SC-19/CONF.230/13

10 May 2019

Original English

UNITED NATIONS EDUCATIONAL, SCIENTIFIC AND CULTURAL ORGANIZATION

International Coordinating Council of the Man and the Biosphere (MAB) Programme

Thirty-first session

UNESCO Headquarters, Paris 17 - 21 June 2019

ITEM 14 OF THE PROVISIONAL AGENDA: Technical Guidelines for Biosphere Reserves

(TGBR)

1. At its 29th session, the MAB-ICC decided the development of Technical Guidelines for Biosphere Reserves (https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000253591).

2. The MAB Secretariat reported on the progress up to July 2018 during the 30th session of the MAB-ICC. The MAB-ICC approved the terms of reference and the roadmap of the TGBR working group but decided to go for a second round of call of nomination for experts to serve in the TGBR working group to address the issue of uneven regional distribution and gender. It requested the MAB Secretariat to send a letter to the Member States requesting additional nomination of experts.

(http://www.unesco.org/new/fileadmin/MULTIMEDIA/HQ/SC/pdf/FINAL_30_MAB_ICC_REPORT

_en.pdf).

3. This document reports on the implementation of the above ICC decisions and gives an update on the development of the TGBR. Report on the second call of proposal: 4. In July 2018, 47 experts from 23 Member States composed the TGBR working group (TGBR-WG) divided in four thematic Sub-groups (TSG): zonation of biosphere reserves; governance of biosphere reserves; policy, management and business plans and data management and monitoring. 5. After a lengthy nomination process, the MAB Secretariat received 25 eligible nominations from the following countries:

SC-19/CONF.231/13 - page 2

Region Country Nominations per Country

LAC

Mexico 3 incl. 1 female

Colombia 3 incl. 1 female

Cuba 4 incl. 1 female

Argentina 1 female

AFR

Senegal 1

Sudan 1

Nigeria 3

Ivory Coast 5 incl. 4 female

ASPAC

Australia 1 female

Korea 2 incl. 1 female

Pakistan 1

Total 25

Two nominations were not eligible due to lack of CVs and two experts self-withdrawn.

In November 2018, the MAB Bureau approved the following composition:

TGBR working group: 70 experts from 33 countries including 15 from LAC, 23 from Europe & North America, 23 from Africa and 8 from ASPAC; 33% of experts are female. Thematic Sub Groups (TSG): - Zonation of biosphere reserves: 17 experts from 15 countries including 3 from LAC, 5 from Europe & North America, 7 from Africa and 2 from ASPAC; 29% of experts are female. - Governance of biosphere reserves: 17 experts from 17 countries including 4 from LAC, 7 from Europe & North America, 4 from Africa and 2 from ASPAC; 29% of experts are female. - Policy, management and business plans: 20 experts from 19 countries including 5 from LAC, 6 from Europe& North America, 5 from Africa and 3 from ASPAC; 35% of experts are female. - Data management and monitoring: 16 experts from 14 countries including 3 from LAC, 5 from Europe & North America, 7 from Africa and 1 from ASPAC; 38% of experts are female. The detailed statistics charters as per the list approved in November 2018 are in Annex I. Update on the work of the TGBR working group (TGBR-WG) and Thematic Sub Group (TSG) 6. All the meetings of the TGBR-WG and TSG are virtual and organized by the MAB Secretariat. Working documents are in English. 7. After the 30th session of MAB ICC, the TGBR-WG held a meeting on 26 July 2018 to review an updated draft of the TGBR outline (TGBR outline Prototype II) prepared by MAB Secretariat, to decide on nomination process of the Chair and Rapporteur of TGBR-WG and TSG. 8. TSGs started their work on January 2019. Three TSG started to draft the content of the TGBR by priority areas and hold regular meetings twice a month ( calendar of meetings Annex II) 9. Since the beginning of the TGBR work, a number of experts were not actively involved in the meetings. Therefore, as per Chairs of the TSG, the MAB Secretariat has sent an email to each non-active member for confirmation of their interest. The final list of the 70 approved experts as well as TSG members with mention of their respective chair and rapporteur is in annex III.

SC-19/CONF.231/13 - page 3

10. In order to improve communication and sharing of documents, the MAB Secretariat created a collaborative workspace dedicated to the TGBR in UNESTEAM. It is accessible to all active members of the TSGs. 11. It is worth noting that MAB France provides support to the development of the TGBR. An intern is seconded to the MAB Secretariat for 6 months from February 2019 to July 2019. 12. In order to document the TGBR development work, surveys were sent to the Advisory committee members to seek their relevant views and experiences related to the TGBR (Annex IV). The responses will be shared on the UNESTEAM working space. Direct interaction between some members of Advisory Committee and TSG could be organised as appropriate. 13. The draft outline of the TGBR as of May 2019 (Annex V) will be submitted to the MAB Bureau for approval during the 31st session of the MAB-ICC.

14. The MAB Council is invited to:

a) Take note of this report and to endorse the decision of the MAB Bureau on the draft outline of the TGBR

b) Provide guidance for the work of the TGBR c) Encourage Member States to provide support to the MAB Secretariat in developing the

TGBR.

SC-19/CONF.231/13 - page 4

ANNEX 1: FIRST LIST OF THE TGBR EXPERTS

Data Management and Monitoring

Regional Distribution

Candidates / Region Percentage

AFR 7 44% ASPAC 1 6% ENA 5 31%

LAC 3 19% Total 16 100%

Gender Distribution

Candidates Percentage Women 6 38%

Men 10 63% Total 16 100%

Gender Distribution by Region

Women Men

Percentage of Women Candidates

AFR 2 5 33% ASPAC 0 1 0% ENA 3 2 50%

LAC 1 2 17% Total 6 10 100%

SC-19/CONF.231/13 - page 5

SC-19/CONF.231/13 - page 6

ANNEX 2: CALENDAR OF THE TGBR MEETINGS

TGBR working group

Date location Main outcome

06/07/2018 Skype meeting Draft TORs of the WG Draft Road map of the WG

07/26/2018 Face to face meeting in Palembang finalize draft TORs and Road map to be presented to MAB ICC

09/26/2018 Skype meeting Discussion on TGBR outline Nomination of Chair and Rapporteurs

Policy Management thematic sub-group

Date Location Main outcome

01/29/2019 Skype meeting Election of interim Chair and

Rapporteur

Discussion on table of contents and

agree on way forward for the drafting

work

Distribution of responsibilities among

the experts by items of the priority area

Contributions of participants by mail and on a shared document

Governance thematic sub-group

Email discussions on going on table of content – work in progress

Zonation thematic Group

Date Location Main outcomes

26/03/2019 Skype meeting Election of the Chair Discussion on the way of working in-group of the TSG Discussion on table of contents

09/04/2019 Skype meeting Discussion on specifics items of the draft between the experts Presentation of the shared literature

24/04/2019 Skype meeting Introduction to the UNESTEAM platform Discussion on specifics items of the draft between the experts Distribution of the responsibilities between the participants

SC-19/CONF.231/13 - page 7

Monitoring thematic sub-group

Date Location Main outcomes

22/03/2019 Skype meeting Election of the Chair Discussion on the way of working in-group of the TSG Creation of thematic sub working group and a pool online for the participants

08/02/2019 Skype meeting Election of the Rapporteur Distribution of the responsibilities between the participants Discussion on the way of working in-group of the TSG

02/05/2019 Skype meeting Distribution of the responsibilities between the new participants Discussion on contributions on the shared document Introduction to the UNESPEAM platform

SC-19/CONF.231/13 - page 8

Gender distribution

female 38% Male 62%

ANNEX 3: CURRENT LIST OF THE TGBR EXPERTS & LIST OF THE CHAIR AND RAPPORTEUR

number % gender distribution female 5 38,46154

Male 8 61,53846

Total 13 100

number % geographic distribution AF R 5 38,46154

AS P AC 1 7,692308

E NA 31 4 30,76923

L AC 3 23,07692

Total 13 100

R wanda

AF R

K AP L IN

B eth A.

F

WHAT E VE R

D bkaplin@ ur.ac.rw bkaplin@ antioch.edu

Y

reply

Nigeria

AF R

AK INDE L E S hadrach Olufemi

M

WHAT E VE R

soakindele@ futa.edu.ng

reply Nigeria AF R IS IC HE I Augustine M WHAT E VE R aoi789@ yahoo.com reply

C hina AS P AC L UO Ze M D luoze@ cnic.cn Y reply R ussia E NA Y AS HINA T atyana F WHAT E VE R D altai-yashina@ yandex.ru Y reply

F rance

E NA

HIR L E MANN

G abriel

M

D g.hirlemann@ parc-vosges-

nord.fr

Y

reply

P ortugal

E NA

L E ANDR O S ergio Miguel F ranco Martins

M

D sleandro@ ipleiria.pt

Y

reply

Mexico

L AC

T E S S AR O Maria P ia G allina

F

WHAT E VE R mgallina@ conanp.gob.mx

reply

Mexico

L AC

B AC A C ris topher G onzales

M

WHAT E VE R cris topher.gonzalezb@ conanp.g

ob.mx

reply B raz il L AC DOMING UE S S ergio Augusto M D sergioguto@ gmail.com Y reply

B urkina F aso

AF R

OUE DA

Adama

M

D oueda14@ yahoo.fr

oueda@ univ-ouaga.bf

Y

reply

Ivory C oast

AF R

K ANG A K oco Marie J eanne

F

WHAT E VE R kangamariejeanne@ yahoo.fr

< kangamariejeanne@ yahoo.fr>

reply United S tates

E NA

G ALLO

K irs ten

F

D

K irs te n_ G a llo@ nps .g ov

Y

reply

TSG CHAIR RAPPORTEUR

Governance

Martin Price (United Kingdom)

Mireille Jardin (France)

Data Management and Monitoring

Sergio Leandro (Portugal) Beth Kaplin (Rwanda)

Policy, Management and business plans

Lütz Moller (Germany) Ruida Pool-Stanvliet (South Africa)

Zonation

Reinaldo Francisco Ferreira Lourival (Brazil)

Catherine Cibien (France)

Geographic distribution

AFR 38% ASPAC 8% ENA 31% LAC 23%

Monitoring TSG active group

SC-19/CONF.231/13 - page 9

ANNEX 4: SURVEY FOR THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEMBERS

In the framework of the redaction of the technical guidelines of biosphere reserves (TGBR), we would like to ask you some questions on your experience as member of the Advisory Committee. This work is divided in four thematic sub-group: Governance, Zonation, Management & Policy and Monitoring. We kindly invite you to illustrate the items with concrete examples if you can!

I. GOVERNANCE Open issue: What were the principal difficulties in terms of governance you may observed throughout the revision or the designation of new biosphere reserves? Are there specific questions which caused you any difficulties? ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

1. Local participation

Problem according to local participation? Are there different interpretations of the vision of the “participation”?

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

Are there different ways of organizing the participation and its integration into the governance structure?

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

How should endorses and signs the nomination form? E.g: in the BR of the Cevennes, some of the municipalities did not signed the Charter of the parc. For this reason the parc did not met the conditions of BR at the last report. ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

Did you meet some difficulties in the Integration of indigenous people in the governance? Their vision of biodiversity? The political organization?

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

What are the issues according the role of the private sector? Are their different models of integration of private sector in the BR governance? Integration VS financing, element to select private enterprises or are all of them welcome?

SC-19/CONF.231/13 - page 10

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

2. Institutional mechanism

What kind of difficulties you noted in determining the role of national authorities?

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

What kind of difficulties you noted in determining the function of management authorities of the three areas? (Core, buffer and transition)?

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

In terms of governance, what are the issues of different kind of ownership title of biosphere reserve (private, public…). What kind of mechanism/ Authority model are set up? What are the advantages or weaknesses of the different models?

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

II. MANAGEMENT Open issue: What are the difficulties encountered in the implementation of a management plan of BR ? ? Are there specific questions which caused you any difficulties ? ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

Does this notion (management plan = MP) build a consensus? Are there various categories of visions?

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

Do exist difficulties to integrate in the long run the 3 aspects in the MP? (Conservation, development structures and green economy?)

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

According to the business strategy, what are the principal issues? According to the fund raising?

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

SC-19/CONF.231/13 - page 11

According to the marketing strategy and the communication strategy, what are the principal difficulties you have met during your experience in the AC? : branding, logo settlement

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

Difference between plan and policy? What are the most frequently designed? ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

III. ZONATION

Open issue: What are the principal issues connected with the zonation of BR ? ? Are there specific questions which caused you any difficulties? ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

What are the difficulties faced with the exteriors limits? ( geographical, ecological, political, cultural limits) How the advisory committee decides the area is adapted to coordinated the three functions of a BR?

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

Areas: how you determine that the 3 areas (Core, Buffer and Transition) are relevant in terms of the three functions (conservation, development structures, green economy)?

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

Did you noted some difficulties in building a BR on a pre-existing governance structure like a National/regional parc, a protected area …?

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

Do the notions of core area, buffer area and transition area build consensus Remind to develop some examples for each category if you can! Core: difference between German vision of the core area: no management VS French vision: strict interpretation of the statutory framework: the protection of the core area must be organized according the objectives of the BR (but who decides of the coherence? How?) How make others countries? Buffer: How do you interpret the framework statutory if it does not specify some case?

e.g BR in Spain do not meet the criteria because there was a nuclear central on his buffer area (statutory framework do not specify it is forbidden)

SC-19/CONF.231/13 - page 12

e.g: sometimes, there is no place around the core area to set up a buffer zone (e.g BR Gorges du Gardon), what should we do in this case? How do we consider the protection of the core area is sufficient? …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

How do you chose at the AC the activities, which are compatible? By which logic of interpretation for each area (Core, Buffer and transition) ? Are there oppositions?

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. Transition: Do this notion build consensus? ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

IV. MONITORING Open issue: According to the monitoring, what kind of difficulties you noted during your experience at the Adivisory committee? Are there specific questions which caused you any difficulties? ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

What are the difficulties to build performance indicators? For the 3 areas? For the long run?

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

Which criterion need indicators? Does that build consensus? ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

By which logic do we decide the conditions of excellence awards?

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

What problem do you encountered for periodic report?

SC-19/CONF.231/13 - page 13

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

Do you heard about difficulties in the building of information center?

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

SC-19/CONF.231/13 - page 14

ANNEX 5: DRAFT OF THE PROTOTYPE III

Technical Guidelines for Biosphere Reserves

Summary of MAB 29th session discussions regarding TGBR prototype

Discussion

● Limit uniform approach because of the wide range of diversity within the WNBR.

● Should be based on experiences on the ground.

● Take into account the existing national guidelines created by the MAB National Committees.

● Make recommendations based on the needs concluded from the evaluation of the national periodic

reports.

● The document should be comprehensive but short.

● For MAB to grow and have a significant impact, it will need a sustainable funding strategy. A

resource mobilization strategy for MAB should be developed by an assigned technical working

group.

Areas in need of guidance

● Nomination, zonation, infrastructure development

● Use of the MAB logo, branding for BRs, copyright implications

● Transboundary Biosphere Reserve (TBR) cooperation

● National use of different terminologies

● Participatory approaches

● Local economic activities

● Modes of governance

● Management policies

● Templates with regard to reporting

● Collaboration with the private sector (policy regarding collaboration with mining companies)

● Reviewing outcome of evaluations

SC-19/CONF.231/13 - page 15

Contents

Introduction ........................................................................................................................... 17

A. Background and purpose of the TGBR ....................................................................... 17

B. MAB programme ........................................................................................................ 17

C. Drafting Procedure .................................................................................................. 17

D. Open Access Policy ................................................................................................ 17

I. Nomination of a new biosphere reserve ......................................................................... 17

A. Biosphere reserves as learning sites for sustainable development: 3 integrated functions

(Article 3, Seville) ............................................................................................................... 17

B. How to nominate a Biosphere Reserve? ..................................................................... 17

C. How to participate in the WNBR? ............................................................................ 17

D. How to extend an existing Biosphere Reserve? ...................................................... 18

E. How to rename a Biosphere Reserve? ....................................................................... 18

F. How to voluntarily withdraw a Biosphere Reserve? .................................................... 18

G. What is the WNBR Coding System? ....................................................................... 18

II. Zonation ............................................................................................................................ 18

Definition of zones in the Statutory Framework of the WNBR : .......................................... 18

A. Zonation : a tool for integrated management, integrating the 3 funtions of the BR ...... 18

B. External limits of the BR ............................................................................................. 18

C. Objective : What are the to the conservation objectives of the biosphere reserve (as

requested in Article 4, 5.a of statutary framework), ............................................................ 19

D. Core area: How is it established ............................................................................. 19

E. Buffer zone: ................................................................................................................ 19

F. Transition area: .......................................................................................................... 19

G. Mapping .................................................................................................................. 19

H. Reasons for changes/BR extention? ....................................................................... 20

I. Linkages to governance and support by local authority :............................................ 20

J. Accountability of BR Model monitoring and evaluating efficiency ................................ 20

III. Governance (work in progress)................................................................................... 20

A. Local participation (elements of this section will include sub-sections a) before

nomination and b) after designation ................................................................................... 20

B. Institutional/governance mechanisms ......................................................................... 20

C. Policy, Management and Business Plans ................................................................... 21

Introduction ........................................................................................................................ 21

A. Management Policy and Plan ..................................................................................... 21

B. Business Policy and Plan ........................................................................................... 26

C. Marketing Strategy .................................................................................................. 27

D. Communication Strategy ......................................................................................... 27

E. Transboundary Biosphere Reserves .......................................................................... 30

F. Multi-designated sites ................................................................................................. 30

D. Data Management and Monitoring .............................................................................. 31

A. Quality Control ............................................................................................................ 31

B. Periodic Review .......................................................................................................... 31

C. Web-based information clearing house and information center? (3.1 Madrid) ......... 32

D. How to map Biosphere Reserves? .......................................................................... 32

V. Transboundary Biosphere Reserves ............................................................................. 33

SC-19/CONF.231/13 - page 16

VI. Multi-designated sites ................................................................................................... 34

ANNEXES ............................................................................................................................. 34

BIBLIOGRAPHY ................................................................................................................... 34

SC-19/CONF.231/13 - page 17

Prototype III Draft

Transboundary Biosphere Reserves, Multi-Designated Sites, info box/case study, terminology

Introduction

A. Background and purpose of the TGBR

B. MAB programme

1) What is a Biosphere Reserve?

2) The World Network of Biosphere Reserves

3) Transboundary Biosphere Reserves

4) Multi-designated sites

C. Drafting Procedure

D. Open Access Policy

I. Nomination of a new biosphere reserve

A. Biosphere reserves as learning sites for sustainable development: 3 integrated

functions (Article 3, Seville)

1. Conservation 2. Development 3. Logistical support 4. What does a functioning model for Biosphere Reserves look like?

B. How to nominate a Biosphere Reserve?

1. How to initiate a nomination? 2. How to prepare a nomination file? 3. Info box / case study 4. What is the Designation Procedure? (Article 5, Seville) 5. How to nominate Transboundary Biosphere Reserves? 6. What about multi-designated sites?

C. How to participate in the WNBR?

1) Scientific research Subregional

Regional

Global

Publication

2) Environmental education and training Subregional

Regional

Global

3) Regional and thematic networks 4) UNESCO networks

SC-19/CONF.231/13 - page 18

D. How to extend an existing Biosphere Reserve?

E. How to rename a Biosphere Reserve?

F. How to voluntarily withdraw a Biosphere Reserve?

G. What is the WNBR Coding System?

II. Zonation

Definition of zones in the Statutory Framework of the WNBR :

a) a legally constituted core area or areas devoted to long term protection, according to the

conservation objectives of the biosphere reserve, and of sufficient size to meet these

objectives;

b) a buffer zone or zones clearly identified and surrounding or contiguous to the core area or

areas, where only activities compatible with the conservation objectives can take place;

c) an outer transition area where sustainable resource management practices are promoted

and developed.

A. Zonation : a tool for integrated management, integrating the 3 funtions of the BR

Definition of three functions of BR in the Statutory Framework of the WNBR :

a) conservation - contribute to the conservation of landscapes, ecosystems, species and

genetic variation;

b) development - foster economic and human development which is socio-culturally and

ecologically sustainable;

c) logistic support - support for demonstration projects, environmental education and training,

research and monitoring related to local, regional, national and global issues of conservation

and sustainable development.

Combine and integrate several means of conservation and management in a sustainable development

project at regional scale. cf Seville Strategy, “vision”, 1995: “Biosphere reserves are much more than just

protected areas”.

B. External limits of the BR

How are they defined and according to which rationale ?

Comparing the 3 main models :

a) Building a BR around a protected area (centrifugal/cluster), · (or we take a cluster BR as a

distinct model?) Limits determines by the ecological solidairty between the core and the

rest of the BR

b) Building a BR ex nihilo : ecological / cultural / geographical / administrative limits?

c) Building the BR established along the boarder.

Geographical / ecological / administrative limits

SC-19/CONF.231/13 - page 19

C. Objective : What are the to the conservation objectives of the biosphere reserve (as

requested in Article 4, 5.a of statutary framework),

How and who to define them?

What are the development objectives of the BR? (no reference to this aspect in the statutory framework,

only the conservation objectives regarding the core area)

D. Core area: How is it established

a) size

b) degree and type of protection, does it guarantee integrity and long term?

(interpretation of protection degree and type in internationally recognized categories,

e.g. IUCN PA mng. categories?)

c) Which level of human use, how is it controlled

d) role for sustainable development (ecosytem services) research, monitoring, education

and training

E. Buffer zone:

a) SIze / What means reinforcing the conservation of the core areas? How to define?

b) Geographical definition clearly identified zone(s) surrounding or contiguous to the core

area(s),

c) What is the system for regulation of activities and resource use (public / private)?

d) role for conservation, sustainable development, research, monitoring, education,

training,

F. Transition area:

a) Size, geographical definition “the transition area should be extended to enhance large

areas suitable for approaches such as ecosystem management” (Seville Strategy, the

vision)

b) level of development, type of activities (industry, mining, power stations, cities). Do

they threaten the core protection?

c) role for conservation, sustainable development, research, monitoring, education,

training

d) population (is low population a problem ? )

G. Mapping

Connections to be made with the « monitoring group »

SC-19/CONF.231/13 - page 20

H. Reasons for changes/BR extention?

I. Linkages to governance and support by local authority :

if no formal approval in buffer or transition, what happens? ("holes" in the zonation)

J. Accountability of BR Model monitoring and evaluating efficiency

(12 - Questions and Answers)

III. Governance (work in progress)

A. Local participation (elements of this section will include sub-sections a) before

nomination and b) after designation

a) Engagement strategy development: early engagement and building long-term

relationships

b) Stakeholder mapping: how to proceed and how to use it

c) Local participation: how to organize it, mechanisms to ensure local participation and

techniques for conflict resolution

d) Inclusion of areas where traditional lifestyles and indigenous uses of biodiversity are

practiced (including sacred sites) cf Seville Strategy, Goal II, 3

e) Role of the agency responsible for the core area

f) Role of local authorities and other government agencies/organisations (at any level from

local to national)

g) Involvement of the private sector

B. Institutional/governance mechanisms

a) Role of national authorities and/or, in federal states, regional authorities

b) Establishment of a biosphere reserve from 1) an existing protected area or 2) ex nihilo

c) Mechanisms to manage human use and activities in the buffer zones (art 4 item 7 a):

regulatory and contractual policies, incentives, joint decision-making

d) Authority or mechanism: difference between authority and mechanism, composition,

regulatory/enforcement powers (police powers)

e) Institutional mechanisms to manage, coordinate and integrate programmes and

activities of the BR

f) Models for authorities and mechanisms; and their advantages and weaknesses

1) Existing body of a protected are, (in some cases, extending beyond its boundaries), or of

part of the area

e.g., National Park, Regional Nature Park, cooperation Nature/Marine Park

SC-19/CONF.231/13 - page 21

2) Structure under specific national legislation on BRs

e.g. Spain, Mexico

3) Public governing body adapted to the needs of the BR

e.g. a municipality with the addition of a management committee and associations

4) Governance of an Island

e.g., Minorca, Isle of Man

5) Public

e.g., grouping of public institutions including municipalities

6) Private

e.g., association or charity under national law

7) Public/private partnerships (with clear definition of roles and responsibilities)

8) Ad hoc structure

9) Others

IV. Policy, Management and Business Plans

Introduction

Introduction to chapter V: emphasize that documents not an end in itself, but endpoint and starting point of

crucial processes; explain the legal basis for need of these documents; explain need for different plans and

strategies (management, business, marketing, communications), how they interact and whether/why these

are addressed as separate or integrated documents; include the target groups to whom the different plans

and strategies are directed and their roles

A. Management Policy and Plan

a) Introduction

explain terminology of management policy vs management plan, emphasize legal necessity of a plan; note

the fact that management plan should be for the entire BR and not only for a section such as the core area

(source of paragraphs 1, 2, 5: “Management Manual for UNESCO biosphere reserves in Africa”, 2015 p. 77;

paras 3 and 4 new text)

All biosphere reserves should have a management policy or plan which is an official multi-year framework

(process and document) for achieving objectives in a structured and goal-driven way.

The Seville Strategy requires “that each biosphere reserve has an effective management policy or plan and

an appropriate authority or mechanism to implement it” ... “that includes all of the zones of biosphere

reserves”. The Seville Strategy further requires that biosphere reserves involve all of the various stakeholders

in planning and decision-making and provide training to enable meaningful participation. A management

plan should also accommodate the principles of adaptive management, therefore a management plan

should be updated at regular intervals. Beyond the Seville Strategy (Objectives II.2.1 and IV.1.6), a

SC-19/CONF.231/13 - page 22

management plan is legally required by the Statutory Framework (Article 4.7.b), nomination form (4.7, 12.4,

16.1.1), periodic review form (3.4, 7.5.6, 7.7.4), and Lima Action Plan (A2.2, A3.2, A4.5).

UNESCO uses both terminologies “management policy” and “management plan” interchangeably in the

legally binding documents. This double terminology reflects that in different countries and in different

management styles, different concepts are used. At present, the term management plan is preferred. To be

clear, UNESCO requires only one multi-year strategic framework from each biosphere reserve, not two.

Typically, a management plan will address a (plus/minus) 10-year period (in line with the frequency of the

periodic review).

A management plan needs to address all zones of a biosphere reserve equally. Conserving biodiversity is

necessary in all three zones, but various instruments are available in the different zones. Promoting

sustainable economic and social development is necessary in all three zones, but means something different

in each zone. Research and education should be promoted in all three zones. Some biosphere reserves have

the challenge of including multiple designations, with possibly diverging zonations, such as national parks,

Ramsar sites or World Heritage sites. For biosphere reserves, UNESCO specifies three categories of zones

(core, buffer, transition). However, sub-categories of these zones could be defined in accordance with

national law or local specificities (e.g core 1, core 2, buffer 1, buffer 2, etc.). Zonations due to different

designations must be legally and conceptually compatible.

b) Why is a management plan necessary (i.e. what are its crucial benefits)?

(source: “Management Manual for UNESCO biosphere reserves in Africa”, 2015 p. 77; paras 3 and 4 new

text)

A management plan is needed because:

UNESCO requires it (cp. above);

The biosphere reserve management team (like all organisations) needs a guideline

document;

National government will most likely require it for accountability and for providing funding;

Any potential donor will most likely require it to understand how an individual project fits

into an overall approach;

Local partners might expect a written document; outlining the goals of a biosphere reserve;

Management without a plan is “ad-hoc” and not effective;

Management without a plan can rapidly lead to “strategic shifts” away from key goals;

Formulating a management plan is one of the best opportunities to engage in-depth with

stakeholders and communities to secure much needed support and buy-in.

c) What is a management plan?

(source: “Management Manual for UNESCO biosphere reserves in Africa”, 2015 p. 77; paras 3 and 4 new

text)

A management plan as a document (cp. 5 below for the process) should contain several items. The following

list is only one possibility; these items can be worded differently, there can also be additional or fewer items:

Organizational/governance structure responsible for implementation of the plan.

Status-quo analysis of opportunities and threats, strengths and weaknesses.

SC-19/CONF.231/13 - page 23

Status-quo analysis of priorities for the biosphere reserve, from the perspective of the

stakeholders’ interests.

Scenario development, including analysis of external pressures and internal vulnerabilities.

A long-term vision (either short “summary statement” or visions for several priority themes,

possibly “mission statement”).

Medium-term goals which need to be attained to make the vision a reality, accompanied by

indicators and benchmarks.

Priority projects, whose implementation will lead to attaining the medium-term goals.

Case study: Management plan of Waterberg Biosphere Reserve, South Africa

The biosphere reserve in the Limpopo province in the northern part of South Africa was designated in 2001.

In order to address the various challenges such as mining, hunting, unemployment, fragmentation of the

landscape, and together with the periodic review and a considerable extension, a management plan was

completed in 2011. Since biosphere reserves do not have legal status in South Africa, achieving leverage and

impact on land use practices on the ground is of utmost importance. Thus, in the context of the management

plan, improved strategic planning was foreseen to go hand in hand with engaging with all competent levels

of government, including the formulation of the management plan, which was intended to address spatial

planning, development guidelines and the long-term conservation objectives. The management plan spells

out a vision and a mission statement, a detailed analysis of lessons learnt and of present and future

challenges and specific priority projects (e.g. communication, skills training, tourism development,

community tourism, conservation of wetlands, rhino protection and environmental education). The plan also

confirms the organizational structure, including a stakeholder committee representing a balance of up to 30

local interest groups.

d) Issues to be addressed by a management plan

(conservation, infrastructure development, green economy, etc)

(source: “Management Manual for UNESCO biosphere reserves in Africa”, 2015)

The management plan needs to address all those issues that are relevant for the specific biosphere reserve.

For coastal or marine biosphere reserves, the topics are different than those for mountain or dryland

biosphere reserves; for very rural areas, the topics are different to those of densely populated and maybe

even semi-urban biosphere reserves. The issues should not only be defined according to their current

relevance, also “upcoming issues” that are likely to become relevant soon, should be integrated.

The issues to be addressed will need to be defined jointly by the management team, its steering committee

and/or advisory board, and, in particular, through a participatory approach involving stakeholders and local

communities to the extent possible.

For most biosphere reserves, the following issues will likely be part of their management plans:

Biodiversity and ecosystem services and their conservation;

Sustainable land-use and resource use;

Improving livelihoods and generating benefits for communities;

SC-19/CONF.231/13 - page 24

Promoting green economies;

Infrastructure development;

Ecosystem restoration;

Disaster reduction and risk management;

Tourism;

Climate change;

Research and education.

Depending on the specific biosphere reserve, issues such as mining or local/traditional /indigenous

knowledge might also be priorities.

e) How to plan and draft a management plan? Include how to develop a BR vision, stakeholder and

community participation and involvement, governance of BR

(source: “Management Manual for UNESCO biosphere reserves in Africa”, 2015, pages 120 pp)

The process of formulating a management plan can be long and may need many resources (in some

biosphere reserves, the process takes 1 to 2 years). Therefore, the management team of a biosphere reserve

should seek full explicit support from all relevant partners, including government institutions and

communities. Essential partners should fully understand why a plan actually is beneficial for everybody,

beyond a legal UNESCO requirement. Before a process is started, sufficient funding has to be secured. Such

a process might be eligible for funding from international donors.

Formulating a management plan should be seen as an opportunity to reach out to communities and

stakeholders. It can also be seen as a chance to experiment with new, more dynamic, more participatory and

more efficient working methods.

There are various steps to be followed when drafting a comprehensive management plan (based on the

“Management Manual for UNESCO biosphere reserves in Africa” p. 121, and the IUCN “Management

Planning for World Heritage Properties” p. 9):

Step 1 - Establishing the steering group and its working methods: A steering group needs to be established

for the entire duration of the process of elaborating a management plan. The steering group has to be under

the leadership of someone with experience and under the coordination of the biosphere reserve

management team. Ideally the steering group should be multidisciplinary and needs to include key

stakeholders and political mandates according to the dynamics of the specific biosphere reserve. The

steering group needs to agree on ways of collaborating and on meeting schedules. The steering group is

helpful as a supervisor; its tasks would include to control the progress of the process, to identify gaps, and

to revise and adopt texts.

Step 2 - Collecting information from stakeholders and communities: Communities and stakeholders should

be consulted on their specific interests and problems. This could take place in a series of workshops. First

have an open brainstorming session on a “status-quo analysis”. What is the situation today? What should

change, what should change immediately? Interests and problems should be clustered. The cluster themes

should not be imposed, but should be a result of workshops. If repeated workshops are organized,

subsequent workshops can validate or adapt the results of previous workshops.

SC-19/CONF.231/13 - page 25

Step 3 - Developing a vision: A management plan should formulate a long-term vision for the biosphere

reserve. Cooperation with scientists and external consultants can support future scenario-building. The

vision should be developed in a participatory manner by the entire community. It should not only be driven

by an analysis of problems, vulnerabilities, threats and risks, but just as well by an analysis of opportunities

and strengths. The final decision about the formulation of the vision should be made by the steering group.

Step 4 - Formulating goals and objectives aligned with the vision: These are the goals that need to be achieved

in 3, 5 or 7 years, such that in 10 years the vision is achieved. There should also be a clear and credible causal

connection. Success indicators that provide insight about reaching the goals should be formulated.

Step 5 - Projects and interventions: The final step of developing a management plan is to identify the projects

and interventions whose implementation will lead to reaching the goals. A project or intervention is

something really concrete, as “presenting the region at the national tourism fair” or “hiring a tourism

consultant”. It is helpful to reach out to stakeholders and communities also for collecting ideas for projects

and interventions, and for later clustering and prioritizing them. This again could be done through

consultation meetings, but also through contests or calls for proposals. Projects should be prepared with

reference to what is realistic and the likely budget scenarios which could lead to limitations on

implementation success.

Once the management plan is formulated, there needs to be a process of approval and adoption. If there is

a separate steering group for the process of formulating the management plan, then the final document

needs to be adopted by this steering group first.

Case study: Elaborating the management plan in Swabian Alb Biosphere Reserve, Germany

From 2011 to 2012, the German biosphere reserve Swabian Alb (designated in 2009) established its first

management plan in a very participatory process. More than 1,000 participants took part. Twelve working

groups were established on topics such as education, nature conservation, tourism, forests, agriculture and

cultural heritage; altogether these working groups brought together more than 200 people and met 46

times. A steering group of 23 members met 6 times. In addition, a government supervising committee of 13

persons met 3 times. Two managers and 1 external expert as coordinators met 22 times. In addition, several

competitions for children were carried out, an internet discussion forum was established and 2 large public

hearings of more than 300 participants were organized. There were 5 additional public hearings on specific

topics. The result was that 12 thematic visions were formulated, 55 concrete goals adopted, and 350 ideas

for concrete projects selected of which 28 have been prioritized. The management plan itself consists of 3

comprehensive documents of several hundred pages.

f) How to implement a management plan? Include stakeholder and community participation and

involvement

(source: “Management Manual for UNESCO biosphere reserves in Africa”, 2015, pages 81 pp and 96)

Implementing the management plan involves different aspects:

Establishing responsibilities for ensuring implementation of the management plan amongst

the management team and relevant stakeholders;

Funding and implementing the priority projects and interventions agreed in the plan;

SC-19/CONF.231/13 - page 26

Ensuring that other projects and interventions, possibly implemented by third parties, are

in line with the vision and goals of the plan, to the extent possible;

Monitoring of implementation success.

Long-term successful management teams know how to maintain an effective biosphere reserve.

Maintenance does not only mean having proper strategies, acquiring the funds needed, or having the right

staff to implement the strategies through imposing regulations in a “top-down” manner. Management teams

listen to the needs and wishes of stakeholders and communities and set priorities accordingly; they create

support, commitment and shared values; they involve stakeholders in implementation processes.

Participatory management involves collaboration with all stakeholders and include community involvement

and community engagement.

For funding, it is important to achieve the integration of the biosphere reserve and its goals into national

laws, policies and strategies. At least in the long run, each biosphere reserve has to be funded from national,

and/or provincial or municipal sources. If this is not possible in developing countries, the UNESCO designation

should be used as a “quality label” in order to attract a wide variety of funding from national, international,

and private sources. That this is indeed possible and comparatively “easy”, e.g. through GEF (global

environment facility), is due to the specific combination of factors that is special for biosphere reserves.

Through a diversified funding portfolio, biosphere reserves should acquire funding from several different

sources for individual projects, for example from scientific institutions, ODA (official development assistance)

donors, intergovernmental institutions, international NGOs (non-governmental organisations) or charitable

foundations.

No plan makes sense if the results from its implementation are not monitored. Management effort and

effectiveness is based on a continuous cycle of planning, implementation,

monitoring and evaluation. A complete and adequately resourced monitoring and evaluation programme

should form an integral part of the management plan. Indicators (data collected as part of monitoring) should

be quantified and accompanied by benchmarks. The indicators need to be linked to the goals and objectives

to give an indication whether the medium- and long-term goals of the biosphere reserve are likely to be

achieved. Be sure to choose indicators that are actually measurable, depending on staff, funding and

relations with stakeholders. Monitoring of the management plan should go hand-in-hand with all other

relevant monitoring, to optimize the human and financial resources. For example, it should be fully in line

with the cycle of the periodic review. It should also be in line with the monitoring of any large-scale project,

as funded by one or several donors.

B. Business Policy and Plan

a) Introduction

explain terminology of business strategy, business policy and business plan

b) Why is a business strategy/policy/plan necessary?

In the first place a business plan must complement the management plan of a specific biosphere reserve. A

business plan is crucial in providing guidance to, and supporting the financial future of a biosphere reserve.

It assists a biosphere reserve to fulfill its responsibilities in accordance with the UNESCO MAB Programme.

The business plan must be aligned to the goals and strategies of the management plan.

SC-19/CONF.231/13 - page 27

c) What is a business strategy/policy/plan, what could be its key content?

Info box / case study

A business plan is a tool to leverage monetary support for the goals of a biosphere reserve.

d) How to plan a business strategy?

A business plan should address at least the following aspects:

What are the top goals and objectives to be focused on within the time frame of the business

plan

What resources are necessary to fulfill these goals and objectives

Compile a biosphere reserve budget

How will the management team fill the gap between what they currently have and what is

necessary

Providing a suite of funding strategies for the biosphere reserve

e) How to implement a business strategy?

f) Funding models for BRs

Fundraising strategy

Info box / case study

C. Marketing Strategy

a) Introduction:

b) Why is a marketing strategy necessary?

c) What is a marketing strategy, what could be its key content?

Info box / case study

d) How to plan a marketing strategy?

e) How to implement a marketing strategy?

f) How to develop a brand for Biosphere Reserves?

Use of UNESCO logos

Copyright

D. Communication Strategy

a) Introduction:

Why is a communication strategy necessary? Make the link to the global MAB communications strategy

Much of the success of the MAB Programme, and individual BRs, depends on communication. One of

the five Strategic Action Areas of the MAB Strategy (2015-2025) is: Comprehensive, modern, open and

transparent communication and data sharing. Resultantly, Action A2.4 of the Lima Action Plan directs, at

SC-19/CONF.231/13 - page 28

individual biosphere reserve level: Ensure that biosphere reserves have clear communication plans and

mechanisms to implement these.

During the 30th session of the MAB Council in July 2018 in Palembang, Indonesia, UNESCO has adopted

a global MAB communication strategy - downloadable at:

http://www.unesco.org/new/fileadmin/MULTIMEDIA/HQ/SC/images/SC-

18_CONF_210_12_MAB_Comm_Strategy-ANNEX_1-EN.pdf

There is a difference between a communication strategy and a communication plan. A strategy is a

flexible document answering the questions of ‘why’ and ‘what’ and is ongoing until being reviewed. A

plan is relevant for a fixed time and answers the question of ‘how’. For the purpose of this guideline, the

term communication plan will be used as it is important for biosphere reserves to focus on action-

oriented communication with definite outcomes.

b) What is a communication strategy, what could be its key content?

Info box / case study

A communication plan is a tool to assist the biosphere reserve in spreading its core message to all

relevant target audiences in order to meet the biosphere reserve’s goals and objectives. People need to

commit to the story of the biosphere reserve which starts with the vision as adopted by all stakeholders.

It is generally accepted that simple ideas are easier to understand. Therefore a biosphere reserve could

develop a slogan, focused on the core values, which could be used effectively in a communication plan

to obtain support and buy-in. An example of a good slogan is from Vhembe Biosphere Reserve in South

Africa: “We celebrate Life in the Land of Legend”.

A communication plan is time bound and includes deadlines - in other words, what you will be doing

before a certain time. It is crucial to engage with audiences in a meaningful way to inspire them, and to

empower people to take responsibility and action. Biosphere reserves are connecting people and nature

to inspire a positive future today.

The global MAB Communication Strategy has 6 key elements:

Objectives (aligning all communication activity to engagement outcomes);

Foundation (a framework for storytelling);

Target audiences (getting specific on who you are engaging and what they care most

about in order to connect with them);

Create messaging (consider inspirational key messages, and who the target audiences

will listen to);

Choose activities (selecting the best method to deliver the message to the target

audiences to have the greatest measurable impact);

Measurement (consistent method of measuring communication impact and

effectiveness).

A communication plan should address:

the reason for communicating;

definition of the different target audiences (including internal and external audiences);

SC-19/CONF.231/13 - page 29

description of the key messages the MAB Programme and the individual biosphere

reserve wish to convey; and

explanation on how the desired messages will be delivered/communicated to the

identified target audiences.

The key content of a communication plan should at least include (from

https://www.odi.org/publications/5186-planning-tools-how-write-communications-strategy):

Objectives - aligned to the management plan;

Audiences - target audiences with whom the biosphere reserve need to communicate

to achieve their objectives including government representatives, neighbouring

landowners, community leaders, local businesses, children and youth, local residents;

Messages - communication is all about storytelling, create a comprehensive case

covering all key messages;

Tools and activities - identify the most appropriate tools and activities, aligned to

available time and resources;

Resources and Timescales - set legitimate levels of expectations;

Evaluation and amendment - consider performing a communications audit to assess the

effectiveness of the plan including aspects such as reach (numbers of people),

investment (funds spent), impact (increased awareness or willingness to get involved).

Communication tools and activities could include (amongst others) website to hold publicly available

information about the biosphere reserve and its activities; online social media such as blogs and Twitter

feeds; newsletter or e-zine; press releases; public information days and meetings; biosphere reserve

related festivals and family events; youth competitions; regular meetings with stakeholders; forums both

for knowledge exchange and conflict resolution; production of promotional materials such as T-shirts,

banners, hats, leaflets and brochures; biosphere reserve branded merchandise.

Biosphere Reserves are:

About people, by people, for people

A vehicle for people to organise around

Connect people across the world

Connecting culture, nature and economy

Understand heritage, create future

Explore better solutions in practice

SC-19/CONF.231/13 - page 30

Ways of living, not only ways of conserving

Share values and language

Fuelled by passion

c) How to plan and implement a communication strategy?

Drawing up a communication plan is an art, not a science and there are different ways of approaching this

task.

The process of drafting a communication plan should start with establishing a working group, based with the

biosphere reserve management team, and that should include, or have access to, communication experts.

The communication plan should build the biosphere reserve story in line with MAB values. The working group

should manage the drafting of the plan as a two-way process, both vertically and horizontally, across all

audiences, levels and spheres.

The working group must work according to a set program which should start with a situation analysis to

evaluate the current state of communication. Following actions should address dates for meetings,

workshops with external stakeholders, timelines for gathering of information, drafting responsibilities, and

the process of adopting the communication plan.

Implementation of the communication plan is the responsibility of the biosphere reserve management team.

They should also ensure that capable consultants and/or service providers are appointed in cases where

there is a lack of relevant expertise. The management team should also facilitate monitoring and evaluation

of the communication plan, whether the work is done internally or by appointed service providers.

E. Transboundary Biosphere Reserves

a) Introduction, specificities, could provide examples of documents

Info box / case study

F. Multi-designated sites

a) Introduction:

explain that this section is referring to international designations, however note that individual BRs usually

include multiple national (as well as international) designations; introduce the case of overlapping BRs in

Brazil

Info box

Case study: Jeju Island Biosphere Reserve (draft)

The Jeju Island Biosphere Reserve was designated in 2002 and then was inscribed on the World Heritage list

in 2007. In 2010, Jeju Island was also endorsed as Global Geopark and was revalidated afterwards. At first,

management structure of these designated sites were complicated. Management of Biosphere Reserve was

under the Department of Environment Policy of Jeju local government, which is in charge of conservation of

biodiversity and national park. However, management of World Heritage and Global Geopark was under the

Department of Cultural Policy of Jeju local government due to the national situation. Later, Jeju government

established the Jeju World Natural Heritage Center for the integrated management of biosphere reserve,

world (natural) heritage and global geopark in Jeju Island. The Center set up a management committee of

SC-19/CONF.231/13 - page 31

UNESCO designated sites which is composed of 30 people from the Ministries, experts, local people and local

government who are involved in UNESCO sites. The Committee has three sub-committees on biosphere

reserve, world heritage and global geopark and these sub-committee members meet biannually and advise

the management issues.

ANNEXES

BIBLIOGRAPHY

German Commission for UNESCO (2015). Management Manual for UNESCO Biosphere Reserves in Africa.

URL: https://www.unesco.de/sites/default/files/2018-01/Manual_BR_Africa_en-1.pdf

IUCN. 2008. Management Planning for Natural World Heritage Properties. IUCN Protected Areas

Programme, Gland, Switzerland: IUCN. 35pp. URL: https://portals.iucn.org/library/efiles/documents/2008-

077.pdf

V. Data Management and Monitoring

What data should Biosphere Reserves monitor?

A. Quality Control

a) How to track performance of a Biosphere Reserve? (Performance Indicators (Seville

Strategy))

b) What tools can you use to monitor Biosphere Reserves?

B. Periodic Review

a) What is the Process of Excellence?

1) Which indicators can be used to know that the BR meets the criteria of the Statutory

Framework of the WNBR?

2) Are de draft decisions for the ICC prepared by the Advisory Committee clear enough or

explicit for decision making?

3) The evaluation or assessment of individual reserves by the Advisory Committee, need to

be reflected in clear and explicit reports that can help the process of learning, and

undertake activities to enhance management and attain excellence.

b) How to prepare a report for the periodic review?

Do we need a guide to explain how to prepare a report with information linked to indicators of quality and

quantity ( of performance or impact).

Or do we need to revise the format for Periodic Review and do specific modifications?

1) The Member States can't relay only in the evaluation of the Advisory Committee, they

need to raise national capacity of experts to give advice or orient the BR managers to

help achieve a credible, fully functioning network of sites of excellence. How can MAB

support the capacity building?

SC-19/CONF.231/13 - page 32

- Info box / case study

C. Web-based information clearing house and information center? (3.1 Madrid)

What this chapter about ? website ? database ? online database ?

In 3.1 Madrid, Actions: Creation of a web-based information clearinghouse and information centre, to

exchange and share technology, research, training, education and cooperation opportunities, findings and

experience, and to help to solve problems at local, regional and international levels

In 3.1 Madrid, Success Indicator: Functioning information clearing house mechanism Number and variety of

publications (print, webbased, etc.) and communications in UN as well as other regional and nationally

important languages; Current template of WNBR map adapted to

produce region and ecosystem specific maps as and when needed

what kind of data? geo-spatial data, time-serial monitoring data? related to what should BR monitor for?

what tools and device to monitoring?

Technical standard? web-based technical (html, css, javascript), database, language, webgis, .........

software: open source software? open standard?

D. How to map Biosphere Reserves?

Info box :

To map a Biosphere Reserves, several methods, tools and data sources exists. Peoples use them according

to the purpose of the map. In most of the cases the publics authorities, regional or national have maps or

can produce maps on demand.

a) Methods

The first step so is to be clear in the differents purposes or-and recepients. The costs consideraly change

according the case, from gratuitous to a few thousand dollars. If the oprator have time for that, develop his

skills it can be free by using opendata and opensource software. But doing a maps is a profession.

For examples the purposes or recipients can be :

Project map : a map who contribute to a projet, who is not public, it's no necessary to do a

advanced work

Official technical map : more professionnel and more advanced, the scale in genral is more

big

General map of the BR : professionnal work but in a scale most of cases more small

Touristic map : the communication aspects of the map have to be works a lot

b) Who make the maps ?

If no partners, no publics autorities can do the maps for the BR, two possibilities. Doing a personnal

realization orgivethe works to an external private society.

Advantage : have his own data base, control his costs, go faster in cartogrpahy and geographic analysis

Disadvantage : at each time you need to pay

SC-19/CONF.231/13 - page 33

c) Data :

The most expensive aspect and the most difficult is to find the good data to do the maps or to create the

data.

In each country, several institutions manage or create data.

open data (corpernicus, ...)

geographics webservices

sellers or reseller of data

c) Tools :

cartography software :

a lot of online solution exists, or software to download

Geographic Information System (GIS) :

proprietary software vs opensource software

Advantage :

Disadvantage :

Web Mapping solution :

Advantage :

Disadvantage :

Question for the group :

is the creation of the zoning concern this paragraph ? asking to TSG Zonation

(because creation is doing by GIS in general)

Case study :

a. Biosphere Reserve of Nothern Vosges-Pfaelzerwald :

Made with ArcGIS Online in three language :

http://parc-vosges-

nord.maps.arcgis.com/apps/MapTools/index.html?appid=2799b4b43ee1464e925353bc3da51b7c

V. Transboundary Biosphere Reserves

- Info box / case study

Particularity of data management and monitoring in TBR

SC-19/CONF.231/13 - page 34

VI. Multi-designated sites

- Info box / case study

Particularity of data management and monitoring in Muti-designated sites

ANNEXES

BIBLIOGRAPHY

SC-19/CONF.231/13 - page 35

ANNEX 6: SURVEY FOR ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEMBER - TSG GOVERNANCE

For each issue, please can each of you briefly indicate what you feel is - or are:

- the main problem(s) that should be looked at; - the various solutions which you know have been found to solve the problem; - what sort of guidance or recommendation would be needed to help countries or sites to

improve the situation or simply deal with the issue.

I. Local participation (elements of this section will include sub-sections a) before

nomination and b) after designation

Engagement strategy development: early engagement and building long-term relationships

Stakeholder mapping: how to proceed and how to use it

Local participation: how to organize it, mechanisms to ensure local participation and

techniques for conflict resolution

Inclusion of areas where traditional lifestyles and indigenous uses of biodiversity are

practiced (including sacred sites) cf Seville Strategy, Goal II, 3

Role of the agency responsible for the core area

Role of local authorities and other government agencies/organisations (at any level from

local to national)

Involvement of the private sector

II. Institutional/governance mechanisms

Role of national authorities and/or, in federal states, regional authorities

Establishment of a biosphere reserve from 1) an existing protected area or 2) ex nihilo

Mechanisms to manage human use and activities in the buffer zones (art 4 item 7 a):

regulatory and contractual policies, incentives, joint decision-making

Authority or mechanism: difference between authority and mechanism, composition,

regulatory/enforcement powers (police powers)

Institutional mechanisms to manage, coordinate and integrate programmes and activities

of the BR

Models for authorities and mechanisms; and their advantages and weaknesses

1) Existing body of a protected are, (in some cases, extending beyond its boundaries), or

of part of the area

a. e.g., National Park, Regional Nature Park, cooperation Nature/Marine Park

2) Structure under specific national legislation on BRs

a. e.g. Spain, Mexico

3) Public governing body adapted to the needs of the BR

a. e.g. a municipality with the addition of a management committee and associations

4) Governance of an Island

a. e.g., Minorca, Isle of Man

5) Public

a. e.g., grouping of public institutions including municipalities

6) Private

a. e.g., association or charity under national law

7) Public/private partnerships (with clear definition of roles and responsibilities)

8) Ad hoc structure

9) Others