《Best Practice in Protected Area Management and ….docx》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《Best Practice in Protected Area Management and ….docx（46页珍藏版）》请在taowenge.com淘文阁网|工程机械CAD图纸|机械工程制图|CAD装配图下载|SolidWorks_CaTia_CAD_UG_PROE_设计图分享下载上搜索。
1、Best Practice in Protected Area ManagementPlanningANZECC WorkingGroup on NationalParks and ProtectedAreas ManagementBenchmarking andBest PracticeProgramLead AgencyParks and Wildlife ServiceTasmaniaMay 2000Figure 2Protected AreaManagement Planning System(incorporating evaluation)Management Objectives
2、(Where do we want to go?What do we want to achieve?)Adjust actions?Management Actions(How are we goingto get there?)Review Management(What needs to happento improve performance?)Evaluation(Where are we? Are we getting where we want to go?)Figure 3Model of Protected Area Management Planning Process5.
3、 Revision of final plan, submission analysis and reportingGenerally this step involves documentation of public comments along with the resulting proposed plan changes. This documentation then accompanies (he proposed final plan through the subsequent approval steps. The level of feedback (o submitte
4、rs is variable, ranging from basic acknowledgement (most agencies) to published analysis of submissions (WA).Advisory/management committees/counciis and Traditional Owners may be involved in this or the previous stage, reviewing plans and submissions and advising the Minister (NSW, SA, NT, WA, Tas.
5、ACT, NZ). NZ has a legislated deadline to revise a draft plan and forward it to the Conservation Board within 8 months of public release. The Board then is required to approve the plan or refer it back to the DG within 6 months.6. Approved planA plan is approved by the Traditional Owners/Minister/Ch
6、ief Executive/Board and, in some cases, finally by the Parliament or the Governor. There is a myriad of different administrative processes. The public is informed of approval through public notice and copies are made available.7. ImplementationThere is little detail on how implementation is achieved
7、. The Commonwealth, NZ and ACT arc actively exploring this area.8. Monitoring and evaluationThere is little detail on processes here. Mid-term reviews are conducted in WA and NT. NZ and Tas arc developing monitoring and evaluation frameworks and processes.9. Decision to review planAs circumstances o
8、r legislation dictate. Usually the same processes are followed in broad terms.5 REVIEW AND DISCUSSION OF PRACTICESThis section identifies sonic “good practices “ in various aspects of the management planning process. Where known, specific planning tools/products are referred to. These are listed tog
9、ether in Appendix 8.5.1 Audience for management plansManagement plans arc prepared mainly for regular use by protected area managers (including operational staff). However, they are not intended as detailed works programs. Members of the public and senior agency staff are also important users. In so
10、me situations, traditional owners, neighbours, local Government or commercial operators can also be primary users.Management plans must meet managers, needs in terms of content, level of detail, case of use. There arc often conflicts between the needs and expectations of reserve managers, the comniu
11、nity and senior staff etc.Good PracticesIdentify and involve main users closely in plan preparation. Facilitate and encourage managers to lead/contribute to planning projects. Understand main users expectations and seek to meet them, where appropriate, in the planning process.5.2 Format and content
12、of management plansThere has been some convergence in the format and content of management plans. In general there has been a move to shorter, more concise plans, focussing on significant values and issues with little background resource information. These shorter plans may be supported by subsidiar
13、y documentation in which specific issues or areas arc addressed in more detail. This method of planning can be more suitable to traditional owners because it provides an opportunity for detailed discussion of issues.Queensland has taken the initiative of producing A3 brochure style plans fbr some sm
14、aller/simpler reserves.The Commonwealth has adopted a very simple English style fbr ils latest Kakadu plan, io make ii more accessible to traditional owners. Although some consider this style condescending, the concept of making plans more accessible to a wider range of users is worthy. Similarly, t
15、he Commonwealth has also translated key sections of the Uluru plan into the local Aboriginal language, Pitjantjatjara, and of the Christinas Island plan into Chinese and Bhasa Malay thereby acknowledging the main cultural groups on the Island.Standard formats are more or less being used within each
16、agency. Sometimes these are supported by electronic templates and planning manuals (o assist staff. These provide quality control as well as speeding the process.Good PracticesUse a simple, clear style with user-friendly language. Place the reserve in context - regional, national, international. Ide
17、ntify significant values and issues. Identify the criteria by which the performance of management under the plan will be assessed (see Tas reserve management performance standards)Use electronic templates and vary as needed (e.g. Qld, Vic, NSW, NT, Tas). Produce a management planning kit/manual for
18、planners including procedures, standard documents, common policies etc. (see Vic, NSW, Qld, NT documents)Use two (or more) levels of management plans - more detailed, fuller plans for national parks and important protected areas and less detailed, briefer plans for smaller reserves (see Qld plans).5
19、.3 Targets and timeframesTargets set by Ministers and/or agency senior management have been most effective in gaining high proportions of reserves covered by management plans. With the exception of WA and Qld, all other states and NZ expect to have all or nearly all national parks with management pl
20、ans by the end of 2001 (see Appendix 4). In NSW new parks have been added to the system and the target is now to have plans fbr new parks within 2-5 years after gazcttal.The focus of management planning effort has been on higher status, high use reserves. For example, there are approximately 27(X) p
21、rotected areas in Victoria under various pieces of legislation but only the 91 reserves managed under the National Parks Act are part of Parks Victorias planning target.In NZ, where DOC is responsible for over 5000 pieces of land, overall planning direction is provided by Conservation Management Str
22、ategies (CMSs) for each conservancy. Individual management plans are prepared for each national park and other reserves as identified by (he CMS. NT, WA and Tas are also using/dcvcloping broad planning approaches to provide a level of planning for all reserves.Timeframes for plan preparation and app
23、roval vary from 10 months (o 2+ years (sec Appendix 3 tor individual planning stages). Too tight a timeframe can alienate the public, miss out on valuable consultation and result in a plan needing early revision. However, there is a point where collecting additional information and further consultat
24、ion will not add much more to the plan but can be expensive.Good PracticesGain high level (Ministerial/Agency) public commitment to planning targets and timetables - as a means of ensuring planning is initiated and completed. Develop comprehensive planning for the entire protected area estate not ju
25、st a selection of reserves (see NZ, NT, Tas approaches). Establish realistic timeframes for the planning process to enable meaningful public consultation pre and post draft plan.5.4 Public involvementProviding opportunities for the public to have input to management of protected areas is a major rol
26、e of the management planning process. The community may be involved in the planning process at many levels, including: basic provision of information about the planning process and a general invitation to comment (planning tbr the public);targeted consultation with groups and individuals about speci
27、fic issues (planning with the public); active participation by the community in issues identificalion/definition and resolution (planning by the public).Greatly increased levels of time and resources are required to support active community participation in management planning. Determining the appro
28、priate level of community involvement in a planning project is a key “good practice “ decision.All reserve legislation requires formal exhibition of draft management plans for a minimum period (1-3 months) and some legislation requires pre-draft consultation.Regardless of legislative requirements, a
29、ll agencies consult with stakeholders and the public in the early planning stages. Formal calls for submissions at this stage can bring out important issues but generally most public response comes with the draft plan. Invited stakeholder workshops are an effective way of gathering and focussing pub
30、lic input at an early stage.Where there are tight planning time frames, pre and post draft consultation is minimal and may lead to loss of public involvement and confidence in the process.With many competing demands on peoples time, techniques are required that encourage and assist public involvemen
31、t.The internet is becoming increasingly important, especially for publishing draft plans. However, face-to- facc contact with interested people and groups will remain a key aspect of public consultation, particularly with Aboriginal/Iwi people, but also local coninuinitics and neighbours.The experie
32、nce of adequately consulting with traditional owners is mixed. Where traditional rights have been recognised through settlements, land title etc., there arc clear mechanisms for Aboriginal/Iwi involvement. Elsewhere, pending Native Title claims have complicated (he process of consultation withAborig
33、inal communities. It can be unclear who should be consulted. Time constraints imposed by planning targets can mitigate against attempts at meaningful consultation with Aboriginal people. However, approaches adopted by NZ. NT. WA, the Commonwealth and Tas arc useful. Characteristics of effective proc
34、esses of consultation with traditional owners include: allowing adequate lime for relevant community members to be consulted, face to face contact in the community environment, use of suitable media and language and official recognition in the process through membership of boards, committees, partne
35、rships etc.Most agencies do not provide published feedback to the public on submissions received on draft plans and any resulting changes. Although time-consuming, this step would improve accountability and confidence in the process as well as encourage continued involvement.Good PracticesTailor con
36、sultation to the particular circumstances. Inform the public when planning has commenced. Involve key stakeholders and others early. Enable “non-submission writers to be heard through on-site visits etc. where they feel comfortable. Establish and use state/regional/district consultation databases. U
37、se a variety of media. Prepare public consultation packages for staff (sec NSW guide to the design of public consultation programs). Prepare information for the public on the planning process (see Qld pamphlet outlining the process and how people can get involved). Provide user friendly consultation
38、 materials and draft plans. Include submission guide in front of draft plans (see WA draft plans). Provide feedback to the public of impact of submissions received on draft plan (see WA documents). Allow sufficient time for meaningful consultation with Aboriginal/Iwi people, face-to-face contact whe
39、re they feel comfortable (e.g. WA, NT, NZ, Commonwealth approaches).5.5 Boards, councils, advisory and consultative committeesLegislative provision for boards of management and councils/advisor)z committees varies but most provide for their involvement in preparation of plans. In some cases they are
40、 formally involved in plan approval. In NZ Conservation Boards may approve management plans.District and/or reserve specific consultative and advisory committees may also be involved in plan preparation and are part of the broader public involvement process covered in Section 5.4. The effectiveness
41、of such groups in helping to resolve management planning issues can depend on how representative they are of the broad range of stakeholder interests. The more representative the better.Where they are formally involved in approval of management plans, boards and advisory councils/committees clearly
42、have a significant role in the process. How well ihis is being met and how their operation may be improved is beyond the scope of this study. However, the use by statutory bodies of sub-committees to specifically review draft management plans and public submissions as a basis for a full council reco
43、mmendation to the Minister appears to increase the effectiveness of these bodies. Also, as for the general public, the involvement of advisory bodies in plan development from an early stage through field visits and participation in goal and issue identification can be most productive.The value of ot
44、her committees can be more problematic. Where set up and supported by the agency for a specific planning task they may work well. Depending on the fbrvour rating of issues, personalities, agency resources etc., it can be difficult to get individuals representing particular interests to agree to bala
45、nced resolution of issues.Good PracticesRole and level of responsibility/authority of the council/comniittee is meaningful and clearly defined. There is regular 2-way communication and information sharing between the agency and council/committee. Council/comniittee members understand and support man
46、agement objectives for the protected area.5.6 Contracting out vs. internal staff.Most agencies use in-house staff, generally designated planning staff, to prepare management plans. At limes, most have used consultants/contractors for specific or specialised planning work (e.g. site design).Parks Vic
47、toria has been the only agency to use contractors to a significant degree but even here value is added in-house, the amount depending on the performance of (he contractor. Parks Victoria embarked on a greatly accelerated management planning program in 1995 following a government audit of activities.
48、 The circumstances were exceptional - clear targets were established publicly by the Minister, there was a massive increase in the level of resourcing and access to an available pool of high level skills (many senior staff had been made redundant in the public service cut-backs).Advantage of using c
49、ontractors: more readily match resources to (he demands of the programperformance of the work is isolated from competing demands gain access to more experienced personnel (in the particular circumstances applying in Victoria)Disadvantages of using contractors: limited freedom to change briefcontractors limited appreciation of organisational standards contrac