Report on the
Management Effectiveness and Capacity of Protected Areas in the Philippines
PROTECTING KEY BIODIVERSITY AREAS through Better Management and Protected Area Enactment
Imprint As a federally owned enterprise, GIZ supports the German Government in achieving its objectives in the field of international cooperation for sustainable development. This project is part of the International Climate Initiative (IKI). The Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation, Building and Nuclear Safety (BMUB) supports this initiative on the basis of a decision adopted by the German Bundestag.
Published by: Deutsche Gesellschaft fuĚˆr Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ) GmbH Registered offices Bonn and Eschborn GIZ-BMUB Office Quezon City, Philippines T +63 2 426 02 39 E: info@giz.de I: www.giz.de Responsible Berthold Schirm Protected Area Management Enhancement (PAME) Project Principal Advisor and Program Coordinator E: berthold.schirm@giz.de Authors: Claire Rhea Madarang, Andre Jon Uychiaoco, Berthold Schirm, Aldrin Mallari and Eddie Quitoriano, Manila Philippines Design and Layout: Ryan G. Palacol and Opalyn Agulay, Manila Philippines Photo credits/sources: All photos herein are by GIZ and of its partners, unless indicated otherwise. Maps: The map printed here is intended only for information purposes and in no way constitutes recognition under international law of boundaries and territories. GIZ accepts no responsibility for the map being entirely up to date, correct or complete. All liability for any damage, direct or indirect, resulting from its use is excluded. GIZ is responsible for the content of this publication. Place and date of publication: Manila, Philippines, 2017
PROTECTING KEY BIODIVERSITY AREAS through Better Management and Protected Area Enactment
Report on the
Management Effectiveness and Capacity of Protected Areas in the Philippines
TABLE OF CONTENTS 1
2
3
List of Tables & Figures
iv
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AND KEY RECOMMENDATIONS
1
1.1 Management effectiveness increase in 60 existing PAs and 55 new protected areas established have contributed to the Philippine Development Plan 2011-2016’s goals 1.2 Recommendations to sustain increasing management effectiveness and conservation outcomes
3
BACKGROUND AND GLOBAL PERSPECTIVE
5
2.1 Increase in global human well-being has been impacting the environment 2.2 Nations around the world commit to protect biodiversity and sustain human development 2.3 Protected areas are a proven tool for environmental conservation and economic growth 2.4 Biodiversity-rich and vulnerable Philippines acting to conserve biodiversity and to contribute to human development 2.5 Need to improve management of existing PAs and establish new ones in biodiversity-rich areas
6
3
6 8 9 10
THE PROTECTED AREA MANAGEMENT ENHANCEMENT PROJECT
12
3.1 Aim to increase management effectiveness in 60 protected areas and establish 100 new protected areas in Key Biodiversity Areas 3.2 Situational analysis: Need for improved legislation, basis (ecosystem services benefits from PAs), partnerships, resources, capacity and information for more effective PA management 3.3 Approach: Programmatic capacity development including mentoring until delivery of outputs 3.4 Approach: Supporting a national roadmap and framework to improve coordination between national and local PA planning 3.5 Approach: Providing assistance to priority KBAs in need of support and those with underrepresented ecosystems (e.g. caves and freshwater) through a Partnership Fund to support of local PA-specific initiatives and expert monitoring in pilot-testing the integrated ridge-to-reef planning approach for establishing PAs
13 15 16 17 18
RESULTS 4
19
4.1 Average management effectiveness increased in more than 60 existing PAs and 55 new PAs were established
20
5
6 7
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
38
5.1 The Project has generally achieved its objectives and contributed to the PDP 2011-2016 5.2 Sustain and take forward gains
39
GOOD PRACTICES: PAME STORIES ON THE GROUND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT AND ANNEXES
41 48
39
LIST OF TABLES & FIGURES Table Table Table Table Table
iv
1. 2. 3. 4. 5.
PAME Project Outcome Indicators PAME Capacity Development Program Topics Total # of hectarage of PAME supported PA sites PAME Project Outcome Indicator with Results List of 64 existing Protected Areas (PAME 60) with their Total METT scores in 2013 and 2017. Table 6. List of 100 new and proposed Protected Areas (PAME 100) with their Total METT or MEAT scores. Table 7. Number of sites reporting various dimensions of improved protection of species biodiversity Table 8. Summary of analysis based on the six elements of PA management.
13 17 20 21 23
Figure 1. PAME Project site map 14 Figure 2: Spiderweb graph showing PAME 60 and PAME 100 scores from 2013 to 2017 Figure 3. PAME Capacity Development
14 22
Report on the Management Effectiveness and Capacity of Protected Areas in the Philippines
25 35 36
31
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AND KEY RECOMMENDATIONS
1
Protecting Key Biodiversity Areas through Better Management and Protected Area Enactment
1
The world’s growing population and economy are causing adverse impacts to the environment, that, when not decisively addressed, will have irreversible effects on the planet by 2050. Massive deforestation, land degradation, and destruction of coral reefs, among other environmental stressors, continue, which also dramatically affect people’s livelihoods. Climate change only worsens the impact. The United Nations (UN) and the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN), though, recognize that economic progress and environmental conservation can go hand in hand. With this urgent need for immediate and large-scale action for the environment, countries around the world committed to the Aichi Biodiversity Targets in 2011 and the UN Sustainable Development Goals in 2015. Aichi Target #11 particularly aims to have at least 17% of terrestrial and inland water and 10% of coastal and marine areas in the world conserved through effectively managed protected areas. Establishing protected areas (PAs) is a key solution to achieve both environmental protection and sustainable economic growth. When properly managed, a PA’s flora and fauna are wellpreserved. And, as these flora and fauna thrive, ecosystem goods and services for humans’ sustenance and livelihood ideally become more available in the future. In the Philippines, one of the world’s 17 mega-biodiverse countries and among the most vulnerable to biodiversity loss and climate change, the 2011-2016 Philippine Development Plan (PDP) specifically targeting: 1) strengthening management effectiveness of 2 million hectares (6.7%) of terrestrial and 1.1 million hectares (0.5%) of marine areas through existing national protected areas (PAs), and 2) establishing and effectively managing an additional 0.3 million hectares of critical habitats. The Philippines is also implementing the 2015-2028 Philippine Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan (PBSAP), which is in line with the Aichi Targets’ vision for biodiversity by 2020. The Protected Area Management Enhancement (PAME) in the Philippines Project aimed to improve the management effectiveness in 60 existing protected areas (PAs) in the Philippines and establish 100 new protected areas in Key Biodiversity Areas (KBAs). The project began in October 2012 and will end in December 2017. It is implemented by the Department of Environment and Natural Resources through its Biodiversity Management Bureau (DENR-BMB) in partnership with the German Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation, Building and Nuclear Safety (BMUB) through the Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ) GmbH. With a funding of 9 million euros from the German government and 1 million euros from Philippine partners, PAME is a unique scaling-up initiative: the only conservation project worldwide targeting to strengthen such a large number of PA sites within a short amount of time. Specifically, PAME aimed to: 1) Improve management and technical capacities of DENR, protected area staff and key partners 2) Support the improvement of protected area management in at least 60 existing terrestrial and marine protected areas in defined key biodiversity areas (KBAs) through improved plans, legal frameworks, financial plans, and monitoring systems 3) Support the establishment of at least 100 new protected areas under innovative conservation management systems (for example, those led by local governments and communities) 4) Support an improved knowledge management and awareness-raising for PA management and value of biodiversity conservation 2
Report on the Management Effectiveness and Capacity of Protected Areas in the Philippines
In selecting project sites, PAME considered those which did not receive support from international organizations or large corporations, and more particularly, 60 PAs which are in or near KBAs (PAME 60), and 100 KBAs from underrepresented ecosystems among current PAs, like caves, rivers, and lakes, among others (PAME 100). Other PAME 100 sites were directly selected as part of the Integrated Ecosystem Management (IEM)-based Comprehensive Land Use Planning (CLUP).
Management effectiveness increase in 60 existing PAs and 55 new
1.1 protected areas established have contributed to the Philippine Development Plan 2011-2016’s goals
PAME generally achieved its main goals: Average METT scores of 64 existing national protected areas increased from 34% in 2013 to 49% this 2017. This is a 46% increase, higher than the targeted 30% increase. Although only 55 out of 100 proposed sites were established or expanded through local legislation, more than 45 other sites are already under local legislative council deliberation. The legal process has been initiated and many more conservation areas will be established in the near future. Management effectiveness score of the 100 new or proposed sites is 27% on average, which is beyond the project target of 20%. Moreover, 114 out of the 160 project sites reported improved protection of species biodiversity, which is indicated by, one, two, or all of the following: 1) increased patrols, 2) decreased violations, and 3) improved biodiversity condition, without any deterioration in any of the other 2 indicators. The project has therefore contributed to the PDP’s specific target of increasing area of PAs under effective management, providing support to 1.3 million hectares for existing national terrestrial PAs (65% of PDP’s 2-million-hectare target) and 0.3 million hectares for existing national marine PAs (9% of PDP’s 3.4-million-hectare target). Meanwhile, the 65 local conservation areas established so far through project support or incentive spans 183,227 hectares, more than half of the PDP’s 300,000-hectare target. In terms of improving capacity of DENR and PA management teams, PAME has trained over 17,000 in relevant PA management topics like biophysical assessment and monitoring, and management planning. 94% of training participants surveyed attested to the trainings’ added value to their regular work. Meanwhile, PAME’s knowledge management and communication improved, with 64% of sites releasing information, education, and communication (IEC) materials with the three foundations of sustainability (ecological, economic, and social).
Recommendations to sustain increasing management effectiveness and
1.2 conservation outcomes
Building upon the positive results and lessons learned from the project, the following recommendations will strengthen DENR’s work to enhance PA management and conserve biodiversity in line with PBSAP 2015-2028 and the Philippine Development Plan 20172022:
Protecting Key Biodiversity Areas through Better Management and Protected Area Enactment
3
Policy 1. Finalise National PA System Master Plan 2. Continue support for the passage of the E-NIPAS Bill Organizational Development 3. Finalize, approve and apply the draft DENR technical bulletin on plan-financemonitoring 4. Continue implementation of programmatic hands-on capacity development including mentoring until delivery of outputs. Also, involve previous training participants in implementation 5. Follow through on the recommendations of the Organizational Development and Training Needs Assessment Report authorized by the DENR Executive Committee in 2015 6. Improve DENR and local partners reporting system building upon national PA information/database system with attachments (e.g. bio-physical monitoring, socioeconomic assessments, management plans, IEC materials, patrol records, etc.) shared DENR-wide. 7. Copy appropriate elements from PAME website to BMB website. 8. Revive the use of common/ integrated communication channels (e.g. People’s Hour) jointly with all the other DENR units in an integrated manner Implementation 9. Use the existing training modules and documentation of experience for future Integrated Ecosystem Management/Enhanced Comprehensive Land Use Planning approaches 10. Strengthen partnership with various sectors at different levels (e.g. platform for national inter-agency PA System steering and exchange; regional steering structures e.g. Mindanao PAMB network; systematic planning, budgeting and monitoring of implementation by PAMB) 11. More emphasis on partnerships with IP and follow-up of DENR-NCIP agreements especially on securing FPIC in all sites 12. Use small grants competitive approaches in providing technical/financial support to KBAs coupled with the provision of close mentoring 13. Apply the existing and mandated tools/good practices: TBs on bio-physical, socioeconomic, PA management planning checklist and partner with local technical institutions (e.g. universities) 14. Apply the existing and mandated tools/good practices: evidence-based METTs 15. Applying the METT will trigger regular completion/updating of PA management plans in order to attract resources 16. Improve financial sustainability through applying the Integrating Ecosystem Services into Development Planning (ValuES) approach (e.g. ecosystem services-based prioritization of sites) 17. Improve financial sustainability through applying lower-cost methods (e.g. GIS/remote sensing-based bio-physical and socio-economic surveys, etc.) 18. Strengthen cooperation among projects to optimize opportunities for synergies through the assistance of DENR-BMB-FASPS platform, DENR-FASPS, GIZ Green Sector Forum, National Convergence Initiative, and the Philippine Development Forum. 19. Continue awareness raising and behavior change using the systematic process of the Social Marketing Lite methodology and other successful initiatives 20. Develop a PAME 2 proposal based on successful sites and ecosystem-services-based on sustainable livelihood and tourism 4
Report on the Management Effectiveness and Capacity of Protected Areas in the Philippines
Photo by ANGOC
BACKGROUND AND GLOBAL PERSPECTIVE
2
Protecting Key Biodiversity Areas through Better Management and Protected Area Enactment
5
Increase in global human well-being has been impacting
2.1 the environment
The world’s population and economy have been growing steadily over the past several decades, coupled with improving quality of life. This growth, however, comes with a high price tag to the environment, which can have future irreversible effects if not effectively addressed. Global population is now at 7.6 billion and is anticipated to increase to 9.8 billion in 2050 (United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs, 2017), while the world economy is expected to grow more than double by 2050 (PricewaterhouseCoopers, 2017). Generally, quality of life is improving, with increased incomes, longer life expectancies, and improved health, among others (UN, 2017). Impact on the environment, though, is dramatic. Around 40 per cent of the world’s oceans are affected by pollution, depleted fisheries, and destruction of habitats. 20% of the world’s coral reefs have been destroyed, while half are at risk (UN Sustainable Development Goals, 2015). The world lost 129 million hectares of forest between 1990 and 2015 (UN Food and Agriculture, 2015). Meanwhile, over half of agricultural land is moderately to be severely affected by soil degradation, affecting the 2.6 billion people who depend on agriculture for livelihood (UN SDG, 2015). Climate change further aggravates the degradation of our life support systems. For example, increasing carbon levels worsen oceans’ acidity, which severely damages coral reefs and thus contributes to declining fish supply (Center for Sustainable Systems, 2016). Over 10% of the world is estimated to suffer from nutritional deficiency if fish catch continues to decline over the next decades (Golden, 2016). If current trends continue, by 2050, the planet would have been pushed beyond its tipping point, leading to abrupt shifts in biodiversity and ecosystems that would be time-consuming, expensive, or even impossible to reverse once they have began. Urgent and comprehensive action at the international, national, and local level needs to be taken to prevent this from happening (UN Convention for Biological Diversity, 2010).
Nations around the world commit to protect biodiversity and sustain
2.2 human development
With the need for urgent and large-scale action for the environment, together, countries around the world made strong commitments with tangible targets for biodiversity and human development. These commitments were made with the recognition that economic progress and environmental conservation can go hand in hand. While efforts to protect biodiversity worldwide are being undertaken, massive effort was needed to make significant impact. From this urgency, governments party to the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) committed to act on the Aichi Biodiversity
6
Report on the Management Effectiveness and Capacity of Protected Areas in the Philippines
Photo by ANGOC
Targets. The 2011-2020 Aichi Biodiversity Targets are 20 measurable targets that aim to conserve biodiversity, enhance its benefits to people through ecosystem services, improve and bring awareness of its importance to the mainstream, and capacitate stakeholders that would help achieve these goals. Consistently, in 2015, 193 UN member states adopted a new sustainable development agenda to end poverty, address inequality, and protect the environment. The 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) aim to “balance human prosperity with protecting the planet.” Biodiversity is recognized as connected with other SDGs, as it is linked to livelihood and economic growth. The recent 2016 IUCN World Conservation Congress echoes the SDGs’ focus on this balance, with the Congress theme stressing that “nature conservation and human progress are not mutually exclusive.”
Protecting Key Biodiversity Areas through Better Management and Protected Area Enactment
7
Protected areas are a proven tool for environmental conservation
2.3 and economic growth PAs are important (DENR and others 2014) as they are: 1) Natural habitats. PAs are home to various flora and fauna usually including endemic, endangered, and threatened species. 2) Sources of food, water, livelihood, and other ecosystem services. There are people living in or near PAs who depend on their environment for their daily needs and livelihood. Forested watersheds provide water, while forests are a source of wild meat, medicinal plants, timber, and more. Marine protected areas (MPAs) serve as breeding ground for fish to multiply, and corals and mangroves reduce the effects of storm surge and waves. PAs are also sources of raw materials for production of goods. 3) Safeguards against disasters and climate change. PAs can serve as buffer zones or barriers against typhoons, floods, and other natural disasters. They can also mitigate climate change – for example, forests help lower carbon levels. 4) Culturally significant. Many PAs have cultural, and even spiritual, significance for indigenous communities living there. These PAs are their ancestral domain or sacred sites, or both. They also provide aesthetic and recreational value that underlie tourism.
Establishing protected areas (PAs) is a key solution to achieve both environmental protection and sustainable economic growth. When properly managed, a PA’s flora and fauna are well-preserved. And, as these flora and fauna thrive, ecosystem goods and services for humans’ sustenance and livelihood ideally become more available in the future. Nations committed to conservation recognize this, which is why establishing more PAs is a biodiversity target globally. However, for biodiversity to truly thrive, much work needs to be done not only to strategically establishing PAs in biodiversity-rich areas but also in effectively managing them. IUCN defines a protected area as “a clearly defined geographical space, recognised, dedicated and managed, through legal or other effective means, to achieve the long-term conservation of nature with associated ecosystem services and cultural values.” Because of the importance of PAs, Aichi Biodiversity Target #11 particularly aims to have 17% of terrestrial and inland water and 10% of coastal and marine areas be declared and managed as PAs. As of 2014, IUCN reported 15.4% of terrestrial and 8.4% of coastal and marine areas are protected globally.
While the Aichi Targets work as good interim targets, they can only do so much and “do not represent what is actually required for humanity to live in sustainable harmony with nature” (IUCN World Parks Congress, 2014). Even while there are substantial PAs worldwide, only a fourth of the world’s assessed PAs are effectively managed. 75% of biodiversity-important areas are still yet to be declared as PAs (IUCN, 2014). For PAs to truly make a difference to biodiversity and the environment, they must be 1) situated at biodiversity-important areas, 2) not seen as stand-alone, but understood as connected to other ecosystems, 3) well-managed, and not just be PAs in name only, and 4) effectively monitored (IUCN World Parks Congress, 2014).
8
Report on the Management Effectiveness and Capacity of Protected Areas in the Philippines
Photo by DENR BMB
Biodiversity-rich and vulnerable Philippines acting to conserve
2.4 biodiversity and to contribute to human development
The Philippines is one of the world’s most biodiversity-rich countries but is also among the most vulnerable to biodiversity loss and climate change. It also has a high poverty incidence. Thus, the country set its own targets for the environment and the economy, one of which is to establish new PAs and improve management of existing ones. The Philippines is one of the world’s 17 mega-biodiverse countries accounting for 70% of the world’s species. (Conservation International Philippines, 2017). The Philippines has over 52,000 described species, more than half of which cannot be found anywhere else in the world. (DENR, 2002) It is also situated in the most biologically diverse marine region, the Coral Triangle. However, the Philippines is also a biodiversity hotspot, and is threatened by habitat degradation, overexploitation of natural resources, pollution, climate change, among others. Over 90% of its original forests have been lost (DENR, 2002). Less than one percent of its coral reefs are in excellent condition (DENR, 2015). At least 701 species are threatened (IUCN, 2016). The Philippines is also the third most vulnerable country to climate change. The country is regularly hit by typhoons, with these now becoming stronger and unpredictable, like Haiyan in 2013, which claimed over 6,000 lives and 900,000 homes (CI Philippines, 2017). The country’s issues are not limited to the environment, though. Over 26 million people, or 26% of the country’s population, live in poverty (Philippine Statistics Authority, 2016). With this, conservation and poverty alleviation indeed need to go hand in hand. It is essential for the country’s rich biodiversity to not only be protected but also be harnessed for the people’s benefit. The Philippines has adopted its own plans for biodiversity conservation and inclusive economic growth, consistent with the SDGs and Aichi Targets. The 2011-2016
Protecting Key Biodiversity Areas through Better Management and Protected Area Enactment
9
Philippine Development Plan (PDP) aims to reduce poverty and improve quality of life through increased or improved governance, macroeconomy, competitiveness of industries, infrastructure development, access to social services, peace and security, and ecological integrity. One of its goals is the conservation, protection, and rehabilitation of the environment, with emphasis on sustainable management of forests and watersheds, enhanced management of coastal and marine resources, development of environment-friendly livelihoods and enterprises, among others. The most recent 2017-2022 PDP was drafted in continuity with the above vision. The 2015-2028 Philippine Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan (PBSAP), on the other hand, rallies for the same inclusive economic growth that is PDP’s framework, while emphasizing protection of the environment. Its vision for 2028 is aligned with Aichi Biodiversity Targets’ longer-term 2050 vision, which is for “biodiversity valued, conserved, restored and wisely used, maintaining ecosystem services, sustaining a healthy planet and delivering benefits essential for all people.” In terms of PAs as tools for conservation and economic growth in particular, the 2011-2016 PDP sought to 1) strengthen management effectiveness of 2 million hectares of terrestrial and 3.4 million hectares of marine national PAs, and 2) establish and effectively manage an additional 0.3 million hectares of critical habitats. In particular, it aimed to increase percentage of land under effective protected area management from 2.1% to 8.8%, of sea from 0.09% to 0.62%, and of critical habitats from 0.0006% to 1.01%. For a PA to be assessed as effectively managed for purposes of the PDP 20112016, it has to have a 1) Protected Area Management Board (PAMB) that will actively manage and monitor the PA’s management, 2) a working management plan, 3) clear delineations and demarcations marking its coverage and boundaries, and 4) be funded, with a functional Integrated Protected Area Fund (IPAF), which is derived from earnings from PA operations – for example, ecotourism.
Need to improve management of existing PAs and establish new ones
2.5 in biodiversity-rich areas
Consistent with global patterns, while the Philippines has its share of PAs, these have been found to be in need of more effective management, conservation, and monitoring to truly have an impact on the environment and their communities. And, a significant majority of biodiversity-rich areas are currently not protected, and are yet to be declared as PAs, including those managed by indigenous communities. Meanwhile, the current list of PAs does not fully represent the country’s diverse ecosystems like caves, lowland forests, and freshwater. Given these, massive effort is needed to make significant impact, especially to achieve the PDP’s PA targets. The Department of Environment and Natural Resources’ Biodiversity Management Bureau (DENR-BMB), formerly Protected Areas and Wildlife Bureau (PAWB),
10
Report on the Management Effectiveness and Capacity of Protected Areas in the Philippines
works to conserve and sustainably manage the country’s rich biodiversity. One of its mandates is to establish and manage protected areas. Together with partner organizations, the DENR-BMB identified over 10 million hectares of 228 Key Biodiversity Areas (KBAs) as the country’s richest in biodiversity, with 128 terrestrial and freshwater KBAs recorded in 2006, and 123 marine KBAs in 2009. KBAs are crucial to the survival of globally-threatened and geographicallyconcentrated species, and are classified as such using global standard criteria (Ambal and others 2012). These 228 KBAs were then prioritized for conservation. However, a vast majority (137 of 228, or 60%) of these KBAs were not under any protection then. 41 were only partially protected, while only 50 KBAs, or 22% of 5 KBAs, were fully protected. The National Integrated Protected Area System (NIPAS) Act of 1992, considered a landmark law on PAs, covers identification and classification of PAs in the country, organization of management and decision-making bodies composed of various stakeholders for each PA, and the enactment of a financing mechanism. Through NIPAS, 240 PAs in over four million hectares of land and close to one million at sea were consolidated and/or newly identified around the Philippines. However, among these, only 91 intersect KBAs or priority areas for conservation. The other PAs (not intersecting KBAs) may have been based upon older data, methods and criteria for identifying areas for protection; these PAs may be poorer in biodiversity or may have lost their biodiversity in the years since they were established. Caves, rivers, lakes, lowland forests, and deep marine areas were also not well-represented in the current NIPAS. Meanwhile, even as indigenous communities protect their communal forests and sacred grounds in their own capacity, they are vulnerable as they lack formal recognition, with no legal status or acknowledgment for their roles on biodiversity conservation, and with limited support or assistance from the government. The National Commission on Indigenous Peoples has the mandate to assist indigenous communities but has very limited staff and budget. And, even being declared as a PA is not an assurance that the site is well-protected or managed. Many had moderately low management effectiveness. Outcomes of improved ecosystem and species extent and quality, contribution to community livelihoods and benefits from ecosystem services are poorly monitored. Meanwhile, in terms of support, some sites receive substantial support from one or more agencies, while the vast majority of sites have little to no funding. Given the above of 1) current PAs needing management and conservation improvements, 2) new ones needing to be established to secure biodiversity-rich areas, recognize indigenous community conserved areas (ICCAs), and fully represent the country’s diverse ecosystems, and 3) finally, the urgency of the PDP targets of increasing areas of old and new effectively managed PAs, massive, wide-scale efforts are needed to make a significant impact.
Protecting Key Biodiversity Areas through Better Management and Protected Area Enactment
11
3 12
Photo by GIZ/Berthold Schirm
THE PROTECTED AREA MANAGEMENT ENHANCEMENT PROJECT
Report on the Management Effectiveness and Capacity of Protected Areas in the Philippines
Aim to increase management effectiveness in 60 protected areas and
3.1 establish 100 new protected areas in Key Biodiversity Areas
Given the large-scale work needed to meet the PDP targets of increasing management effectiveness in existing PAs and establishing new ones, the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) requested assistance from and partnered with the German Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation, Building and Nuclear Safety (BMUB). BMUB commissioned the Deutsche Gesellschaft fĂźr Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ) GmbH to provide assistance. Together DENR and GIZ implemented the Protected Area Management Enhancement in the Philippines (PAME) project. The project aimed for the improvement of management effectiveness of 60 existing PA sites and the establishment of 100 new PAs in Key Biodiversity Areas (KBAs), with a funding of 9 million euros from the German government and 1 million euros from the Philippines. PAME began in October 2012 and will end on December 2017. Specifically, PAME aimed to: 1) Improve management and technical capacities of DENR, protected area staff and key partners 2) Support the improvement of protected area management in at least 60 existing terrestrial and marine protected areas in defined KBAs through improved plans, legal frameworks, financial plans, and monitoring systems 3) Support the establishment of at least 100 new protected areas under innovative conservation management systems (For example, those involving local governments and communities) 4) Support an improved knowledge management and awareness-raising for PA management and value of biodiversity conservation To meet the above objectives, PAME set specific targets. (See Table 1) TABLE 1. PAME PROJECT OUTCOME INDICATORS Outcome: Improved protection and management of key biodiversity areas in the Philippines Outcome Indicator Baseline Target Management effectiveness index of 60 60 PAs 60 PAs supported existing protected areas in Average 34 score Average 44 score selected KBAs is improved by an average increase 30% of at least 30% compared to the initial situation At least 100 new PAs have been 0 PAs 100 PAs established through project support while 0 score assumed 20 score achieving on average a management effectiveness rating of at least 20. DENR clients confirm receiving improved 3.45 direct Increase from baseline services for the management of their 2.91 indirect (scale of 4 protected areas excellent to 1 poor)
Protecting Key Biodiversity Areas through Better Management and Protected Area Enactment
13
Figure 1. PAME Project site map
PAME 100 New and Proposed Sites
14
Report on the Management Effectiveness and Capacity of Protected Areas in the Philippines
Outcome: Improved protection and management of key biodiversity areas in the Philippines Outcome Indicator Baseline Target At least 60% of the supported 160 PAs With all 3 foundations of 96 sites (60%) display effective protective measures sustainability = 40 out of in a continuous manner and with public 160 sites (25%) awareness in relation to the three foundations of sustainability (ecological, economic, and social). 70% of the supported 160 PAs 0% 70% demonstrate an improved protection 0 out of 112 out of of species diversity through a) regular 160 sites 160 sites patrols, and / or b) reduction of violations and / or c) increased or constant biodiversity, without any deterioration of the other parameter.
PAME is a unique project as it is the only conservation project worldwide that targeted a large number of sites all at once, attempting to deliver a large-scale effect. Usually, most projects support only one up to ten national PAs.
Situational analysis: Need for improved legislation, basis (ecosystem
3.2 services benefits from PAs), partnerships, resources, capacity and information for more effective PA management
Since the passage of the NIPAS Act over 20 years ago, there had been no extensive, organized initiative to assess and analyze the management effectiveness and capacity of NIPAS PAs. PAME’s first initiative was the National Management Effectiveness Capacity Assessment (NMECA) conducted 2013 to 2014 (Guiang and others, 2014). For the selection of project sites from existing national protected areas, 641 sites that were not yet being complemented by existing large external support (e.g. from UNDP, USAID, etc. including GIZ projects) were selected from 82 NIPAS sites intersecting KBAs. The study found 64 existing national PAs with a management effectiveness score of 34 out of 100 on average and the specific aspects for improvement for each PA. This became the main basis for PAME’s interventions at the project sites.
1 Sixty-two (62) sites were originally identified. Later Lanao Lake was removed since it was the site of another DENR project. Three (3) additional NIPAS sites were later identified to also intersect KBAs. Thus, there are 64 project sites for which management effectiveness was assessed.
Protecting Key Biodiversity Areas through Better Management and Protected Area Enactment
15