Collaborative Management Partnerships for Protected Areas A Resource Guide SUPPORTED BY LED BY © 2021 International Bank for Reconstruction and Development / The World Bank 1818 H Street NW Washington DC 20433 Telephone: 202-473-1000 Internet: www.worldbank.org This work is a product of the Staff of The World Bank with external contributions. The findings, interpreta- tions, and conclusions expressed in this work do not necessarily reflect the views of The World Bank, its Board of Executive Directors, or the governments they represent. The World Bank does not guarantee the accuracy, completeness, or currency of the data included in this work and does not assume responsibility for any errors, omissions, or discrepancies in the information, or liability with respect to the use of or failure to use the information, methods, processes, or conclusions set forth. The boundaries, colors, denominations, and other information shown on any map in this work do not imply any judgment on the part of The World Bank concerning the legal status of any territory or the endorsement or acceptance of such boundaries. Nothing herein shall constitute or be construed or considered to be a limitation upon or waiver of the privileges and immunities of The World Bank, all of which are specifically reserved. Rights and Permissions The material in this work is subject to copyright. Because The World Bank encourages dissemination of its knowledge, this work may be reproduced, in whole or in part, for noncommercial purposes as long as full attribution to this work is given. Any queries on rights and licenses, including subsidiary rights, should be addressed to World Bank Publications, The World Bank Group, 1818 H Street NW, Washington, DC 20433, USA; fax: 202-522-2625; e-mail: pubrights@worldbank.org. Author Kathleen H. Fitzgerald Cover photo Gaston Piccinetti / Shutterstock Design Renata Zincone 2 Table of Contents Introduction to Protected Area Collaborative Management Partnerships (CMP) 4 Protected Area CMPs in Africa 7 Protected Area CMPs in Central and West Africa 14 Country Specific CMPs in Africa 20 Country Specific CMPs Outside of Africa 31 CMP Governance 37 Sample CMP Marketing Prospectuses 42 Online Resources 44 Figures Figure 1. CMPs with NGOs in Africa, 2018 11 Figure 2. CMP Governance and Management Models 18 Table Table 1. IUCN’s Four Governance Types for Protected Areas 40 © Mike Dexter/Shutterstock 3 Introduction to Protected Area Collaborative Management Partnerships Global biological diversity is essential for human existence and quality of life.1 Biodiversity provides us with food, water and shelter; regulates our climate and disease; maintains nutrient cycles and oxygen production; and provides us with spiritual fulfilment and opportunities for recreation and recuperation, which can enhance human health and well-being.2 While biodiversity and ecosystem services underpin our economies, livelihoods and health, they are grossly undervalued. Biodiversity is under severe threat with critical implications for human well- being. The accelerating loss of biodiversity and the associated impacts are expected to further weaken economies, exacerbate global food insecurity, and compromise the welfare of people. The World Economic Forum’s 2020 Global Risk Report rates “biodiversity loss” as the second most impactful and third most likely risk for the next decade. Despite this systematic risk, a 2020 report3 finds there is a global biodiversity financing gap of between $598 billion and $824 billion per year. The COVID-19 pandemic has widened the conservation funding gap by crowding out investment in biodiversity and protected areas (PAs) in lieu of financing for other sectors. Other revenue streams for conservation, such as nature-based tourism, were shut down overnight. The fiscal and monetary stimulus governments have embarked on to keep economies afloat will fur- ther reduce budgets available for environmental conservation. At the same time, to address the pressing health and economic impacts of COVID-19, countries are taking on more debt, which will further strain already limited resources. Conservation areas have long served as pillars to biodiversity conservation. Their effective management and sustainability is essential to biodiversity conservation, climate mitigation, and delivery of ecosystem services upon which people and economies depend. Africa’s biodiversity is protected through an extensive network of PAs covering 14 percent of the continent’s land area and 12 percent of the marine area.4 These PAs support rare, threat- ened, and endangered species, vast and diverse ecosystems, and ecosys- tem services. Africa’s PA estate also drives a robust wildlife-based tourism 1 IPBES (The Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services). 2019. Global Assessment Report on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services. Bonn, Germany: IPBES Secretariat. 2 Dasgupta, P. 2021. The Economics of Biodiversity: The Dasgupta Review. London: HM Treasury: https://assets. publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/962785/The_Economics_of_ Biodiversity_The_Dasgupta_Review_Full_Report.pdf. 3 Deutz, A., Heal, G. M., Niu, R., Swanson, E., Townshend, T., Zhu, L., Delmar, A., Meghji, A., Sethi, S. A., and Tobin-de la Puente, J. 2020. Financing Nature: Closing the global biodiversity financing gap. The Paulson Institute, The Nature Conservancy, and the Cornell Atkinson Center for Sustainability. 4 Protected Planet, https://www.protectedplanet.net/region/AF. 4 economy, which contributed 10.3 percent to gross domestic product and generated $61 billion in 2019. That same year, nature-based tourism support- ed 24.6 million jobs, which accounted for approximately seven percent of the total employment on the continent.5 Despite the ecological, social, and economic value of Africa’s PAs, there is a lack of adequate funding for PA management and biodiversity conservation in Africa, which mirrors the global biodiversity funding gap. In 2018, researchers assessed 282 state-owned PAs with lions and concluded that more than $1 billion is needed annually to secure Africa’s PAs with lions. Approximately, 94 percent of the PAs assessed were funded insufficiently and the available funding satisfied only 10 to 20 percent of PA requirements on average.6 Sufficient long-term financial resources are required for Africa’s PA estate to be managed effectively. The lack of adequate PA management finance is resulting in the underperfor- mance of Africa’s PAs, putting species, ecosystems, and the network itself at risk. A 2017 analysis finds that almost 60 percent of the PAs in Eastern Africa (excluding South Sudan) have either inadequate and/or basic management capacity with major deficieinces. Only eight percent of the PAs assessed in East Africa were found to have sound management capcity.7 The lack of management effectiveness means that many of Africa’s PAs are not able to achieve their ecological, economic and social potential and in some cases are at great risk of downsizing, downgrading, and degazettement, putting their very existence at risk. Recognizing the decline in biodiversity and escalating threats alongside the severe limitations in PA funding, African governments are partnering with non-governmental organizations (NGOs) in PA management. These part- nerships vary in structure and approach, and are referred to as collaborative management partnerships (CMPs). CMPs are defined as when a PA authori- ty (government, private, community) enters into a contractual arrangement with a partner (private or NGO) for the management of a PA. The duration of the contract varies, depending on the PA.8 CMPs can be used for national, private, and community PAs. 5 World Travel and Tourism Council. Economic Impact Reports, Africa, https://wttc.org/Research/Economic-Impact. 6 Lindsey, P., Miller, J., Petracca, L., Coad, L., Dickman, A., Fitzgerald, K., Hunter, L. et al. November 6, 2018. “More Than $1 Billion Needed Annually to Secure Africa’s Protected Areas with Lions.” PNAS 115 (45) E10788-E10796. 7 IUCN ESARO. 2020. The State of Protected and Conserved Areas in Eastern and Southern Africa. State of Protect- ed and Conserved Areas Report Series No. 1. Nairobi, Kenya: https://portals.iucn.org/library/sites/library/files/docu- ments/2020-034-En.pdf 8 Baghai, M., Miller, J., Blanken, L., Dublin, H., Fitzgerald, K., Gandiwa, P., Laurenson, K., Milanzi, J., Nelson, M., and P. Lindsey. 2018. “Models for the Collaborative Management of Africa’s Protected Areas.” Biological Conservation. 218, 73-82. 5 There are 40 co-management and delegated management CMPs in Africa (excluding South Africa and Madagascar) with 13 NGO partners covering approximately 11 percent of Africa’s PA estate. There is strong momen- tum and interest in CMPs; however, until recently, there was no guide for the establishment of CMPs, except for a one developed by The Central African Forest Commission.9 The World Bank has produced numerous toolkits and reference materials that document experiences of different countries and sectors in creating and implementing public-private partnerships (PPPs). In 2021, the World Bank’s Global Wildlife Program published the Collaborative Management Partner- ship Toolkit (CMP Toolkit). The CMP Toolkit assesses CMP models and serves as a reference guide for governments, NGOs, communities, private land- owners, and implementing partners considering CMPs, and raises awareness of CMP experiences in Africa to highlight benefits, challenges, and lessons learned. This resource guide provides a sample of some of the references used during the development of the CMP Toolkit. The authors drew from Africa case studies, and global PA governance and public-private partnerships (PPP) best practice. 9 COMIFAC (Commission des Forêts d’Afrique Centrale). July 22, 2019. Guide sous-régional de bonnes pratiques pour la gestion durable des aires protégées en mode partenariat public-privé (PPP) en Afrique Centrale. https://static.wixstatic. com/ugd/22a750_d2f6ca6944e0475993022cb16256633c.pdf 6 Protected Area CMPs in Africa © mhenrion/Shutterstock 7 Protected Area CMPs in Africa Attracting Investment for Africa’s Protected Areas by Creating Enabling Environments for Collaborative Management Partnerships Author(s) Lindsey, P., Baghai, M., Bigurube, G., Cunliffe, S., Dickman, A., Fitzgerald, K., Flyman, M., Gandiwa, P., Kumchedwa, B., Madope, A., Morjan, M., Parker, A., Steiner, K., Tumenta, P., Uiseb, K., Robson A. Publication Date 2021 Publisher Biological Conservation Pages 13 Publication Link https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/ article/abs/pii/S0006320721000318 Language English Publication Type Article Recognizing the ecological and economic value of Africa’s PA and the escalating threats, and drawing from the available literature and the authors’ collective experience, the authors look at the potential for CMPs between state wildlife agencies and NGOs to attract investment and technical capacity to improve PA performance. While highlighting the benefits of CMPs (CMPs median funding is greater than baseline state budgets for PA management) they cite the factors that limit the scaling up of CMPs, such as perceptions by government that such partnerships may represent an admission of failure, result in a loss of revenues for government, or undermine sovereignty. There are also constraints associated with NGOs and donors that limit the uptake of CMPs. The authors conclude that preliminary evidence suggests that expanding CMPs for PAs can improve PA management, share the costs of protecting PAs, build local capacity, help protect ecosystem services, stimulate rural development, and benefit local communities. 8 Closing the Gap: Financing and Resourcing of Protected and Conserved Areas in Eastern and Southern Africa Author(s) International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN), Conservation Capital Publication Date 2020 Publisher IUCN—The Biodiversity and Protected Areas Management (BIOPAMA) Programme Pages 96 Publication Link https://portals.iucn.org/library/node/49045 Language English Publication Type Report This report provides an overview of the status of PA fi- nance in Eastern and Southern Africa, covering 24 coun- Closing the gap Financing and resourcing of protected and conserved areas in Eastern tries, to understand the extent of the financing challenge and Southern Africa to PA management. The report outlines different innova- tive finance mechanisms that might be used to help de- crease the funding gap, including CMPs (page 52). INTERNATIONAL UNION FOR CONSERVATION OF NATURE - BIOPAMA PROGRAMME 9 Models for the Collaborative Management of Africa’s Protected Areas Author(s) Baghai, M., Miller J., Blanken L., Dublin H., Fitzgerald K., Gandiwa P., Laurenson, K., Milanzi, J., Nelson, A., Lindsey, P. Publication Date 2018 Publisher Biological Conservation Pages 9 Publication Link https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/ abs/pii/S0006320717314106 Language English Publication Type Article One of the first comprehensive analyses of CMPs, this article provides an extensive review of CMPs in Africa. The authors interviewed 69 experts from state and NGO partners about 43 PAs covering 473,861 km 2 in 16 African countries and analyzed responses to identify how partnerships differ, particularly in how they allocate governance and management responsibility. They identify three CMP structures: 1. Financial and technical support , where an NGO assists the state with aspects of management without formal decision-making authority. 2. Co-management , where an NGO shares governance and manage- ment responsibility with the state. 3. Delegated management , where an NGO shares governance responsi- bility with the state and is delegated management responsibility. 10 Figure 1. CMPs with NGOs in Africa, 2018 747 Source: Baghai et al. 2018. 748 Figure 1. Map of the protected areas included in the study, with colour indicating the model 749 of collaborative partnership. 11 Public–Private Partnerships as a Management Option for Protected Areas Author(s) Hatchwell, M. Publication Date 2014 Publisher Animal Conservation (17) Pages 02 Publication Link https://zslpublications.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/ doi/epdf/10.1111/acv.12098 Language English Publication Type Opinion Piece An early, short opinion piece on the role of CMPs in PA management. The author cites the increase in CMPs and recommends that as governments, NGOs, and donors consider CMP arrangements in Africa, more clarity is needed on the effectiveness of PPPs on short-term conservation outcomes and on the long-term implications for national management capacity. The author queries whether the rule of law is more effectively established and maintained under CMP management regimes than under those it replaces and if so, this may benefit the local human populations, which typically suffer along with wildlife from the breakdown of law and order. 12 Managing National Parks: How Public-Private Partnerships (PPP) Can Aid Conservation Author(s) Sapariti, N. Publication Date 2006 Publisher The World Bank Group Pages 04 Publication Link https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/bitstream/ handle/10986/11185/11185/371980VP0no03090 Saporiti01PUBLIC1.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y Language English Publication Type Opinion Piece A short thought piece on the ecological value of nation- 37198 NOTE NUMBER 309 Public Disclosure Authorized privatesector P U B L I C P O L I C Y F O R T H E al parks in developing countries, home to the planet’s JUNE 2006 Public Disclosure Authorized Managing National Parks most undervalued natural assets, and the role of PPPs Nico Saporiti Nico Saporiti (nsaporiti@ifc.org) is How Public-Private Partnerships Can Aid Conservation an investment officer in Po s i t i ve ex p e r i e n c e w i t h p u bl i c - p r i vat e p a r t n e r s h i p s i n n at u re the Advisory Services in supporting responsible commercialization to capture c o n s e r vat i o n i n A f r i c a s h ow s t h at t h ey c a n i m p rove s e r v i c e t h ro u g h Department of the International Finance p ro f e s s i o n a l m a n a g e m e n t a n d m a r ke t i n g , re d u c e t h e n e e d f o r p u bl i c Public Disclosure Authorized Corporation. s u b s i d i e s , a n d m o b i l i ze c a p i t a l f o r i nve s t m e n t i n p a r k i n f r a s t r u c t u re T H E W O R L D B A N K G R O U P PRIVATE SECTOR DEVELOPMENT VICE PRESIDENCY The author is grateful for a n d b i o d i ve r s i t y. T h e b e s t c h o i c e o f s t r u c t u re f o r s u c h p a r t n e r s h i p s the valuable contributions d e p e n d s m a i n l y o n t h e c a p a c i t y o f t h e i n c u m b e n t p u bl i c p a r k a g e n c y. of Carla Faustino Coelho of the International Global spending on protected areas amounts to solution. But such ventures need to perform a Finance Corporation and their significant economic value. The author suggests around US$6.5 billion a year, while estimates of range of functions requiring a broad set of skills Peter Fearnhead of the amount required to fully support conserva- (figure 1). Conservation tion range between US$12 billion and US$45 Partnerships. billion. Less than 12 percent is spent in devel- What are the policy choices? oping countries, which often have the greatest As the creation of new protected areas has out- biodiversity. In fact, over the past decade many paced governments’ ability to provide adequate developing country governments have cut their financial resources, some park agencies have budgets for protected areas by more than half. developed autonomous models that allow a Public Disclosure Authorized International aid for biodiversity conservation more businesslike management approach and that PPPs offer a powerful policy tool for improving the has also declined. As a result, protected areas in greater financial independence. And some gov- developing countries receive an average of less ernments have entered into public-private part- than 30 percent of the funding estimated to be nerships. These partnerships fall into two broad needed for basic conservation management. categories, with different levels of responsibility Many national parks in developing countries and risk for the private partner: exist only on paper, lacking enough funds to pay I Traditional tourism partnerships. The private for staff salaries, patrol vehicles, or wildlife con- partner uses the government’s (natural) servation programs. Insufficiently protected, assets to provide services and generate these parks are vulnerable to poaching, defor- income, such as by operating shops, lodges, economic sustainability of parks, enhancing the quality estation, and agricultural use by local communi- and restaurants. ties. How to protect their valuable biodiversity? I Biodiversity management partnerships. The pri- Responsible commercialization through public- vate partner performs a public function on private partnerships provides an important behalf of the government, such as the con- of services, efficiently leveraging investment in conser- vation, and contributing to the core function of protect- ing biodiversity. The author suggests that commercially managed PAs can generate enough revenue to cover op- erating and maintenance costs. Positive experience with PPPs in nature conservation in Africa shows that they can improve service through professional management and marketing, reduce the need for public subsidies, and mo- bilize capital for investment in park infrastructure and bio- diversity. The best choice of structure for such partner- ships depends mainly on the capacity of the incumbent public park agency. 13 Protected Area CMPs in Central and West Africa © BGStock72/Shutterstock 14 Protected Area CMPs in Central and West Africa Africa is Changing: Should its Protected Areas Evolve? Public-Private Partnership for Protected Areas: Current Situation and Prospects in French – Speaking Africa. Author(s) Brugière, D. Publication Date February 2021 Publisher The International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) — The Program on African Protected areas & Conservation (PAPACO) Pages 31 Publication Link https://papaco.org/fr/wp-content/up loads/2021/02/etudesAP_PPP_FR.pdf https://papaco.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/ etudesAP_PPP_EN_v2.pdf Language French and English Publication Type Article This paper provides a brief history of PPPs in Central and Parlons-en ! West Africa; profiles 15 “formal” CMPs in Central and West Africa; highlights the main contributions of PPPs to the region and the challenges; and suggests when PPPs should be used and makes specific recommendations for L’AFRIQUE CHANGE : SES AIRES PROTÉGÉES DOIVENT-ELLES ÉVOLUER ? their adoption. Brugière notes the success of PPPs and PARTENARIAT PUBLIC-PRIVÉ POUR LES AIRES PROTÉGÉES : ÉTAT DES LIEUX ET PROSPECTIVES EN AFRIQUE FRANCOPHONE recommends that they should be used in three situations: Auteur : David Brugière 1. When states do not wish to invest directly in the let ’s talk management of PAs for political reasons or due to about it ! budgetary constraints. 2. During the development phase of a newly created PA or the rehabilitation of a paper park. AFRICA IS CHANGING: SHOULD ITS PROTECTED AREAS EVOLVE? PUBLIC-PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP FOR PROTECTED AREAS: CURRENT 3. When the PA is under pressure from militarized SITUATION AND PROSPECTS IN FRENCH-SPEAKING AFRICA Author: David Brugière poaching that requires special expertise and con- siderable resources. 15 Assessment of Protected Area Management Partnerships in Central Africa: Draft Preliminary Findings and Recommendations Author(s) Baghai, M., Agnangoye, J.P., Pongui, B. Publication Date January 2021 Publisher United States Forest Service International Programs Pages 31 Publication Link www.usfscentralafrica.org Language English Publication Type Report This study assesses PPP models in Central Africa, with an emphasis on delegated management. This is not an audit or a performance assessment of individual CMPs. The goal of the report is to identify the strengths and weaknesses of various models (in theory and in practice), identifying characteristics and modalities of successful models, and where there are weaknesses, providing recommendations ASSESSMENT OF PROTECTED AREA MANAGEMENT PARTNERSHIPS IN CENTRAL AFRICA Preliminary Findings and Recommendations | January 2021 U.S. Forest Service International Programs for targeted strengthening. They also looks specifically at how CMPs build capacity and engage local communities, as these are important elements of effective CMPs. They review eight CMPs in the region, looking at four core ar- eas: Conservation impact; Economic performance; Social Impact; and Capacity Building. The report outlines specif- ic recommendations for each CMP model along the four core areas. 16 A Central African Perspective on Delegated Protected Area Management: An Opinion Author(s) Scholte, P., Agnangoye, J.P., Chardonnet, B., Eloma, H.P., Nchoutpouen, C., Ngoga, T. Publication Date 2018 Publisher Tropical Conservation Science, Volume 11: 1–10 Pages 10 Publication Link https://journals.sagepub.com/ doi/10.1177/1940082918796621 Language English Publication Type Article Recognizing the trend in Central Africa for African states to delegate PA man- agement to private partners and suggesting that most of the articles written until 2018 about delegation of PA management are from Eastern and Southern Africa, the authors review CMPs to determine their effectiveness in Central Africa. See Figure 2 . They highlight: 1. PAs with delegated management are among the most well known, including some World Heritage Sites, albeit with serious management challenges. 2. Funding from formal development agreements, from a donor country to a specific recipient country, is the dominant source of funding for delegated CMPs. 3. Lack of legal provisions and clarity in CMP process has been an obsta- cle for the adoption of delegated CMPs for some countries. 4. Increasingly, partners are creating foundations to facilitate the opera- tions and management of a CMP. 5. Building the capacity of nationals and PA agencies in handling dele- gated management should be at the forefront of partnerships. 17 Figure 2. Variants of the Modes of Strategic Governance and Operational Management from Government Management to Delegated Management D e l e g a te d 4 . G over n a n ce D i rec t Ser v i ce D el eg at i o n o f G OV E R NA NC E a n d m a n a g em en t Prov i d er d el eg a ted 3. G over n a n ce S h are d 2. Sh a red s h a red PPP gover n a n ce a n d & m a n a g em en t m a n a g em en t d el eg a ted Gove rn m e n t o n ly 1. Te ch n ical an d F in an cial S u ppo r t G ove r n m e n t S h are d De le g ate d on l y De le gat io n o f M A N AG E M E N T Source: Scholte 2018, original source Baghai 2016. 18 Guide Sous Regional de Bonnes Pratiques pour la Gestion des Aires Protegees en Mode Partenariat Public – Prive (PPP) en Africque Central (A Best Practice Guide for the Management of Protected Areas with Public-Private Partnerships (PPPs) in Central Africa) Author(s) Ngoye, R.N., Scholte, P., Agnangoye, J.P., Eloma, H.P., Nchoutpouen, C. Publication Date June 2018 Publisher Commission des Forêts d’Afrique Centrale (COMIFAC) Pages 72 Publication Link https://www.comifac.org/documents/autres- publications/guide-sous-regional-de-bonnes- pratiques-pour-la-gestion-durable-des-aires- protegees-en-mode-partenariat-public-prive- ppp-en-afrique-centrale Language French Publication Type Report The sub-regional institutions of The Economic Community of Central African States (ECCAS), COMIFAC, and Network of Protected Areas in Central Africa (RAPAC) were requested by the national institutions in charge of PAs to help them better understand and take ownership of the PPP management method given the growing interest in CMPs, and the difficulties encountered in Cen- tral Africa related to limited expertise and lack of appropriate legal framework. This guide followed training sessions and workshops and includes a review of the use of PPPs in the United States, a description of the distinction between a for-profit and a not-for profit PPP, best practices for establishing PPPs, and some obstacles to avoid when developing PPPs. The guide strongly recom- mends a tendering process when seeking partners and highlights what public partners should look for in a bid. The annex includes sample contracts. 19 Country Specific CMPs in Africa © AndreAnita/Shutterstock 20 Madagascar Protected Area Co-management and Perceived Livelihood Impacts Author(s) Ward, C., Stringer, L.C., Holmes, G. Publication Date 2018 Publisher Journal of Environmental Management, 228 Pages 12 Publication Link https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/ S0301479718310119 Language English Publication Type Article The authors purport that the creation of PAs to conserve biodiversity has pos- itive and negative impacts, and in some cases the impacts are unequally dis- tributed within local communities. They recognize that there is global interest in local community involvement in PA governance and that co-management has aimed to reduce costs of PA establishment and their uneven distribution. Yet, this study suggests that there is mixed evidence to support whether such initiatives are succeeding. In this study, a PA in Madagascar, co-managed by local community associations and a national NGO, is used as a case study to explore how co-management governance processes impact livelihoods, and how these impacts are distributed within and between villages. The majori- ty of respondents perceived negative livelihood outcomes, and impacts were unevenly distributed between social groups. Data shows that the main drivers of this were PA-related rules restricting forest activities. Drivers of improved livelihood outcomes were training and materials improving agricultural yields and increased community cohesion. 21 Madagascar Developing a Resilient Co-Management Arrangement for Protected Areas: Field Experience from the Ankeniheny-Zahamena Corridor in Madagascar Author(s) Rajaspera, B., Raik, D.B., Ravololonanahary, H. Publication Date July 2011 Publisher Human Dimensions of Wildlife, 16:4, 244-258 Pages 16 Publication Link https://www.researchgate.net/publica tion/254305756_Developing_a_Resilient_ CoManagement_Arrangement_for_Protected_ Areas_Field_Experience_From_the_Ankeniheny- Zahamena_Corridor_in_Madagascar Language English Publication Type Article In 2003, Madagascar committed to tripling its PA estate to conserve its unique biodiversity and essential ecosystem services. Implementing this commit- ment involved creating a new legal framework, selecting sites, establishing resource use rules, and developing governance and innovative management arrangements. Drawing on their experience in the Ankeniheny-Zahemana Cor- ridor (CAZ), which was at the time among the most advanced in its establish- ment as a PA with a co-management governance arrangement, the authors identified nine key elements of good governance: clear resource governance goal, coherent institutional structure, clear rules, participation, transparency, monitoring, enforcement, equity, and transfer of authority. Each of these fac- tors is explored in the desire to inform and improve future CMP arrangements. 22 Malawi Neoliberal Conservation and Protected Area Based Tourism Development in Malawi: The Case of Majete Wildlife Reserve Author(s) Bello, F.G., Lovelock, B., Carr, N. Publication Date 2017 Publisher Journal of Tourism Challenges and Trends Pages 26 Publication Link https://www.proquest.com/openview/ec39e4fab 1b3797dc131d3d610e692be/1?pq-origsite=gschol ar&cbl=2028917 Language English Access Fee Paid Publication Type Article This paper assesses the contribution of tourism development to biodiversity conservation and how local communities are involved in PA tourism. The views of local people, tourism operators, PA management agencies, government departments, and NGOs were investigated through a qualitative study. The findings reveal that Majete Wildlife Reserve, which was a paper park in 2003, has been rehabilitated and is thriving with wildlife. Tourism infrastructure, which was non-existent, has been developed providing income for biodiversity conservation and sustainable community development. Local communities have started sharing in tourism benefits and functional community participation has been achieved. 23 Mozambique Collaborative Management Models for Conservation Areas in Mozambique. Regional Best Practices, Current Models in Mozambique, and a Framework for Enhancing Partnerships to Protect Biodiversity Assets and Promote Development Author(s) Baghai, M., Lindsey, P., Everatt K., Madope, A. Publication Date May 2018 Publisher USAID Pages 194 Publication Link https://biodiversitylinks.org/projects/completed- projects/bridge/bridge-resources/biodiversity- integration-in-practice-a-case-study-of-usaid- in-mozambique Language English Publication Type Report The comprehensive report aims to help formalize the manner in which CMPs can best operate across Mozambique’s network of conservation areas (CAs). This report includes a three-part study to: 1. Perform a regional review of CMPs in Africa—including the main models, evaluating their pros and cons, and drawing lessons learned for improved governance and management. 2. Assess CMPs in Mozambique, including current and past partnerships, to take stock of Mozambique’s experience and draw important insights and lessons learned for the future. 3. Develop a strategic framework and roadmap to help guide and improve partnership models and practices in Mozambique’s CAs. 24 Mozambique Biodiversity Integration in Practice: A Case Study of the Integrated Gorongosa and Buffer Zone Project, Mozambique Author(s) USAID Mozambique Staff Publication Date October 2018 Publisher USAID Pages 24 Publication Link https://pdf.usaid.gov/pdf_docs/PA00TD3P.pdf Language English Publication Type Article Gorongosa National Park is managed by a CMP between the Government of Mozambique and the Greg Carr Foundation and has had success in ecological recovery and community development. This case study explores the integrated biodiversity conservation and development program designed to advance natural resource management and improve human well-being through the Integrated Gorongosa and Buffer Zone (IGBZ) project. The case study emphasizes biodiversity integration and implications for integration across sectors at USAID broadly. Three enabling conditions contributed to biodiversity integration: strong institutional support at all levels; integrated, flexible funding; and a culture of inclusiveness and adaptive management. 25 Mozambique Upgrading Protected Areas to Restore Wild Biodiversity Author(s) Pringle, R.M. Publication Date 2017 Publisher Nature Pages 09 Publication Link https://www.researchgate.net/publication/ 317276745_Upgrading_protected_areas_to_conserve wild_biodiversity Language English Publication Type Article This paper profiles the ecological recovery in Mozambique’s Gorongosa Na- tional Park (a CMP between the Greg Carr Foundation and the Government of Mozambique) and Costa Rica’s Área de Conservación Guanacaste. Pring- le notes that many PAs are underfunded, poorly managed, and ecologically damaged and the conundrum is how to increase their coverage and effective- ness simultaneously. Pringle cites the two innovative restoration and rewild- ing programs and how they demonstrate how degraded ecosystems can be rehabilitated, expanded, and woven into the cultural fabric of human societ- ies. The author suggests that worldwide, enormous potential for biodiversity conservation can be realized by upgrading existing nature reserves while har- monizing them with the needs and aspirations of their constituencies. 26 South Africa National Co-management Framework Author(s) Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism, Department of Land Affairs /Commission, iSimangaliso Wetland Authority, SANParks, Ezemvelo Wildlife, Mpumalanga Tourism and Parks Agency, Eastern Cape Parks Publication Date 2013 Publisher Same as authors Pages 9 Publication Link https://chm.cbd.int/api/v2013/docu ments/ 59036B4E-A84D-8359-8C02-2E1EA1D27FC2/at tachments/National%20Co-Management%20 Framework.pdf Language English Publication Type Article Following the settlement of land claims in South Africa for areas of biodiversity significance, the development of beneficiation and co-management models between PA authorities and land claimants included a number of hurdles and hidden costs impeding the delivery of tangible benefits to the communities. This paper reviews the legal framework for the various co-management models in South Africa, highlights the pros and cons of each model, and outlines a framework to ensure more effective redress of land rights in a fair and equitable manner to the claimants. 27 South Africa Contract Parks in South Africa Author(s) Grossman, D. and Holden, P. Publication Date 2008 Publisher In Child, B., Suich, H, Spenceley, A. (eds). 2013. Evolution and Innovation in Wildlife Conservation. Rutledge. Pages 15 Publication Link https://conservation-development.net/Projekte/ Nachhaltigkeit/CD1/Suedafrika/Literatur/PDF/ Grossmann.pdf Language English Publication Type Book Chapter Following South Africa’s transition from a minority led to a democratic gov- ernment, an approach was needed to address historical injustice around PAs while securing biodiversity. Co-management, where local people have strong historical linkages to the land, was used to achieve ecological sustainability, social equity, and economic benefit. South Africa’s legislation provides for the establishment of contractual national parks, where landowners enter into a contract with the relevant Ministry and the area is proclaimed as a contrac- tual park, with the owners retaining title and negotiated rights. This chapter outlines the South African experience with co-management, and three con- tractual parks involving local indigenous people are described. Lessons are discussed, bearing in mind that at the time this was written, the models had short histories. 28 Zambia Collaborative Governance and Benefit Sharing in Liuwa Plain National Park, Western Zambia Author(s) Nyirenda, V.R., and Nkhata, B.A. Publication Date 2013 Publisher Parks Journal 19.1 Pages 11 Publication Link https://parksjournal.com/wp-content/up loads/2013/04/PARKS-19.1- Nyirenda-Nkhata-10.2305IUCN.CH_.2013. PARKS-19-1.VRN_.en_.pdf Language English Publication Type Article This case study on Liuwa Plain National Park (3,660 km 2) in Zambia demon- strates the relationship between social capital and operational management by multiple partners from 2004 to 2011. In 2004, the Zambia Wildlife Author- ity, African Parks, and the Barotse Royal Establishment established a CMP for Liuwa Plain. The authors review power relationships, ecological benefits, and socio-economic performance, and conclude that social-economic-ecological gains and benefit distribution were influenced by the capacity of partners to negotiate collective interests. Intra and inter-partnership networking, social learning, and differential capacity were also cited as important factors. 29 Zimbabwe Partnerships and Stakeholder Participation in the Management of National Parks: Experiences of the Gonarezhou National Park in Zimbabwe Author(s) Musakwa, W., Gumbo, T., Paradza, G., Mpofu, E., Nyathi, N.A., Selamolela, N.B. Publication Date 2020 Publisher Land 9, 399 Pages 17 Publication Link https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/9/11/399 Language English Publication Type Article This article is about the CMP between the Zimbabwe Parks Management and Wildlife Authority (ZPWMA) and Frankfurt Zoological Society (FZS) for Gonarezhou National Park (GNP). Before 2007, ZPWMA faced challenges in maintaining its biodiversity, community relations, and infrastructure. In 2017, ZPWMA and FZS formed a partnership under the Gonarezhou Conservation Trust (GCT). This study examines the relationship between GCT management, park stakeholders and communities, and biodiversity. The authors highlight challenges and lessons learned. Despite hurdles, the results show improving biodiversity conservation, ecosystem management, and community engagement. The authors argue that similar partnership arrangements can be applied to PAs in Zimbabwe and Africa for better biodiversity management and tourism. 30 Country Specific CMPs Outside of Africa Walter Wust/SERNANP 31 Australia Co-management of Protected Areas: An Opportunity for All? Author(s) Pearson, L.J. and Dare, M. Publication Date 2014 Publisher In Lo, A., Pearson, L.J., and Evans, M.C. 2014. Opportunities for the Critical Decade: Enhancing Well-being within Planetary Boundaries. Presented at the Australia New Zealand Society for Ecological Economics 2013 Conference. The University of Canberra and Australia New Zealand Society for Ecological Economics Pages 21 Publication Link http://anzsee.org.au/download/anzsee_2013_conference_ proceedings/01_Pearson%20and%20Dare.pdf Language English Publication Type Article This article asserts that there is ambiguity around the meaning and application of co-management and stresses the need to critically explore the governance and management arrangements required for successful nature conservation. The authors use primary data from three PAs in regional New South Wales (Australia), and the broader governance literature to develop a co- management implementation framework that identifies three distinct models of co-management in action; control, coordination, and collaboration. The three models vary concerning stakeholder positions, power, representations, interactions, and role in delivery. This framework is beneficial for exploring the range of existing co-management arrangements, is potentially suitable for specific management contexts and outcomes, and provides a frame from which environmental managers can evaluate the applicability of alternative governance frameworks and their potential strengths and weaknesses. 32 Colombia Conflict in Protected Areas: Who Says Co-Management Does Not Work? Author(s) De Pourcq, K., Thomas, E., An Vranckx, B.A., Léon-Sicard, T., Van Damme, P. Publication Date 2015 Publisher PLoS ONE Pages 15 Publication Link https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal. pone.0144943 Language English Publication Type Article Since the 1990s, co-management schemes, where the management of resources is shared by public and/or private sector stakeholders, has been a strategy used to reduce conflict around the world. The authors suggest that while there was initial high hope for this strategy, in recent years co-management has been perceived as falling short of expectations. They note that sys- temic assessments on co-management’s role in conflict mitigation and prevention do not exist. Despite initial high hopes, in recent years co-management has been perceived as falling short of expectations. However, systematic assessments of its role in conflict prevention or mitigation are non-existent. Interviews with 584 residents from 10 PAs in Colombia revealed that co-manage- ment could be successful in reducing conflict at grassroots level, as long as some critical enabling conditions, such as effective participation in the co-management process, are fulfilled not only on paper but also on the ground. The authors hope the findings will re-incentivize global efforts to make co-management work in PAs and other common pool resource contexts. 33 India Institutional Analysis of Multi-level Collaborative Management in Periyar Tiger Reserve, Southern India Author(s) Parr, J. Publication Date 2015 Publisher IUCN, Parks Journal Pages 14 Publication Link https://parksjournal.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/Parr-PARKS- 21.2-10.2305IUCN.CH_.2014.PARKS-21-2JWKP.en_.pdf Language English Publication Type Article Periyar Tiger Reserve in the Southern Western Ghats is a government-managed PA with manage- ment programs extending in the buffer area. The Government of India designated the reserve as a Learning Centre of Excellence, and it is recognized internationally for effective management. This paper analyzes the institutional arrangements of the reserve at different levels, from the landscape level to the individual village. The authors found that a multi-stakeholder collaborative management body is important for effective landscape management. They provide a description of the different bodies, how they interact and their overall responsibilities. The PA management tasks are well-defined, with working groups established for four management fields, increasing constructive engagement with stakeholders, engaging the 72 villages, 5,584 households, and 28,000 villagers, through 76 committees. 34 Norway Co-management of PAs to Alleviate Conservation Conflicts: Experiences in Norway Author(s) Fedreheim, G.E. and Blanco, E. Publication Date 2017 Publisher International Journal of the Commons, Volume 11 Pages 19 Publication Link https://www.thecommonsjournal.org/articles/10.18352/ijc.749/ Language English Publication Type Article This paper explores the perceptions of PA stakeholders (referred to as actors) about co-manage- ment at the local level and its ability to mitigate conflict, using data from surveys at eight PAs in northern Norway, just before a change to co-management was implemented. They found that the two strongest determinants that explain actors’ initial support of the governance change as a means to alleviate conflict are: first, the relationship of actors to the PAs in terms of knowledge of the PAs and mental models on conservation; and second, the economic relevance of the areas for them. Other sociocultural variables such as indigenous background, age, education level and gender have been considered relevant and were also identified as significant attributes that define preferences for conservation management alternatives. Interestingly, the authors did not find evi- dence suggesting that respondents who had taken part in participatory processes in PAs affected their perceptions on the potential for co-management to reduce conflicts. 35 United States Parks 2.0: Operating State Parks through Public-Private Partnerships (United States) Author(s) Gilroy, L., Kenny, H., Morris, J. Publication Date December 2013 Publisher Reason Foundation, Buckeye Institute Pages 45 Publication Link https://www.buckeyeinstitute.org/library/doclib/Parks-2.0-Operating- State-Parks-Through-Public-Private-Partnerships.pdf Language English Access Fee Free Publication Type Report Fiscal challenges for state governments in the United States have placed significant pressure on state park systems, leading to declines in park funding, cutbacks in park services, and, in some cases, even the closure of parks. This crisis prompted policymakers to rethink traditional approaches to funding and operating state parks, with PPPs offering a potential solution. This paper outlines the different kinds of models that could be used for state PPPs and reviews the use of PPPs by the United States Forest Service and what the terms of a PPP contract should include. The authors highlight prospects in different US States and include a concession request for proposals and a sample contract in the annex. 36 CMP Governance © Gillian Holliday/Shutterstock 37 CMP GOVERNANCE Engagement and Participation in Protected Area Management: Who, Why, How and When? Author(s) Dovers, S., Feary, S., Martin, A., McMillan, L., Morgan, D., Tollefson, M. Publication Date 2015 Publisher In Worboys, G. L., Lockwood, M., Kothari, A., Feary, S., Pulsford, I. (eds). 2015. Protected Area Governance and Management. ANU Press. Pages 29 Publication Link https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/j.ctt1657v5d.21.pdf Language English Publication Type Book Chapter This chapter explores the demands on, and opportunities provided to, PA managers when engaging with individuals, communities, and organizations on PA management. The first section notes the emergence of collaborative arrangements in resource and environmental management and how these apply to PA management. General principles applying to engagement and public participation are outlined. The last four sections explore four questions: with whom PA managers engage; why these individuals and groups engage with PA management, and their values and motivations; how to engage stakeholders, and the forms of and strategies for participation; and when engagement should occur. The chapter also includes relevant case studies. 38 Governance of Protected Areas: From Understanding to Action Author(s) Borrini-Feyerabend, G., Dudley, N., Jaeger, T., Lassen, B., Broome, N.P., Phillips, A., Sandwith, T. Publication Date 2013 Publisher IUCN Pages 144 Publication Link https://www.iucn.org/sites/dev/files/import/downloads/iucn_ governance_complete_no_sig_9_09.pdf Language English Publication Type Report This is a comprehensive best practice guideline on PA governance with a goal to enhance gov- ernance capacities for the world’s PA systems. Part 1 provides an overview of the four different PA governance types recognized by the IUCN, with examples of what they are, why they are im- portant, and how they might be integrated into coherent and effective PA systems (see Table 1 ). This section also addresses the complex question of what constitutes good governance in various circumstances. Part 2 offers practical guidance for a multi-stakeholder group willing to embark on the process of assessing, evaluating, and improving governance for a given system. 39 Table 1. IUCN’s Four Governance Types for Protected Areas Governance Sub-t ypes Type • Federal or national ministry or agency in charge Typ e A. • Sub-national ministry or agency in charge (e.g., at regional, provincial, Governa n ce by govern me n t municipal level) • Government-delegated management (e.g., to an NGO) • Transboundary governance (formal arrangements between one or more Typ e B . sovereign States or Territories) Sha red gove r n an ce • Collaborative governance (trough various ways in which diverse actors and institutions work together) • Joint governance (pluralist board or other multy-party governing body) • Conserved areas established and run by: Typ e C. • Indigenous landowners Private gove rn an ce • non-profit organizations (e.g., NGOs, universities) • for-profit organizations (e.g., corporate owners, cooperatives) Typ e D. • Indigenous peoples’ conserved territories and areas–established and run Governa n ce by by indigenous peoples Indigenous pe o ple s an d • Community conserved areas and territories–established and run by loca l comm u n it ie s local communities Source: Borrini-Feyerabend et al. 2013. 40 Co-management: Concepts and Methodological Implications Author(s) Lars, C. and Berkes, F. Publication Date 2004 Publisher Journal of Environmental Management Pages 11 Publication Link https://www.researchgate.net/publication/7985025_Co- Management_Concepts_and_Methodological_Implications Language English Publication Type Report Co-management, or joint management of natural resources, is commonly framed as a power sharing arrangement between the state and a community of resource users. The authors suggest that in reality, there often are multiple local interests and multiple government agencies at play, which should be considered. They assert that co-management is a continuous problem-solving process, not a fixed state, involving extensive deliberation, negotiation, and joint learning and that power sharing is the result, and not the starting point, of the process. They recommend the following steps: 1. Defining the social-ecological system under focus. 2. Mapping the essential management tasks and problems to be solved. 3. Clarifying the participants in the problem-solving processes. 4. Analyzing linkages in the system, across levels of organization and geographical space. 5. Evaluating capacity-building needs for enhancing the skills and capabilities. 6. Prescribing ways to improve policymaking and problem-solving. 41 Sample CMP Marketing Prospectuses © SA-Pictures/Shutterstock 42 Mozambique The government of Mozambique, in collaboration with the World Bank and the Global Wildlife Program, held an international conference in Maputo in June 2018 to maximize finance for nature-based tourism development and to promote long-term CMPs that deliver results for people and wildlife. The International Conference on Nature-Based Tourism in Conservation Areas brought together over 500 participants, including the president of Mozam- bique, former president of Botswana, ministers, and a diverse cohort of poli- cy makers, tourism professionals, local opinion makers, conservationists, en- trepreneurs, academia, and investors and donors. The prospectus outlined tourism opportunities in eight PAs and CMP opportunities in six PAs. Mozambique Investment Forum Agenda https://pubdocs.worldbank.org/en/239471528209810089/Internation- al-Conference-on-Nature-Based-Tourism-in-Conservation-Areas-Agen- da-EN.pdf Mozambique Investment Forum Prospectus http://www.anac.gov.mz/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/Na- ture-based-Tourism-2020.pdf Uganda In 2017, President Yoweri Kaguta Museveni hosted a one-day Conservation and Tourism Investment Forum at the Lake Victoria Serena in Kigo, Ugan- da. Private investors, development partners, conservationists, tourism op- erators, and government officials attended. During the Forum, tourism in- vestment and CMP opportunities were profiled in five protected areas and the Government of Uganda announced a number of investment incentives. Space for The Giant’s Club, the United Nations Development Programme, the African Wildlife Foundation, and government agencies such as Uganda Wildlife Authority, Uganda Tourism Board, and Uganda Investment Authority organized and sponsored the forum. Uganda Investment Forum Prospectus https://medioambientepaisajesyciu- dadverde.files.wordpress.com/2018/10/gorilas.pdf 43 Online Resources © Bluerain/Shutterstock 44 Global Wildlife Program https://www.worldbank.org/en/programs/global-wildlife-program The Global Wildlife Program is a global partnership on Wildlife Conservation and Crime Prevention for Sustainable Development funded by the Global En- vironment Facility (GEF) and coordinated by the World Bank, that brings to- gether 37 projects across 32 countries in Asia, Africa, and Latin America and the Caribbean. In 2021, the GWP published the Collaborative Management Partnership Toolkit (CMP Toolkit). The CMP Toolkit assesses CMP models and serves as a reference guide for governments and implementing partners considering CMPs. It raises awareness of CMP experiences in Africa to high- light benefits, challenges, and lessons learned. CMP StoryMaps The Global Wildlife Program in partnership with parks partners created three storymaps to highlight the experiences, successes, and lessons learned from CMPs in Africa. Akagera National Park, Rwanda: https://geowb.maps.arcgis.com/apps/ MapJournal/index.html?appid=13eb14717d994b598489f2d86f9624c3 Gorongosa National Park, Mozambique: https://geowb.maps.arcgis. com/apps/MapJournal/index.html?appid=8488e8e45a7b40d09d3 253100eb47d95 Nouabalé-Ndoki National Park, Republic of Congo: https://geowb.maps. arcgis.com/apps/MapJournal/index.html?appid=c3560ff334a- 14b00946e158100488c2b 45 Public-Private-Partnership Knowledge Lab https://pppknowledgelab.org/ The PPP Knowledge Lab brings together the most relevant and authorita- tive resources on PPPs in one location to empower governments and their advisors to design and deliver best-in-class infrastructure projects. The PPP Knowledge Lab provides a PPP reference guide, additional tools and resourc- es, and information by sector and countries. Public-Private-Partnership Legal Resource Center (PPPLRC) https://ppp.worldbank.org/public-private-partnership The PPPLRC provides easy access to sample legal materials that can assist in the planning, design, and legal structuring of an infrastructure project — es- pecially a project which involves a PPP. The PPPLRC is organized in two broad categories: guidance on structuring a PPP project and its enabling environ- ment, and sector specific information. Webinar on Collaborative Management Partnerships https://biopama.org/event/closing-the-gap-collaborative-manage- ment-of-protected-areas/ This 90-minute panel features a discussion with government (Rwanda), NGO (African Parks, IUCN, and Frankfurt Zoological Society) and donor (European Union) representatives on CMPs. Practical examples of CMPs are described from Rwanda and Zimbabwe, exploring delegated and integrated CMPs. 46 SUPPORTED BY LED BY Gaston Piccinetti / Shutterstock