DOCSLIB.ORG

Rapid Review of Conservation Trust Funds May 2008

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

CONSERVATION FINANCE ALLIANCE Working Group on Environmental Funds Rapid Review of Conservation Trust Funds May 2008 Second Edition Prepared by Barry Spergel and Philippe Taïeb Rapid Review of Conservation Trust Funds The CFA’s Working Group on Environmental Funds was created in 2007 to encourage promotion, knowledge transfer and exchange about environmental funds in support of the protection of global biodiversity. Members of CFA Working Group on Environmental Funds Brazilian Biodiversity Fund (FUNBIO) Capital Hotel Management Conservation International (CI) European Commission (EC) French Development Agency (AFD) French Global Environment Facility (FFEM) Global Environment Facility (GEF) German Development Bank (KfW) Latin American and Caribbean Network of Environmental Funds (RedLAC) Mesoamerican Reef Fund (MAR) National Environmental Fund (FAN – Ecuador) Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB) The Nature Conservancy (TNC) US Agency for International Development (USAID) US Department of Treasury Wildlife Conservation Society (WCS) The World Bank World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF) Citation Conservation Finance Alliance (CFA). 2008. Rapid Review of Conservation Trust Funds. Prepared for the CFA Working Group on Environmental Funds by Barry Spergel and Philippe Taïeb. Rapid Review of Conservation Trust Funds TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary I. Background and Methodology 1 II. Purposes and Roles of Conservation Trust Funds 4 III. Strategic Planning, Grantmaking and Administrative Costs 10 IV. Funding Protected Areas’ Recurrent Costs and Financial Gap Analysis 14 V. Monitoring and Evaluating Impacts on Biodiversity 22 VI. Board and Governance Issues 27 VII. Legal and Tax Issues 37 VIII. Fundraising 44 IX. Investment Management 50 X. Conservation Trust Funds in Africa 60 XI. Advantages and Disadvantages of Conservation Trust Funds 68 Rapid Review of Conservation Trust Funds ANNEXES A. Terms of Reference 76 B. List of Persons Interviewed 82 C. Bibliography 85 D. Analysis of Questionnaires Completed by CTF Executive Directors 89 E. Conservation Trust Fund Case Studies 92 F. List of Conservation Trust Funds 148 G. Model Template for Monitoring and Evaluating Conservation Trust Funds 166 Rapid Review of Conservation Trust Funds Acronyms and Abbreviations AFD Agence Française de Développement/ French Development Agency ANGAP Association Nationale pour la Gestion des Aires Protégées/ Madagascar‘s National Protected Areas Management Agency ARPA Amazon Region Protected Areas Program BMCT Bwindi Mgahinga Conservation Trust BTFEC Bhutan Trust Fund for Environmental Conservation CBD Convention on Biological Diversity CBO community-based organization CEPF Critical Ecosystems Partnership Fund CFA Conservation Finance Alliance CI Conservation International CITES Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species CPAF Caucasus Protected Areas Fund CSR corporate social responsibility CTF conservation trust fund EAI Enterprise for the Americas Initiative EAMCEF Eastern Arc Mountains Conservation Endowment Fund, Tanzania EC European Commission EU European Union EF environmental fund EFJ Environmental Foundation of Jamaica FAN Fondo Ambiental Nacional/ National Environmental Fund, Ecuador FANP Fondo para Áreas Naturales Protegidas/ Natural Protected Areas Fund, Mexico FAP Fondo de Áreas Protegidas/ Protected Areas Fund, Ecuador FAPB Fondation pour les Aires Protégées et la Biodiversité de Madagascar/ Madagascar Foundation for Protected Areas and Biodiversity FEDEC Fondation pour l'Environnement et le Développement au Cameroun/ Foundation for Environment and Development in Cameroon FFEM Fonds Français pour l’Environnement Mondial/ French Global Environment Facility FFI Fauna and Flora International FGV Getulio Vargas Foundation FIAES Fondo Iniciativa para las Américas El Salvador/ EIA Fund, El Salvador FMCN Fondo Mexicano para la Conservación de la Naturaleza/ Mexican Nature Conservation Fund FNMA Fundo Nacional do Meio Ambiente, National Environmental Fund, Brazil FONAMA Fondo Nacional para el Medio Ambiente/ National Environmental Fund, Bolivia FONDAM Fondo de las Américas/ Americas Fund, Peru FPAA Fondo para la Acción Ambiental y la Niñez/ Fund for Environmental Action and Childhood, Colombia FPE Foundation for the Philippine Environment FPLA Fondo para las Américas/ Americas Fund, Argentina FUNBIO Fundo Brasileiro para a Biodiversidade/ Brazilian Biodiversity Fund FUNDESNAP Fundación para el Desarrollo del Sistema Nacional de Áreas Protegidas/ Foundation for the Development of the National System of Protected Areas, Bolivia GCF Global Conservation Fund GEF Global Environment Facility GTZ Gesellschaft für Technische Zusammenarbeit/ German Agency for Technical Cooperation IBAMA Instituto Brasileiro do Meio Ambiente e dos Recursos Naturais Renováveis/ National Protected Areas Agency, Brazil IUCN International Union for Conservation of Nature KEHATI Indonesian Biodiversity Foundation KfW Kreditenanstalt für Wiederaufbauung/ German Development Bank Rapid Review of Conservation Trust Funds LAC Latin America and the Caribbean M&E monitoring and evaluation MAR Fund Mesoamerican Reef Fund METT Management Effectiveness Tracking Tool, World Bank/WWF MMCT Mulanje Mountain Conservation Trust NACUBO National Association of College and University Business Officers NATURA Fundación para la Conservación de los Recursos Naturales/ Natural Resources Conservation Fund, Panama NGO non-governmental organization PA(s) protected area(s) PACT Protected Areas Conservation Trust, Belize PES Payment for Ecosystem (Environmental) Services PROFONANPE Fondo Nacional para Áreas Naturales Protegidas por el Estado/ National Fund for Protected Areas, Peru PUMA Fundación Protección y Uso Sostenible del Medio Ambiente / Foundation for Protection and Sustainable Use of the Environment, Bolivia RedLAC Latin American and Caribbean Network of Environmental Funds RfP request for proposals RSPB Royal Society for the Protection of Birds SCF Suriname Conservation Fund SERNAP Servicio Nacional de Áreas Protegidas/ National Agency for Protected Areas, Bolivia SGP small grants program SINAPE Sistema Nacional de Áreas Naturales Protegidas por el Estado Peruano/ Peru‘s National Protected Area System Management Agency SNAP Sistema Nacional de Áreas Protegidas/ National Protected Areas System, Bolivia, Ecuador SRI socially responsible investing TFCA Tropical Forest Conservation Act TMF Table Mountain Fund TNC The Nature Conservancy TNS Foundation Fondation Tri-National de la Sangha/ Sangha Tri-National Foundation, Cameroon, Central African Republic, Republic of Congo UNDP United Nations Development Programme USAID United States Agency for International Development WCS Wildlife Conservation Society WWF World Wide Fund for Nature (also known as World Wildlife Fund) $ United States dollar Rapid Review of Conservation Trust Funds EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Why a Rapid Review of Conservation Trust Funds? This Rapid Review of Conservation Trust Funds presents an overview of experience with the creation, operation and evaluation of conservation trust funds (CTFs) and provides a rationale for further investment in CTFs. The Review is not intended to replicate the Global Environment Facility‘s (GEF‘s) 1999 comprehensive Evaluation of Experience with Conservation Trust Funds, but rather to review the current status of CTFs worldwide, focusing on those that have been in operation for at least five years. It identifies best practice standards for effective governance and administration of CTFs, and provides guidelines for monitoring and evaluating CTFs‘ operations and biodiversity impact. The Conservation Finance Alliance (CFA) Working Group on Environmental Funds commissioned the Review, with support provided by the French Development Agency (AFD), French Global Environment Facility (FFEM), German Development Bank (KfW), Conservation International (CI) and the World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF). The Review was prepared by a consulting team consisting of Barry Spergel and Philippe Taïeb based on extensive interviews, a CTF survey, review of CTF literature including CTF evaluations, and consultations in Paris, Washington and San Salvador. The consultants and the Working Group are grateful to the many individuals and organizations who participated in the Review, with special thanks to the GEF that served on the Steering Committee for the Review, and the Latin American and Caribbean Network of Environmental Funds (RedLAC). CHAPTER 1 – BACKGROUND ON CONSERVATION TRUST FUNDS Over the last fifteen years, CTFs have been established in more than 50 developing countries and transition economies. As shown in map below, the majority of CTFs have been established in the Latin American and Caribbean region. CTFs are private, legally independent grant-making institutions that provide sustainable financing for biodiversity conservation and often finance part of the long-term management costs of a country‘s protected area (PA) system. They can serve as an effective means for mobilizing large amounts of additional funding for bio - diversity conservation from international donors, national governments and the private sector. CTFs raise and invest funds to make grants to non-governmental organizations (NGOs), community based-organizations (CBOs) and governmental agencies (such as national parks agencies). CTFs are financing mechanisms rather than implementing agencies. They also can serve as mechanisms for strengthening civil society and for making government PA manage government agencies more transparent, accountable
Recommended publications
  • Leeds Thesis Template

    Leeds Thesis Template

    Long-term Changes in Land Cover and Carbon Storage in Tanzania, East Africa Simon Willcock Submitted in accordance with the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy The University of Leeds School of Geography August 2012 - ii - The candidate confirms that the work submitted is his own, except where work which has formed part of jointly-authored publications has been included. The contribution of the candidate and the other authors to this work has been explicitly indicated below. The candidate confirms that appropriate credit has been given within the thesis where reference has been made to the work of others. Chapters 3, 4 and 5 are the result of collaborations. These jointly-authored manuscripts were led by Simon Willcock. The data used in these manuscripts includes those from a collaborative database of unpublished plot data. Contributions to the collaborative dataset came from PP, AA, ND, KD, EF, JG, JH, KH, ARM, BM, PKTM, NO, EJTJ and RDS (see author list below). All analyses were performed by Simon Willcock, supervised by Oliver Phillips and Simon Lewis. The manuscripts were prepared by Simon Willcock, supervised by Oliver Phillips and Simon Lewis. Additional input was provided by AB, PP, NDD and RM. Author list – The authors, their affiliations and email addresses are described below: Simon Willcock, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK. [email protected] Oliver L. Phillips, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK. [email protected] Philip J. Platts, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK. University of York, York, UK. [email protected] Andrew Balmford, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
  • The Nomination of the Eastern Arc World Heritage Property

    The Nomination of the Eastern Arc World Heritage Property

    United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation Convention Concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage NOMINATION OF PROPERTIES FOR INCLUSION ON THE WORLD HERITAGE LIST SERIAL NOMINATION: EASTERN ARC MOUNTAINS FORESTS OF TANZANIA United Republic of Tanzania Ministry of Natural Resources and Tourism January 2010 Eastern Arc Mountains Forests of Tanzania CONTENTS EASTERN ARC MOUNTAINS WORLD HERITAGE NOMINATION PROCESS ......................................2 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ...............................................................................................................................................4 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY.................................................................................................................................................5 1. IDENTIFICATION OF THE PROPERTY........................................................................................................9 1. A COUNTRY ................................................................................................................................9 1. B STATE , PROVINCE OR REGION ..................................................................................................9 1. C NAME OF THE PROPERTY .........................................................................................................9 1. D GEOGRAPHICAL COORDINATES TO THE NEAREST SECOND ..........................................................9 1. D MAPS AND PLANS , SHOWING THE BOUNDARIES OF THE NOMINATED PROPERTY AND
  • Humanitarian Response in Ukraine Enhancing Enhancing Coordination in Coordination in Humanitarian Humanitarian Settings Settings

    Humanitarian Response in Ukraine Enhancing Enhancing Coordination in Coordination in Humanitarian Humanitarian Settings Settings

    DIASPORA ORGANIZATIONS AND THEIR HUMANITARIAN RESPONSE IN UKRAINE ENHANCING ENHANCING COORDINATION IN COORDINATION IN HUMANITARIAN HUMANITARIAN SETTINGS SETTINGS ACKNOW- LEDGEMENTS The DEMAC and Owl RE research team would like to thank the members of diaspora communities in Ukraine and across the world, as well as the represen- tatives of donors, UN agencies, NGOs, government officials, and other actors who dedicated their time providing information and sharing their valuable knowledge and experiences. This study is made possible by the generous support of the American people through the United States Agency for International Development (USAID). The contents are the responsibility of Danish Refugee Council on behalf of DEMAC and do not necessarily reflect the views of USAID or the United States Government. Published June 2021 2 3 ENHANCING ENHANCING COORDINATION IN COORDINATION IN HUMANITARIAN HUMANITARIAN SETTINGS SETTINGS ABOUT DEMAC WHY The mission of DEMAC is two-fold: DIASPORA? 1) to enable inclusive coordination and collaboration among diaspora organizations providing humanitarian assistance, and across diaspora organizations and institutional humanitarian actors Work with diasporas has shown that diaspora organizations are multi-sectoral, fast responding actors who work transnationally, including in countries facing humanitarian crises. Having a 2) to facilitate higher levels of engagement and visibility for diaspora organizations connection and understanding of their country of origin or heritage plays a vital role in humanitari- in the humanitarian system an assistance where diaspora organizations often are part of the first response in the aftermath of a disaster. The objective is to contribute to transforming the humanitarian ecosystem by laying the groundwork for a deeper understanding of diasporas as humanitarian actor groups with They are also key actors when it comes to raising the alarm in times of crisis.
  • Forest Cover and Change for the Eastern Arc Mountains and Coastal Forests of Tanzania and Kenya Circa 2000 to Circa 2010

    Forest Cover and Change for the Eastern Arc Mountains and Coastal Forests of Tanzania and Kenya Circa 2000 to Circa 2010

    Forest cover and change for the Eastern Arc Mountains and Coastal Forests of Tanzania and Kenya circa 2000 to circa 2010 Final report Karyn Tabor, Japhet J. Kashaigili, Boniface Mbilinyi, and Timothy M. Wright Table of Contents Introduction .................................................................................................................................................. 2 1.1 Biodiversity Values of the Eastern Arc Mountains and Coastal Forests ....................................... 2 1.2 The threats to the forests ............................................................................................................. 5 1.3 Trends in deforestation ................................................................................................................. 6 1.4 The importance of monitoring ...................................................................................................... 8 Methods ........................................................................................................................................................ 8 2.1 study area ............................................................................................................................................ 8 2.1 Mapping methodology ........................................................................................................................ 8 2.3 Habitat change statistics ..................................................................................................................... 9 2.4 Map validation
  • Spending by NYC on Charter School Facilities: Diverted Resources, Inequities and Anomalies

    Spending by NYC on Charter School Facilities: Diverted Resources, Inequities and Anomalies

    Spending by NYC on Charter School Facilities: Diverted Resources, Inequities and Anomalies A report by Class Size Matters October 2019 Spending by NYC on Charter School Facilities: Diverted Resources, Inequities and Anomalies Acknowledgements This report was written by Patrick Nevada, Leonie Haimson and Emily Carrazana. It benefitted from the assistance of Kaitlyn O’Hagan, former Legislative Financial Analyst for the NYC Council, and Sarita Subramanian, Supervising Analyst of the NYC Independent Budget Office. Class Size Matters is a non-profit organization that advocates for smaller classes in NYC public schools and the nation as a whole. We provide information on the benefits of class size reduction to parents, teachers, elected officials and concerned citizens, provide briefings to community groups and parent organizations, and monitor and propose policies to stem class size increases and school overcrowding. A publication of Class Size Matters 2019 Design by Patrick Nevada 2 Class Size Matters Spending by NYC on Charter School Facilities: Diverted Resources, Inequities and Anomalies Table of Contents Table of Figures 4 Cost of Facility Upgrades by Charter Schools and Missing DOE Matching Funds 9 Missing Matching Funds 11 Spending on Facility Upgrades by CMO and DOE Matching Funds 16 DOE spending on leases for Charter schools 17 Cost of buildings that DOE directly leases for charter schools 21 DOE-Held Lease Spending vs Lease Subsidies 23 DOE Lease Assistance for charters in buildings owned by their CMO or other related organization 26 Cost of DOE Expenditures for Lease Assistance and Matching Funds for each CMO 31 Proposed legislation dealing with the city’s obligation to provide charter schools with space 33 Conclusion and Policy Proposals 34 Appendix A.
  • Forest Health Monitoring in the Eastern Arc Mountains of Kenya and Tanzania: a Baseline Report on Selected Forest Reserves

    Forest Health Monitoring in the Eastern Arc Mountains of Kenya and Tanzania: a Baseline Report on Selected Forest Reserves

    Forest Health Monitoring in the Eastern Arc Mountains of Kenya and Tanzania: a baseline report on selected forest reserves Seif Madoffe, James Mwang’ombe, Barbara O’Connell, Paul Rogers, Gerard Hertel, and Joe Mwangi Dedicated to three team members, Professor Joe Mwangi, Moi University, Eldoret, Kenya and Forest Department, Nairobi; Mr. Charles Kisena Mabula, Tanzania Forest Research Institute, Lushoto, and Mr. Onesmus Mwanganghi, National Museums of Kenya, Nairobi, who passed away shortly after the completion of the field work for this project. They will always be remembered. FHM EAM Baseline Report Acknowledgements Cooperating Agencies, Organizations, Institutions, and Individuals USDA Forest Service 1. Region 8, Forest Health Protection, Atlanta, GA – Denny Ward 2. Engineering (WO) – Chuck Dull 3. International Forestry (WO) – Marc Buccowich, Mellisa Othman, Cheryl Burlingame, Alex Moad 4. Remote Sensing Application Center, Salt Lake City, UT – Henry Lachowski, Vicky C. Johnson 5. Northeastern Research Station, Newtown Square, PA – Barbara O’Connell, Kathy Tillman 6. Rocky Mountain Research Station, Ogden, UT – Paul Rogers 7. Northeastern Area, State & Private Forestry, Newtown Square, PA – Gerard Hertel US Agency for International Development 1. Washington Office – Mike Benge, Greg Booth, Carl Gallegos, Walter Knausenberger 2. Nairobi, Kenya – James Ndirangu 3. Dar es Salaam, Tanzania – Dan Moore, Gilbert Kajuna Sokoine University of Agriculture, Morogoro, Tanzania (Faculty of Forestry and Nature Conservation) – Seif Madoffe, R.C.
  • Maximizing Results

    Maximizing Results

    ST/ESA/326 Department of Economic and Social Affairs DEVELOPMENT COOPERATION FOR THE MDGs: MAXIMIZING RESULTS INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT COOPERATION REPORT asdf United Nations New York, 2010 Department of Economic and Social Affairs The Department of Economic and Social Affairs of the United Nations Secretariat is a vital interface between global policies in the economic, social and environmental spheres and national action. The Department works in three main interlinked areas: (i) it compiles, gener- ates and analyses a wide range of economic, social and environmental data and information on which States Members of the United Nations draw to review common problems and take stock of policy options; (ii) it facilitates the negotiations of Member States in many intergovernmental bodies on joint courses of action to address ongoing or emerging global challenges; and (iii) it advises interested Governments on the ways and means of translating policy frameworks developed in United Nations conferences and summits into programmes at the country level and, through technical assistance, helps build national capacities. Note The present report is an independent publication commissioned by UN DESA drawing from the work of the Development Cooperation Forum and additional research and positions of independent authors. Opinions expressed in this report do not necessarily reflect the views of the United Nations. The designations employed and the presentation of the material in this publication do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the Secretariat of the United Nations concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concern- ing the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries.
  • Assessing Five Years of CEPF Investment in the Eastern Arc Mountains and Coastal Forests of Tanzania and Kenya

    Assessing Five Years of CEPF Investment in the Eastern Arc Mountains and Coastal Forests of Tanzania and Kenya

    Assessing Five Years of CEPF Investment in the Eastern Arc Mountains and Coastal Forests of Tanzania and Kenya A Special Report June 2009 1 CONTENTS Overview …………………………………………………………………………………. …………… 3 CEPF Five-Year Logical Framework Reporting……………………………………………………….. 24 Appendices …………………………………………………………………………………………….. 32 2 OVERVIEW Critical Ecosystem Partnership Fund (CEPF) investment in the Eastern Arc Mountains and Coastal Forests of Tanzania and Kenya commenced in June 2003 with the approval of an ecosystem profile developed with stakeholders and a grant allocation of $7 million to be awarded over five years. The Eastern Arc Mountains and Coastal Forests shelter one of the greatest densities of plant and vertebrate species found nowhere else, or endemic, in the world. Juxtaposed with a high degree of forest fragmentation and threats, this area is considered among the areas most likely to witness the extinction of species in the near future. The Eastern Arc Mountains and Coastal Forests comprise part of the larger Eastern Afromontane and Coastal Forests of Eastern Africa biodiversity hotspots, respectively. At the time the ecosystem profile was prepared, the Eastern Arc Mountains and Coastal Forests region was classified as a biodiversity hotspot itself. However, a reappraisal of the hotspots released in 2005 divided this region and placed it within the two newly identified hotspots mentioned above. The profile and CEPF investments focused strictly on the Eastern Arc Mountains and Coastal Forests of Kenya and Tanzania that comprise the original hotspot. This report aims to assess the impact made possible by CEPF investment and is based upon grant recipients’ project performance and final reports. All available final reports can be accessed from the publications section of the CEPF Web site, www.cepf.net.
  • Friday Wire (9-9-16)

    Friday Wire (9-9-16)

    Friday Wire (9-9-16) https://ui.constantcontact.com/visualeditor/visual_editor_preview.jsp?age... Having trouble viewing this email? Click here Hi, just a reminder that you're receiving this email because you have expressed an interest in Colorado League of Charter Schools. Don't forget to add [email protected] to your address book so we'll be sure to land in your inbox! You may unsubscribe if you no longer wish to receive our emails. September 9, 2016 Welcome to another edition of the Friday Wire. Let us know if your school is in the news! Please send any articles or announcements to Kerri Barclay, Communications Associate at the League. Articles and announcements are due by noon on Thursday of each week. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ANNOUNCEMENTS Free Student Desks High Point Academy in Aurora has 35 student desks to give to another charter school. The desks are five years old and in good condition. For more information, contact Lynn Muehlhausen at [email protected]. The League is Hiring: Director of Research & Data Analysis Exciting News! The League is hiring for a Director of Research and Data Analysis. This is a full-time position that will work on visionary research projects to help advance the League and the entire charter public school movement. This role will also provide assistance to League member schools that are seeking data analysis and documentation for internal and external accountability and advocacy efforts. Please share this opportunity with your networks and with anyone who might be a good fit for this position. The deadline for applications is Friday, September 16.
  • Disney Conservation Fund Frequently Asked Questions

    Disney Conservation Fund Frequently Asked Questions

    Disney Conservation Fund Frequently Asked Questions CRITERIA 1. What criteria are used to evaluate each proposal? 2. What are the priority considerations for the Disney Conservation Fund? TIMELINE 3. What is the timeline for Disney Conservation Fund funding? 4. When is the application due? ELIGIBILITY AND APPLICATIONS 5. What are Disney’s Charitable Giving Guidelines? 6. How do I receive an invitation to apply? 7. Are individuals, universities and government agencies eligible? 8. What if I am a student and want to apply? 9. Are organizations outside the US eligible? 10. What are Tech Soup and NGOsource? 11. Are zoological institutions and aquariums eligible? 12. Can I submit more than one proposal? 13. Do you support multi-year proposals? 14. What if my project was previously funded (I am submitting a continuing project)? 15. If I have applied in the past, do I need to create a new login to access the CyberGrants system? 16. How do I combine my applications under one login if I submitted multiple applications under different logins? 17. Can multiple people work on the same application on the online system at the same time? 18. What do I do if I submitted my application prematurely? 19. Don't I need to submit my IRS letter this year? 20. Can I submit my own W-9 tax form? 21. How will my application photo be used? 22. How much information can I submit in my application? 23. What do you mean by “conservation education?” 24. What is the Disney Conservation Fund’s stance on invasive and non-native species? 25.
  • Humanitarian Assistance and Corporate Social Responsibility

    Humanitarian Assistance and Corporate Social Responsibility

    Chapter 16 Humanitarian Assistance and Corporate Social Responsibility Lothar Rieth This chapter addresses the potential for non- commercial business engagement in humani- tarian assistance, with a particular focus on disaster relief. With only a few exceptions, the potential for corporate contribution to disaster relief operations has previously not been fully realized. There have only been a few partnership projects between corporations and the UN or corporations and civil society organizations. In addition, major donors such as the EU and national implementing agencies have been quite hesitant and disinterested in cooperating with business actors in the aftermath of natural disasters. An examination of different types of non- commercial business engagement in the past and corresponding business motivations constitutes the starting point for the analysis. Motivations and conditions under which businesses engage in natural disaster response are identified. In conjunction with current donor policies, the potential of non- commercial business engage- ment and its major obstacles are discussed. General and detailed policy recommendations are formulated. Owing to financial constraints this chapter is based primarily on desk research. Secondary sources, grey materials and interviews were used to gather information as field visits were not possible. Nevertheless, a thorough examination of the issues at hand was possible and the results of this study show that business contributions to disaster relief can constitute functional supplements to disaster recovery operations, but in the short and mid- term perspective will only complement, not replace, public sector and civil society efforts. The analysis underlines two aspects: by definition business contributions, be they commercial or non- commercial, do not fully comply with the fundamental humanitarian principles of impartiality, independence and humanity.
  • Annual Report of the Town of Milford, New Hampshire

    Annual Report of the Town of Milford, New Hampshire

    NHam 352.07 M64 1980 X x)wn Report Milford, New Hampshire 1980 Unlversay oj library Annual Reports for the Town . year ending December 31, 1980 . Milford^ New Hampshire OUR COVER This year's Town Report cover shows a faciHty most citizens may never see. It is the main building at the town's new sewer treatment plant located in the east end of the town near the Lorden Lumber Company. A special report in this Town Report tells of progress in com- pleting the plant which is expected to be in use in 1981. The Cabinet Press, Inc. — Milford, N. H. — 1981 INDEX AUDITORS End of Report BUDGET 28 Report of Examination of Financial Statements 139 PUBLIC WORKS 35 SELECTMEN 8 WARRANT 11 FINANCIAL ACCOUNTS 82 LIBRARY 75 PROTECTION of Persons and Property 67 Ambulance — Court — Firemen — Police SPECIAL REPORTS Conservation Commission 107 Planning Board 110 Town History HI Town Street Numbering Committee 112 SYNOPSIS of Town Meeting 113 VITAL STATISTICS . 129 Three Retirees V Scott Gangloff Lura Seavey Pictured here are town employees who are retiring. Scott Gangloff has been Town Clerk and Tax Collector for 15 years. Lura Seavey has been Selectmen's secretary for about 40 years, and John Daniels worked in Public Works and the Water Depart- ment for more than four decades. John Daniels Town Officers Selectmen Ernest L. Barrett Term Expires 1981 Rosario Ricciardi Term Expires 1981 Frederic H. Fletcher Term Expires 1982 Walter F. Putnam Term Expires 1982 Bartolo Prestipino Term Expires 1983 Superintendent of Public Works Robert E. Courage Building Inspector Raymond Mitchell Moderator Robert D.