Business Planning for Protected Areas Building capacity for the implementation of the CBD Programme of Work on Protected Areas WORKSHOP REPORT South Eastern European Workshop Organized by the German Federal Agency for Nature Conservation, WWF International, The Nature Conservancy in cooperation with the CBD Secretariat held at Isle of Vilm, 3-7 December 2008 financed by the Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation and Nuclear Safety of Germany
Transcript
Business Planning for Protected Areas
Building capacity for the implementation of the CBD
Programme of Work on Protected Areas
WORKSHOP REPORT South Eastern European Workshop Organized by the German Federal Agency for Nature Conservation, WWF International, The Nature Conservancy in cooperation with the CBD Secretariat held at Isle of Vilm, 3-7 December 2008 financed by the Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation and Nuclear Safety of Germany
South Eastern European Workshop on Business Planning for Protected Areas Vilm, 3-7 Dec 2008
2
Content Workshop background, purpose, objectives, and organization 3 Acronyms and Abbreviations 4 Business-Oriented Financial Planning for Protected Areas 6 Experiences and Lessons from SINAC’s Financial Strategy 7 The Financial Analysis: Activity Based Cost Accounting 8 Assessing institutional and legal barriers for improving financial planning 9 Applying ABC for realistic financial needs and gap analysis 10 Innovative Financing Model – Sečovlje Salina Nature Park (SSNP) 11 DINARIC ARC ECOREGION – Protected Areas for a Living Planet 12 Financial mechanisms classification and options: Revenue Mechanisms 13 Sources of revenue and environmental fiscal reform 16 Screening of Financial Mechanisms exercise 17 Environmental Fiscal Reform 18 Outline of an environmental fiscal reform 20 Forever Costa Rica 20 Results of RAPPAM in Slovenia and recommendations 22 WWF Danube-Carpathian Programme 23 Formulation of the Financial and Business Plans 24 Outlining of a system-level financial plan and business plan 26 Economic Impact of PAs 26 German NP Campaign: Wadden Sea NP 27 Supportive actions at the national level 28 Supportive actions at the regional level 30 Concrete steps and milestones in development Business /Financial plans 31 Preparation of National Action Plans / National Road Maps 32 Financial Planning Survey Results 32 Conclusions 34 Annexes:
1 Programme of the workshop 2 List of participants 3 Exercise sheet “Applying ABC for realistic financial needs and gap analysis” 4 Information on the DINARIC ARC ECOREGION – Protected Areas for a Living Planet 5 RAPPAM goals of Slovenia 6 Financial plan for a PA in Albania 7 Financial plans for PAs in the other countries of the workshop 8 National Action Plans/ Road maps of the countries of the workshop
Presentations Group works
South Eastern European Workshop on Business Planning for Protected Areas Vilm, 3-7 Dec 2008
3
Background of the workshop: - CBD Programme of Work on Protected Areas was adopted in 2004 - State parties were asked for support for the implementation - 2006-2007: series of regional workshops on the review of implementation and building
capacity; 2 workshops held on Vilm in 2007 - Follow up through regional programmes, training workshops on specific issues identified in
the region, and other means - Financing of protected areas, and in particular business planning, was identified as an
important area for capacity building and improvement in South Eastern Europe The workshop was organized by the Federal Agency for Nature Conservation, WWF International and The Nature Conservancy (TNC) and mainly financed by the Federal Ministry of the Environment, Germany. It was held in December 2008 at the International Academy for Nature Conservation on the Isle of Vilm, in Germany. Workshop purpose: This workshop was intended to provide an overview for countries in South Eastern Europe of the fundamentals of Financial Analysis, fundamentals of selecting financial mechanisms and formulating a financial plan. Objectives of the workshop: - Understand key elements of sustainable finance and PA business planning - Know where you are in the process - Develop a road map for moving forward - Create a model business plan for at least one PA in your country - Establish a learning network of practitioners Organization of the workshop: The general structure of the workshop was as follows, and the detailed final agenda is attached as Annex 1. - Day 0: Welcome, participant introductions, general overview of the workshop - Day 1: Fundamental of Financial Analysis - Day 2: Fundamentals of selecting financial mechanisms and formulating the Financial Plan - Day 3: Formulating the Financial Plan, national presentations of the Plans - Day 4: Wrap up, discussing workshop survey results, workshop evaluation Marlon Flores and Guillermo Chan, two top sustainable finance practitioners from The Nature Conservancy took the lead, and expert input was provided by Jamie Ervin (TNC), Stella Satalic (WWF European Policy Programme – Dinaric Arc Ecoregion), David Strobel (WWF International, Danube-Carpathian Programme) and Andrej Sovinc (Secovlje Salina Nature Park – Slovenia). Twenty-three participants came from 9 countries: Albania, Bulgaria, Croatia, Hungary, Montenegro, Romania, Serbia, Slovak Republic and Slovenia. The full list of participants with their contact details is given in Annex 2.
South Eastern European Workshop on Business Planning for Protected Areas Vilm, 3-7 Dec 2008
4
Acronyms and Abbreviations ABC Activity Based Cost Accounting ASP Natural Protected Area BfN German Federal Agency for Nature Conservation BiH Bosnia and Herzegovina BP Business Plan BRESCE Regional Bureau for Science and Culture in Europe CBD Convention on Biological Diversity CCC Cable Car Company CERI Carpathian EcoRegion Initiative CI Conservation International CIF Cost, Insurance, Freight CNPA Carpathian Network of Protected Areas CPAMEMT Carpathian Protected Areas Mmanagement Effectiveness Measurement Too CZ Czech Republic DAE Department of Agricultural Economics DAE Dinaric Arc Ecoregion DJN Dajti National Park DPA Directory of Protected Area EAG Early Action Grant EC European Commission EFR Environmental Fiscal Reform EU European Union FAO The Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations FF Forestry Fund FN National Fund FP Financial Plan FPN National Parks Fund FSC Forest Stewardship Council FTA Forestry Agenda FVS Wilderness Life Fund G/S Goods and Services GEF Global Environmental Facility GIS Geographic Information System GOCR Gobierno de Costa Rica (Costa Rica's Government) GRUAS The name of a process for Costa Rica's National Level Ecological GAP Analysis HCVF High Conservation Value Forests HD Habitats Directive HNVF Healthy Neighborhoods Venture Fund IUCN The Union for the Conservation of Nature LAC Latin American Countries LDGC Lower Danube Green Corridor MA Ministry of Agriculture MOE Ministry of Environment MoEFWA Ministry of Environment Forestry and Water Administration MOEW Ministry of Environment and Water (Bulgaria)
South Eastern European Workshop on Business Planning for Protected Areas Vilm, 3-7 Dec 2008
5
MP Management Plan MPA Marine Protected Areas NFA National Forest Administration (Romania) NGO Non-governmental Organization NISP National Implementation Support Programme for the CBD PoWPA NNRR Natural Reserves NP National Park NR Natural Resources OECD Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development PA Protected area PA4LP Protected Areas for a Living Planet programme PES Payment for Environmental Services PNE Patrimonio Natural del Estado (State Natural Equity) PoWPA Programme of Work on Protected Areas RAPPAM Rapid Assessment and Prioritization of Protected Area Management SEA Strategic Environmental Assessment SFA State Forestry Agency SINAC Sistema Nacional de Areas de Conservacion – Costa Rica SINANPE System of Protected Areas in Costa Rica SK Slovak Republic SNV Netherlands Development Organization SSNP Sečovlje Salina Nature Park SW South West TEN-T Trans European Network for Transport TNC The Nature Conservancy ToR Terms of Reference UN United Nations UNDP United Nations Development Programme UNEP United Nations Environmental Programme UNESCO United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization USAID United States Agency for International Development USD United States Dollar VC Visitor VN Visitor Number WWF World Wide Fund for Nature
South Eastern European Workshop on Business Planning for Protected Areas Vilm, 3-7 Dec 2008
6
Day 1
Business-Oriented Financial Planning for Protected Areas: A Tool for Financial Success Marlon Flores Senior Advisor, TNC – Conservation Finance and Fiscal Policy – Global Protected Area Team
Number of PA and PA coverage is constantly increasing worldwide – it is good, but problems appear: existing financial sources are not enough and it is hard for PAs to find new funds and donors. Financial gaps are getting bigger and bigger. Traditional Approach to PA Financing:
- Limited government funding - Site-level approach and international project-based (USAID / GEF / TNC /WWF / CI) - Trust Fund: Endowment, Sinking, Revolving - Capacity aspects are usually not addressed.
PAs need to broaden their range of vision and see the opportunities not only in the traditional funding (central funding, international projects, Trust Fund), but also in business models (use business principles, market analysis, business plans, dedicated staff and strategic partnership, long term financial planning, promote fiscal reform). PAs have to realize that they need to use at least the following basic business principles:
PAs all over the world need financial sustainability:
- The ability of a country to meet all costs associated with the management of a protected area system (central unit and PAs)
- Implies “supply” (additional funding) and “demand” (managing financial needs). Financial sustainability needs to be addressed from both sides of the financial equation.
Sustainable financial planning (financial analysis, cost reduction strategies, assessment of revenue mechanisms, reform of the legal and institutional framework, and implementation of the financial plan) is a key element for reaching financial sustainability.
South Eastern European Workshop on Business Planning for Protected Areas Vilm, 3-7 Dec 2008
7
Working at a system level is more efficient, because: - Activities required at a national level can affect all PAs (fiscal reform, funds management) - Activities require coordinated effort and support from central governmental institutions - Sites often require similar activities → cost-effective to provide these centrally (training,
monitoring) - Fundraising can be more effective if coordinated centrally - System level planning allows cross-subsidization between sites.
Financial Planning road map:
1. Financial Analysis (needs/gaps) / Financial System Assessment 2. Screening and selection of revenue mechanisms 3. Formulation of financial and business plans
Unfortunately there are always barriers to sustainable finance:
- Financial: Government budget allocations are below needs. Poor diversification of revenue sources.
- Structural – Institutional: Legal, political and institutional constraints to innovation, change and cost-effective operations.
- Leadership: PA managers are ill equipped and poorly motivated to promote diversification of revenue and cost effectiveness.
- Technical capacity: Limited technical knowledge on financial planning, implementation of financial mechanisms and market opportunities.
Experiences and Lessons from SINAC’s Financial Strategy Guillermo Chan The Nature Conservancy – TNC Integrating the Planning process: SINAC’s Financial Strategy →
↕ Capacity Strengthening → SINAC → NISP/EAG ← TNC
↕ Monitoring and Management →
↕ GAP assessment → SINAC’S STRATEGIC PLANNING PROCESS: PNE: GRAUS, SINAC’s Effectiveness and monitoring, ASP Management Human Capacity building (training), Institutional Framework (structure), Information system FN Assessment, Incomes, GAP, Annual workplan, Long-term financial plans Income Identification and Quantification Process: Financing Sources: Ordinary budget, Special Funds (FPN, FF, FVS), Other sources (NGOs, CI, private)
South Eastern European Workshop on Business Planning for Protected Areas Vilm, 3-7 Dec 2008
8
Example of financial needs plan: Type of Expense Average Personnel 47.9% Training 3.9% Operational Expenses 13.3% Equipment 13.7% Infrastructure 14.2% Maintenance 7.1% TOTAL 100.0% Example of an income composition: Income Composition Average Ordinary Budget 45.2% Park Fund 34.4% Forest Fund 2.2% Wildlife Fund 0.1% Private resources 18.1% TOTAL 100% Financial Strategy General Conclusions:
- It is necessary to up-date and complete the strategic planning process - First financial exercise at the system level that used standardized information - Level of detail that allows making projections and scenarios easily - Lack of homogeneous working methods and procedures - Lack of controls in income collection - There is a need for integrated accounting information - It is necessary to strengthen the human team throughout the system, both financially and
administratively (training) - It is urgent to up-date rates and fees (income, need, gap).
The Financial Analysis: Activity Based Cost Accounting Marlon Flores Financial Analysis: 1. Assesses income, costs, needs, expenses 2. Defines “basic” and “optimal” needs 3. Uses metrics to link conservation objectives, programs and costs 4. Defines financial gaps (for basic and/or optimal levels) 5. Identifies investment priorities 6. Identifies cost reduction opportunities 7. Fundamental for developing reliable financial and business plans.
South Eastern European Workshop on Business Planning for Protected Areas Vilm, 3-7 Dec 2008
9
In the case of PAs usually there is a disconnection between conservation goals and costs. With the help of ABC Accounting it is possible to link PA Objectives & Goals with Costs. Activity–Based Cost Accounting (12-step process) Key aspects:
- Separate all activities into program areas - List the key metrics for mission critical and optimal states - Allocate expenditures and investments by program area - Calculate the resources required to meet mission critical and optimal states - Calculate the gap between currently available resources and required staff, non-staff and
investment resources - Complete the summary financial statement.
ABC Accounting helps to find out how big the financial gap (difference between existing funding and needs) is. It is also important to reduce costs so that the financial gap can be minimized: • Reduce personnel, equipment, program costs • Employ strategic alliances / volunteers • Improve financial systems (Funds management) • Co-manage PAs. Small groups work: Assessing institutional and legal barriers for improving financial planning 1. What are the major barriers to an enabling legal and institutional framework for sustainable finance in your country? - Protected Areas’ budget is set by governments - Allocations that go from the central government to the PAs are not enough - There are also other sources of money – for example from Information centres, but money
first goes to the national level (government’s budget) – it will be distributed centrally – usually not in the way it should be
- The worst happens when money doesn’t go back to protected areas at all (for example in Bulgaria) – “Black box”
- Lack of well trained staff and managers, they need knowledge and good management plans for protected areas
- National parks do not have the right to use concessions, but the Parks have to pay a fee to companies for example for using water (Croatia)
- Nature parks don’t adapt management plans – there is no base to do ABC accounting - In Romania the main problem is that the Protected Areas are part of the National Forest
Administration. Being part of NFA means that the National Parks are equal to companies, so it is even harder to receive money in this way. The Ministry of Environment doesn’t give money to NFA even though they apply through projects.
- No legal framework for environmental services (Albania)
South Eastern European Workshop on Business Planning for Protected Areas Vilm, 3-7 Dec 2008
10
- In Montenegro there is no system of Protected Areas, the national parks exist separately as private enterprises – here conflict appears between protecting wildlife or generating money
- Lack of governmental vision, political will and good political leadership – agriculture, health, etc. are much more important and supported than nature conservation – No recognition of the importance of nature tourism (Hungary)
- In Germany it is not possible to make revenue by national parks, entrance fees are not accepted by the public – a good solution could be: donations from the Ministry of Education to the parks instead of charging the students
- Common conclusion: there are too many priorities in the Protected Area Management Plan what to do → Conflicts appear: what to prefer amongst nature protection, improvement of tourism services, project development?
2. How would you design the process for assessing the legal and institutional framework for sustainable finance in your country? - Cross-sector coordination (environment and water, agriculture, forestry) is needed - Vision for PAs!! – There is a need for proper political leadership - Clear objectives of PAs – identify what PA is for – based on that, implement management
plans - Once a PA has a management plan it is important to know how the legal institutions work. Small group work: Applying ABC for realistic financial needs and gap analysis Actual exercise is attached as Annex 3 Participants find this exercise:
- Hard, since it is difficult to quantify budget numbers - Easy for those who have a management plan, since you just copy the available
information - Helpful - Others thought one example is OK, but to prepare an ABC Accounting system for the
whole PA would be really hard and time consuming.
Participants thought they would need the following things to begin and/or institutionalize this process in their agency or country:
- Management plan - Proper political leadership - Make the agency/country be interested in this process - Clarify what the benefits are - Secure the allocation of the budget - Skilled staff
South Eastern European Workshop on Business Planning for Protected Areas Vilm, 3-7 Dec 2008
11
Park’s Identity: - Area: 650 ha (Lera, Fontanigge) - Ownership: 97% state owned - N° of villages: 0, N° of inhabitants: 0 - Important species: 288 bird sp., 45 plant sp., invertebrates, amphibians, fish, reptiles… - Important habitats: estuary, mudflats, halophytes, salt meadows… - Traditional salt-works; supportive to wildlife and habitats. Protected area – legal background: - Nature Park (designated by the Government of the Republic of Slovenia in 2001) - Cultural Heritage Monument (2001) - Ramsar site (1993) - Natura 2000 site (2004). Situation in the Salina before 2002: - Traditional salt-production is a pre-condition for a diversity of habitats and wildlife, dependent
of water regime managed by man - Due to high production costs of salt and invasion of much cheaper salt from N Africa to
European market, the former managers of the area almost ceased with salt production and have not maintained water management infrastructure for decades
- The dykes and the salt basins were therefore deteriorated, there was no control over water regime – disturbances for wildlife and habitats, the area was a “paper-park” without management and there was a chaos caused by uncontrolled visitation.
Year 2002 – the mobile telecommunications operator MOBITEL acquires the company SOLINE Salt Production Ltd. – in order to ensure restoration, preservation and development. The responsibility for the management of the PA was given to the private company Mobitel/Soline Salt-production Ltd. by concession contract – 20 years. Mobiltel has to pay a minimal annual fee and has to manage the park according to the approved management plan. It has the right to share the profit from tourism and salt production and to use the images from the area for promotion. Reasons why Mobitel decided to invested in Sečovlje Salina Nature Park: - Growth of income from salt sale (promotion of a “green product”) - Growth of visitor numbers and income - New tourist infrastructure in the surroundings of the Park area (spa resort) - Better corporate reputation - Preservation of natural and cultural heritage – good promotion tool for the company Currently, 62% of the park’s budget comes from Mobitel, the rest is government contribution, projects, donations, water management, and park income. The plan is to make the park more self-sufficient - though they are unsure when this can happen.
Innovative Financing Model – Sečovlje Salina Nature Park (SSNP) Andrej Sovinc Secovlje Salina Nature Park – Slovenia
South Eastern European Workshop on Business Planning for Protected Areas Vilm, 3-7 Dec 2008
12
What has changed since the year of 2002: - 36 km of dykes restored, 12 buildings reconstructed, 18 salt-pans renovated: increase in salt
sale, 20 direct new jobs created - conditions have improved for habitats and wildlife - trade mark programmes and new park activities were developed – 5 times more visitors
within 5 years - 2008 was the first year when the nature park didn’t close with negative budget numbers. Even though the park benefits greatly from the company’s experience in financial management, economic growth and market approach, the park staff should not forget the pure conservation goals, the “non-profitable” activities, and the nature itself.
Day 2 DINARIC ARC ECOREGION – Protected Areas for a Living Planet Stella Satalic WWF European Policy Programme – Dinaric Arc Ecoregion Project duration: 2007-2011, implementing agency: WWF Mediterranean Programme Office Programme goal: Create enabling conditions for the implementation of the CBD PoWPA (representative, effectively managed and sustainably financed PA network). 3 pillars of work: Biodiversity info, Capacity building, PA financing/business plans – securing/improving sustainable finance of PAs. Memorandum of Understanding is signed. CBD Programme of Work on Protected Areas (PoWPA)
Contribution of Habitats Directive (HD)/ Natura 2000, EC 2006 Action Plan or other EU Instruments
References to additional actions needed at EU or national level/PoWPA goals and activities
Programme Element 3: Enabling activities Goal 3.4: To ensure financial sustainability of protected areas and national and regional systems of protected areas
HD Art 8 possibility for EU co‐financing for Natura 2000
3.4.1 by 2005, conduct a national level study of existing funds, financial needs and options for meeting those needs
Progress: Objective 1: PA gap analysis-GIS Corine, Emerald, Biodiversity targets, website Objective 2: Scorecards, Maps of responsibilities, Capacity Building Questionnaires, RAPPAM country plans Objective 3: Big Win action plans, Big Win mapping of donors, Training on PA financing (Vilm, Dec 08),
South Eastern European Workshop on Business Planning for Protected Areas Vilm, 3-7 Dec 2008
13
Big Win for Dinaric Arc: Joint statement signed on 29th May 2008 in Bonn National Commitments: - Establishment of new PAs (13) - Enlargement of existing PAs - Improvement of PA management - Transboundary cooperation More detailed information on Joint Statement 1 and 2 and on Succeeded Activities: see Annex 4. Financial mechanisms classification and options: Revenue Mechanisms Marlon Flores Screening and Selection of Revenue Mechanisms Protected Area revenue mechanisms: 1. Entry fee reform 2. Water user’s fee 3. Voluntary contributions in restaurant and hotel bills 4. PA trust (3 forms: 1. Endowment: Capital that is put aside generates interest, which is solely
used 2. Sinking: money is used up over time, 3. Revolving: Money is spent, fund is replenished again)
5. Collection of spare currency 6. Co-management with Amigos of The Park Foundation 7. Gift & merchandise shop 8. PA volunteer program. Based on how complex it is to implement these above mentioned revenue mechanisms and how big or low their impact is, each of these mechanisms can be classified using the following table:
Implementation complexity Low High
High
Act immediately
Start action
(long-term view)
Relative impact
Low
Act opportunistically
Low priority / Drop
A. Identification of goods and services (G/S) of PA B. Search for potential customers (investors) for the identified goods and services C. Determination of the financial mechanism to tie investors to the identified goods and services (fees, concessions, grants) A←C→B
South Eastern European Workshop on Business Planning for Protected Areas Vilm, 3-7 Dec 2008
14
Feasibility Analysis of Financial Mechanisms (It is recommended to hire a consultant to prepare the Feasibility Analysis, 10-20 pages) Focus should be on identifying two or more operative models to implement a financial mechanism. Based on this analysis, the best operational model can be selected.
- Description of different options - Advantages and disadvantages - Market analysis: customers, demand, competition, market, costs, suppliers, location,
resources, staff - Political viability and fiscal reform (legal/ regulatory) - Social viability - Financial analysis (investment/ return) - Risk analysis - Comparative analysis - Recommendations.
Commonly-cited reasons for not carrying out a Feasibility Analysis:
- Because other parks are already using it - Another feasibility study already exists - They are just ways for consultants to make money - It has already been carried out by the company that will be in charge of implementing the
financial mechanism - The feasibility study (and business plan) can be conducted by park staff - Better carry out a survey, increasing park entrance fees, and allocating resources for
urgent needs. Reasons for carrying out a Feasibility Analysis:
- Define the scope of the project - Identify the best business operating model - Identify reasons not to proceed - Increase the possibility of success (identifies risk and risk mitigating factors) - Provides accurate information for better decision making - Expand possibilities for investment in protected areas - Help to secure financing from investors or donors.
Innovative Financial Mechanisms in Latin-America: 1. Peru, FTA (free trade agreement), #18.3.4. Forestry Agenda. Increase of approximately USD 15 million to strengthen patrolling and control of illegal logging through a free trade agreement 2. Increased governments allocations to the park system: Mexico 40% and Colombia 100% 3. Debt-for-Nature swap in Guatemala: USD 1.5 million (next 15 years) and in Costa Rica: USD 26 million (USD 1.6 M per year) 5. Water Fees in Ecuador: 1% of water fees earmarked to protect national parks. Revenue goes to an endowment fund for 9 Pas (USD 0.5 M per year); 6. Municipal funding for watershed protection in Bogotá, Colombia (Water fund, USD 15 million).
South Eastern European Workshop on Business Planning for Protected Areas Vilm, 3-7 Dec 2008
15
Revenue sources for Protected Areas: I. Non-market based options:
- Government’s budget allocations - Private capital donations - Corporate long-term contributions - Debt-for-nature swaps - Trust funds (Problem with trust funds: only donors put money into them, not governments.
Reason why trust funds were created: governmental contributions weren’t sufficient. But the problem is still not solved in this way, since creating a trust fund doesn’t encourage governments to find solutions for the financial problems. Trust funds are also facing critical financial problems in today’s critical financial environment.)
II. Market based options: 1. “User-pays principle” options: fees and taxes which are directly based on renewable use of natural resources in and outside of PAs:
Tourism based fees and taxes: - Park entry fees - Recreational activity fees - Concession fees - Hotel taxes. Payments for environmental services: - Watershed protections - Carbon sequestration.
2. “Polluter pays principle” options: compensation fees, based on natural resources use - Fines and damages awards, pollution charges, fuel taxes - Environmental compensations - Natural resource extraction fees.
Embarked revenues which are not related to the environment:
- “Sin taxes” (for example on cigarettes, alcohol, gambling) - Sales taxes - Social licensed plates and postage stamps.
Options based on activities outside PAs could be earmarked for conservation: Land use taxes, forestry taxes, greasing fees, minding fees, oil concessions, lease payments and royalties, sand and gravel excavation charges:
- Real estate charges - Water supply, sewage charges - Pesticide and fertilizers taxes - Fines - Environmental compensations - Carbon taxes - Biodiversity offsets - Profit from green venture capital funds and eco-enterprises.
South Eastern European Workshop on Business Planning for Protected Areas Vilm, 3-7 Dec 2008
16
Even though there are so many financial mechanisms available still there is a huge financial gap for PAs. The reason behind it is that they don’t implement the financial mechanisms, because they don’t know how to do financial reform. Revenue diversification is very important: • Risk management principle of investment policy • Reduce dependency on international and government funding • Promotes income generation / retention, and formulation of fiscal law • Address government’s capacity issues. Sources of revenue and environmental fiscal reform – Financial illustrations Guillermo Chan Reviewing existing environment and tourism laws for financing opportunities – then a cost-benefit analysis – and based on that, bring the system up-to-date. New Water fee law in Costa Rica:
- Introduces the culture of “everybody pays for the use of water” - Started to be collected a year ago from individuals, companies and agricultural industry - Is a 7-year incremental process from the actual tariff scheme - At the 7th year the annual revenue will be approx. USD 25 M - The new law also provides a procedure for best practices and fiscal incentives - Most impacted sectors: agricultural and hydroelectric.
USD 25 million at the seventh year:
- 50% of it would go to: Management and improvement of current hydrological network. Investment and development
- 25% of it would go to: PES in private lands with strategic watershed allocation - 25% would go to: Strengthening of PAs with importance for the water system.
Update of Forestry Law (1):
- This law was created in 1998, since then it hasn’t been revised or updated - The Forestry law includes aspects such as:
• Issue of timber permits (licenses and fees) • Permitted species and quantities • Tax for wood products importation (3% CIF value).
Update of Forestry Law (2): Currently taxed goods:
- Gross wood importation, wood leafs, wood for floor insert, wood for handcrafted goods… - NEW taxed goods: Tools with wood parts, fiber wood boards, boxes or related for storage
purposes, wood boards for doors or furniture, kitchen/cooking items, any other handcrafted or decorative items…
Its financial impact: + 150% increase in tax revenue / +USD 200,000 per year
South Eastern European Workshop on Business Planning for Protected Areas Vilm, 3-7 Dec 2008
17
Screening of Financial Mechanisms exercise (participants were asked to select financial mechanisms and classify them based on how complex their implementation and how high or low their impact would be) Consider the impacts:
- Social - Environmental - Financial
Bulgaria:
- 7 financial mechanisms were selected - Concession fee - Public-private partnership is important - They found the exercise very useful – they have never done this before.
Albania:
- Selected 10 financial mechanisms - Good idea could be: Profit from the sale of organic products - Entry fee, additional taxes – could greatly increase the revenue - Another possibility: companies pay for mobile phone antennas - They realized: In many cases updates to the laws would be needed for
implementation. Croatia:
- Water fee – it exists there, but it goes to the water company, it shall be channeled towards the PAs
- New charge for hydropower, water fee – high complexity – requires law changes. Hungary:
- PAs’ most important and biggest revenue source is the governmental allocation - Agricultural, tourism income is also an important source - EU funds are accessible - Three is only a small contribution from corporations – they should donate more,
for specific projects – it could be good visibility, PR for them - Rental fee - Debt-for-nature swaps – could be an option, but implementation would be very
complex, Trust fund - Conclusion: most of the financial mechanisms fall into the high complexity and
high impact category. Romania:
- Recreational activities - Conclusion: most of the financial mechanisms fall into the high and medium
complexity category. Slovakia:
- PAs can generate money in different ways, but all the money has to come from the state budget
South Eastern European Workshop on Business Planning for Protected Areas Vilm, 3-7 Dec 2008
18
- There is no motivation to generate money by PAs, since they cannot make independent decisions
- Political will (they have no green party) is important, political reform is needed. Final Conclusion: Whatever we do, it comes with combined environmental and fiscal reform. Environmental Fiscal Reform (EFR) Marlon Flores EFR refers to a range of taxation or pricing instruments that can raise revenue, while simultaneously furthering environmental and social goals. The context of EFR: • Economic crisis, despite broad benefits • Conservation challenges are beyond the competency of environmental ministries alone • International development agenda focuses on poverty reduction, climate change, food security • Used in OECD and middle income countries and limited use in low-income countries • Need to understand the reform process. Benefits of EFR: • Move from “control-and-command” policy to economic instruments • Multi-objective, high potential to solve conservation problems
1. Social benefits: • Poverty reduction (MDG) • Environmental Problems > poverty • Access to infrastructure • Pro-poor investment
2. Environmental benefits: • Improved Natural Resources management • Decrease of pollution • Funding for environment
3. Fiscal benefits: • Fund generation • less distortions • less demand on central funding.
During negotiation with the Ministry of Finance about an EFR not only the environmental, but the social, fiscal benefits have to be also emphasized, because these are all connected to each other. Opportunities to carry out an EFR: • Inefficient exploitation of publicly owned or controlled NNRR • Undertaking polluting activities to a socially undesirable level • Taxes on natural resources extraction (or import) • User charges or fees (payments for environmental services – PES) • Subsidy reform, environmentally related taxes • Conventional taxes (sales taxes).
South Eastern European Workshop on Business Planning for Protected Areas Vilm, 3-7 Dec 2008
19
Barriers to achieve EFR: • Policy experts who say what to do but not how to do it • Conservation policy experts who place too much emphasis on “command and control” policies • Lack of political will • Lack of institutional capacity • Limited public awareness of conservation problems. Key stakeholders: • Poor and vulnerable groups (disaggregated by gender, location, ethnicity etc.) • Non-poor households • The private sector • Civil society (NGOs, media, academic institutions) • Politicians / decision-makers (Ministries, Parliamentarians, political parties) • Bureaucrats (all levels) • Development agencies and international actors. Example of designing EFR: A government has earmarked one percent of the income from gasoline sales’ tax that will be allocated to the national protected area system. Fiscal benefit: National Parks will have extra revenue. Environmental benefit: Some of this extra revenue can go to support patrolling and enforcement programs in the national parks. Social benefits: communities in and around the protected areas will also benefit from this decision. The process of fiscal reform: 1. Identify the key stakeholders and define the agenda 2. Discuss the need of fiscal policy reform and options 3. Implementation 4. Monitoring and evaluation. Examples of EFR:
- Water tariffs in Colombia: Water tariff was very low. The government decided to increase the water fee – Public protest started – Increase had to be eliminated – Problem: there was no support from the civil society.
- Sustainable water tariffs in Latin American countries: Find out how much it costs to maintain and clean the water – ABC accounting – Find out the cost of running the PA – Calculate how much can be contributed to the PA’s cost from the water tariff. They are just about to start a study on the new policy.
- Gasoline tax in Mexico: Idea: use a certain % of the sales tax on gasoline to finance PA system. Proposal went to Congress – Congress thought with this action low and mid-income families would be harmed too much – It didn’t go through.
South Eastern European Workshop on Business Planning for Protected Areas Vilm, 3-7 Dec 2008
20
1. Romania: Idea: Establish a system for natural resource extraction fees – certain % of the extraction fees would go directly to the PAs. National Forest Administration and private owners already pay 3% of the wood exploitation, but this goes to the Environmental Fund, not to the PAs. (In case of water, mineral resources, electricity – no idea about extra contribution) From the Environmental Fund a very small part goes back through projects to the PAs. This should be changed. In Romania there is no trust in NGOs, because they don’t return the funds to the PAs (except WWF). Make sure there is political support during the whole process. Public awareness is also a very important factor. Ministry of Environment, politicians have to be involved in the decision making process, since they approve the new law. Unfortunately the implementation of this plan would only be realistic on paper in Romania. 2. Slovakia Implement a Park entry fee system. PAs, municipalities, local communities have to be involved. The reasons for entry fees, and where money will go have to be clearly defined – Memorandum of understanding will include this. Political will at local level is a very important factor. The implementation of this plan is realistic, since they have had entry fees in parks for 5 years. Forever Costa Rica Guillermo Chan 188 governments adopted the goal of having “at least 10 percent of the world’s eco-regions effectively conserved.” UN CBD goal: by 2012, nations would “establish a global network of comprehensive, effectively managed and ecologically representative national and regional systems of protected areas”. The Conservation Goal: Establish an ecologically representative, effectively managed system of terrestrial and marine protected areas, with a stable source of funding, thus enabling Costa Rica to be the first developing country to meet the goals under the UN CBD Program of Work on PAs. Terrestrial & Freshwater Protected Areas: Strict protected areas will receive ongoing funding under Forever Costa Rica (26.5 % of continental territory in PA system).
Group work Outline of an environmental fiscal reform
South Eastern European Workshop on Business Planning for Protected Areas Vilm, 3-7 Dec 2008
21
Protected Area Management Improvements: 1. Financial commitments 2. Improved procurement process 3. Decentralization process 4. Clear institutional structure 5. Improved information technology 6. Improved benefit sharing 7. Improved capacity at regional level 8. Improved role of regional councils 9. Developed management plans 10. Build institutions and legal framework for marine protected areas & sustainable fisheries.
Sources and uses of funds: Sources of funds: Total USD 440 M (present value):
- Existing Government of Costa Rica: USD 360 M - Existing external: USD 10 M - New Government of Costa Rica: USD 20 M - New external: USD 50 M
Uses of funds: Total USD 440 M (present value): - Terrestrial and freshwater: USD 368 M - Marine: USD 72 M
External funds flow only if and when all closing conditions are met: – Government actions – Government commitment to maintain or increase protected area funding in perpetuity – Total external funds raised. Multilaterals and bilaterals: Government taking the lead, Minister of Foreign Relations confident can raise USD 17M+: Early indications: GEF USD 2.15M, Germany/LifeWeb USD 2-3M (Costa Rica well positioned), Spain, Korea, others expressions of interest Capitalizing the trust fund - USD 50M: USD 50M new external funding (capital) - USD 17M Multilaterals & bilaterals: Government of Costa Rica - USD 34M Foundations & individuals: Moore, Linden, TNC. Why is this project important?
- Double MPAs in Costa Rica - Conserve 30% & 32% respectively of Eastern Tropical Pacific and SW Caribbean
portfolios - Provide global example - Possible to complete CBD goals - Strengthens credibility of the treaty itself and TNC’s global PA work - Replicable sustainable finance model as approach to achieve CBD goals.
All of the parks have to have a management plan – they have to show the results to the government.
South Eastern European Workshop on Business Planning for Protected Areas Vilm, 3-7 Dec 2008
22
Results of RAPPAM in Slovenia and recommendations Andrej Sovinc Rapid assessment and prioritization of PA management in Slovenia:
- 9 national parks cover 80 % of the total protected area - Changes in land use, tourism and recreation are threats in most of the parks - Intervention – water – is very common in the parks - Waste disposal in the parks is mostly negligible - Invasive species appear as a common problem - Having a trained staff: variable - The PAs have a high socio-economic impact in the country - Ministry of Environment had a huge financial support towards the PAs from the
state institution which manages the state land - Only two of the PAs have an approved management plan - Research and monitoring level: variable, in some PAs good, in others poor.
Evaluation of the PA system in Slovenia:
- Planning in the parks overall is not so good - Policy level is not high - Political support towards the park is at a middle level.
To ensure sustainable financing of PAs: - More staff training would be needed to be able to get international funds through
applications - There is no support from the Ministry to find new financial sources.
Recommendations were prepared based upon the results of the RAPPAM analyses in Slovenia, which involved 9 PAs with management authorities in place. Results are presented in the following form: • Recommendation/ Task • Addressed to/ Responsible • Deadline. Goals:
1) Strengthening the management effectiveness of PAs 2) Capacity strengthening at the institutional level 3) Management of habitats and species in PAs 4) To ensure sustainable financing of PAs 5) Strengthening of the importance and public appreciation of Pas.
For more detailed goals please see Annex 5.
South Eastern European Workshop on Business Planning for Protected Areas Vilm, 3-7 Dec 2008
23
Day 3 WWF Danube-Carpathian Programme David Strobel Protected Areas for a Living Planet (PA4LP) Programme The “Protected Areas for a Living Planet Programme (PA4LP)” of WWF aims at supporting the PoWPA implementation in the region and is part of WWF’s programme on “Forests and PAs”. Core activities of PA4LP Programme:
- Formation of a Carpathian Network of Protected Areas (CNPA) - Development of tools that facilitate & improve PA mgmt (CPAMEMT, CHM) - Training and capacity building (practioners & trainers) - Valuation of PA goods & services / development of a PES scheme - Development of pilot projects on participative management.
Project financing: MAVA foundation (2007-2011) Main project approach: Bottom-up: development of concepts that help PAs in improving their management and in becoming increasingly engaged in networking → governments have committed to fulfilling CBD (and CC) goals, but in practice do not have the capacities to steer or implement the required activities. Status RAPPAM in Carpathian countries:
• Ukraine (2008) – all Carpathian PAs (report to be produced in Dec 2008) • Romania (2006) – most of the Carpathian PAs • Slovakia (2004) – 9 PAs • Czech Republic (2004) - 2 PAs • Serbia (2009) (steered by WWF Dinaric Arc Programme) • Hungary, Poland: pending.
Carpathian Protected Areas Management Effectiveness Monitoring Tool (CPAMEMT) http://cpamemt.ueuo.com Valuation of goods & services / development of a PES scheme:
(1) Assessment of the value generated in 3 Carpathian model PAs – Slovakian, Romanian, Polish through a series of 3 workshops with stakeholders (Feb – Sep 2009)
(2) Feasibility study and development of a PES scheme for one of the 3 model areas, incl. assessment of legislative/ fiscal requirements (Nov 2009 – June 2010)
(3) Development of guidelines which facilitate this process in other PAs in the Carpathians or other regions (2nd half 2010)
(4) implementation (2010, 2011,…)
South Eastern European Workshop on Business Planning for Protected Areas Vilm, 3-7 Dec 2008
24
Financing situation in most of the Carpathian countries: - Predominantly strong reliance on the state (e.g. through national PA or forest agencies) - Trend to reduced financial means for PA administrations (e.g. CZ, SK) - Less staff has to cope with an increasing workload.
Key challenges for PA financial sustainability:
- Becoming more independent from state funding/ strengthening engagement in EU and private funding schemes
- Development of PES schemes that are adapted to the individual PA conditions, as 2nd/ 3rd pillar of financing
- Continuous capacity building and training of PA staff to ensure the efficient use of available/ potential financing schemes.
CNPA (Carpathian Network of PAs) – formulation is in process in cooperation with UNEP – all 7 countries (Poland, Ukraine, Slovakia, Hungary, Romania, Moldova, Serbia) are in. It would help to access EU funds much easier. Requirement: PA has to be larger then 100 ha. Carpathian Opportunity – just started – focus is on food, agricultural, tourism sector. Formulation of the Financial and Business Plans Marlon Flores What is a PA Financial Plan?
- Management tool used to guide the financial operation of the PA system - Indicates what are the cash needs and guides on how to raise the cash, such as entry
fees, PES, concessions, donations, etc. - Refers to the means by which cash will be acquired to cover future expenses, for
instance through earning, appropriations, and international grants. - Summarizes protected area income, needs and financial gaps - Includes supportive business plans for diverse market-based financial mechanisms - May include the different strategies to address legal and institutional reform and capacity
to enable the implementation of the plan. What is a Business plan?
- A business plan is a formal statement of a set of business goals, the reasons why they are believed attainable, and the plan for reaching those goals. It may also contain background information about the organization or team attempting to reach those goals.
- The business goals being attempted may be for-profit or non-profit. - For-profit business plans typically focus on financial goals. - Non-profit and government agency business plans tend to focus on service goals,
although non-profits may also focus on maximizing profit. What is a Business Plan and how is it different from the Financial Plan?
- Management tool that is connected to the financial plan - Uses market-analyses: demand-supply, competition, risk, etc. - Used to achieve the full financial potential of a revenue mechanism
South Eastern European Workshop on Business Planning for Protected Areas Vilm, 3-7 Dec 2008
25
- Includes all aspects of the implementation of a financial mechanism, commonly focuses on a single revenue mechanism and its operating model.
Components of a Financial Plan of the Protected Area System: System-level Financial Plan:
- PA background: 2-3 pages, - Objective: About where to go and how to get there - Financial background: What kind of changes to make - Summary of financial needs and gaps: No text, tables, data instead - Investment priorities: What is the money needed for? Mentioning areas where the money
is going. How to get the investment priorities? Here donors should see what the benefits are for them.
- Financial goals and gap reduction: How the money is going to help to solve problems. Companies create an environmental unit in order to stay in business.
- Summary of financial mechanisms i. mechanisms ii. feasibility analyses iii. financial goals iv. business plan Business Plan:
- Economic impact - Description of the mechanisms - Implementation program (action plan) - Value added
- Operations - Investment and return - Financial goals - Marketing - Administration SYSTEM-LEVEL MASTER PLAN The business plan(s) can either be part of the document’s main text, annexed or a separate document. For a nature conservation organization a business plan is usually about conservation goals, but not about finance – this should be changed! To prepare a business plan, a consultant should be hired who is specialized in Strategic planning. The Plan should be about 10 pages. It includes: Problem – Solution – Advantages: how the PA contributes to the (local) economy’s development. The public, government decision-makers, donors and the private sector will see PA managers as business professionals with a clear idea of where they are, where they are going and how they are going to get there! - Starting with the existing template, develop a detailed outline for a financial plan for a
protected area site (add/ edit details) - Based on this outline, develop an operational work plan and process for completing the
financial plan: • What are the steps towards completing the financial plan? • Who will do each step? • By when will each step be completed?
South Eastern European Workshop on Business Planning for Protected Areas Vilm, 3-7 Dec 2008
26
Small groups work: Outlining of a system-level financial plan and business plan Based on this outline, develop an operational work plan and process for completing the financial plan. Please see Annex 6 and Annex 7 for the countries’ financial plan. Economic Impact of PAs Marlon Flores Making the Case for PA using the multiple economic valuation of ecosystems methods: Protected Areas have to be communicated as investments, not as costs. Approaches for this:
Approaches Objective How we do it 1. Determining the total value of the current flow of benefits from an Ecosystem
To understand the economic contribution that ecosystems make to society
Identify all mutually-compatible services provided; measure the quantity of each service provided; multiply by the value of each service
2. Determining the net benefits of an intervention that alters ecosystem conditions – economist is needed to do this
To assess whether the intervention is economically worthwhile
Measure how the quantity of each service would change as a result of the intervention, as compared to their quantity without the intervention; multiply by the marginal value of each service
3. Examining how the costs and benefits of an ecosystem (or an intervention) are distributed – it is about winners and losers
To identify winners and losers, for equity and practical reasons
Identify relevant stakeholder groups; determine which specific services they use and the value of those services to that group (or changes in values resulting from an intervention)
4. Identifying potential financing sources for conservation
To help make conservation financially sustainable
Identify groups that receive large benefit flows, from which funds could be extracted using various financing mechanisms
Identifying benefits of protected areas: - By sector: Agriculture Health Tourism Energy Industry.
South Eastern European Workshop on Business Planning for Protected Areas Vilm, 3-7 Dec 2008
27
- By benefit: Biodiversity Employment Food Drinking water Cultural and spiritual Climate change Disaster mitigation Pollution Medicinal plants Recreational.
Examples of PA benefits:
- Tourism in Peru has given the government an increase in employment and tax revenue and has decreased poverty. In concrete numbers it generates USD 1.7 million for entrance fee for SINANPE, with a multiplier effect in the economy of USD 127.6 million.
- Water: At least 16 PAs provide environmental services for water production for 1,759,527 people. People consume approximately 254.9 million m3 annually (a value of USD 81 million). 6 PAs provide 65.34% of hydroelectric power generation (11.1 million of MWh annually, or USD 335.2 million).
- Erosion protection: Filtering of sediments for erosion in Poechos Dam (North of Peru) has an annually cost of USD 14.1 million. The PAs that protect the high basins allowed Peru to save about USD 1.2 million in the last 10 years in terms of avoided costs.
- Carbon storage: Approximately 16 million ha of lands in PA are tropical forests. Considering the rate of CO2 storage, there is a stock of 3,901 million tons of CO2 in PAs.
Designing a communications campaign:
- Show the PA’s contribution, additional investment to the economy - Clear objectives of the campaign (based on financial need and gaps and the specific
environmental fiscal reform strategy needed) - Identify target audience of campaign - Develop compelling message - Identify communications channels - Identify and engage key spokespeople – who is popular in your country?
German NP Campaign: Wadden Sea NP Gisela Stolpe BfN – International Academy for Nature Conservation Background of Wadden Sea NP: - Important for birds - Very rural/ remote area - Tourism is important - Nursery grounds for fish, mussels, shrimps - Conflicts around new NP.
South Eastern European Workshop on Business Planning for Protected Areas Vilm, 3-7 Dec 2008
28
Objective of the campaign: To create a positive attitude among
- The people living in the NP region - Other people of the federal state of Schleswig-Holstein - Decision makers.
Approach used: Testimonials of 4 VIPs (Famous writer, mobile phone boss, young actors, erotic shop business leader)
- Different target groups - Provocative - Conveying different values.
What was done during the campaign:
- On 4 consecutive Saturdays adverts in major newspapers - 4 x 1000 posters - 4 x 60.000 stickers used by all state agencies - 4 x 500 free postcards – given to NP info centers.
Costs:
- 30.000 EUR - Partly paid by sponsoring - No fees to VIPs.
Day 4
Participants were asked to identify:
- supportive actions at the national level - supportive actions at the regional level - concrete steps, milestones in development financial, business plan.
Supportive actions at the national level Provide human and financial resources for process:
- Identify money for start - Develop task force - Identify focal point per country.
Mobilize public awareness:
- Mobilize all stakeholders to support the idea of FP / BP - Get support from different stakeholders to start making and implementing FP - Make the public understand that PAs don’t have enough money
South Eastern European Workshop on Business Planning for Protected Areas Vilm, 3-7 Dec 2008
29
- Share this information with Ministry of Environment and PAs - Present BP to the government - Commitments towards FP & BP
Identify financial mechanism:
- Promote case study examples on “alternative” revenue sources for PAs - Develop brand mark for products - Establish a multi-sector body to explore the process of PES & taxes’ development.
Prepare a BP for a concrete PA:
- Prepare a Financial Plan & a Management Plan for each PA in the country - All plans must be unique - Prepare a case study – financial plan for a PA site
Political negotiations:
- Approve all PA Management Plans by the government - Lobby politicians and administration - Try to explain the importance of PA management to the ministry - Methodology for FP must be approved by the ministry - Ministry request to apply FP - Inform the ministry on the importance of having & formulating the financial plan - Lobby for Environmental Fiscal Reform - Materials and documents for business planning on webpage of state nature conservancy.
Training on FP/BP:
- National actions: round tables, workshops, seminars - National seminars for sharing experience with existing “alternative” financing in different
PAs - National seminars for financial & business planning for protected areas - Convene a training process on sustainable financial & business planning at national level - Meeting with all the PAs (NFA + MOE in Romania) - Meetings and presentations to show the importance of FP - Workshop on financial planning for PAs at system and site level - Create a network of PAs at national level - Workshops for all PA managers in the country
South Eastern European Workshop on Business Planning for Protected Areas Vilm, 3-7 Dec 2008
30
Building support:
- Consultations with local stakeholders - Recruit celebrities for campaign - Disseminate the results of the workshop to wider audience in the region - Have open discussions on FP importance - Involve actors (main NGO, local org., public) - Meetings and discussions with regional PAs - WWF: Inform the ministries about the BP concept - WWF: Discuss the concept at the NPC meeting 15 –17 Dec. 2008
Learning / exchange:
- Workshop for all partners in region - Next workshop should take place in Bosnia/ Serbia/ Albania - Follow-up workshop (on particular issues / components) with in the Dinaric Arc initiative - Workshop to see progress (- compare system, - choose best practice examples) - Meetings to show results - Regular meetings for capacity improvement and experience exchange - Improve information exchange through workshops and seminars.
Identify responsibilities: - Ministry appoints the focal point responsible for BP development
Information management beyond workshops: - Constant coordination between countries - Create a website for implementation for PA in region - Website or mailing list for info and experience exchange - Share information on progress between countries.
Identify concrete steps / management:
- WWF: define the roadmap - WWF: define the TOR (consultants, park staff, focal point) - Help WWF? For identifying a project for CNPA BP - Have a regional fund for BP projects - Possibilities to create an international network of PAs
Regional guidance on instruments: - International seminars for sharing experiences with various finance sources in PAs /
countries - Identify financial mechanisms - Analyse each country’s system→ create a model that uses best part from each.
Initiate post graduate studies on PA economics → NPCs to identify the existing curriculum
Supportive actions at the regional level
South Eastern European Workshop on Business Planning for Protected Areas Vilm, 3-7 Dec 2008
31
Concrete steps and milestones in development Business /Financial plans Create political will and commitment:
- Try to show the importance of having and implementing a financial plan to park management
- Ministry request to apply FP - Present ideas and actions to stakeholders - Get commitment from the Ministry by January 2009 - Find the money sources for preparing the BP.
Capacity building:
- Workshop for management planning linked to business planning - Workshop on financial planning for PA economists - Educate people in PAs (staff, employees) - Educate park and ministry staff in financial issues - Management trainings.
Prerequisites:
- Identify system vs. site level - Prepare the guidelines on business planning for park managers, try to make plan simple - Economic valuation and feasibility studies – find appropriate experts (difficult?) - Identify the consultants who are able to do good economic studies - Standardise the program and activities at national level - Realistic Management Plan for PA.
Individual steps:
- Create a taskforce: 1. Define PA cost structure, 2. Define programs / function - Create a team for business plan preparation - Identify the main activities and goals for the BP - Analyse goals, costs, methods and needs - Activity-based cost accounting - Assessment of financial needs + gaps for all PAs - Map current – revenues, - types of incomes / mechanisms, - flows (step by step) - Include all parks in certain steps of creating a BP for one park, transfer the knowledge to
their own PAs. Work on legal and institutional framework:
- Negotiations on political level for a fiscal reform January 2009 –2013 - Environmental Fiscal reform - Lobby to ME for increase and use of Trust Funds directly by PAs - Create few NGOs for preparing application to Trust Funds - Analyse legal / institutional framework - Centralized system of information + costs
South Eastern European Workshop on Business Planning for Protected Areas Vilm, 3-7 Dec 2008
32
Preparation of National Action Plans / National Road Maps Please see Annex 8. Financial Planning Survey Results presented by Guillermo Chan Q1. Please indicate the country that you represent: Bulgaria: 3 participants Romania: 2 participants Albania Slovenia Croatia Hungary Q2. In which of the following aspects of PA financial planning are you involved? Implementation: 56% Formulation of the financial or business plan: 44% Q3. Is there a management plan for the protected area (PA) system of your country? Few protected areas have MP: 56% MP are available for all or most of PA‘s: 33% Q4. Is there a centrally managed PA system in your country? There are sub systems of PA‘s managed at different level: 56% There is a single centrally managed PA system: 44% Q5. Have the financial needs and financial gaps of the PA system or individual protected areas in your country been assessed? The financial needs and financial gaps have not been assessed: 67% There is a recent assessment of the financial needs and gaps: 22% Q6. Are the PA management plans (at system or individual level) organized by conservation goals, objectives, functional areas, programs and subprograms? The management plans of the PA‘s have defined goals, objectives, programs: 89% The goals, objectives, programs or sub programs are not clear/ others: 11% Q7. Is there a financial plan and/or business plan for the PA system or individual PAs? There is a financial plan for the PA system level and financial plan or BP for individual PAs: 44% There are no financial plans: 44%
South Eastern European Workshop on Business Planning for Protected Areas Vilm, 3-7 Dec 2008
33
Q8. Are the conservation goals in the management plans of your PA system or individual PAs linked to costs for basic or optimal conservation results? No, resources are allocated according to availability of central funding and there are no links: 56% Conservation goals are linked to costs for basic and optional levels of conservation results: 22% Conservation goals are linked to costs for basic conservation results: 22% Q9. Indicate the four most important revenue sources of your PA system or individual PA? Central government allocation: 78%, Park entry fees: 44%, GEF/others international: 44%, Other re-creative activities: 33% Tourism concessions: 33%, PES/Environmental compensation: 0% Q10. Does the legal and regulatory framework for PAs in your country allows the PAs to generate and retain self-generated revenue? Self-generation and retention of revenue is possible: 57% Is not possible, funds are transferred to government‘s central budget: 22% Q11. How will you consider the financial management capacity, both individuals and institutions, at the PA system or individual PAs? (Capacity to carry out financial analyses, assess and implement revenue mechanisms, formulate financial and business plans, and develop a supportive regulatory framework) Basic: 56% Medium: 22% Advanced: 11% Q12. Does the current legal and regulatory framework governing PAs in your country support the formulation and implementation of a financial plan for the PA system or individual PAs? Yes: 78% No: 22%
South Eastern European Workshop on Business Planning for Protected Areas Vilm, 3-7 Dec 2008
34
Conclusions Participants agreed that even though most of them had small economic backgrounds, the training/workshop helped them a lot to understand financial and business planning, mechanisms, and analysis much better. They can also see much clearer, how important it is for the PAs to combine the conservation goals with the business principles to reach financial sustainability. Participants realized they have no time to waste any more, they have to start making steps toward developing and implementing financial and business plans for their own countries’ protected areas. Most of the participants agreed though that unfortunately this is not going to happen easily and quickly, since it will require a lot of serious changes, such as inter alia:
- Political lobbying - Changes in the law/ legislations - National fiscal reform.
But – especially after seeing the good examples from Costa Rica – participants have better hopes and it seems more realistic now, that they can implement similar good practices in their own countries and sooner or later the South Eastern European protected areas will also reach financial sustainability. The WWF Dinaric Arc project is committed to assist the countries in the region in the development of Business Plans for at least one PA in each country in the next two years. A second training workshop for experts from Bosnia-Herzegovina who could not attend this workshop due to visa problems will take place in January 2009 in Sarajevo with technical support from Andrej Sovinc and Stella Satalic and with financial support from the German Federal Agency for Nature Conservation.
South Eastern European Workshop on Business Planning for Protected Areas Vilm, 3-7 Dec 2008
Annex 1 Programme of the workshop
South Eastern European
Workshop on Business Planning
for Protected Areas
December 3rd – 7th, 2008
at the
International Academy for Nature Conservation
Isle of Vilm
organised by
The German Federal Agency for Nature Conservation (BfN)
in cooperation with The Nature Conservancy, CBD-Secretariat
and WWF International
Wednesday, 3rd December, 2008
18:20 Registration and dinner
19:30 Welcome, Introduction of participants Introduction to the venue & into the course
Thursday, 4th December, 2008
FUNDAMENTALS OF FINANCIAL ANALYSIS
08:30 Opening, introduction, objectives
09:00 Financial Planning; elements and definitions
09:30 Institutional and legal framework of financial planning and assessment
10:00 Coffee / tea break
10:15 The nuts and bolts of activity-based cost accounting
11:30 Financial Planning Survey: results and discussion
12:30 Lunch
14:00 Small groups work 1: Assessing institutional and legal barriers for improving financial planning (using SINAC assessment tool)
15:30 Coffee / tea break
16:00 Small groups work 2: Applying ABC for realistic financial needs and gap analyses (framing questions will be provided)
17:30 Open discussion and wrap-up of day (review lessons)
18:30 Dinner
20:00 Case study presentation: Andrej Sovinc presents business plan
Friday, 5th December, 2008
FUNDAMENTALS OF SELECTING FINANCIAL MECHANIMS AND FORMULATING THE FINANCIAL PLAN
09:00 Identifying and selecting financial mechanisms, and cost reduction
09:30 Financial mechanisms classification and options
10:00 Diversification of financial mechanisms
10:30 Coffee / tea break
10:45 Small group work 3: Country-based screening of financial mechanisms exercise (using complexity/impact matrix)
12:30 Lunch
13:30 Guided tour of Vilm nature reserve
15:00 Coffee / tea break
15:15 The nuts and bolts of environmental fiscal reform
15:45 Small groups work 4: Outline of an environmental fiscal reform action plan including: identification, setting the agenda, discussion of options, decision-making, implementation and monitoring
16:45 Coffee / tea break
17:00 Introduction to business principles in PA financial planning and discussion
17:45 Open discussion and wrap-up of day (review lessons)
18:30 Dinner
Saturday, 6th December, 2008
FORMULATING THE FINANCIAL PLAN
09:00 Formulating the financial plan for protected area systems: definitions and elements and bringing all the pieces together
09:30 Formulating a business plan: definition, elements, when do you need a BP, and how to go about formulating it, and its connections to the financial plan
10:00 Economic Impact: assessing the contribution of protected area’s ecosystems to economic growth and equity (making the case for PAs)
10:30 Coffee / tea break
10:45 Small groups work 5: Outlining of a system level financial plan and business plan (s)
12:30 Lunch
14:00 Small groups work 6: Outlining the strategy to make the case for the system of protected areas: combining financial and economic valuation results.
15:30 Coffee / tea break
16:00 Measuring progress: The UNDP Financial Sustainability Scorecard for National Systems of Protected Areas
16:45 Open discussion and wrap up of day (review lessons)
18:30 Dinner
20:00 Farewell party (to be organised by the participants)
Sunday, 7th December, 2008
09:00 Plenary discussion of small group discussions
10:30 Coffee / tea break
10:45 Brainstorm next steps in large group discussion
11:00 Discussion of next steps in small group work
11:45 Presentation of next steps in large group, workshop wrap up
12:30 Lunch
13:35
14:05
Departure from Vilm
Train departure from Lauterbach Mole (arrival in Berlin central train station at 18:15 h)
South Eastern European Workshop on Business Planning for Protected Areas Vilm, 3-7 Dec 2008
Annex 2 List of participants
1
South Eastern European Workshop on Business Planning for Protected Areas
3 to 7 December 2008, INA Vilm, Germany
List of participants No. Name Institution Address Country Phone/Fax/e-mail 1. Bartusova, Zuzana
Administration Office of National Park Poloniny, Stakčin, Slovakia State Nature Conservancy of Slovakia
South Eastern European Workshop on Business Planning for Protected Areas Vilm, 3-7 Dec 2008
Annex 3 Exercise sheet “Applying ABC for realistic financial needs and gap analysis”
Program metrics Current level Mission critical (Basic) Optimal level
1
2
3
4
5
5
3
4
Program goals1
2
Program Name:Description:
Financial Plan Detailed SheetDate started:Date completedDetailed sheet owner:
The mission critical state describes theminimum level required tooperate the program whilemeeting basic programrequirements.
The optimal statedescribes the ideal state ofthe program if allnecessary funds, personneland other resources wereavailable to achieve thatstate.
The program metrics are specific, measurable, achievable, and realisticand where necessary also have a time frame
South Eastern European Workshop on Business Planning for Protected Areas Vilm, 3-7 Dec 2008
Annex 4 Information on the DINARIC ARC ECOREGION – Protected Areas for a Living Planet
DINARIC ARC ECOREGION – Protected Areas for a Living Planet –Stella Satalic from WWF
Project duration: 2007-2011, implementing agency: WWF Mediterranean Programme
Office
Joint Statement (1)
- Recognize the specific natural and cultural values of the Dinaric Arc ecoregion and
acknowledge the CBD PoWPA to be a valuable framework for conserving biological
diversity and generating benefits to local and national economies.
- Aim to further continue our activities towards implementation of national priorities leading
to delivering on the objectives of the CBD PoWPA.
- Support increased understanding of the relationship between the CBD PoWPA and the EU legislation on nature conservation.
- Encourage mutual cooperation and exchange of experiences in protected areas
management on the regional level.
- Recognize the importance of regional cooperation to achieve transboundary sustainable
management of the South-Eastern European region.
Joint statement (2)
- Recognize and support the need for sustainable use of water resources and protection of
groundwater-dependent ecosystems by introducing sustainable integrated management
principles in the Dinaric karst system.
- Encourage the preservation of the cultural heritage of the Dinaric Arc through support for
traditional activities in protected areas which contribute to biodiversity conservation and
local livelihoods.
- Call upon the Dinaric Arc Initiative partners (WWF, UNESCO BRESCE, IUCN, UNDP,
Council of Europe, FAO, SNV, UNEP, Euronatur) and other interested parties to
strengthen their cooperation with the Dinaric Arc countries and facilitate necessary
support in the delivery of the national priorities.
- Support evaluation of the contribution of protected areas to each country’s economy and for the region as a whole. Albania: 8. Strengthening institutions at national and regional levels, through assessing
protected areas management effectiveness (RAPPAM)
Bosnia and Hercegovina: 13. Strengthening institutional protected area management
capacity at the entity and the state levels
Croatia: 5. Strengthening institutions at national and regional levels, through assessing
protected areas management effectiveness (RAPPAM)
Montenegro: 7. Development of an institutional base for implementation of the CBD and
capacity building
Serbia: 6. Strengthening the institutions at national and regional levels, through
assessing protected areas management effectiveness (RAPPAM)
Slovenia: 8. Carrying out further awareness raising campaigns to demonstrate benefits
of protected areas for local inhabitants and increasing public support for nature
conservation.
Successes (1)
- New projects based on DAE
- GEF Early Action Grant: BiH - Activity 1.1.5 Ecological gap analysis (USD 109.200) -
approved
- GEF Early Action Grant: Albania - Activity 1.1.5 (Comprehensive protected areas gap
assessment, and planning of interim measures to protected highly threatened or value
areas), and Activity 3.1.1 (Legal and institutional gaps addressed) (USD 150.000) –
approved.
Successes (2)
New projects based on DAE:
- Finnish Government: Programme on transboundary PAs in South-East Europe (support
to Big Win) - submitted
- GEF/MAVA: Marine PAs in Adriatic - approved
- Norwegian Government: Natura 2000 in BiH - approved
- Italian Government: Contribution of NP Sutjeska to regional economy - approved
- Norwegian government; Natura 2000 in Serbia and
- Montenegro (submitted)
South Eastern European Workshop on Business Planning for Protected Areas Vilm, 3-7 Dec 2008
Annex 5 RAPPAM goals of Slovenia
RAPPAM in Slovenia – Goals GOAL 1: STRENGHTENING THE MANAGEMENT EFFECTIVENESS OF PAs
• To adapt guidelines for the preparation of management plans (MPs) to fit best national situation and system of PAs in Slovenia; MOE; 2009/III
• To prepare and implement training on management planning for PA; MOE; 2009/IV • To prepare and implement training for park managers and staff on data management and
use; MOE; 2009/III • Each PA to prepare analyses of pressures and threats; results to be included in the MPs;
Park management authorities; Included in preparation of the MPs • To prepare a sustainable tourism vision for PA which should be consulted and agreed
with local communities; Park mgmt auth/local communities; included in preparation of the MPs
• To speed up process of adoption of the MPs (for state designated parks); Park mgmt auth/MOE; 2010/IV
• To prepare lists of missing ecological and socio‐economic surveys for PAs and involve research and other institutions in their implementation; Park management authorities; 2009/IV
• To prepare list of those PAs that urgently need a management authority or interventions; MOE/Inst.for Nature Protection; 2009/IV
• To update legal documents on establishment of certain PAs; MOE/Park management authorities; 2010/IV
GOAL 2: CAPACITY STRENGTHENING AT THE INSTITUTIONAL LEVEL
• To prepare an overview of the implementation of the »first choice« in PAs by the Government and include land acquisition as priority in the yearly MPs and increase the funding for this purpose in the state budget allocation; MOE/Agency for Environment/ Park mgmt auth; 2010/II;
• To establish a central unit for PAs within the MOE which should provide necessary advisory services and technical support (legal, economical, taxes, project design, accounting…); MOE; 2010/II
• Central unit for PAs will be responsible for management of those PAs for which public or other managerial institution has not been established yet and should encourage other institutions to be involved in the management of PAs; MOE; deadline after the completion of the previous item
• MOE to strengthen cooperation with other sectors of public policy in the implementation of PA policies and foresee the establishment of intersectional working group on PAs; MOE/government; 2010/I
• Park authorities to review the cooperation with NGOs and explore the possibilities for effective cooperation; Park mgmt auth; 2010/I
• To ensure coordinated approach of MOE and Park mgmt auth in defending nature conservation policies; MOE/ Park mgmt auth; ongoing task
• To establish an effective communication between Park mgmt auth and Institutes for Nature Protection to enable involvement of Park mgmt auth in the process of conservation guidelines for PAs; Park mgmt auth /Institute for Nature Protection; 2009/II
• To establish mechanisms and ways of involvement of Park mgmt auth in the processes of issuing conservation agreements for interventions within the PAs and ensure on‐time and effective information exchange of information on future and planned interventions in PAs; MOE/Agency for Environment/ Park mgmt auth; 2009/IV
• To ensure enforcement of inspection services; MOE; 2009/III GOAL 3: MANAGEMENT OF HABITATS AND SPECIES IN PAs
• To create a mechanism which will enable Park mgmt auth to be involved in the decisions on land‐use practices for the areas that are state owned; MOE/ Park mgmt auth; 2009/II
• To ensure dissemination of data and results of monitoring activities that are carried out by the state institutions to the Park mgmt auth; MOE/Institute for Nature Protection/ Park mgmt auth; 2009/II
• To outline particular interventions and activities to manage invasive species in PAs in the National strategy on invasive species; MOE; 2010/I
• Involvement of the agricultural service and technical agencies in provision of advisory services on nature conservation measures that are part of Agro‐environmental Measures; MOE/Ministry for Agriculture/ Park mgmt auth /Institute for Nature Protection; ongoing task
• To create a variety of additional conservation measures to complement agro‐environmental measures, which are based on conservation programmes; MOE/Ministry for Agriculture; ongoing task
GOAL 4: TO ENSURE SUSTAINABLE FINANCING OF PAs
• To enlarge the budget allocation for PAs and to ensure unified approach for the preparation of the yearly management plans, reporting on PA management and ensure effective monitoring on the expenditures in PAs; MOE/ Park mgmt auth; ongoing task
• MOE to ensure support to Park mgmt auth in the process of applications of the projects for the international funding. MOP; ongoing task
• To ensure »intermediate money« to overcoming delays in the payments from approved projects; MOE/Ministry of Finances; 2009/II
• To prepare and implement training on the application and preparation of projects for international funding for PAs; MOE; 2009/IV
GOAL 5: STRENGHTENING OF THE IMPORTANCE AND PUBLIC APPRECIATION OF PAs
• To design and implement communication projects to improve public appreciation of PAs and demonstration of benefits that are derived from PAs; Park mgmt auth /MOE; ongoing task
• Park mgmt auth to take care for effective promotion of sustainable forms of tourism that are applicable in PAs and put eforts in the inclusion of their inclusion in the national/local tourism strategies. Park mgmt auth; deadline to be decided.
South Eastern European Workshop on Business Planning for Protected Areas Vilm, 3-7 Dec 2008
Annex 6 Financial plan for a PA in Albania
Abbreviations
• VC = Visitor • CCC = Cable Car Company• VN = Visitor Number• MoEFWA = Ministry of Environment
Forestry and Water Administration• DPA = Directory of Protected Area
South Eastern European Workshop on Business Planning for Protected Areas Vilm, 3-7 Dec 2008
Annex 7 Financial plans for PAs in the other countries of the workshop
Slovenia
Financial plan for Kolpa National Park – 2009-2018 Landscape PA Background:
- Founded in 2006. IUCN category V. 4300 ha - Kolpa river - Traditional agriculture - Potentials: tourism, sustainable agriculture instead of traditional, handcrafts
products Objective of Financial Plan: Sufficient resources for:
- National resources preservation - Enabling successful sustainable development of local communities
Financial needs and gaps:
- Staff and material costs - Infrastructure: information center, mechanization, water infrastructure - Projects - Land purchase
Investment priorities:
1. Information center 2. Developing a model of sustainable land use 3. Design of park brand products 4. improvement of water regime → Favorable ecological status: habitat, species
Summary of financial mechanisms: Mechanisms:
1. Government budget allocation o From Ministry of Environment for the Protected Area New sources could be for example for Water Fund: o Ministry of Agriculture o Ministry of Tourism
2. Fees: Park fees and services 3. Projects: local communities, cross border 4. Donations
Feasibility analysis for:
1. Water fund 2. Tourism 3. Revenue from state owned agricultural land
Financial goals and gap reduction: Financial gap: 2.750.000 EUR for 10 years Business plans for:
1. Design and marketing of park services and products 2. Information center 3. Water fund
Economic impact Action plan: What Who When Management plan Park authority, Ministry of Env. 2009 Information center Park authority, MOE, Min. of Tourism 2012 Development of services Park authority, local community, NGO 2012 and products Improvement of water Park authority, MOE 2015 regime Development of sustainable Park authority, MOE, Min. of Agr., NGO, 2018 use model: land use and Universities, Local communities large carnivores
Montenegro
Financial Plan for National Parks of Montenegro – 2009-2012 PA Background:
- 4 National Parks - Potentials: develop tourism services, develop food production
Objective: Better controls of income (improve information system and train staff) Develop a brand (organic, non-organic food, other products from locals) Raise revenue for service development Raise revenue from private sector Financial background: Income:
Current (EUR) Optimal (EUR) Gap (EUR) Staff 1.100.000 1.430.000Equipments 200.000 200.000Program protection 350.000 700.000Services 100.000 120.000Marketing 50.000 100.000HR 50.000 100.000
Total 1.800.000 2.650.000 850.000 = 32,1%
Investment priorities: 1. Information system 2. Building creative and education capacity 3. Investment in local communities: Financial-feasibility analysis, work with local
people, develop local brand Economic impact:
- Raise the standard of employment - Increase in number of staff - Better life for local people
Hungary
Financial plan for Orseg National Park
Management Plan PA Background Main activities:
- Protection and ranger service - Conservation - Environmental education
Problem: Ranger service → 50.000 ha out of total 100.000 ha PA is unguarded! Consequences:
Objectives: improvement of the ranger service! Program metrics Cost at current
level – staff # 10 (USD)
Cost at basic level – staff # 17 (USD)
Cost at optimal level – staff # 25 (USD)
1. Staff 200.000 340.000 500.0002. Equipment 5.000 8.500 12.5003. Vehicle 25.000 42.500 62.5004. Operation 240.000 408.000 600.0005. Gap-total 329.000 705.000 Investment priorities: Guarding NATURA 2000 Sites outside of national Pas
1. Staff and operation 2. Vehicle 3. Equipment
Financial mechanisms:
1. Staff → Governmental allocation - EU directives - Public security
2. Vehicle→ Car dealerships Marketing: ad surface, car popularity increase
3. Equipment→ Producers of outdoor clothing, binoculars, etc. 4. Operation→ National gasoline company (MOL) – going green
Feasibility: Increasing government allocation for staff:
- civil pressure (NGOs) - political parties, etc.
Economic impact:
- Reduced illegal logging and waste deposit - Increase in number of tourists - More cost efficient operation of ranger service (less km/each ranger) - Improving employment – directly = 7 – 15 new jobs, indirectly = tourism
Implementation: 2009 – Preparation and negotiations 2010 – Employ half of the rangers + related operational elements 2011 – Monitoring and presenting results 2012 – Second half of program implementation 2013 – Final evaluation
Romania
Financial Plan for the PA system Background: PA system:
- There are 27 Protected Areas in Romania, 22 of them are managed by the National Forest Administration (NFA), 1 by a University, 2 by Local Authorities, 2 by the Ministry of Environment
- 7% of the Romanian territory is covered by these PAs - II. + V. IUCN
MA→NFA→PAs
↕ Custody Ministry of Environment−──Trust Fund→Some part of it is available for PA: NGO – 10%, NFA – 60% Land restoration: 2004 increased, 2008 decreased (MA means: Ministry of Agriculture) All of the PAs have management plan where actions are listed. Objective: Achieve long term financial sustainability for PA system Financial background:
1. Total income in: 2004: 2 million USD 2005: 2,9 million USD 2006: 6,1 million USD 2007: 6,4 million USD
2. Current situation in 2007: o Basic level: 6,4 million USD o Optimal level: 18 million USD o Gap: 11,6 million USD
Investment priorities:
- Key program priority analysis is already done (all PAs have Management plan submitted for approval
- Deep financial analysis is not possible due to lack of relations in accounting between costs and activities
Measures TbD: - Standardize programs for all PAs - Implement into accounting system - Build also the optimal scenario - Consider programs to strengthen the National Agency of the Protected Areas (at
this moment is being created) and NGOs An accurate analysis of the investment priorities Financial mechanisms:
1. National Forest Administration funding 2. Ministry of Environment trust funds (they might need a fiscal reform) 3. EU funding 4. Water fees and hydropower (Business Plan) 5. Tourism (Business Plan) 6. International funds/programs (WWF, TNC, etc) 7. Bilateral (GTZ, USAID, GEF, etc) 8. Mining sector (Business Plan)
Croatia Financial Plan for Sjeverni Velebit National Park
PA Background: Prepare proper management plan Adjust for target Objective:
- Increase sources of revenue - Decrease financial gap
Financial background:
- Government budget: 60 % - Own revenue: 30 % - Donations: 10 %
Needs and gaps:
- Current revenue: 3 million kuna (Croatian currency) - Optimal revenue: 5 million kuna - Gap: 2 million kuna
Priorities:
- Improve services (for example there are only 2 mountain huts) - Establish organized transport (bus would take people to the part after they park
their car→ reduce pollution) - Improve patrolling - Scientific research
Financial mechanisms:
- Redistribution of tourist fee - Pollution tax (redistribution) - Stamps→ Post office issues NP stamps→ income goes to the park - Online shops - Gift shops – expanding their offers→ develop a local brand, workshops with
locals Implementation of the plan:
1. Identify stakeholders 2. Raise public awareness 3. Joint initiative with other Pas 4. Meet with Ministries 5. Academic study 6. Political lobby 7. Negotiations between ministers 8. Change legislation 9. Collect money!
Slovakia
Financial Plan for Slovensky raj National Park Background:
- National Park was established in 1988 - 700.000 – 1.000.000 visitors/year - Second most visited park in Slovakia - NATURA 2000 site - Administration of NP is not an independent unit - More than 50% of the NP budget comes from state budget - 0 ha land in NP is owned by National Park/State Nature Conservancy - Current Management Plan – not approved, it doesn’t contain financial plan - 21 employees - NP budget is divided into 3 categories: Salaries, Overheads, Investments - Park entry fee exist, but it is not part of NP budget - Taxes (land use, parking fee, recreation) → Municipalities’ budget
General objective: Achieve a long term financial sustainability for NP by implementing diverse financial strategies. Specific objective: Objective 1: Find opportunities to establish a self generated financial system, capacity building
Objective 2: Legislative reform to achieve land ownership for NP in strict reserves (18% of total area of NP).
Objective 3: Provide feasibility study for NP
Objective 4: Establish economic unit to implement feasibility plan and business plan
Objective 5: Raise awareness in local communities to understand benefits of PA for them
Objective 6: Memorandum of understanding for all stakeholders Investment priorities:
Present problems: 1. “Black box” problems 2. Land ownership. Current situation: if the park wants to get entry fee they have to
own the land 3. No feasibility study 4. No skilled staff 5. No self-generated sources 6. Local communities don’t understand the benefits of PA 7. Conflict of interest with other stakeholders
Bulgaria Financial plan for Natural Park Strandja
PA background: - There is PA network developed and according to the PA Low Bulgaria has 6
categories - The main responsible institutions for PA management are MOEW and SFA - The biggest National Park in Bulgaria - The park is situated in south-east part of Bulgaria
Objectives:
- Conservation of old growth forests in Strandja PA - Zone of high conservation value forest according to the management plant of the
PA Financial background:
Year Cost (Euro) Income (Euro) Financial gap 2005 10 000 2 000 8 000 2006 10 000 4 000 6 000 2007 10 000 6 000 4 000
Cost: - Patrolling and guarding the territory of the PA - Raise public awareness - Fire prevention control - Uniforms Income: - Private donations - Funds - Compensation for logging in old-growth forests (from the central budget) - Entry taxes - Tourism
Financial gaps: - Central budget subsidies - Tourism taxes (visitor center, photo shooting, etc.) - Taxes of water distribution companies - Carbon sequestration taxes - Donations
Investment priorities (profit): FSC Certification, Photo hunting, Build new information center (selling materials, tourism services)
Economic impact: ‐ Developing alternative tourism in local communities ‐ Protection of water sources ‐ Conservation and protection of old growth forests
Serbia
FINANCIAL PLAN FOR NATIONAL PARK FRUŠKA GORA National park system background Fruška Gora is proclaimed a National Park in 1960 in order to provide its permanent protection and to improve its natural resources and beauty. The area of active protection is 25.525 square kilometers. Fruška Gora is an isolated, narrow, island mountain in Pannonia plain. It is intended by river courses extending to the south and north, with some side ranges with steep slopes, spreading from the main narrow range. Its location, specific geological history and different microclimatic conditions make it very interesting and important to science. Thanks to unique and very rich deposits of fossil fauna and flora, Fruška Gora is called the 'mirror of geological past. The main characteristic of this region is the existence of numerous protected, rare and endangered species. Fruška Gora's valleys are covered with pastures and fertile fields, numerous vineyards and orchards which decorate its lower slopes while higher ground, above 300 meters, is covered with dense deciduous forests. Fruška Gora hides 16 orthodox monasteries famous for their specific architecture, treasuries, libraries and frescoes and numerous archeological sites from prehistoric and historic times as well. Due to its outstanding natural resources, wonderful landscapes, exceptional charm and beauty, that will bring you closer to nature, Fruška Gora is ideal place for rest and recreation. The Fruška gora is a natural entirety with specific geology, relief, hydrographic and varied edaphic conditions. All this, as well as specific climatic conditions, has given rise to the development of a specific flora and fauna that has attracted numerous researchers. The oldest records on the nature in the Fruška gora were made by botanists in the middle of the 18th century, followed by numerous studies of geological, paleonthological and geomorphologic forms and phenomena, flora and vegetation, fauna and the other fields of natural and social sciences. On the basis of numerous investigations, "The Fruška gora Monography" has been published. A great number of papers, essays, expert opinions, and proposals on the Fruška gora have been published as well. In the 19th and the first half of the 20th centuries, data were collected that clearly showed that the Fruška gora is endowed with exceptional nature values. In the papers of the scholars from that period, there is a suggestion of the need to preserve this wealth.
After the Second World War nature protection activities began. In 1948, the Fruška gora was proclaimed a National picnicking place and placed under the general protection as a unique mountain area with well preserved forest vegetation, flora and fauna. In 1960, a law proclaiming the Fruška gora a National Park was passed. The borders of the National Park encompass the most typical part of a broader region under the forests. These borders have largely remained the same till today and mark a territory of 25,525 hectares. Due to a major scientific importance in the monitoring of processes and trends of a spontaneous development of natural ecosystems or because of cultural and educational importance, certain parts of the Fruska gora, as the best preserved remains of autochthonous communities in this region, have been placed under special protection. There are 39 protected areas and another 26 are planned to be protected. Since 1990, according to the new legislative regulation, the National Park, being protected area of exceptional importance for the Republic, has been classified in I category. In accordance with a legal requirement that adequate protection regimes have to be defined, during the last two years recognition of the nature values in the National Park has been taken.
Financial background
No.
INCOME
PLANNING(EUR)
1 2 3
1. Self generated income (forestry, fishery, hunting, sale of souvenirs, eco-tourism,…) 2.850.000,001.1. Return of investing in forestry 400.000,00 2. Government’s budget allocation, Regional budget allocation, Fund for Environmental 150.000,00 3. Taxes (natural resource extraction for minerals, recreation activity) 400.000,00 4. Concession fees - 5. PA volunteer program (civil army) - TOTAL 3.400.000,00
No
EXPENDITURES
PLANNING (EUR)
1 2 3
1 Management of PA 23.450.0002 Protection of natural and culture resources 6.700.0003 Protection and use of natural resources 254.600.0004 Project and activities on protection and development 46.900.0005 Organization of area 3.350.000
TOTAL 3.350.000,00
No
INVESTMENTS
PLANNING (EUR)
1 2 3
1 Feasibility study for road taxes 15.000 2 Training for rangers and staff 5.000 3 Building’s adaptation 7.000 4 Reconstruction of visitor center 16.000
TOTAL 43.000
OBJECTIVES
GOALS STRATEGY MEASURES 1.
Establishing basic activities for protection and development of PA
1.1.
Optimal organization of public enterprise
1.1.1. 1.1.2.
Changes of organization and systematization in corporation with Ministry Workshops for staff and employees (IUCN, WWF guidelines)
GOALS STRATEGY MEASURES
2.
Enhancement control on PA
2.1.
Equipping and developing control service
2.1.1. 2.1.2.
Education of rangers and voluntaries Reorganization control service
GOALS STRATEGY MEASURS
3. Development alternative activities (tourism, education, promotion, …)
3.1. Equipment of visitors centre and education of staff for eco-tourism activities
3.1.1.
Guidelines programs for tourist and students, promotion environmental results in newspapers, cooperation with tourist organization, promotional materials
GOALS STRATEGY MEASURES
4.
Education for stakeholders on principles of sustainable development
4.1.
Implementation of CBD, RAPPAM
4.1.1.
Workshops
Summary of financial needs and gaps Needs – New knowledge and cooperations with relevant environmental institutions (consultant agency) Gaps – Eco taxes for traffic across PA (Building payment system) Investment priorities Ecotourism and taxes
South Eastern European Workshop on Business Planning for Protected Areas Vilm, 3-7 Dec 2008
Annex 8 National Action Plans/ Road maps of the countries of the workshop
National Action Plans / National Road Maps Albania
2009 January Secure national commitment February Select one PA with Management Plan for elaboration of Business and
Financial Plan March Select one PA with Management Plan for elaboration of Business and
Financial Plan April Team: preparation of F.P./B.P. May June Open discussions July Starting FP/BP August September October November December
2010 January February March April May June Finish generalisation of FP/BP July August September October November December
Bulgaria
2009 January PA analysis February Lobby and promote FP/BP idea March 1st consultation with stakeholders April National workshop May Bulgaria guidelines June Working group July ABC accounting, gap analysis, screening of financial mechanisms August Travelling to Costa Rica September Draft plans October Consultants TNC November Consultations with local/national stakeholders December Political government, lobby, consultations
2010 January February March April May June July August September October November December
Croatia
2009 January Inform ministry, suggest making Fin. Plan for Velebit cluster of parks February Create a task force March TORs for consultant and find consultant April Work with consultant and prepare data May Work with consultant and prepare data June ABC analysis July ABC analysis August ABC analysis September ABC analysis October ABC analysis November Pre-selection of financial mechanisms December Pre-selection of financial mechanisms
2010 January Consultant analysis of finance mechanisms February Formulating Financial Plan March Formulating Financial Plan April Formulating Financial Plan May Send financial plan for review to the park June Send financial plan for review to the park July Incorporate comments August Formulate business plan for each mechanism September Formulate business plan for each mechanism October Formulate business plan for each mechanism November Formulate business plan for each mechanism December Final visibility event
Hungary
2009 January Discussion with PA mgmt February Discussion with PA mgmt March Negotiation with MoE April Prepare Mgmt Plan May Prepare Mgmt Plan June Prepare Mgmt Plan July Prepare Mgmt Plan August Prepare Mgmt Plan September Prepare Mgmt Plan October Prepare Mgmt Plan November Prepare Mgmt Plan December Prepare Mgmt Plan
2010 January Searching for funds February Apply for funds March Apply for funds April Hire consultant May Prepare FP June Prepare FP July Prepare FP August Prepare FP September Prepare FP October Prepare FP November Prepare FP December Prepare FP
Montenegro
2009 January Creating a task force February March April
2010 January February March April May June July August September October November December
Implementation
Romania
2009 January Share information with MoE and PAs February Task force March Workshop for MoE and PAs April May June Training of PA economists July Identify money, 1 year of data collection August September October November December
2010 January February March April May June Hire a consultant to do BP July Meeting with consultant and PAs August September October November December BP of PAs
Serbia
2009 January Make our plan simple February Make our plan simple March Make our plan simple April Definition of activities for B.P. May Definition of activities for B.P. June Definition of activities for B.P. July Looking for consulting agency August Looking for consulting agency September Looking for consulting agency October Preparing BP November Preparing BP December Preparing BP
2010 January Implementation and monitoring February Implementation and monitoring March Implementation and monitoring April Implementation and monitoring May Implementation and monitoring June Implementation and monitoring July Implementation and monitoring August September October November December
Slovakia
2009 January February
Meeting with director of SNC and economic unit
March April
Meeting of PA directors, address their needs and proposals to SNC director and MoE
May June
Feasibility study and financial gap analysis for SNC (consultant); workshop for PA economists
July August September
Change of internal economic documents/laws to retain self-generating sources to PA budgets
October November December
Directors of PAs – dialogue with stakeholders creating 1 employment capacity for economist in each PA
2010 January February March
Start dialogue with ministry of agriculture about ownership of PAs in strict reserves
April May June July August September October November December
Slovenia
2009 January Results of this workshop on a website February Presentation of the concept of sustainable financing planning to MoE and
parks: develop and agree on a road map for Slovenia March Establish task force (Ministry, DAE, parks, ….) April Training for PA staff on sustainable finance planning May Elaboration of the framework for guidelines on sustainable financing
planning for PAs June July August Elaboration of a pilot finance plan for one PA September Task force to lead on the process of sustainable finance plan October November December
2010 January Approval management plans for all PAs in the country February March April May Study on evaluation of PA needs/gaps for all PAs June July August September Study on economic benefits of PAs October November December
![Vision Document - [email protected] - [email protected]](https://static.documents.pub/doc/80x56/61fb2b7e2e268c58cd5afacc/vision-document-emailprotected-emailprotected.jpg)
![[email protected] Computerising Mathematical Texts with MathLang [email protected] = *@[email protected]](https://static.documents.pub/doc/80x56/613c0d6722e01a42d40e691b/emailprotected-computerising-mathematical-texts-with-mathlang-emailprotected.jpg)
