Monitoring Package for Assessing Management Effectiveness of Protected Areas

Transcription

1 Monitoring Package for Assessing Management Effectiveness of Protected Areas Report Prepared for: The National Protected Areas Policy & System Plan Task Force (NPAPSP) by Dr. Roy Young Dr. Larry Wolfe Dr. Victoria Macfarlane University Research and Evaluation and Galiano Institute for Environmental and Social Research July 005 Contact Person: Dr. Roy Young Tel: or 8-680/1 Fax: Belize National Protected Areas System Plan Appendices: Young et al, 005: Monitoring Mngmt Effectiveness 1

2 Table of Contents INTRODUCTION INSTRUCTIONS FOR EVALUATION PROCESS... SITE ASSESSMENTS... Process Organize Site Evaluation Team.... Worksheet and Supporting Documents.... Management Plan.... Management Functions Assessment Overall Report... 5 Site Evaluation Timing...5 BIOREGIONAL ASSESSMENTS...6 Process...6 Bioregional Evaluation Team...8 Bioregional Evaluation Timing...8 NATIONAL ASSESSMENT...9 National Evaluation Team...10 National Evaluation Timing MANAGEMENT FUNCTION INDICATORS...11 DEFINITIONS...11 Sufficient...11 Program...11 Required Inventories...11 Stakeholders...1 RESOURCE INFORMATION Inventory: Physical Environment Inventory: Biotic Environment Inventory: Cultural and Archaeological Resources Inventory: Social, Cultural, and Economic Context Inventory: Resource Use and Occupancy Inventory: Tenures and Claims Site Assessment: Conservation Target Site Assessment: Systematic Threat Assessment Traditional Knowledge Information Management Systems Environmental Monitoring Activities Scientific Research Activities RESOURCE ADMINISTRATION, MANAGEMENT, AND PROTECTION Legal: Legal Status Legal: Boundary Survey and Demarcation Legal: Registration, Permit, and Approval Processes Tenure and Claim Conflict Resolution Activities Guidelines and Best Management Practices Protection: Surveillance Activities Protection: Enforcement Activities Visitor and Tourism Management Activities Visitor and Tourist Monitoring Activities.... PARTICIPATION, EDUCATION, AND SOCIO-ECONOMIC BENEFITS Communication Activities Educational Activities Dissemination of Knowledge and Information Participation: Level of Participation in Management Participation: Local Actors Leading Protected Area Management...7 Belize National Protected Areas System Plan Appendices: Young et al, 005: Monitoring Mngmt Effectiveness

3 .6. Participation: Volunteer Activities Participation: Strength of Social Capital Participation: Capacity Building Benefits: Socio-Economic Benefits Programs Benefits: Extent of Local Economic Benefits Benefits: Recognition of Protected Area Benefits...0. MANAGEMENT PLANNING Management Plan Implementation Operational Plan Implementation Regulations and Zoning Implementation..... Long-Term Management Needs Identification Program Monitoring and Evaluation GOVERNANCE Protected Area Objectives Co-Management Arrangements Administrative Autonomy Operating Procedures: Advisory Committee Operating Procedures: Board Interorganizational Mechanisms HUMAN RESOURCES Site Manager Preparation Site Manager Availability Administrative Staff Availability Technical, Scientific, and Professional Staff Availability Operations Staff Availability Human Resource Surveys Training and Development FINANCIAL AND CAPITAL MANAGEMENT Funding Adequacy Revenue Generation Financial Management Infrastructure Adequacy Equipment Adequacy Internal Access Adequacy Signage Adequacy Maintenance Adequacy...5 BIOPHYSICAL INDICATORS FOR MARINE PROTECTED AREAS MONITORING WORKSHEET...51 BACKGROUND (CONTEXT) ON PROTECTED AREA...5 1) RESOURCE INFORMATION...5 ) RESOURCE ADMINISTRATION, MANAGEMENT, AND PROTECTION...56 ) PARTICIPATION, EDUCATION, AND SOCIO-ECONOMIC BENEFITS...59 ) MANAGEMENT PLANNING...6 5) GOVERNANCE ) HUMAN RESOURCES ) FINANCIAL AND CAPITAL MANAGEMENT...7 APPENDIX A: FRONT SHEETS AND ROLL UPS...76 PROTECTED AREA PROFILE: FRONT SHEET...76 ROLL-UP SUMMARY...77 Belize National Protected Areas System Plan Appendices: Young et al, 005: Monitoring Mngmt Effectiveness

4 INTRODUCTION The evaluation process described in this report was developed for the National Protected Areas Policy and Systems Plan (NPAPSP) project. The purpose of the evaluation process was to provide a practical methodology for monitoring management effectiveness of the Protected Areas System of Belize and for providing recommendations on ways to optimize efficiency and effectiveness in the system s management based on the needs of Belize. The project relied on previous studies of the Project for the Conservation and Sustainable Use of the Mesoamerican Barrier Reef System (MBRS); Programa Ambiental Regional para Centroamérica / Central America Protected Areas System (PROARCA/CAPAS), World Wildlife Fund Centroamérica, World Conservation Union s (IUCN) World Commission on Protected Areas (WCPA), The Nature Conservancy, other agencies, and emerging NPAPSP reports. The explanation of the development and application of this methodology is found in the main report for this study: Young, Roy, Larry Wolfe, and Victoria Macfarlane Monitoring Management Effectiveness in Belize s Protected Areas System. Report prepared for the National Protected Areas Policy & System Plan Task Force (NPAPSP). Site staff and others using this monitoring process should review the above document to understand the monitoring process. This document consolidates material that is used to implement the process. It is a package of tools for conducting assessments of management effectiveness of protected area sites. Section 1.0 provides instructions on how to use the evaluation process. The process uses The Nature Conservancy s Five-S method for assessing success in achieving desired results or outcomes for protected areas. The method also assesses the effectiveness of the process of achieving these outcomes through assessment of management functions. Section.0 provides comprises a list of indicators for evaluating effectiveness of management functions. Finally, Section.0 provides a worksheet that site staff can use to assemble information needed for site assessments. Belize National Protected Areas System Plan Appendices: Young et al, 005: Monitoring Mngmnt Effectiveness 1

5 1.0 INSTRUCTIONS FOR EVALUATION PROCESS These instructions outline the recommended processes to use at the site, bioregional, and national level. Site Assessments Process Figure 1 outlines a suggested approach for the assessment of a protected area site. This process can be adapted as necessary by evaluation teams to fit the situation. However, the evaluation report needs to produce a report with equivalent information. The suggested process includes the followings steps. 1. Organize Site Evaluation Team A site evaluation team should be appointed to conduct the assessment. The site evaluation team needs to be small enough to facilitate getting together, but large enough to assemble good information and a diversity of opinion. A suggested size is 5 members, which might be varied depending on the size of the site. It is important that the size be workable and that the process does not lead to meeting fatigue of community leaders and protected area staff. The recommended composition of the team is: Site manager Representative of board or advisory committee Representative of sponsoring agency (e.g. Forest Department) Stakeholder from adjacent community Local expert (conservation, evaluation process, or management) The site manager is an essential source of information and opinion, and should have voice and vote at assessment meetings. Ex officio participation of key staff may also be necessary. Someone on the team should be familiar with the assessment approach. If this is the first run of the assessment, the team may wish to invite a knowledgeable facilitator to assist the evaluation. In some cases, the advisory committee for a site, or subcommittee, might be a suitable option as an evaluation team, provided has a composition comparable to that recommended above. The evaluation process would provide an important advisory service, a learning experience for committee members, and a more important participatory role in management of the protected area. Consultation. The evaluation team should determine when input should be sought from local communities and other stakeholders. This should occur early in the process, before ideas become fixed, and at the conclusion of the process, when stakeholders can still question and influence final reports.. Worksheet and Supporting Documents The work of the evaluation team vitally depends on information provided by the protected area staff. A worksheet has been developed to assist staff in identifying the relevant information. Staff should provide the information requested in the worksheet to the site evaluation team well in advance of the first evaluation meeting. The worksheet is a checklist of useful information. Some of the information will be available in reports and other documents, and can be simply referred to in the worksheet. Worksheet information is important to getting information for evaluation as well as for broader planning processes. Belize National Protected Areas System Plan Appendices: Young et al, 005: Monitoring Mngmnt Effectiveness

6 Documents that can help support the team s analysis, which should be provided by the project area staff, might include: Management plans Operational plans Co-management agreements Monthly/quarterly/annual reports Inventories (e.g., resource inventories, socioeconomic inventories, archeological surveys, maps of the area) Research reports Surveys and survey findings (e.g., visitor satisfaction) Legal documents (e.g., relevant legislation, regulations, site designation) Log books (e.g., visitor counts, logs of equipment maintenance, logs of surveillance and enforcement activities) Records of interorganizational collaboration (e.g., joint projects, meeting minutes) Governance documents (e.g., terms of reference, board policy and procedure manuals, meeting minutes) Budgets and financial statements (audits) Staff lists. Management Plan Ideally, the management plan for the protected area will be completed and up-to-date. A good management plan should provide the basis for a good evaluation. The most recent management plan should be provided to the evaluation team, along with details of any revisions in progress at the time of the evaluation. A management must exist for a protected area before its management effectiveness is evaluated.. Management Functions Assessment After completing the outcomes report, the evaluation team can conduct a management functions assessment. This assessment can be done immediately following the outcomes assessment, with a combined report prepared later. Again, additional information may be gathered, when necessary. Additional information can be gathered between evaluations for the later assessments. This assessment has some optional sub-steps: a. Selection of Indicators. The evaluation team should review the indicators suggested in this report. In selecting indicators, they should determine if each indicator is relevant. They should also decide if additional indicators are needed for an adequate assessment. In future assessments, teams should try to use indicators used in previous assessments to allow comparison of ratings over time. b. Decide on Weightings. The attributes of management measured by each indicator may vary in importance. The evaluation team may establish weightings for individual indicators to reflect differences in importance or relevant to the particular protected area. c. Decision Process. The evaluation team should determine in advance what process would be used for making rating choices. Ratings of team members can be averaged, however this can lead to strategic bias where members over-rate their choices to influence final results. Ratings can be done by vote, however this may disguise important minority opinions. These opinions could be reported in comments. The best approach is to work by consensus as much as possible. A Delphi approach involves team members working independently, sharing ratings anonymously, and revising based on seeing other raters ratings and further information. Belize National Protected Areas System Plan Appendices: Young et al, 005: Monitoring Mngmnt Effectiveness

7 Figure 1: Suggested Site Evaluation Process Management Plan Worksheet Mgt Function Workshop Select & Rate Indicators Data Collection Management Functions Report OVERALL REPORT Next Level Belize National Protected Areas System Plan Appendices: Young et al, 005: Monitoring Mngmnt Effectiveness

8 Consensus means that the members generally agree on the ratings, with no serious disagreements. Consensus processes usually lead to more discussion and understanding. The indicators allow for a final numerical rating that should be based on a review, by the evaluation team, of all relevant and available information. Ideally, ratings will be as objective as possible, based on sound evidence. This evidence might include: specific information provided in documents, interviews with/observations from program managers and staff, brief interviews or discussions with other relevant individuals, and personal observations (e.g., on-site observation of facilities). Each indicator has a section that describes what sources should be used. Additionally, each indicator has a section where evidence sources on which the final rating was based should be listed. 5. Overall Report. An overall report should be prepared summarizing the results of the outcomes and management functions assessments. It should be made available for public comment before finalization. The report provides useful information for bioregional and national planning, including support for individual protected areas. The report should thus include detailed evaluation data, including worksheet data, for bioregional and national roll-ups. Site Evaluation Timing The evaluation approach recommends instant, rapid, and detailed assessment options. The first assessment should be considered a baseline assessment and may be either an instant or a rapid assessment, depending on availability and organization of information. The first assessment basically provides information for establishing a starting point for future assessments. This assessment will undoubtedly require more time and effort than later assessments. Site staff must assemble information for the first time, and management and team members must learn the evaluation process. After the first assessment, site management can assemble evaluation information as part of routine operations. It can, for example, start to log valuable information on enforcement, length of surveyed boundaries, and other evaluation information. Such data keeping is crucially essential to site management and should not be considered an evaluation burden. Evaluation processes often drive improved management information systems. Site staff may wish to use the evaluation system to organize internal monitoring processes and do periodic evaluations of their own work. Such ongoing evaluation enhances the benefits of evaluation and improves subsequent formal evaluations. After the first evaluation, subsequent evaluations should be conducted annually based on available information and team judgment. The evaluation team should recommend what level of other future evaluations is necessary. This would include any necessary detailed evaluations, such as the need to conduct a detailed evaluation of visitor satisfaction or financial management procedures. Detailed evaluations should only be done on a very selective basis when needs for evaluation have been identified. In preparing for the site assessment, as a general guide, we suggest the following schedule for the first assessment. The evaluation team should be appointed at least months prior to the evaluation so it can meet and decide what the final schedule should look like. Organize Site Evaluation Team: months prior to the planned assessment date, the site evaluation team is established Worksheet and Supporting Documentation: o months prior to the planned assessment date, the site manager completes the worksheet and compiles supporting documentation. Belize National Protected Areas System Plan Appendices: Young et al, 005: Monitoring Mngmnt Effectiveness 5

9 o.5 months prior to the planned assessment date, the site manager distributes worksheet and supporting documentation (including management plan, if available) to site evaluation team for review Management Plan: Where a Management Plan is available, it will have been submitted in the step above. Preparing for Management Functions Assessment: 1 month prior to the assessment date, the evaluation team meets to decide on final selection of indicators, weighting, and decision process. The team also discusses the existing data that has been compiled and reviewed, as above, to determine if additional information is needed. The site manager then compiles and distributes any further documentation needed to support decisions on the final set of indicators that the team has agreed upon. Management Functions Assessment: the management functions assessment is conducted based on completion of the above steps. Assuming that all above steps have been completed in advance and the team has reviewed all supporting documentation, the management functions assessment should take a day or two to complete. Overall Report: within 1 month after completion of the site assessment, the summary report should be submitted by the leader of the site evaluation team. Although the schedule stretches over several weeks, the evaluation team will require an estimated to 5 actual working days for completing its work on the site assessment process. The working time required for site staff will vary, depending on the existing organization of information, the quality of the management plan and other documentation, and whether they have been through the process before. Because there will be a lot of learning in the first run through of the assessment process, the first assessment should be primarily for training and debugging of the process. Input from managers suggests that site staffs will use indicators as a checklist for improving management before any assessment is even begun. In terms of fairness, sites should not be assessed on the basis of evaluative indicators that they have not seen before the year begins. Otherwise it would be like telling a swimmer that thinks he is finishing a race with 5 laps that the race really involves 0. Bioregional Assessments Process Management effectiveness assessments should be conducted at the bioregional level. These assessments should this include two components: 1. A roll-up of management effectiveness data from individual protected areas within the bioregion. Additional assessment of effectiveness of conservation in the bioregion Figure illustrates how site assessments contribute to bioregional and national assessments. Each individual assessment provides information for bioregional management. First, it provides roll-up data on outcomes and management functions assessments of individual sites. If these data are numerical, it may be possible to calculate numerical data on a regional level. These data may need to be weighted. For example, the ratings for a small site should not be averaged with data from a huge site. Nonetheless, these data should provide one measure of bioregional management effectiveness. It will allow comparison of regions. To illustrate, there may be 10 protected areas in a bioregion. For an indicator on biotic inventories, scores for sites may range from to.5 with an average of.5. For cultural and archaeological resources, the average score may be 1.5. This suggests broadly that information for biotic resources is better than for cultural and archaeological resources. This may suggest a need for more investment in cultural and archaeological inventories. Belize National Protected Areas System Plan Appendices: Young et al, 005: Monitoring Mngmnt Effectiveness 6

10 The site information also provides factual data as a database for bioregional planning and assessment. Based on the principle that the whole is more than the sum of its parts, the bioregional assessment should look at its own management functions. SITE ANALYSES Roll-Up BIOREGIONAL ANALYSES Roll-Up NATIONAL SYSTEM ANALYSIS CONSULTATION REPORT TO BELIZE Figure : Evaluation Roll-Up Process The bioregional assessments should address the status of ecological and cultural resources within the bioregion. For example, Belizeans want to know in succinct terms how well the coral reef systems and Mayan ruins are being protected in various areas of the country. The Five-S approach is well suited to an assessment of regional level conservation outcomes. Bioregions have some additional functions that need to be assessed. Certain protected areas functions can best be implemented at a bioregional level. For example, best management practices and guidelines can be developed at the bioregional level to address the unique management needs of a bioregion. Referring to coral reefs, guidelines can be developed cooperatively at bioregional level for activities such as visitor management. In fact, existing regional partnerships are already in place for some bioregions. The Mesoamerican Barrier Reef System Project, for example, is a forum for cooperation for international cooperation, and its Belizean component is an ideal bioregional venue for promoting best management guidelines. Examples of management functions at the bioregional level include: Belize National Protected Areas System Plan Appendices: Young et al, 005: Monitoring Mngmnt Effectiveness 7

11 Level of cooperation or partnerships among protected areas, communities, government agencies, nongovernment organizations, and others in the bioregion Status assessments of conservation targets and focal species by ecosystem Management plans for ecological corridors and connectivity Regional threat analyses and mitigation strategies Multi-site species management and recovery plans for species at risk Development of best management practices and guidelines for specific ecosystems Ecosystem-related education and awareness programs Support to individual protected areas Consultation. The evaluation team should determine when input should be sought from local communities and other stakeholders. This should occur early in the process, before ideas become fixed, and at the conclusion of the process, when stakeholders can still question and influence final reports. Bioregional Evaluation Team The bioregional team will likely be larger than a site team. It should be large enough to assemble good information and a diversity of opinion. A suggested size is 8 members. The recommended composition of the team is as follows: Representatives of protected areas sites selected to provide site level perspectives Representatives of two line government ministries (forests, fisheries), and Institute of Archaeology Representative from regional ecosystem body (e.g. MBRS) Representative of national protected areas agency (depending on future structures) At least one member of the team should be thoroughly familiar with the assessment approach, or alternatively, an outside facilitator should be commissioned for the evaluation. Ex officio participation may be expected from several organizations and stakeholders, such as key community and tourism stakeholder groups and agencies, international organizations, and donor organizations. Bioregional Evaluation Timing The first bioregional assessment, realistically, will be a rapid assessment, which will take longer than an instant assessment. Unless information is available and well organized, the evaluation team will need to put some effort into ensuring the information base is adequate. Subsequent assessments will be easier as team members establish information bases. The bioregional outcomes assessment will provide valuable input into site assessments. For example, a Five-S study will identify bioregional conservation targets and threats that should be considered in site assessments. Review of bioregional management functions, such as inventories and enforcement regimes are all examples of functions that would overlap with site assessments. In addition, site managers can participate in bioregional assessments on an ex officio basis, and learn more about how the methods work. Bioregional assessments also depend on input from site evaluations, which means the second assessment may provide a more complete analysis. The team should meet early to determine the scope and content of the evaluation, and begin to assemble and organize information. This includes a process for selecting appropriate indicators for assessing bioregional management functions. Belize National Protected Areas System Plan Appendices: Young et al, 005: Monitoring Mngmnt Effectiveness 8

12 Bioregional assessments could be conducted annually or biennially. Instant assessments and rapid assessments could alternate on a two year cycle. Detailed assessments should be conducted on recommendation of the evaluation team, and would focus on selected issues or problems identified in the assessment. National Assessment National level assessments would report on progress toward achieving objectives of the National Protected Areas Policy and System Plan, as well as a summary of ecological and cultural status of protected areas and management function performance. It should include two components: 1. A roll-up of management effectiveness data from individual protected areas and bioregions. Additional assessment of national conservation objectives Figure illustrates how site and bioregional assessments contribute to national assessments. Roll-up data would come from both sites and bioregions (see example in Appendix A). A national assessment should provide an overview of how sites are doing, including healthy sites and ones needing priority attention. It should also report on progress being made in various bioregions. Such information is crucial to planning, management, and allocation of resources. It is also critical to international organizations and donors who must have reliable information to guide their investments. Most importantly, this information is crucial to Belizean citizens in setting their priorities. National assessments should consider the nation-wide status of ecological and cultural resources. The Five-S approach is useful for an assessment of national conservation outcomes. The conduct of this process would provide a high-level prioritization and evaluation of conservation targets requiring national attention. In addition, the evaluation should consider performance of certain national functions. Legislation, for example, is a national task, and the adequacy of legislation is an element in evaluating national performance. Examples of management functions at the bioregional level include: Level of cooperation or partnerships among protected areas, bioregions, communities, government agencies, nongovernment organizations, and others in the bioregion Level of international cooperation with Belizean conservation Status and effectiveness of national legislation and regulations Coverage of ecosystems in protected area designations, including filling gaps Adequacy of government protected areas structures and mandates Level of interagency cooperation Collaborative integrated resource planning recognizing conservation goals Level of agency enforcement and prosecution work National data standards and information bases National environmental awareness and education Higher education for managers and staff Capacity building for protected areas and local stakeholders Belize National Protected Areas System Plan Appendices: Young et al, 005: Monitoring Mngmnt Effectiveness 9

13 National Evaluation Team The national team will likely be larger than a site or bioregional team, but should be kept reasonably small to ensure effectiveness. It should be large enough to assemble good information and a diversity of opinion. A suggested size is eight members, but in any case, should be of manageable size. It should include senior representatives of organizations. The recommended composition of the team is as follows: Representatives of two line government ministries (forests, fisheries), and Institute of Archaeology Representatives from national protected areas managers association and private protected areas association Representative of the University of Belize Representative from PACT Representative of national protected areas agency (depending on future structures) An outside facilitator should be commissioned to lead the evaluation. Ex officio participation may be expected from several organizations and stakeholders, such as key national community and tourism stakeholder groups and agencies, international organizations, and donor organizations. National Evaluation Timing The National Protected Areas Policy and System Plan Project (NPAPSP) provides extensive information for the first national assessment. However, this information must be adapted for evaluation. Realistically, the first evaluation will be a rapid assessment. Subsequent assessments will be easier as team members establish information bases. The first assessment depends on input from site and bioregional evaluations, which means it is a second year event following the bioregional assessments. On the other hand, the team should meet early to determine the scope and content of the evaluation, and begin to assemble and organize information. This includes a process for selecting appropriate indicators for assessing national management functions and reviewing and making bioregional evaluation indicators consistent. Subsequent quick assessments should be conducted every second year. These assessments would be based on available information and team judgment. A more detailed rapid assessment would require more extensive work and should be conducted every four years. Detailed assessments should be conducted on recommendation of the evaluation team, and would focus on selected issues or problems identified in the assessment. Belize National Protected Areas System Plan Appendices: Young et al, 005: Monitoring Mngmnt Effectiveness 10

14 .0 MANAGEMENT FUNCTION INDICATORS The following indicators are part of a proposed methodology for assessing the effectiveness of management of Belize s protected areas as a contribution to the National Protected Areas Policy and System Plan project. The explanation of the development and application of this methodology is found in the main report for this study: Young, Roy, Larry Wolfe, and Victoria Macfarlane Monitoring Effectiveness in Belize s Protected Areas System. Report prepared for the National Protected Areas Policy & System Plan Task Force (NPAPSP). Management effectiveness is defined in this methodology as (1) success in achieving desired ecological, cultural, and socio-economic outcomes () through the implementation of well-managed protected area management functions. These indicators are designed primarily to assess part () of this definition. Management of protected areas in Belize is a cooperative effort. Therefore, this definition addresses how well a given protected area is managed. This is not an evaluation of the effectiveness of an individual manager. Some indicators measure aspects of management outside the full control of the site manager and staff. Nonetheless, site management is a major contributing factor to success in management. Definitions Sufficient Sufficient, when referring to sufficient for management and/or planning, means adequate for current planning, management, and decision-making for the protected area at this time, and implementation of the protected area s management plan. When an item process is sufficient, it means that, while not perhaps perfect, it does serve the purpose for which it is intended. For example, a sufficient identification of illegal uses means that managers know how much illegal use is occurring and enforcement people know what areas need emphasis to do there work. Program A program is a group of activities to accomplish a purpose. An enforcement program, for example, is a group of enforcement activities (warnings, arrests, prosecutions) designed to reduce violations of regulations or rules. A program need not be formal program with a name. It is basically an area of activity performed by staff. In smaller protected areas, some individuals may implement several programs, such as visitor management, education, and inventory work. The essence of the definition is the implementation of a set of purposeful activities. In these indicators, program may be either singular or plural, and either way means the same thing. In these indicators, programs can also include processes. A program should be founded on a program strategy or plan for implementing a program, which lays out who will do what, with which resources, on what schedule, and with what performance quality requirements. This strategy or plan can be incorporated within the protected area s management plan, operational plan, or other document. Required Inventories Required inventories are information sets collected on various site features and attributes that are used in planning and management. To determine what is required, management should conduct a scoping process that identifies what is needed and essential for implementation of the management plan and for site management. In other words, required inventories include only what is required for planning and Belize National Protected Areas System Plan Appendices: Young et al, 005: Monitoring Mngmnt Effectiveness 11

15 management. Required inventory information should be mapped at appropriate scales and levels of accuracy, and nature and state of relevant resources and processes documented. Required inventories would address physical; biotic; cultural and archaeological resources; social, cultural, and economic context; resource use and occupancy; and tenures and claims. Indicators are identified for each of these areas. Stakeholders A stakeholder is a person, group, or organization that has a stake or interest in the management of a protected area. Local stakeholders include local communities, businesses, citizens, organizations, and other stakeholders based in the community. Belize National Protected Areas System Plan Appendices: Young et al, 005: Monitoring Mngmnt Effectiveness 1

16 Resource Information Goals These indicators assess the extent to which: Programs are in place to gather, store, analyze, and monitor information important to managing the protected area. Information gathered and analyzed are sufficient for management. Conservation information has been gathered to identify important conservation targets and threats Inventory: Physical Environment No useful inventories exist on the physical environment of the protected area. 1 Some required inventories have been completed on the physical environment. However, this information is either out-of-date, poorly documented, very limited in scope and quality, dispersed or difficult to access, and/or otherwise not sufficient for management Most required inventories on the physical environment have been completed. However, this information has not yet been comprehensively documented and mapped, and is not sufficient in key areas for management. Essential required inventories on the physical environment have been completed, and are fully sufficient for management. Score Belize National Protected Areas System Plan Appendices: Young et al, 005: Monitoring Mngmnt Effectiveness 1

17 Score 1.. Inventory: Biotic Environment No useful inventories exist on the biotic environment of the protected area. Some required inventories have been completed on the biotic environment. However, this information is either out-of-date, poorly documented, very limited in scope and quality, dispersed or difficult to access, and/or otherwise not sufficient for management. Most essential required inventories on the biotic environment have been completed. However, this analysis has not yet been comprehensively documented and mapped, and is not sufficient in key areas for management. Essential required inventories on the biotic environment have been assembled and mapped, and are fully sufficient for management. 1 Score 1.. Inventory: Cultural and Archaeological Resources No useful inventories exist on cultural and archaeological resources of the protected area. Some required inventories have been completed on cultural and archaeological resources. However, this information is either out-of-date, poorly documented, very limited in scope and quality, dispersed or difficult to access, and/or otherwise not sufficient for management Most required inventories on cultural and archaeological resources have been completed. However, this information has not yet been comprehensively documented and mapped, and is not sufficient in key areas for management. Essential required inventories on cultural and archaeological resources have been completed, and are fully sufficient for management. 1 Belize National Protected Areas System Plan Appendices: Young et al, 005: Monitoring Mngmnt Effectiveness 1

18 Score 1.. Inventory: Social, Cultural, and Economic Context No useful inventories exist on the social, cultural, and economic context of the protected area. 1 Some required inventories have been completed on the social, cultural, and economic context. However, this information is either out-of-date, poorly documented, very limited in scope and quality, dispersed or difficult to access, and/or otherwise not sufficient for management Most required inventories on the social, cultural, and economic context have been completed. However, this information has not yet been comprehensively documented and mapped, and is not sufficient in key areas for management. Essential required inventories on the social, cultural, and economic context have been completed, and are fully sufficient for management. Score 1.5. Inventory: Resource Use and Occupancy No useful information exists on existing resource uses and occupancies in the protected area. 1 Some required inventories have been completed on current resource uses and occupancies. However, this information is either out-of-date, poorly documented, very limited in scope and quality, dispersed or difficult to access, and/or otherwise not sufficient for management. Most required inventories on current resource uses and occupancies have been completed. However, this information has not yet been comprehensively documented and mapped, and/or is not sufficient in key areas for management. Essential required inventories on current resource uses and occupancies have been completed, and are fully sufficient for management. Belize National Protected Areas System Plan Appendices: Young et al, 005: Monitoring Mngmnt Effectiveness 15

19 1.6. Inventory: Tenures and Claims Score No useful information exists on existing tenures and claims in protected area. 1 Some required inventories have been completed on current tenures and claims. However, this information is either out-of-date, poorly documented, very limited in scope and quality, dispersed or difficult to access, and/or otherwise not sufficient for management. Most required inventories on current tenures and claims have been completed. However, this analysis has not yet comprehensively documented and mapped, and/or is not sufficient in key areas for management. Essential required inventories on current tenures and claims have been completed, and are fully sufficient for management Site Assessment: Conservation Target Score No conservation targets have been identified for this site. 1 Some conservation targets have been identified, but based on weak methodology and/or very limited consultation. They are out-of-date and/or very narrow in scope. They are not sufficient for planning and management. Conservation targets have been identified for the sites based on appropriate methodology and consultation. However, these targets are not up-to-date and/or broadly representative enough to be fully sufficient for planning and management. Conservation targets have been identified for the sites based on appropriate methodology and consultation, and are fully sufficient for planning and management. Belize National Protected Areas System Plan Appendices: Young et al, 005: Monitoring Mngmnt Effectiveness 16

20 Score 1.8. Site Assessment: Systematic Threat Assessment No systematic threat status assessment has been conducted for this site. 1 Some threat analyses have been conducted, but these are weak in methodology, unsystematic, out-of-date, narrow in scope, and/or lacking in consultation. They are not sufficient for planning and management. Threat analyses have been conducted based on appropriate methodology and consultation. However, these analyses are not up-to-date (within last five years) and/or not adequately systematic or broad enough in scope to be fully sufficient for planning and management. A systematic threat assessment has been conducted within the past five years based on appropriate methodology and consultation. This assessment is fully sufficient for planning and management. Score 1.9. Traditional Knowledge No traditional knowledge processes are being applied to planning and management of the site. Traditional knowledge processes exist, but it are poorly designed, unordered, incomplete, and/or are not being used. Traditional knowledge processes are being implemented. However, these processes are small in scale relative to need, and/or under funded, and/or not being evaluated, and therefore are not sufficient for management. Traditional knowledge processes are being implemented. These processes utilize a wide array of traditional information, using appropriate information technology. This system is adequate in scale relative to demand, adequately funded, regularly evaluated, and sufficient for management. 1 Belize National Protected Areas System Plan Appendices: Young et al, 005: Monitoring Mngmnt Effectiveness 17

21 Score Information Management Systems No system exists to manage information on the site and its features and resources. 1 An information system exists, but it is poorly designed, unordered, incomplete, and/or is not being used. An information system is being implemented. However, the system is small in scale relative to need, and/or under funded, and/or not being evaluated, and therefore is not sufficient for management. An information system is being implemented. It covers a wide array of information, using appropriate information technology, including GIS, computer databases, and remote sensing systems, where appropriate. This system is adequate in scale relative to demand, adequately funded, regularly evaluated, and sufficient for management. Score Environmental Monitoring Activities No environmental monitoring activities exist. 1 Environmental monitoring strategies have been developed, but are not being implemented (indicate why). Environmental monitoring activities are being implemented. However, these activities are narrow in scope relative to need, under funded, and/or are not being evaluated, and are not sufficient for management. Environmental monitoring activities are being implemented. These activities are adequate in scale relative to demand, adequately funded, regularly evaluated, continuously implemented from year-to-year, and sufficient for management. Belize National Protected Areas System Plan Appendices: Young et al, 005: Monitoring Mngmnt Effectiveness 18

22 Score 1.1. Scientific Research Activities No functional scientific research activities exist. 1 Functional scientific research strategies have been developed, but are not being implemented (indicate why). Functional scientific research activities are being implemented. However, these activities are narrow in scope relative to need, under funded, and/or are not being evaluated, and are not sufficient for management. Functional scientific research activities are being implemented. These activities are adequate in scale relative to demand, adequately funded, regularly evaluated, and sufficient for management.. Resource Administration, Management, and Protection This category covers a broad range of issues, including administration of land tenures and uses; compliance, surveillance and enforcement; and visitor management. Visitor/user management includes actions taken to manage and regulate the activities of legal uses within the protected area. These can include tourists, traditional users, licensed resource users, and others. Visitor/user management may involve construction and maintenance of capital, control of guiding activities, accommodation, and concessions. Goals These indicators assess the extent to which: The protected area is legally established and demarcated. Processes exist to address and manage legal uses of the site, outside influences, conflicting rights and uses, and illegal and prohibited activities, and visitors. Belize National Protected Areas System Plan Appendices: Young et al, 005: Monitoring Mngmnt Effectiveness 19

23 Score.1. Legal: Legal Status The site is not recognized in any official declaration or proposal. 1 The site has been proposed or publicly announced, but not otherwise protected. The site has been designated by ministerial or government agency decision or regulation. The site has been designated by strong legislation or equivalent permanent legal recognition or international recognition (Ramsar, UNESCO). Score.. Legal: Boundary Survey and Demarcation The boundaries of the site are not legally defined nor are they legally surveyed or demarcated in the field. The boundaries have been legally defined in the documents designating or establishing the site, but less than 50% of the planned surveys and demarcation has been completed. The boundaries have been legally defined in the documents designating or establishing the site, and between 50% and 75% of the planned surveys and demarcation has been completed. The boundaries have been legally defined in the documents designating or establishing the site, and at least 75% of planned surveys and demarcation has been completed. 1 Belize National Protected Areas System Plan Appendices: Young et al, 005: Monitoring Mngmnt Effectiveness 0

24 Score.. Legal: Registration, Permit, and Approval Processes No registration, permit, or approval processes exist. 1 Necessary registration, permit, or approval processes exist, but are not being implemented. Necessary registration, permit, or approval processes are being implemented. However, these processes are small in scale relative to need, and/or underfunded, and/or not being evaluated, and therefore are not sufficient for management. Necessary registration, permit, or approval processes are being implemented. These processes are adequate in scale relative to demand, adequately funded, regularly evaluated, and sufficient for management. Score.. Tenure and Claim Conflict Resolution Activities No strategies or activities exist for resolving conflicts. 1 A conflict resolution strategy exists, but is not being implemented. Conflict resolution activities are being implemented. However, these activities are small in scale relative to need, and/or underfunded, and/or not being evaluated, and therefore are not sufficient for management. Conflict resolution activities are being implemented. These activities are adequate in scale relative to demand, adequately funded, regularly evaluated, and sufficient for management. Belize National Protected Areas System Plan Appendices: Young et al, 005: Monitoring Mngmnt Effectiveness 1

25 Score.5. Guidelines and Best Management Practices No guidelines or best management practices exist for the site. 1 Guidelines and/or best management practices are being prepared for some management activities, or alternatively, they exist but need revision to be consistent with the management plan. They are not sufficient for management. Guidelines and/or best management practices have been completed for most major management activities, but are not being fully implemented. These are not sufficient for management without greater implementation. Guidelines and/or best management practices have been completed for most major management activities, and these are being fully implemented. They are fully sufficient for management. Score.6. Protection: Surveillance Activities No surveillance strategy exists 1 A surveillance strategy exists, but is not being implemented (indicate why). Surveillance activities are being implemented. However, these activities are small in scale relative to need, and/or under funded, and/or not being evaluated, and therefore are not sufficient for management. Surveillance activities are being implemented. These activities are adequate in scale relative to demand, adequately funded, regularly evaluated, and sufficient for management. Belize National Protected Areas System Plan Appendices: Young et al, 005: Monitoring Mngmnt Effectiveness

26 Score.7. Protection: Enforcement Activities No enforcement activities exist. 1 Enforcement strategies exist, but are not being implemented (indicate why). Enforcement activities are being implemented. However, these activities are small in scale relative to need, and/or under funded, and/or not being evaluated, and therefore are not sufficient for management. Enforcement activities are being implemented. These activities are adequate in scale relative to demand, adequately funded, regularly evaluated, and sufficient for management. Score.8. Visitor and Tourism Management Activities No visitor and tourism management activities exist. 1 Visitor and tourism management strategies exist, but are not being implemented (indicate why). Visitor and tourism management activities are being implemented. However, these activities are small in scale relative to need, and/or under funded, and/or not being evaluated, and therefore are not sufficient for management. Visitor and tourism management activities are being implemented. These activities are adequate in scale relative to demand, adequately funded, regularly evaluated, and sufficient for management. Belize National Protected Areas System Plan Appendices: Young et al, 005: Monitoring Mngmnt Effectiveness