the results• Case studies concentrating on the process

of carrying out an evaluation


‘…the assessment of how well a protected area is being managed – primarily the extent to which it is protecting values and achieving goals and objectives’ (WCPA, 2006)


• looking at design issues; • the adequacy and appropriateness of

management systems and processes; and • the delivery of protected area objectives

including conservation of values


Management follows a process


Effectiveness

Appropriate-ness

Effectiveness

EfficiencyEconomyAppropriate-ness

StatusFocus of evaluation

Impacts: effects of management in relation to objectives

Results of management actions

Services and

products

Suitability of management

processes

Resourcing of agency Resourcing of site

PA legislation and policy

PA system design

Reserve design

Management planning

Significance

Threats

Vulnerability

National policy

Partners

Criteria

Outcomes

What did we achieve?

Outputs

What were the results?

Process

How do we go about it?

Inputs

What do we need?

Planning

Where do we want to be?

Context

Where are we now?

Contents of evaluation


Global Uptake

• Over 40 different systems for assessing management effectiveness

• Evaluations have taken place in over 6,000 sites in 100 countries

• 90 per cent of the site assessments carried out with/or using systems that can be related to the WCPA Framework


Indicators with WCPA framework

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

RAPPAMTracking tool

EOHFinland MEEWWF Brazil

USA SOPNSW SOP

Catalonia MEEHow is Your MPA Doing

PROARCA/CAPASParks profiles

Mesoamerica MPAMarine tracking tool

PIPMARIPA-G

Central African RepublicAfrica rainforest study

CI METTPA Consolidation index

Qld Park Integrity

context input planning process output outcome


Experiences in Europe• 100 PAs – German Nature Parks Quality Campaign

and 14 PAs – National Parks quality criteria and standards

• 70 PAs and agency – Finland ‘State of the Parks’• 40 PAs – Lithuania• 365 PA sub-units – Catalonia and 42 PA’s in Tenerife,

Canary Islands, Spain• 9 PAs – National Parks, England, UK• 900 PAs – the Carpathian region (WWF Mava project)• 13 PAs in Bulgaria, 26 PAs in Romania, 18 PAs in

Georgia have used WWF’s RAPPAM• Also systems in France, and in development in

Austria, Italy and Scotland, UK


The 2004 CBD Programme of Work on Protected Areas aims, by 2010 (for terrestrial ecosystems) and 2012 (for

marine), to establish:

“comprehensive, effectively managed and ecologically-representative national systems

of protected areas”

• 4 programmes• 16 goals and associated targets • 92 activities for Parties


Goal 4.2 - To evaluate and improve the effectiveness of protected areas management

Target: By 2010, frameworks for monitoring, evaluating and reporting protected areas management effectiveness at sites, national and regional systems, and transboundary protected area levels adopted and implemented by Parties


Suggested activities of the Parties4.2.1. Develop and adopt, by 2006, appropriate

methods, standards, criteria and indicators for evaluating the effectiveness of protected area management and governance, and set up a related database, taking into account the IUCN-WCPA framework for evaluating management effectiveness, and other relevant methodologies, which should be adapted to local conditions.

• 4.2.2. Implement management effectiveness evaluations of at least 30 percent of each Party’s protected areas by 2010 and of national protected area systems and, as appropriate, ecological networks.

Management Effectiveness Training Seminar: Europarc 2008 UNEP World Conservation Monitoring Centre

Towards Effectively Managed Protected Areas


Thank you

Sharing experiences and lessons learned from Protected

Area ME Assessments

Information not easily available…

nor widely shared…

http://www.unep-wcmc.org/wdpa/me/

http://www.unep-wcmc.org/wdpa/me

session 1: introduction to management effectiveness session 2:

Documents

effective management

global approach

global study

objectives wcpa

experiencesthe assessment

evaluationthe assessment

itwcpa framework

portfolio assessmentsusing