1 / 11

~ MPA Scorecard ~ Assessing and Reporting on MPA Management Effectiveness

~ MPA Scorecard ~ Assessing and Reporting on MPA Management Effectiveness. Marco V. Cerezo (FUNDAECO) Barbara Reveles (SEMARNAT) Wil Mehia (TIDE) Marea E. Hatziolos (World Bank). Objectives. Reporting at Global Level. Use of results:

shayr
Download Presentation

~ MPA Scorecard ~ Assessing and Reporting on MPA Management Effectiveness

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. ~MPA Scorecard ~ Assessing and Reporting on MPA Management Effectiveness Marco V. Cerezo (FUNDAECO) Barbara Reveles (SEMARNAT) Wil Mehia (TIDE) Marea E. Hatziolos (World Bank)

  2. Objectives

  3. Reporting at GlobalLevel Use of results: • to report on progress of investments in Protected Area management to GEF and its implementing agencies • Tool is now being mainstreamed into terrestrial PA projects • Complement this with tool for use by MPA managers to get an overall view of status of PA management • to develop index of environmental sustainability at national level: Total area under protection X = Integrity of management effectiveness ecosystems/ sustainability ofgoods & services

  4. WCPA Framework • Context Where are we now? • Planning Where do we want to be? • Inputs What do we need? • Process How do we go about it? • Outputs What were the results? • Outcomes What did we achieve?

  5. Piloting the Scorecard • Scorecard was applied in 4 MPAs • Two of these located in the Gulf of Honduras (Trinational Alliance: TRIGOH) • One in Guatemala (Sarstun) • One in Belize (Port Honduras) • Another in Honduras • Cayos Cochinos • Another in Mexico • Banco Chinchorro

  6. Results • In Guatemala, scorecard was applied to Rio Sarstun and two terrestrial PA s in a participatory exercise w/staff • Low score was obtained • previously a paper park • new management plan is under preparation with field presence • Exercise very positive • Scorecard easily applied • Uses common sense • Requires readily available information • Does not require extensive preparation or time • Leads to constructive discussion

  7. More than just a Scorecard… • Answers are the result of in- depth discussion with staff and synthesize relevant information • Questions address a range of issues: • Legal status and regulations • Law enforcement • Boundary demarcation • Integration into ICM plans • Resource inventory • Management Plans/ Objectives • Research • Staff, budget and resource mgt • Equipment and training • Education and communication • Indigenous People and local community participation • Tourism, visitor facilities and fees • Economic benefits

  8. Result of Pilots Strong Points • Easy to use/teambuilding • Indicates trends/shows gaps • Can help in reallocating effort • Potential to standardize reporting throughout region Weaknesses • Emphasis on process and inputs rather than outputs and outcomes • Need to reconcile with other evaluation tools • Adequacy of tool depends on maturity and nature of MPA • Implications for future donor support may influence reporting

  9. Next Steps • How to use the results to improve management • How to improve the scorecard • Finer grained to more fully capture extent of effort and progress achieved? • More tailored to reflect differences in MPA type and age? • How to reconcile with other tools • Work in progress: www.MPAscorecard.net

More Related