Management Effectiveness Evaluation (MEE) of Protected Areas in India Dr. V. B. Mathur Dean, Faculty of Wildlife Sciences, Wildlife Institute of India Chandrabani, Dehradun (Uttarakhand). INDIA Email: vbm@wii.gov.in Approaches to assessing management effectiveness ♦ Protected areas management effectiveness evaluation has been conducted in many countries using range of methodologies/ approaches emanating from the global MEE framework. These approaches vary considerably in their scale, depth, duration and data collection methods (Ervin, J. 2006). S.No. Type of Approach Application in India 1 Comprehensive system-wide, Peer-based assessment 28 Project Tiger Reserves 2 In-depth, Evidence based assessment 02 World Heritage Sites 3 Rapid Expert-based scorecard 30 National Parks and Wildlife Sanctuaries MEE of Project Tiger Reserves in India ♦ India has established 28 Project Tiger Reserves in 17 States covering an area of 37,761 km2. ♦ Though the main focus is on flagship species tiger, the project strives to maintain the stability of ecosystems. ♦ An independent assessment, based on WCPA-MEE framework adapted to Indian conditions, was carried out in 2005 by 8 independent experts, using 45 parameters. ♦ The results were peer-reviewed by IUCN experts in 2006. MEE of Project Tiger Reserves in India MEE of Project Tiger Reserves in India Results at a Glance… S. Name of the Tiger No. Reserve Score Category S. Name of the Tiger Reserve Score No. Category 1 Kanha 166 Very Good 15 Pench (Maharashtra) 125 Good 2 Dudhwa 154 Very Good 16 Buxa 124 Good 3 Corbett 152 Very Good 17 Dampa 121 Good 4 Sunderbans 152 Very Good 18 Bhadra 117 Good 5 Pench (M.P.) 144 Very Good 19 Nameri 112 Good 6 Palamau 141 Very Good 20 Pakke 106 Satisfactory 7 Simlipal 140 Very Good 21 Valmiki 106 Satisfactory 8 Melghat 137 Very Good 22 Kalakad-Mundanthurai 104 Satisfactory 9 Panna 135 Very Good 10 Tadoba-Andhari 134 Good 23 Manas 102 Satisfactory 11 Bori-Satpura 128 Good 24 Namdapha 95 Satisfactory 12 Bandhavgarh 127 Good 25 Nagarjunasagar-Srisailam 91 Satisfactory 13 Periyar 127 Good 26 Ranthambhore 89 Satisfactory 14 Bandipur & Rajiv Gandhi N.P. (Nagarhole) 126 Good 27 Indravati 70 Poor 28 Sariska 61 Poor more… Enhancing our Heritage (EoH) Project Monitoring and Managing for Success in Natural World Heritage Areas EoH Project sites… Aldabra Atoll, Seychelles Kaziranga, India Rio Platano, Honduras Bwindi Impenetrable, Uganda Serengeti, Tanzania Keoladeo, India Royal Chitwan, Nepal Sangay, Ecuador Canaima, Venezuela EoH Project – Final Reports MEE of World Heritage Sites Conclusions… ♦ MEE for a continuous period (2003-2007) has provided a very valuable understanding of the management processes and their dynamics ♦ The EoH Project Workbook and Worksheets containing the 12 Toolkits greatly facilitates the MEE process. ♦ There is a need to include ‘Social Indicators’ while conducting MEE. Currently, there is a bias towards ‘Ecological Indicators’. MEE of National Parks and Wildlife Sanctuaries ♦ The trigger for this came from the Prime Minister’s Office. All PAs (National Parks and Wildlife Sanctuaries) should be subjected to an independent audit periodically and the outcomes should be placed in the parliament. ♦ The Ministry of Environment and Forests (MoEF) has constituted six independent teams to conduct MEE, which is being currently done at 2 levels: i. Site (National Parks and Wildlife Sanctuaries) ii. State (States/ UTs) ♦ An analyses of Strengthens-Weakness-OpportunitiesThreats (SWOT) is being done of the Protected Area Network in India MEE of National Parks and Wildlife Sanctuaries Site Level Element Name No. of Criteria Criteria Context 03 Site values, Threats, Biotic pressures Planning 09 Zonation, Management Plan, Stakeholders, Habitat Management, Protection, HumanWildlife Conflict, Landscape Management Inputs 05 Human Resources, Infrastructure, Funds, NGO inputs Process 05 Trained Manpower, HRD, Livelihoods 04 Dissemination, Visitor Services, Maintenance schedule Outputs Outcomes 06 Population Trends, Threats abatement, Community relationship MEE of National Parks and Wildlife Sanctuaries Site Level: Results MEE of National Parks and Wildlife Sanctuaries State Level Element Name Context Planning Inputs Process Outputs Outcomes No. of Criteria Criteria 04 03 01 05 03 01 PA Vision & Goals; Organizational set-up; Administrative framework; Regional cooperation Representativeness, Management Plans, Revenue sharing Resource availability Trained manpower, Performance evaluation, Complaints, HRD Dissemination (website, brochure etc), Maintenance schedule Populations trends, Threats abatement MEE of National Parks and Wildlife Sanctuaries State Level: Interim Results Lessons Learnt… The major lessons that have been learnt from developing and implementing the MEE process in India are: ♦ Creating an understanding towards the concept and practice of ‘performance evaluation’ amongst all concerned with the MEE process is the critical first step. ♦ Creating ‘independent’ teams for MEE and reducing/ removing any ‘conflict of interest’ helps in increasing the acceptability of the evaluation results. ♦ Participatory evaluation helps the process as well as the final product. more… Lessons Learnt… ♦ Effective dissemination of results of the MEE process to a range of stakeholders is important to bring in ‘changes’ and ‘improvements’ in the management processes at the site level. ♦ Methodological refinements, where needed and pragmatic analyses of results is required to make the evaluation process effective. MEE of Protected Area Network in India The Way Forward…. ♦ Continue to bring in methodological and process refinements, as required. ♦ Enhance the participation of a range of relevant stakeholders. ♦ Disseminate the findings and bring in appropriate changes in policy, governance and management to enhance effectiveness of management of PAs. Thank You
© Copyright 2024