transboundary protected area solutions€¦ · during the presentation (and send to everyone so all...

Welcome to the 6th PANORAMA webinar!

1. Please mute your microphone (on computer or phone).

2. Please type any comments or questions into the chat box during the presentation (and send to everyone so all can see).

3. If you are experiencing any connection issues, please contact Valérie Batselaere in the chat box or email [email protected]

Transboundary Protected Area Solutions 7 December 2016

mailto:[email protected]

Agenda Welcome; introducing the PANORAMA initiative • Marie Fischborn (IUCN Global Protected Areas Programme)

Introducing the WCPA Transboundary Protected Areas Specialist Group • Charles Besançon (IUCN WCPA Transboundary Specialist Group)

Solution 1: Promoting transboundary co-existence of large carnivores • Brady Mattsson (University of Natural Resources & Life Sciences Vienna, Austria)

and Andrej Arih (Triglav National Park, Bled, Slovenia)

Solution 2: Good Water Neighbors: Rehabilitating the Jordan River through transboundary cooperation • Marina Djernaes (Center for Water Security, EcoPeace Middle East, USA)

Q&A and discussion

Closing words

PANORAMA Solutions …

are tools, methods, processes and approaches that work and inspire action, and

…have an impact

…are replicable / scalable

…are topic relevant

Community Conservation

PANORAMA – some solution providers

Lauru Land Conference of

Tribal Community

University of San Carlos Guatemala

Government of Palau

Share and exchange on solutions

Online platform

Communications: - Newsletter

- Publications - Social media

- Webinars

Face-to-face meetings: - Workshops

- Trainings

PANORAMA web platform www.panorama.solutions

http://www.panorama.solutions/

Thematic portals within the PANORAMA platform

Hosted by

Hosted by

Hosted by

Transboundary solutions on the new PANORAMA platform

Thank you!

www.panorama.solutions

[email protected]

Next PANORAMA webinar: early 2017; World Heritage

IUCN WCPA Transboundary Conservation Specialist Group

Charles Besancon

Executive Committee, Transboundary Conservation Specialist Group

Transboundary Conservation Specialist Group

Peace Parks and Transboundary Conservation


“In a world beset by conflict and division, peace is one of the cornerstones of the future. Peace parks are building blocks in this process, not only in our region, but potentially the entire world.” – Nelson Mandela, 2001

Growth of Transboundary Conservation

0

50

100

150

200

250

1988 1997 2001 2005 2007

Transboundary Conservation Areas andinternationally adjoining protected areas


• Established in 1997

• The only global network of transboundary conservation specialists

• 260+ expert members

• http://www.tbpa.net



1. Support CBD Parties in delivering the goals and targets of the CBD Programme of Work on Protected Areas

2. Support transboundary conservation initiatives through improved knowledge management, networking and capacity building


Transboundary Conservation Specialist Group: Objectives

IUCN WCPA’s Best Practice Guidelines on transboundary conservation


• Comprehensive resource for establishing, managing and monitoring transboundary conservation areas

• Establishes new definitions and typology of transboundary practice

• Pre-launch at IUCN World Parks Congress, Sydney, 2014

• Published in May 2015

https://portals.iucn.org/library/sites/library/files/documents/PAG-023.pdf




Typology of Transboundary Conservation Areas

1. Transboundary Protected Area

2. Transboundary Conservation Landscape and/or Seascape

3. Transboundary Migration Conservation Area

Special designation:

Park for Peace


Thank You!


[email protected]

Brady J. Mattsson1, Harald Vacik1, Andrej Arih2, Stefano Santi3

7 December 2016

Promoting transboundary co-existence of large carnivores

1) University of Natural Resources & Life Sciences Vienna, Austria 2) Triglav National Park, Bled, Slovenia 3) Nature Park Prealpi Giulie, Resia, Italy

Context

Need to engage stakeholders to promote ecological connectivity


Building Blocks 1 & 2 of 5

1. Frame decision problem

Review existing plans & documents

Agree on question:

“Over the next 10 years, how can the managers of Triglav National Park and Prealpi Giulie Nature Park allocate their resources to best satisfy all stakeholders concerned about brown bears in the Julian Alps?”

2. Identify joint management objectives

Stakeholder groups:

Wishes and concerns

Ultimate objectives


Action taken by park managers* Triglav NP

PN Prealpi

Giulie Triglav NP

PN Prealpi

Giulie

Organize forums for info exchange with stakeholders 30 80 30 50

Create inclusive TB bear management position paper 10 0 5 5

Involvement with strategic & operational decisions 5 0 10 10

Participate in EU management projects (e.g. LIFE) 10 0 5 5

Pressure state to give out bear-prevention tools 5 5 5 10

Protected area distributes prevention tools 10 0 5 5

Organize regular meetings of data-gatherers 15 15 10 10

Remove problem bears 10 0 25 0

Participate in research projects 5 0 5 5

TOTAL (must be 100) 100 100 100 100

ASSUMES

UNLIKELY FUTURE*

ASSUMES

LIKELY FUTURE

(Status Quo)


PN Prealpi

Giulie Triglav NP

PN Prealpi

Giulie










TOTAL (must be 100) 100 100 100 100

ASSUMES

UNLIKELY FUTURE*

ASSUMES

LIKELY FUTURE

(Status Quo)


PN Prealpi

Giulie Triglav NP

PN Prealpi

Giulie










TOTAL (must be 100) 100 100 100 100

ASSUMES

UNLIKELY FUTURE*

ASSUMES

LIKELY FUTURE

(Status Quo)


PN Prealpi

Giulie Triglav NP

PN Prealpi

Giulie










TOTAL (must be 100) 100 100 100 100

ASSUMES

UNLIKELY FUTURE*

ASSUMES

LIKELY FUTURE

(Status Quo)

Option 1

Total


PN Prealpi

Giulie Triglav NP

PN Prealpi

Giulie










TOTAL (must be 100) 100 100 100 100

ASSUMES

UNLIKELY FUTURE*

ASSUMES

LIKELY FUTURE

(Status Quo)

Triglav NP

PN Prealpi

Giulie

30 50

5 5

ASSUMES

UNLIKELY FUTURE

Option 2

ASSUMES OPTIMISTIC FUTURE

Building Block 3 of 5

3. A) Management options

B) External factors

C) Allocation options:


* 3 of 9 possible actions shown as examples

Maintain bear pop. carrying capacity

Maintain sustainable agriculture

Minimize conflicts

Allocation options

Agreement among Alpine countries

Perceived competence of parks

Building Block 4 of 5

4. Decision analysis


Diagram

Decision model

Stakeholder workshop

Ultimate objectives

External factors

Building Block 5

5. Agree & implement recommendation

Sensitivity analysis, discuss

Agree on concrete actions


02550

TNP % Allocation

02550 0 25 50

Action 4. Participate in EU management projects (e.g. LIFE, Interreg): exchange ideas through

TB meetings to develop proposals that incorporate TB management principles and incorporate

regular info transfer among stakeholders and between parks; both parks participate in project

implementation; and ensure proper inclusion of project results into parks’ management plans

and operational protocols to facilitate effective TB management of bears.

Action 1. Organize forums for info exchange with stakeholders: organize at least 2

transboundary (TB) meetings per year with relevant representatives to prepare common

protocol for TB info exchange including a common database and sophisticated

communication tools to improve effectiveness of TB bear management efforts.

Action 2. Create inclusive TB bear management position paper: create draft position paper

highlighting areas of agreement among stakeholders; in case of open questions seek common

solutions through workshops; regularly update draft; and incorporate agreed position paper into

parks’ management plans to ensure that stakeholder wishes are taken into account when

implementing TB bear management measures.

Action 3. Involvement with strategic & operational decisions: participate in meetings with state

administration for taking strategic decisions; initiate or participate in national and TB meetings

to discuss crucial management questions and participate in developing decision documents;

and organize operational meetings at local level; and participate in implementing operational

decisions, e.g. measures to mitigate conflicts and raise public awareness.

Action 9. Participate in research projects: follow relevant calls through the European Union

framework programme funding research and innovation; and work closely with researchers when

developing project ideas to incorporate work packages and tasks that will inform TB bear

management

NPPG % Allocation

02550 0 25 50

Action 6. Protected area distributes prevention tools: prepare criteria/protocol for equipment

allocation/donation; organize trainings for the proper installation and use of equipment; and

monitor the effectiveness of equipment use, to improve efficiency of TB bear management

Action 5. Pressure government authorities to give out bear-prevention tools: ask relevant state

authorities in IT and SL to provide bear prevention tools free of cost to relevant stakeholders

(e.g. farmers, bee-keepers); and initiate legislative framework amendment to enable farmers

in the region to apply for preventative tools free of cost or with at least partly reduced costs

[already accomplished on SL side] to improve efficiency of TB bear management.

Action 7. Organize regular meetings of data-gatherers: organize TB meetings including

pressuring data-gatherers about the necessity of sharing data; during meetings with data-

gatherers, identify the type of information required for comprehensive management, reach

agreement concerning data submission, and exchange and interpret the information to

improve effectiveness of TB bear management efforts

Action 8. Manage conflict bears: participate in administrative procedures (written opinions,

coordination, alternatives); work closely with farmers and other stakeholders to reach agreement

on most appropriate solutions beyond administrative procedures to prepare initiative for state

administrations to reduce administrative barriers; and data exchange between authorities of TNP

and PNPG regarding conflict bears to improve efficiency of TB bear management

02550

TNP % Allocation

02550 0 25 50

Action 4. Participate in EU management projects (e.g. LIFE, Interreg): exchange ideas through

TB meetings to develop proposals that incorporate TB management principles and incorporate

regular info transfer among stakeholders and between parks; both parks participate in project

implementation; and ensure proper inclusion of project results into parks’ management plans

and operational protocols to facilitate effective TB management of bears.

Action 1. Organize forums for info exchange with stakeholders: organize at least 2

transboundary (TB) meetings per year with relevant representatives to prepare common

protocol for TB info exchange including a common database and sophisticated

communication tools to improve effectiveness of TB bear management efforts.

Action 2. Create inclusive TB bear management position paper: create draft position paper

highlighting areas of agreement among stakeholders; in case of open questions seek common

solutions through workshops; regularly update draft; and incorporate agreed position paper into

parks’ management plans to ensure that stakeholder wishes are taken into account when

implementing TB bear management measures.

Action 3. Involvement with strategic & operational decisions: participate in meetings with state

administration for taking strategic decisions; initiate or participate in national and TB meetings

to discuss crucial management questions and participate in developing decision documents;

and organize operational meetings at local level; and participate in implementing operational

decisions, e.g. measures to mitigate conflicts and raise public awareness.

Action 9. Participate in research projects: follow relevant calls through the European Union

framework programme funding research and innovation; and work closely with researchers when

developing project ideas to incorporate work packages and tasks that will inform TB bear

management

NPPG % Allocation

02550 0 25 50

Action 6. Protected area distributes prevention tools: prepare criteria/protocol for equipment

allocation/donation; organize trainings for the proper installation and use of equipment; and

monitor the effectiveness of equipment use, to improve efficiency of TB bear management

Action 5. Pressure government authorities to give out bear-prevention tools: ask relevant state

authorities in IT and SL to provide bear prevention tools free of cost to relevant stakeholders

(e.g. farmers, bee-keepers); and initiate legislative framework amendment to enable farmers

in the region to apply for preventative tools free of cost or with at least partly reduced costs

[already accomplished on SL side] to improve efficiency of TB bear management.

Action 7. Organize regular meetings of data-gatherers: organize TB meetings including

pressuring data-gatherers about the necessity of sharing data; during meetings with data-

gatherers, identify the type of information required for comprehensive management, reach

agreement concerning data submission, and exchange and interpret the information to

improve effectiveness of TB bear management efforts

Action 8. Manage conflict bears: participate in administrative procedures (written opinions,

coordination, alternatives); work closely with farmers and other stakeholders to reach agreement

on most appropriate solutions beyond administrative procedures to prepare initiative for state

administrations to reduce administrative barriers; and data exchange between authorities of TNP

and PNPG regarding conflict bears to improve efficiency of TB bear management

Percent Allocation

4a. Decision Model

Approach


Influence Diagram

Real World Problem &

Decision Making

5a. Recommended Strategy

5b.Implement

1. Problem framing

In Progress

4b. Decision Analysis

Learn & Adapt

PA Manager Workshop

Stakeholder Workshop

25 kmSlovenia

ItalyAustria

2. Objectives 3. Actions

Impacts

1. Enhanced transboundary coordination

Joint wildlife management

Ecological connectivity

2. Stakeholder exchange forum

Human-wildlife coexistence

Minimize conflicts

3. Prevention training

Build stakeholder capacity

Reduce bear damage


25 km

http://www.provincia.bz.it/foreste/2693.asp

Reflections 1. Useful participatory process

2. Ongoing challenges:

Engaging stakeholders

Adapting to change

3. Adaptable & transferrable participatory process


Thank you for your

attention!


Brady Mattsson

Postdoctoral Research Associate

Institute of Silviculture

Department of Forest and Soil Sciences

University of Natural Resources &

Life Sciences, Vienna, Austria

E-mail: [email protected]

Andrej Arih

Triglav National Park

Bled, Slovenia

E-mail: [email protected]

Marina Djernaes,

December 7, 2016

Good Water Neighbors

Rehabilitating the Jordan River

through transboundary cooperation

Center for Water Security

Good Water Neighbors

Brings people together across the conflict to jointly advance

sustainable cross border water and sanitation projects and improve

the natural environment.

Beneficiaries: citizens, the governments, international visitors, other

stakeholders, and the global environment.

Raises awareness of the shared

water reality of Jordanians,

Palestinians, and Israelis.

Water Grab and Backdoor Dump

• A conflict mindset has led the Jordan River to be a mere trickle of

what it originally was with 94% of the original water flow diverted.

• High concentration of sewage, fishpond effluents and agriculture

runoff, despite its incredible environmental importance to the

world.

• The Jordan River is a border area surrounded by minefields,

checkpoints and fences.

Building Blocks

Bottom Up - Grassroots initiative

• Address issues from a grassroots perspective

• Achieve local engagement.

• Empower the civil society

Top Down

• Create awareness in national governments and international institutions

• Research and Media

• Mobilize the necessary resources to advance the solutions

Impact

• Sewage treatment plants in Jordan, Palestine

and Israel

• Release of fresh water into the Jordan River by

the Sea of Galilee

• Return of native habitat

• Jordan River Masterplan advances 129 projects

requiring $5.6M investment across the Jordan

Valley including a cross border peace park

Reflections

• It is a long term process

• The synergy between the two approaches is

important for results

• Local leadership from the local community is

important

• Seeing is believing and leads to action

• Facilitators are needed

• Sustainable strong networks can be created

through meetings and collaboration on

environmental

Thank

you Marina Djernaes:

[email protected]

transboundary protected area solutions€¦ · during the presentation (and send to everyone so all...

Documents