EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Final Report
Baseline Study in Three Geographical Areas of Concentration in Mesomerica
Project CAM - 2241
Norwegian Agency for Development Cooperation (NORAD)
The World Conservation Union (IUCN) Regional Office for Mesoamerica
October 2001
INDEX OF CONTENT
I. BACKGROUND
II. OBJECTIVES
III. METHODOLOGY
1. PRINCIPLES 2. ANALYSIS OF THE QUALITY OF PARTICIPATION
IV. DATA ANALYSIS
1. PAZ RIVER GAC 2. SAN JUAN RIVER GAC 3. TALAMANCA – BOCAS DEL TORO GAC
V. CONCLUSIONS
1. WORKING HYPOTHESES 2. PRIORITY SITES 3. PRIORITY THEMES 4. THE CONSORTIUM AS A WORKING MODEL
VI. SELF-EVALUATION
1. ANALYSIS OS STUDY INDICATORS 2. ANALYSIS OF STUDY IMPACTS 3. LESSONS LEARNED
MAP ANNEX
Report elaborated by the Project Team:
Coordinators: Jesús Cisneros y Guiselle Rodriguez Adviser: Alejandro Imbach Supervision: Enrique Lahmann
I. BACKGROUND
As a result an in-depth analysis on the experience of the Regional Office for Mesoamerica (ORMA) of The World Conservation Union (IUCN) during the last thirteen years in Mesoamerica, along with the analysis of impacts on regional sustainability and mobilization of IUCN membership in this context, in December 1999 ORMA presented a proposal to NORAD for a framework program aimed at the organization and consolidation of local conservation and sustainable development initiatives managed by consortia of local organizations in three geographic areas of concentration in Mesoamerica. This work modality, which promotes management of key ecosystems by local consortia, seeks to be a model for addressing the serious socio-environmental problems in Mesoamerica.
NORAD expressed a favorable opinion of the proposal for a framework program and suggested that a preparatory phase be carried out to obtain basic secondary information. This document is the executive summary of the final report on this phase, which consisted of a study of the reference situation (baseline) in three geographical areas of Mesoamerica, called Geographic Areas of Concentration (GACs), in order to establish a baseline with socio-environmental indicators to determine the Framework Program’s future impact on these areas.
II. OBJECTIVES
Long-term Objective Local organized groups sustainably manage key ecosystems in their sites and influence management of similar ecosystems in other places
Objective of the study on the reference situation
IUCN-Mesoamerica in coordination with local organized groups has completed studies to prepare baselines for three geographic areas of concentration in Mesoamerica: Paraíso – La Barrona (Guatemala) – Barra de Santiago (El Salvador); the mid-section of the lower basin of the San Juan River (Nicaragua – Costa Rica); and La Amistad – Caribbean (Costa Rica – Panama). A strategy for socio-environmental management has also been delineated on the basis of these studies.
Specific Objectives
1. Working groups comprised of local organizations and IUCN members were organized at each site to conduct studies of the socio-environmental baseline situation in each place.
2. A situation analysis was made in each GAC using participatory methodology, and the respective baseline studies were completed.
3. Based on the results of (1) and (2), above, sustainable management projects for key ecosystems in the GACs were prepared in participatory form, derived from the work of local consortia. These projects were integrated into the IUCN-NORAD Framework Program proposal.
III. METHODOLOGY
1. PRINCIPLES The process took the objectives and strategies contained in the IUCN-NORAD Proposed Framework Agreement as its point of departure, based on the following working principles:
• Collective and participatory construction of the process and its products • Strengthening of local management • Flexibility and respect for local processes • Strengthening of spaces for cooperation
The chart below presents a brief summary of the methodology utilized for the three GACs.
STEPS OBJECTIVE OUTCOMES
Identification of Select potential Binational group of partners organizations partners Meetings with Share objective and Modifications and agreements with Preliminary binational partners basic methodology respect to methodology Selection of local participants Distribution of logistical tasks Appraisal workshops Appraisal and Common understanding of the identification of critical socio-environmental situation ecosystems Vision of the long-term and change Design Identification of Identification of Regional matrix on the binational and common elements environmental situation, extent of regional themes and natural resource use and the human priorities dimension Rankings, Formulation of a Regional matrix to construct the dimensions and baseline matrix baseline indicators Information Identification and Baseline construction at Consultancies carried out with recovery of the binational level national information information Analysis and ordering Identification of gaps Matrix of binational information Validation of information and relations Strategy Workshop Local validation of Identification of gaps and indicators information with top priority Viability of working as Identification of actors and local consortia resources
2. Analysis of the quality of participation
The greatest possible representativeness was sought with respect to the groups or sectors working in the selected areas. The groups, institutions and persons invited to the workshops were identified jointly with the group of local partners. This led to workshop participation by government environmental institutions, local authorities such as the Majors’ Offices and municipalities, and representatives of community and indigenous associations, groups of producers, fishermen, artisans and small tourist enterprises. Also invited were NGOs and representatives of other local development initiatives, universities and research centers. Local spaces of coordination and networks were also taken into consideration. This made it possible the participation in the workshops by other interested parties. As a result, sectoral representativeness and balance were obtained.
Emphasis was placed on gender equity during preparatory meetings with partners, and women in local groups or specific organizations were expressly invited in order to even out participation between the genders. However, in the majority of the organizations female participation is not significant, and participation in the workshops was masculine for the most part. Nonetheless, this goal should be stressed in a later process.
IV. DATA ANALYSIS
Information gathered in the field was synthesized in three charts (one for each geographic area), and can be found in the annexes of the final report. Based on this information, an analysis of the environmental and social situation in each of these areas was prepared. This may also be found in the annexes of the final report. The three charts that follow present a brief summary of these analyses.
1. GEOGRAPHIC AREA OF CONCENTRATION PAZ RIVER (Guatemala - El Salvador)
GENERAL INFORMATION
The Paz River Geographic Area of Concentration extends along the coast of the Pacific Ocean from Monterrico (Guatemala) to Barra de Santiago (El Salvador). The GAC is formed by the watersheds of short rivers in the zone and by the lower basin of larger rivers such as the Rio Paz itself, which serves as the boundary between Guatemala and El Salvador. Within the coastal marine zone, the GAC runs into the ocean as far as the 30 meter-deep isoline.
Relief is characterized by two well-defined areas. On one side is the coastal plain, generally narrow, and on the other lie the slopes of the middle and upper watersheds of the rivers forming the GAC. (See Map Annex)
The region’s climate is predominately tropical characterized by the alternation of dry (December to May) and rainy (June to November) seasons.
ENVIRONMENTAL SITUATION
Large ecosystems dominating in the zone are the dry tropical and dry premontane forests and the different coastal ecosystems (mangroves, dunes, sandy beaches, estuaries and others.)
The main changes in land-use occur in the dry forests. These are essentially basic crops (corn, sorghum and bean) and pasture. In some sites sesame and fruits (watermelon, mango and others) are grown. Substitution of dry forest by these activities is not well delimited, but is estimated at over 70% in Guatemala and over 85% in El Salvador. In the latter country, the majority of the remaining forests in the GAC are mangroves (see Map Annex).
Coastal ecosystems have been replaced by shrimp cultivation and by recreational and tourist infrastructure (summer homes, small hotels and cabins, establishments providing food, boat docks, etc.) There is no adequate quantification of these substitutions.
HUMAN SITUATION
In El Salvador average density is from 133 to 210 inhabitants/km2, and around 100 inhabitants/ km2 in Guatemala.
The greater part of the population is dedicated to farming, mainly registered as masculine labor. Estimated annual per capita income is US$1,200 for both countries.
Concerning essential services infrastructure, drinking water is one of the major limitations in the GAC, with coverage in El Salvador at barely 18-26% of the population. Only half the homes in the GAC have electricity.
Garbage is generally left untreated in the open air. In Guatemala an investigation of coastal communities revealed that 74% of the homes had no latrine.
Several types of local organizations exist in the GAC, with community or development organizations being those most concerned about environmental management. There are 10 organizations of this type in Guatemala and 19 in El Salvador.
CONCLUSIONS
This AGC presents the greatest level of natural resource degradation. The majority of natural ecosystems have been replaced by other land uses, and the few that remain are fragmented and under strong pressure.
The climatic regime of the GAC does not favor rapid natural regeneration processes, which also conspires against the area’s environmental recovery.
The level of degradation also has a significant effect on productive possibilities in the zone, and increasing erosion is causing further deterioration of soil productivity.
Given the scarcity of wild resources, the possibilities of establishing sustainable extractive activities are limited and insufficient for the resident population. Likewise, tourist attractions are limited due to this degradation.
2. GEOGRAPHIC AREA OF CONCENTRATION SAN JUAN RIVER (Costa Rica – Nicaragua)
GENERAL INFORMATION
The San Juan River Geographic Area of Concentration is located southwest of Lake Nicaragua and along the upper part of the San Juan River were lake waters flow out to the Caribbean Sea.
The GAC spans the municipalities of San Miguelito and San Carlos in Nicaragua, and the cantons of Upala, Guatuso and Los Chiles, in Costa Rica.
Dominated by Lake Nicaragua and the San Juan River, this geographic area of concentration is a relatively low, flat zone. There are gentle hills at the far side of the lake and broad flooded lowlands making up the most extensive and important freshwater wetlands, mainly Guatuso and Caño Negro. The GAC also includes the archipelago of Solentiname, in Lake Nicaragua (see Map Annex).
The region has a climate corresponding to humid tropical lowland with no dry season, although there is a marked decline in rainfall between January and May.
ENVIRONMENTAL SITUATION
The main large ecosystems in this GAC are the tropical wet forests in the lowland and the freshwater wetlands. Specifically, this last group includes lakes, ponds, rivers, and depressions that can be flooded (wooded and grassy.)
Around 50% of the original forests are intact in the Costa Rican cantons of this GAC. A similar situation exists in the Nicaraguan municipalities, although intensive extraction of selected woods has occurred in a good part of these forests.
The main use of land is farming, extending over 134,000 ha in Nicaragua (53% of the territory) and 160,000 ha in Costa Rica (44% of the territory.) Agricultural and livestock use consists of annual crops (basically corn and beans), permanent crops (citrus fruits, in Costa Rica) and pasture. In Costa Rica pasture represents 91% of the total area dedicated to cattle raising (146,000.) In Nicaragua there are 28,000 head of cattle in extensive rangeland, so the area under pasture can be estimated at 30,000 to 50,000 ha.
The main extractive use in the GAC is selective logging in nearly 100,000 ha of forests (39% of the territory) in Nicaragua, and 185,000 ha in Costa Rica (50% of the territory) (see Map Annex). Firewood extraction and fishing in the lake and San Juan River are also important in Nicaragua.
HUMAN SITUATION
The GAC has a population density of between 14 and 23 inhabitants/km2. There are 70 612 inhabitants on the Costa Rican side and 42 238 in Nicaragua. The GAC is fairly homogeneous in ethnic terms, with absolute predomination by the Hispanic population. There are no important indigenous groups and only a very reduced number of blacks.
Direct employment is generated by the following productive activities: livestock, farming, logging and trade. Tourism is incipient. Small-scale fishing represents the main activity of those living near the lake.
The area’s characteristics are associated with the agricultural frontier and recent colonization. Attracted by the quality of these ecosystems, the population has begun to grow in recent decade, leading to the uncontrolled creation of new settlements and social services.
The main diseases reported are respiratory and intestinal illnesses and malaria. Access to electrical service varies greatly among the cantons in the GAC, ranging from 26% to 72% of homes.
There are open-air municipal dumps.
With respect to grassroots organizations, 23 are reported in Nicaragua, of which 65% are involved with environment. Costa Rica has 80 organizations, with at least 25% working in this field. There are many more NGOs working in Nicaragua (13) than in Costa Rica (4).
CONCLUSIONS
The environmental situation of the San Juan River GAC is still acceptable, but subject to serious processes of degradation that will compromise this situation within a relatively short period.
The extension of natural ecosystems has suffered considerably, but almost half of its forest cover still remains and the integrity of the wetlands has not been compromised. The major challenge in this GAC is to move from unsustainable to sustainable production systems that improve income for the local population and reverse, or at least contain, degradation of natural ecosystems.
Technologies for sustainable use of these ecosystems exist and should be applied and disseminated in the region. Extractive uses can be regulated and intensified under appropriate criteria, and non- consumptive uses (mainly tourism) can be developed significantly throughout the GAC.
It should be possible to find ways of intensifying use in areas already converted to agriculture and pasture in order to increase their productivity and the income they generate. It is very possible that the benefits of this intensification will not reach the entire population, so these alternatives should be viewed as complementary to those described above.
3. GEOGRAPHIC AREA OF CONCENTRATION TALAMANCA - BOCAS DEL TORO (Costa Rica – Panama)
GENERAL INFORMATION
The Talamanca – Bocas del Toro GAC extends along the Caribbean coast from Cahuita National Park, in Talamanca, Costa Rica, to Chiriquí Grande in Bocas del Toro, Panama. The polygon comprising the area is completed by the 30-meter deep isoline and an imaginary line running parallel to and 10 km off the coast (see Map Annex).
Relief is generally flat with some undulations corresponding to the foot of the Caribbean mountains of the Talamanca Range.
Climate is tropical with no dry season. Rain occurs on a regular basis during all the months of the year, with slight dips in March and October. Temperatures are hot due to the low altitude, and environmental humidity is also high.
ENVIRONMENTAL SITUATION
The GAC is dominated by two large types of natural ecosystems: tropical lowland forests and coastal ecosystems. The latter includes a variety of large ecosystems, such as mangroves, coral reefs, sea grass beds, sandy beaches, salt flats and others.
The most extensive replacement of natural ecosystems has occurred in the wooded areas, which have been converted for annual and perennial crops. In Costa Rica 58% of the area is still wooded, but most of these forests have been intervened for selective extraction of wood. On the Panamanian side, forest cover reaches 57%, but also has a high proportion of intervened areas. Chemical pollution from intensive banana production is apparent but has not been quantified.
The main extractive activities are extraction of wood and non-timber resources, small-scale fishing and catch of lobster and conch.
Biodiversity conservation is highlighted in this GAC. Both countries have set aside important parts of the territory as natural protected areas in different categories (terrestrial and marine national parks, indigenous reserves, wildlife refuges and others.)
Tourism is another important use throughout the GAC, but of greater dimension and economic significance in Costa Rica. There some 50,000 tourists are registered a year and around 300 establishments are dedicated to tourism (lodging, meals, tours and other services.) Tourism activity is growing in Bocas del Toro.
HUMAN SITUATION
Both zones present population levels below the national average, Talamanca with 26,037 persons and an average density of 9.26 inhabitants/km2, and Bocas del Toro with 87,461 persons and a density of 19.4 inhabitants/ km2, not including the Teribe population.
This GAC is inhabited by different ethnic groups. The main native groups in Costa Rica are bri-bri and cabecar, and in Panama, guaymí and ngöbe. In both countries there is also a significant black population from the West Indies and Hispanic immigrants from other regions of these countries. This has resulted in a rich-heterogeneous mixture of cultural patterns.
The main economic activities in the zone are intensive agriculture, livestock-raising at low densities and artisanal fisheries. In Bocas del Toro the banana companies and petroleum shippers are the principal sources of employment, generating 35% of employment, with the remainder derived from trade, fishing, farming, livestock, silviculture and government.
The isolation of this geographic area is related to the historical difficulties in communicating with centers of government in each of the countries. This situation can be verified easily by analyzing the number and quality of public services available.
Two-thirds of the population has access to water from public or community aqueducts and 63% to electrical service.
There are six open-air dumps within the GAC in the main centers of population. The rest of the population takes care of garbage on an individual basis by burning or burying it or by simply piling it up in the open.
With respect to the organizational level of the population, the GAC has 20 grassroots organizations working in the environmental field, out of a total of 135 different types of associations and community groups.
CONCLUSIONS
The main conclusion regarding the environmental situation of La Amistad GAC is that it is good, particularly in comparison with other regions in both countries. Loss of forest has been a problem, but this is contained. There are limited problems of soil loss and growing problems of pollution. The growth of tourism has strongly increased environmental awareness in the region and helped to improve environmental management. The elevated importance of the protected areas in the GAC contributes to ensuring a sound environmental setting.
Possibly the greatest challenge in the GAC is not necessarily its conservation, but conserving the current environmental situation within the framework of a generalized process of development that significantly improves the living conditions of the local population.
V. CONCLUSIONS
1. Working Hypotheses
The initial working hypotheses were 80% verified; those not verified require specific studies on particular themes, beyond the scope of this baseline study. The information existing is not sufficiently detailed nor was there enough time to delve deeper into some themes. Moreover, the purpose of the study was not to be exhaustive or cover all the themes identified. Detailed analysis of hypothesis is presented in the final report.
2. Priority Sites
As a result of the appraisal workshops, participating organizations were able to identify and delimit specific priority sites in each of the GACs where the main socio-environmental problems occur and where the organizations have some degree of influence in addressing and resolving those problems.
GAC - San Juan River (Costa Rica – Nicaragua), extension: 607, 800 hectares Tepenaguazape River, lower basin and coastal strip up to the mouth of the Tule River Lower basins of the Medio Queso, Zapote and Río Frío rivers Lower basin of the Papaturro River and the Las Camelias pond Solentiname Archipelago AGC - Talamanca-Bocas (Costa Rica – Panama), extension: 388, 300 hectares Lower basin of the Sixaola River Cahuita-Fila Carbón (from San Rafael to Buena Vista) Gandoca-Manzanillo Manzanillo hills (from Kekoldi to Punta Uva) Lower basins of the Changuinola and Guarumo rivers Western section of the Chiriquí Grande lagoon Bastimentos Island Marine Park Almirante Bay GAC – Paz River (El Salvador –Guatemala), extension: 165,800 hectares Lower basin of the Paz River Santiago Bar Mouth of San Juan-Bola de Monte Mouth of El Zaite Santa Rita and Hoja de Sal forests El Imposible forest Las Lisas-Frontera Paraíso - La Barrona Monterrico – Hawaii
It is important to point out that these priority sites within each GAC are a well-defined “site unit” because, from the ecological point of view they are critical ecosystems, and from the sociological perspective they are human communities or administrative units.
3. Priority Themes
While specific themes were suggested for each GAC during the process generated by this study, we can also locate and assess more general themes in force at the regional level.
1. A growing concern about how to improve quality of life for populations without affecting the natural resource base and how to increase income for the populations without overexploiting resources and deteriorating the environment. This constitutes the foundation for discussion on the reach of sustainable development and conservation as central aspects in determining how to generate better living conditions.
2. Community management of natural resources to optimize these resources and identify the correct technical qualities for managing them sustainably.
3. The theme of water resources, with respect to quantity and quality (contamination and access). Water was linked with conservation of key ecosystems during analysis: for example, the relation between conservation of forests and maintenance of springs flowing into rivers.
4. Impacts of human settlements on key ecosystems in terms of the disposal and management of solid waste, chemical contamination and others.
5. Environmental education in its different formal and informal expressions as a determining factor for improving management of key ecosystems, and the importance of comprehensive environmental awareness in sustainably managing the natural resources in those ecosystems.
6. Ecotourism at appropriate scales (low impact) as an economic activity that can buffer growing pressure on natural resources and generate economic income that improves quality of life in the communities.
4. The consortium as a working model
The study of the reference situation or baseline became a means for proposing this option as a working model, with the following characteristics:
1. A consortium of organizations active at the site (GAC), with the technical support of IUCN, aspire to achieve sustainable management of key ecosystems at the local level.
2. Local consortia carry out planning and implementation of activities and management of human and financial resources
3. The role of IUCN in convoking and linking different sectors interested in working together, providing the required technical assistance and utilizing the experiences acquired in the GAC to influence and support national, regional and global policies affecting the environment.
The proposed work model was presented to the different organizations in the GACs, who accepted and identified with it. Some of the reasons for employing this type of work model are the following:
1. Natural resource management supercedes national borders, institutions and their legal norms as traditional models of existing institutionality.
2. No entity or organization can carry out complex and demanding work in isolation.
3. Optimal combination of scarce resources existing in the zones (technical, human and financial) with the object of improving project and program implementation.
4. It is a valid response to the growing trend toward decentralization and return of authority to local entities.
As structures for collaboration among those interested, local consortia have the capacity to recognize different values, experiences, interests and concerns involved in the management of GAC ecosystems. They also have the capacity to take advantage of the comparative advantages of the different actors present in the zone. Likewise, “learning by doing” through continual revision and readjustment of natural resource management will strengthen the actors’ organizational capacity and their capacity to impact on the situation. Finally, the processes consortia carry out must also keep in mind that long-term development is more important than the products and goals proposed for the short term.
VI. SELF-EVALUATION
This section includes an evaluative analysis of indicators and impacts of the Baseline Study and the most important lessons learned from this process. We understand self-evaluation as a key element of the cycle of action and reflection pertaining to all projects, and vital to achieving more effective and relevant actions.
1. ANALYSIS OF STUDY INDICATORS
The matrix below compares the indicators established for the study with those achieved during its development, and shows that most indicators were reached in the process generated by this project.
Matrix analyzing achievement of indicators for the NORAD-IUCN Base Line Study
NARRATIVE DESCRIPTION INDICATORS ESTABLISHED INDICATORS ACHIEVED Long-term Objective Local organized groups sustainably manage key ecosystems in their sites and influence management of similar ecosystems in others places
Project Objective IUCN-Mesoamerica in coordination with local ¾ Reports on the reference situation for • Three GAC reports organized groups has completed studies to prepare each site baselines for three geographic areas of ¾ Baseline report • Final baseline report concentration in Mesoamerica: Paraíso – La Barrona ¾ Project proposal for each site • Proposals for priority sites (Guatemala) – Barra de Santiago (El Salvador); the ¾ Updated proposal for the IUCN- and work strategies in each mid-section of the lower basin of the San Juan River NORAD Framework Program for GAC (Nicaragua – Costa Rica); and La Amistad – Mesoamerica Caribbean (Costa Rica – Panama). A strategy for ¾ Report on the project to establish a • A reformulated IUCN-NORAD socio-environmental management has also been baseline Framework Program proposal delineated on the basis of these studies.
¾ Workshop reports Specific objectives ¾ At least 40% of the organizations • Workshop reports for each of 4. Working groups comprised of local identified participate actively in the the GACs organizations and IUCN members were pre-consortia organized at each site to conduct studies of ¾ Organizations in the pre-consortia are • Participation by 90% of the the socio-environmental baseline situation interested in continuing the process organizations identified in each place. • Report on strategy workshops
5. A situation analysis was made in each GAC ¾ Technical document on methodology using participatory methodology, and the • Report on the methodology ¾ Reports on working meetings respective baseline studies were completed. utilized
¾ Databases for the sites • Consultant report for each GAC
• Bibliography and maps inventoried for each GAC
6. Based on the results of (1) and (2), above, ¾ Document on the vision for each site sustainable management projects for key • Matrix on the vision for each ecosystems in the GACs were prepared in ¾ Work strategy at each site GAC (appraisal workshops) participatory form, derived from the work of ¾ Quality of the participatory process local consortia. These projects were • Work strategies defined by (gender balance, sectoral balance, integrated into the IUCN-NORAD Framework each of the GACs (strategy consensus level) Program proposal. workshops)
• 10% of participants were women
• 80% of sectors were represented
• 100% decisions were reached through consensus
2. Analysis of study impacts
The IUCN conceptual framework establishes that its outcomes are defined by changes in the way other organizations (GOs, NGOs, grassroots organizations, etc.) work or operate that can be attributed to the effects of activities pertaining to the project. Impacts are defined as changes in environmental conditions and in wellbeing attributable to the effects of the project or to partners that utilized inputs from this Framework Program.
Due to the nature and duration of this study it is not possible to analyze its impacts. Therefore, for this specific baseline study, we refer to the main outcomes achieved instead of its impacts. It will be possible to analyze impacts when the different phases of the NORAD-IUCN Framework Program are developed.
The main outcomes of this study are:
1. Horizontal interaction Through the mediation of the baseline study a space was established in each GAC for horizontal contact and interaction among the local organizations involved. This situation should be underscored since, even though these organizations are located in the same geographic region where there are other macro-projects, they had not had the appropriate intermediation to begin perceiving the synergy they can obtain together.
2. Participation and consensus The study was produced within a highly inclusive and participatory process in which organizations placed value on consensus as a dynamic and equitable way of making decisions.
3. Alliances A fundamental understanding was acquired of the strategic importance of working under the scheme of local consortia. For example, organizations in El Salvador proposed following up on the proposal on their own initiative, and those in Talamanca proposed resizing and strengthening the consortium they had already established. The high level of participation occurring in these GACs was a basic factor in receptiveness to this work model.
4. Information Systematization of up-to-date information obtained in the sites and validated by the communities and their organizations provides the Framework Agreement with an excellent platform for work.
3. Lessons Learned
Commitments The process generated by the Baseline Study surpassed all expectations. It was welcomed by the organizations and communities that participated, to the point where they even made a commitment with respect to future development of the proposal. For the coordinating team this signified working with commitments that are both realistic and consistent with the process generated.
Participatory process The methodology and facilitation style of the coordinating team encouraged participatory mechanisms for definitions and decision-making during the entire process. Organizations were highly motivated toward coordinated work, and this willingness was identified and assessed. In all cases, the methodology utilized brought us closer to the essential spirit of the Framework Agreement, which is management of ecosystems by empowered actors.
Intermediation The process generated by the study was the correct one for breaking down initial resistance and mistrust during the insertion phase. The convocation of leading organizations in order to launch the project did not
generate conflict, and this assisted insertion of the coordinator team and horizontal intermediation with the communities and groups contacted. Local intermediation was vital for the process to run smoothly.
Open and flexible methodology Methodology used at each stage was constructed collectively by the IUCN team. However, experience from the first workshop obliged us to reconsider our assumptions and assume a more open attitude regarding the conditions of each GACs.
Feasibility of the projects While the project presented included the preparation of project profiles for the GACs, this was not realistic given constraints of time and resources. A decision was made to restore the identification of resources existing in the zone, exchange among organizations and the definition of priority sites and themes as fundamental points for project formulation in subsequent phases of the framework agreement.
Environmental Awareness The organizations participating exhibited a notable awareness of environmental issues, even though they may be dedicated to other themes (social and productive areas) and development of this thematic content is just emerging in the GACs.
Geographic delimitation Geographic delimitation of the GACs was produced through difficult negotiation in order to reach consensus among those involved. In effect, this was not a “neutral” exercise but one mediated by institutional and organizational interests.
Participatory analysis of the information Information collected in the process was compiled, organized, analyzed and returned in a process of continual feedback for those involved. A combination of deductive and inductive analysis made it possible to gain a more comprehensive understanding of the socio-environmental situation of the GACs and their setting.
Available environmental information The environmental information available for all the GACs was insufficient or not detailed enough to measure trends and processes adequately. The need for future investment in the generation of detailed and good quality information was verified. Information is highly heterogeneous in terms of categories and denominations, which made comparative data analysis difficult.
Consultancies A group of consultants with extensive experience in the zone was contracted, but not all of them dedicated the same amount of time to the task, resulting in delays and the continual revision of several reports.
Binationality Organizations were positively motivated by the proposal for binational ecosystem work, despite apparent historical and cultural differences between the countries.
Consortia The process awoke the possibility of creating local consortia of organizations for ecosystem management. Although there were concerns, this idea took root among the groups in each GAC. They perceived the importance of developing the concept in greater detail as the engine for this initiative, in association with an external facilitating and catalyzing agent (IUCN.) The model was particularly attractive as aiming toward a paradigm in which it is the consortium that contracts and executes instead of being contracted, as usually occurs in the region. Because of this, the Framework Agreement will take on greater importance and relevance to the extent that it enables funds to be allocated so that consortia may function as such, thus genuinely empowering their constituency.
SITUATION ANALYSIS IN THREE AREAS IN CENTRAL AMERICA
March 2001 BACKGROUND
• The immediate reference is the proposal for a Framework Agreement between NORAD and IUCN-Mesoamerica • The rationale for this proposal is the management of critical ecosystems (forests, wetlands, coastal ecosystems) in three areas in Central America, by a consortium of local organizations which are active in each area. HOWHOW WASWAS THETHE PROPOSALPROPOSAL FORFOR AA FRAMEWORKFRAMEWORK AGREEMENTAGREEMENT DEVELOPED?DEVELOPED?
IN-DEPTH ANALYSIS OF THE EXPERIENCE OF IUCN-MESOAMERICA
IN-DEPTH ANALYSIS OF NEED TO DEVELOP AN THE IMPACTS ON INNOVATIVE WORKING MODEL: THE REGION’S ECOSYSTEMS MANAGEMENT SUSTAINABILITY BY LOCAL CONSORTIUM
IN-DEPTH ANALYSIS OF IUCN’S MEMBERSHIP IN MESOAMERICA The proposal is based on: • ORMA’s experience in working with partners. • Need to achieve a more significant impact –on the ground- in the quality of life on the people and on the environmental situation. • The importance of local empowerment. • Need to improve interaction among isolated work of local groups and field- projects. • Need to be able to evaluate impact. THE NEW MODEL (1)
• We aim to achieve sustainable management of critical ecosystems by a consortium of local organizations with the technical support from IUCN • Critical ecosystem in Central America are: – forests – coastal-marine – freshwater wetlands THE NEW MODEL (2)
• Local consortium do the planning, implement activities and manage human and financial resources. • IUCN’s support will consist of: – Providing technical assistance – Bringing up the experiences and lessons learned from the GAC’s to influence policies at the national, regional and global levels THE NEW MODEL (3)
• The model proposes to work in different sites called “Geographical Areas of Concentration (GAC’s) • In the V Regional Forum of IUCN Members from Mesoamerica (Guatemala, 1999), members identified 8 GAC’s • This proposal deals with three GAC’s: Monterrico (Guatemala) / Barra de Santiago (El Salvador), part of the Río San Juan (Nicaragua-Costa Rica) and Talamanca (Costa Rica) / Bocas del Toro (Panama) THE NORAD PROPOSAL
• NORAD has been the first cooperation agency to answer positively to this new approach. • A proposal was submitted to NORAD, in the year 2000, to work in three GAC’s using the consortia model discussed previously. INITIAL METHODOLOGICAL PROPOSAL
DIAGNOSIS ESTABLISHMENT OF OF THE SITE LOCAL CONSORTIUM
INTERVENTION STRATEGY
PROJECTS BASELINE STUDY TERMINOLOGY
•A diagnosis or situation analysis is a study of a specific site with the aim of identifying the priority activities and the most adequate intervention strategy. • A baseline study is undertaken to define the initial situation of those items to be influenced by the project in order to determine the changes (impact) generated by the project. PRESENT SITUATION
• NORAD expressed interest in the Framework agreement and approved an initial funding to conduct a baseline study • IUCN-ORMA wanted to respect the work philosophy of the Framework agreement; therefore, the proposed methodology is the following: PRESENT METHODOLOGICAL PROPOSAL
ESTABLISHMENT OF A LOCAL DIAGNOSIS BASELINE CONSORTIUM OF THE SITE STUDY
INTERVENTION STRATEGY
PROJECTS PROFILES METHODOLOGY
TASK METHOD PRODUCT
Diagnosis Situation Priority Analysis Issues Baseline Evaluation of Present Study Sustainability Condition Planning Logical Projects Framework METHOD #1: SITUATION ANALYSIS Consists of four steps: – Process preparation (initial partners, basic information). – Participatory diagnosis workshop. – Recording of the process and its results. – Provide inputs to the project planning using the LFA (and to the baseline study). PROCESS PREPARATION
• Presentation of the methodology. • Identification of those interested in participating. • Organization of the Diagnosis Workshop: – identify participants – Analysis of the organization – Distribution of tasks DIAGNOSIS WORKSHOP
• Duration: 2 days • Agenda – Brief presentations of the situation in the area (human and environmental aspects) – Condition of the ecosystems •Terrestrial • Freshwater wetlands • Coastal (coastal-marine ecosystems) – Vision and priority issues DIAGNOSIS WORKSHOP
• Products – diagnosis of the area by ecosystem – Intervention priorities in relation to critical ecosystem management – Basic agreements for a bi-national approach – Information sources METHOD # 2: BASELINE STUDY
1. Definition of the study area and subdivision (a product of the diagnosis workshop) 2. Definition of priority issues (a product of the diagnosis workshop) 3. Preparation of the assesment structure 4. Data collection and organization 5. Data analysis and feedback to the project strategy and planning EVALUATION STRUCTURE
PRIORITY e.g. Mangrove degradation ISSUES
CRITERIA e.g. * mangrove deforestation * sedimentation
e.g. * deforested area (has/yr) INDICATORS * reforested are (has/yr) * area under management plan (has) WORK PLAN
• Introductory presentations (done) • Binational meetings • Diagnosis workshops • Development of the baseline study • Binational workshop to develop strategies and project profiles.