DISCLAIMER
The author’s views expressed in this publication do not necessarily reflect the views of the
United States Agency for International Development or the United States Government.
REVIEW : TECHNICAL GUIDELINES
FOR EVALUATING THE MANAGEMENT
EFFECTIVENESS OF AQUATIC,
COASTAL AND SMALL ISLAND
CONSERVATION AREAS (E-KKP3K)
1 | REVIEW: TECHNICAL GUIDELINES FOR EVALUATING THE MANAGEMENT EFFECTIVENESS OF AQUATIC COASTAL
AND SMALL ISLAND CONSERVATION AREAS USAID.GOV
BACKGROUND
As one of the largest archipelagic countries in the
world, the Republic of Indonesia has committed to
designate 20 million hectares of its territorial waters as
conservation areas by 2020. Additionally, the
Government of Indonesia (GoI) has committed to
manage these areas effectively, not just increase the
number of “paper parks.” In 2012, the Ministry of
Marine Affairs and Fisheries (MMAF) through
Directorate General of Marine, Coastal, and Small
Islands (now: Directorate General of Marine Spatial
Planning) issued decree No 44/KP3K/2012 on
Technical Guidelines for Evaluating the Management
Effectiveness of Aquatic, Coastal and Small Island
Conservation Areas (E-KKP3K).
Since the release of the decree, the tool has been used
by stakeholders to evaluate the management
implementation of marine protected areas (MPAs).
Beyond serving as a monitoring tool, E-KKP3K also
provides guidelines for MPAs area managers to develop
priority management programs. After nearly five years of implementation, a number of issues related
with enhancing effectiveness of conservation areas have emerged:
• Some indicators do not provide sufficiently detailed instruction on how to manage marine
conservation areas, for example minimum facilities standards (type and minimum number of
required facilities for an office to be able to run) and personnel (how many personnel with what
kind of minimum capacity) needed to manage a conservation area.
• Although the tool provides types of management program/activities required for MPA manager
action, there are no timeline guidelines or requirements for such activities. For example, what is
the maximum time allowed to complete yellow level?
• The tool provides indicator to measure output achievement but not the outcome (impact)
achieved by the conservation area.
In 2016, the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) kicked off the Bangun
Indonesia Untuk Jaga Alam demi keberlanjutan (USAID-BIJAK), a project that supports the
Government of Indonesia in improving the management of conservation areas and species
protection.
OBJECTIVES
The review of E-KKP3K aimed to identify and analyse “unclear” indicator(s) that were likely
to confuse the user(s), analyse indicator(s), and provide recommendations to improve E-
KKP3K. The review was carried out by posing questions such as what are the causes of
slow progress in the improvement of MPA management performance and have the
USAID.GOV REVIEW: TECHNICAL GUIDELINES FOR EVALUATING THE
MANAGEMENT EFFECTIVENESS OF AQUATIC COASTAL AND SMALL ISLAND CONSERVATION AREAS | 2
assessments resulting from the use of E-KKP3K Technical Guidelines reflected the real
condition in the field?
METHODS
The E-KKP3K review was conducted through the following activities:
a) Preliminary discussion with Directorate of Marine Conservation and Biodiversity
b) Development of protocol to review E-KKP3K
c) Identification of likely “unclear” indicator(s)
d) Analysis on the identified indicator(s)
e) Workshop to review E-KKP3K
f) Development of recommendations
The review of was conducted between March – September 2017 with the following
timeline:
Activity Time Frame
MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP
Preliminary discussion with MMAF
Development and agreement of protocol
Identification of likely unclear indicator(s)
Analysis on the indicator(s)
Development of recommendations
Key stakeholders involed in the review process included:
• Directorate of Marine Conservation and Biodiversity
• Directorate General of Marine Spatial Planning
• Technical units under Directorate General of Marine Spatial Planning
National Agency for Aquatic Conservation Areas – Kupang
National Office for Aquatic Conservation Areas - Pekanbaru
• Conservation area specialists :
Handoko Adi Susanto
Anton Wijonarno
M Khazali
3 | REVIEW: TECHNICAL GUIDELINES FOR EVALUATING THE MANAGEMENT EFFECTIVENESS OF AQUATIC COASTAL
AND SMALL ISLAND CONSERVATION AREAS USAID.GOV
Sutraman
Sudarsono
Glaudy Perdanahardja
RESULTS
BIJAK conducted a survey to identify the causes behind the slow progress of improving
management performance and effectiveness of MPAs. The survey involved 20 respondents
from relevant units in MMAF and district governments. The survey concluded that: (i) the
Technical Guidelines and the software are not difficult to use; (ii) the Technical Guidelines
should be kept as is or only slightly modified, though inputs suggested that the system
should use open source software (instead of current MS-Access platform); and (iii) the
Technical Guidelines should address the latest governance and government issues associated
with the enactment of Law 23/2014. The detail of the results can be seen in the attached
files (Hasil Survei Penggunaan Pedoman Teknis E-KKP3K, and Presentasi_Hasil Survei
Penggunaan E-KKP3K).
These results prompted the review team to return to the question of why the progress of
improving MPA management performance remains slow. Further analysis revealed that one major challenge of MPA management in Indonesia is that managers often do not know how
to achieve the vision statement in the Management & Zoning Plan (RPZ) document. Even if
the monitoring system does exist (as is the case in some MPAs), it did not provide guidance
on how to act upon monitoring results. This may be the result of lack of a decision-making
mechanism, as MPAs have limited authority to follow up the E-KKP3K assessment results.
Another challenge likely contributing to this is a lengthy funding-request process that can
take up to two years before recommended activies to improve management performance
and effectiveness can be implemented. Also, it is unclear what should be done by MPA
management units to achieve their objectives in marine tourism, captured fisheries,
sustainable aquaculture and maritime culture, and traditional management as elements of
achieving a MPA vision or goals.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Based on these results, this study recommends that E-KKP3K Technical Guidelines should be
revised by changing the structure, list of questions, and indicators to make them more
accurate and easily linked to the RPZ document. New sections that the study recommends
be included in the revised Technical Guidelines include: (i) specific conservation targets for
management effectiveness references; (ii) specific targets and conservation, socio-economic
and governance objectives for effectivenemanagement; and (iii) logical model to identify
conservation outcomes/effects and socio-economic and governance impacts of effective management of MPAs. In addition, the study recommends changing the management level
scores. We recommend moving from five levels to three. Under this, the reservation of an
MPA is not major part of management effectiveness anymore but instead a major prerequisite.
Furthermore, we recommend that the assessment of management effectiveness should only
be done when MPA management unit is ready with necessary human resources, technical
USAID.GOV REVIEW: TECHNICAL GUIDELINES FOR EVALUATING THE
MANAGEMENT EFFECTIVENESS OF AQUATIC COASTAL AND SMALL ISLAND CONSERVATION AREAS | 4
capacities and funding. Lastly, the system should not to use color system which can be
misleading.
The E-KKP3K Technical Guidelines was based on, among other documents, the World Bank
Score Card for MPAs (Staub & Hatzeolos, 2004) which was derived from the Management
Effectiveness Tracking Tool (METT), developed by WWF and the World Bank. To make the
assessment results of E-KKP3K more “visually compatible” with METT, it we recommend that
the E-KKP3K Technical Guidelines include a section that presents E-KKP3K assessment
results in the form of METT.
5 | REVIEW: TECHNICAL GUIDELINES FOR EVALUATING THE MANAGEMENT EFFECTIVENESS OF AQUATIC COASTAL
AND SMALL ISLAND CONSERVATION AREAS USAID.GOV
ANNEX1: QUESTIONAIRE FORM DISTRIBUTED TO A NUMBER
OF STAKEHOLDERS
USAID.GOV REVIEW: TECHNICAL GUIDELINES FOR EVALUATING THE
MANAGEMENT EFFECTIVENESS OF AQUATIC COASTAL AND SMALL ISLAND CONSERVATION AREAS | 6
ANNEX II: ACTIVITY DOCUMENTATION
ANNEX III: PROPOSED NEW SCORECARD
Level Term Criteria
1 Conservation Area Is Established.
Objective:
The P3K conservation areas are equipped with
adequate human resources, facilities and funding,
as well as the policy tools required to carry out
management action.
1.1 Human Resources management
1.2 Area management tools
1.3 Standard Operating Procedures (SOP) for office administration
1.4 Funding for area management
1.5 Management and zoning plans
1.6 Identification of P3K conservation areas
2 Minimally-managed Conservation Area.
Objective:
The status of P3K conservation areas are
strengthened through socialization, support and
regional suitability.
2.1 Border area arrangement
2.2 Technical security measures and area utilization
2.3 Conservation area socialization
2.4 Standard Operating Procedures (SOP of managing measures
2.5 Partnerships with stakeholders
2.6 Compliance with other related policies
2.7 Implementation of area supervision
2.8 Implementation of area utilization management
3 Optimally-managed Conservation Area.
Objective:
The P3K conservation areas achieve
planned/desired results and impacts that are
apparent to to the public.
3.1 The result of the implementation of the area utilization management
based on the condition of the habitat within the area
3.2 The results of management action to utilize resource areas
3.3 The impact of utilization management actions based on condition of
socio-economic-culture of the community, partners and other
stakeholders
3.4 Feedback for management
USAID.GOV REVIEW: TECHNICAL GUIDELINES FOR EVALUATING THE MANAGEMENT EFFECTIVENESS OF
AQUATIC COASTAL AND SMALL ISLAND CONSERVATION AREAS | 8
Level
1: Conservation Area Is
Established
Objective: The P3K conservation areas are equipped with adequate human resources, facilities and funding, as well as the policy
tools required to carry out management action.
Adm: Administrative indicators; Opr: operational indicators (existence in the field)
CRITERIA No. QUESTION ANSWER
VERIFICATION
TOOLS EXPLANATION
Yes No Adm Opr
1.1: Human
Resources
management
1.1.1 Does the reserved areas have the
management organizational unit?
Decision of Regional
Head / Minister /
Head of
Organization Unit;
Organizational
Structure Document
and / or Duties &
Functional
Descriptions.
There are persons /
individuals or
organizations
designated and
established through a
written decision.
1.1.2 Does the organizational unit have HR
division to implement the activities?
Decision Letter (SK)
.
At least 1 (one) type
of basic training
according to Duties &
Functions is
implemented, for
example: MPA 101,
Head of Unit
Head of Management Division
Head of Program Division Training of Fish
Resource
Conservation,
Training of diving and
monitoring, etc .
Administrative staff
Functional personnel
Number of HR (staff) according to plan
(what percentage?)
1.2: Area
management
tools
1.2.1 Does the management unit have a
complete office along with the facilities
Physical reports and
checks.
Self explanatory.
1.2.2 Do the management units have
information centers (eg, tourism / visitor
center)?at the region or filed level?
utilization
Physical reports and
checks.
Self explanatory. If
the information
center is located in
the same building as
the office, then it
should be mentioned
separately
1.2.3 Do the management units have the
supporting tools to carry out their
duties ?
Reports (on
monitoring facilities,
resource monitoring
tools,
communication tools
/ socialization and
other means, means
of boundary
markers), and
physical checks.
Self explanatory.
USAID.GOV REVIEW: TECHNICAL GUIDELINES FOR EVALUATING THE MANAGEMENT EFFECTIVENESS OF
AQUATIC COASTAL AND SMALL ISLAND CONSERVATION AREAS | 10
CRITERIA No. QUESTION ANSWER
VERIFICATION
TOOLS EXPLANATION
Yes No Adm Opr
1.3: Standard
Operating
Procedures
(SOP) for office
administration
1.3.1 Have the SOP for office administration
been created?
SOP Documents.
Mention.
Self
explanatory.Referrung
to or adapting SOP
made by Central /
Regional
Government.
1.3.2 Have the SOP for financial management
been created ?
SOP Documents.
Mention.
Self explanatory.
1.3.3 Are there any SOP office management
available?
SOP Documents on
Management tools.
Self explanatory.
1.3.4 Are there any area monitoring plan
documents, including relevant SOP?
(by the regional management unit in
cooperation or coordination with the
national / regional PSDKP Directorate)?
Ratification of
Document and
Decision.
Self explanatory.
CRITERIA No. QUESTION ANSWER
VERIFICATION
TOOLS EXPLANATION
Yes No Adm Opr
1.4: Funding for
area management
1.4.1 Is the Funding Planning, including the
identification of limited financing
capabilities and disparities, for the area
management available?
Strategy document
and area funding plan.
Self explanatory.
1.4.2 Is the area management budget in
accordance with the plan?
Report of the activity
implementation and
funding sources.
The answer refers
to the fulfillment of
the budget needs in
question 1.4.1.
1.4.3 Does the management unit obtain
management financing support from the
Regional Government Budget (APBD)
and / or the State Budget (APBN)?
The financial
statements of the
management
organizational unit are
in accordance with
the provisions &
annual work plan
prevailing in
Indonesia.
Self explanatory.
1.4.4
Is the sustainable funding to support the
fulfillment of the need of area
management budget already available
and implemented smoothly?
Activity and financial
reports.
Self explanatory.
CRITERIA No. QUESTION ANSWER
VERIFICATION
TOOLS EXPLANATION
Yes No Adm Opr
USAID.GOV REVIEW: TECHNICAL GUIDELINES FOR EVALUATING THE MANAGEMENT EFFECTIVENESS OF
AQUATIC COASTAL AND SMALL ISLAND CONSERVATION AREAS | 12
1.5: Management
and zoning plans
1.5.1 Does the area already have the
Management and Zoning Plans (RPZ)?
Self explanatory.
1.5.2 Does the RPZ document include the
following Objectives?
Final Document of
Management Plan.
Self explanatory.
Area management
Area resources
Area Socio-economic-culture
1.5.3 Does the RPZ document include the
following conservation targets? More
than one options can be selected.
Final Document of
Management Plan.
Self explanatory.
Plus SDK as the
conservation target
(artifacts, shipwreck,
BMKT) Coral reefs •
Mangrove •
Seagrass beds •
Species (mention): •
Species (mention): •
Species (mention): •
Other Species? Mention! •
1.5.4 Does the management plan document
include information that can be used as
the baseline data (t0) of the resources?
• Document
Management Plan:
Matrix / Summary
of Management plan
containing the
information on
Resource & Society-
economic-culture
Self explanatory.
The information on
Resource condition
in each conservation
area, such as
percentage of coral
cover, abundance of
targeted fish, etc.
USAID.GOV REVIEW: TECHNICAL GUIDELINES FOR EVALUATING THE MANAGEMENT EFFECTIVENESS OF
AQUATIC COASTAL AND SMALL ISLAND CONSERVATION AREAS | 14
(sosekbud) –
baseline; a
permanent
monitoring site
according to GPS
points.
• Other Supporting
Documents.
1.5.5 Does the management plan document
include information that can be used as
the baseline data (t0) of social-economic-
culture (sosekbud)?
Self explanatory.
The information on
socio-economic-
cultural conditions
in each conservation
area, such as
community
perceptions,
fishermen's income,
etc.
1.5.6 Is the management plan document
supplemented by approved zoning limit
arrangement?
Decision on the
approval of
management plan, and
Minutes of zoning
boundaries
arrangement.
Self explanatory.
1.6: Identification
of KKP3K
1.6.1 Is the proposal submitted to the
Minister of Marine Affairs and Fisheries?
Proposal Documents
& receipt of document
submission.
Self explanatory.
1.6.2 Is the conservation area established by
the Minister of Marine Affairs and
Fisheries?
Ministerial Decision. Self explanatory.
USAID.GOV REVIEW: TECHNICAL GUIDELINES FOR EVALUATING THE MANAGEMENT EFFECTIVENESS OF
AQUATIC COASTAL AND SMALL ISLAND CONSERVATION AREAS | 16
Level
2: Minimally-managed Conservation
Area
Objective: P3K conservation areas are strengthened through socialization, raising support and regional suitability.
CRITERIA No. QUESTION ANSWER
VERIFICATION
TOOLS EXPLANATION
Yes No Adm Opr
2.1: Establishment
of area border
marks and
registration of
the Nautical Map
Is the boundary marks established? The activity reports
(measurement,
mapping and
socialization).
Self explanatory.
Is the areas already covered in the
Nautical Map?
Nautical Map &
Notices to Mariners
(BPI); terrestrial maps
registered in the Land
Registry Agency /
Office of the west
part of the coastal
areas.
Self explanatory.
2.2: Preparation
of supervision
2.1.1 Is the document on the area supervision
plan in cooperation with the local
Ratified documents
and decision.
Self explanatory.
technical plans
and area
utilization
community through Pokmaswas already
prepared?
2.1.2 Is the document of Technical Plan on
Natural Tourism, or other similar study,
to manage tourism activity and visitors
within the area already prepared?
Ratified documents
and decision.
Self explanatory.
2.1.3 Is the Document of Technical Plan of
Caught Fish, or any other similar study,
to manage the caught fish activities
within the area already prepared?
Ratified documents
and decision.
Self explanatory.
2.1.4 Is the document of Technical Plan of
Sustainable Aquaculture, or other similar
study, to manage aquaculture activities
within the area already prepared?
Ratified documents
and decision.
Self explanatory.
2.1.5 Is the document of Technical Plan of
Education and Research in the already
prepared?
Ratified documents
and decision.
Self explanatory.
2.1.6 Is the document of Technical Plan of
Maritime Customs & Cultural
Protection, or other similar study, to
protect maritime custom and culture
within the area already prepared?
Ratified documents
and decision.
Self explanatory.
2.1.7 Is the document of communication
strategy, including the method to
demonstrate the ecological and socio-
Ratified documents
and decision.
Self explanatory.
USAID.GOV REVIEW: TECHNICAL GUIDELINES FOR EVALUATING THE MANAGEMENT EFFECTIVENESS OF
AQUATIC COASTAL AND SMALL ISLAND CONSERVATION AREAS | 18
economic benefits of the area for
stakeholders, already prepared?
2.3:
Dissemination of
information on
conservation
areas
2.3.1 Is conservation area determination
already socialized to all community
elements on a regular basis?
Reporting documents
with a list of those
attending the
socialization and
photograph of the
activities
Self explanatory.
CRITERIA No. QUESTION ANSWER
VERIFICATION
TOOLS EXPLANATION
Yes No Adm Opr
2.4 Standard
Operating
Procedures
(SOP) of
managing
measures
2.3.1 Is the SOP of requirement review of
management activity already prepared?
SOP document of
activity requirement
review.
Self explanatory.
2.3.2 Are the following management SOP
already available according to minimum
requirements?
SOP documents.
Mention.
Self explanatory.
Institutional strengthening
Utilization control (not applicable to
KKPN)
Area resource management
Socio-economic-cultural Strengthening
2.3.3 Is the SOP of research and educational
already prepared?
SOP Documents of
natural tourism.
Self explanatory.
2.3.4 Is the SOP of waters natural tourism
activity implementation already
prepared?
SOP Documents of
Sustainable
Aquaculture.
Self explanatory.
2.3.5 Is the SOP of the sustainable
aquaculture activity implementation
already prepared?
SOP Documents of
Caught Fisheries.
Self explanatory.
2.3.6 Is the SOP of caught fisheries activities
already prepared?
SOP Documents of
maritime resource or
culture.
Self explanatory.
2.3.7 Is the SOP of data resource and marine
culture already prepared?
SOP Documents of
communication and
outreach (IEK).
Self explanatory.
2.3.8 Is the SOP of communication and
outreach (IEK) already prepared?
Activity report on
communication
between stakeholders.
Self explanatory.
2.5: Partnerships
with stakeholders
2.4.1 Is the management of organizational unit
already initiated partnerships with
stakeholders, including with indigenous
peoples to accommodate local cultures
and / or wisdom, if any?
Letter of cooperation
/ partnership.
Self explanatory.
2.4.2 Is the partnership with the stakeholders
already implemented?
Report on activities of
management unit with
partner.
Self explanatory.
USAID.GOV REVIEW: TECHNICAL GUIDELINES FOR EVALUATING THE MANAGEMENT EFFECTIVENESS OF
AQUATIC COASTAL AND SMALL ISLAND CONSERVATION AREAS | 20
CRITERIA No. QUESTION ANSWER
VERIFICATION
TOOLS EXPLANATION
Yes No Adm Opr
2.6: Compliance
with other
related policies
2.6.1 Are the conservation areas listed in the
Regional Medium Term Development
Plan (RPJMD) / Regional Government
strategic plan?
RPJMD / Regional
Government Renstra
(Strategic Plan).
Self explanatory.
2.6.2 Are conservation areas listed in the
National Medium Term Development
Plan (RPJMN) / Government strategic
plan and Regional Medium Term
Development Plan (RPJMD) / Regional
Government strategic plan?
Documents of
Government RPJMN /
Renstra; and RPJMD /
Regional Government
Renstra
Self explanatory.
2.6.3 Are the conservation areas listed in the
document of Zoning Plan for Coastal
Areas and Small Islands (RZWP3K)?
Document of
RZWP3K.
Self explanatory.
2.6.4 Does the conservation area include the
ecosystems – habitat supporting
economical valued fish populations that
are linked each other to similar Fisheries
Management Areas (WPP)?
Documents of
scientific study on
ecosystem – habitat
network supporting
fish population
spatially (and
temporally).
Self explanatory.
CRITERIA No. QUESTION ANSWER
VERIFICATION
TOOLS EXPLANATION
Yes No Adm Opr
2.7:
Implementation
of area
supervision
2.7.1 Is the supervisory activity carried out
independently by supervisory
organizational unit on a regular basis?
Activity reports
(supervision &
socialization of the
rules), information
board.
Self explanatory.
USAID.GOV REVIEW: TECHNICAL GUIDELINES FOR EVALUATING THE MANAGEMENT EFFECTIVENESS OF
AQUATIC COASTAL AND SMALL ISLAND CONSERVATION AREAS | 22
2.7.2 Is the supervisory activity carried out
independently by supervisory
organizational unit, but not on a regular
basis (incidentally)?
Activity Report. Self explanatory.
2.7.3 Is an integrated supervisory activities of
the area (with the management
organizational unit or with other parties
such as AL/Navy, water police unit)
carried out on a regular basis?
Activity Report. Self explanatory.
2.7.4 Is an integrated area supervision (with
the management organizational unit or
with others such as AL, water police
unit) already carried out on a regular
basis (incidental)?
Activity Report. Self explanatory.
2.7.5 Is POKMASWAS already established
(and has the organization & mechanisms
required for its activities)?
Document (activity
report and
establishment of
POKMASWAS).
Self explanatory.
2.7.6 Is the supervision by POKMASWAS
already carried out regularly?
Activity Report. Self explanatory.
2.7.7 is the supervision by POKMASWAS
already carried out, but not on a regular
basis (incidentally)?
Activity Report. Self explanatory.
2.7.8 Does the supervisory organizational
unit already have regional supervision
guidelines?
Technical Guidelines
of area supervision.
Self explanatory.
2.7.9 Does the supervisory organization unit
have the area supervision action plan?
National Action Plan
(RAN) of Area
Supervision.
Self explanatory.
2.7.10 Does the supervisory organization unit
already have supervisory post within the
area?
Physical Check. Self explanatory.
USAID.GOV REVIEW: TECHNICAL GUIDELINES FOR EVALUATING THE MANAGEMENT EFFECTIVENESS OF
AQUATIC COASTAL AND SMALL ISLAND CONSERVATION AREAS | 24
2.7.11 Does the supervisory organization unit
already have supervisory means?
Physical Check. Means of
supervision in the
form of surveillance
ship / speed boat,
beach radar, etc.
2.7.12 Does the human resources (HR)
supervision have participated the area
supervision training?
Training certificate. Self explanatory.
2.7.13 Is the supervisory organizational unit
supported by a supervisory budget?
Financial statements. Self explanatory.
2.7.14 Does the area utilization implementer
already comply with the prevailing
regulations?
Report of supervision
result.
Self explanatory.
CRITERIA No. QUESTION ANSWER
VERIFICATION
TOOLS EXPLANATION
Yes No Adm Opr
2.8:
Implementation
of area utilization
management
2.8.1 Is the management action to utilize the
areas for activities related to Water
Nature tourism already carried out?
Monitoring &
evaluation (M & E)
reports: (a) habitat of
places & tourist
attractions; (b) tourist
visits; and (c) the
indicator to be the
reference.
Self explanatory.
Referring to related
Tehcnical Plan
2.8.2 Is the initial habitat measurements already
carried out?
The document of
related technical plan
and survey reports to
measure t0.
Self explanatory.
2.8.3 Is management action of the activities
related to the Waters Natural tourism
already involved local community or
partners already carried out?
Monitoring &
evaluation (M & E)
reports: (a) local
community
involvement; (b)
partner involvement;
and (c) the indicator
to be the reference.
Self explanatory.
USAID.GOV REVIEW: TECHNICAL GUIDELINES FOR EVALUATING THE MANAGEMENT EFFECTIVENESS OF
AQUATIC COASTAL AND SMALL ISLAND CONSERVATION AREAS | 26
2.8.4 Is the measurement of the initial socio-
economic-cultural conditions of the local
community and partners involved in the
PAP already carried out?
The document of
related technical plan
and survey reports to
measure t0.
Self explanatory.
2.8.5 Is the management action to utilize the
areas for the activities related to the
Caught Fisheries already carried out?
Monitoring &
evaluation (M & E)
reports: (a) fish stock;
(b) control and
restriction of caught
tool and boat/ship; (b)
fish product limitation
(c) the indicator to be
the reference.
Self explanatory.
2.8.6 Is the measurements of the initial condition
of fish resources (fish stock) already carried
out?
The document of
related technical plan
and survey reports to
measure t0.
Self explanatory.
2.8.7 Is the management action to the utilize
the area for activities related to
Sustainable Aquaculture already carried
out?
Monitoring &
evaluation (M & E)
reports: (a) water
quality and aquatic
ecology; (b) product
limitation (c) the
indicator to be the
reference.
Self explanatory.
2.8.8 Is the measurement of the initial condition
of the habitat and the aquatic environment
already carried out?
The document of
related technical plan
and survey reports to
measure t0.
Self explanatory.
2.8.9 Is the management action to utilize the
area for education and training activities
already carried out?
Monitoring &
evaluation (M & E)
report of
implementation of
education and
research activities
supplemented
indicator to be the
reference
Self explanatory.
2.8.10 Is the protection measures on the
custom resource and maritime culture
already carried out?
2.8.11 Is the communication strategies to
demonstrate the ecological and socio-
economic benefits of the area already
carried out?
Report of
communication
strategy
implementation.
Self explanatory.
Level
3: Optimum Managed Conservation
Area
Objective: The P3K conservation areas give planned/desired results and impacts and shown to the public.
USAID.GOV REVIEW: TECHNICAL GUIDELINES FOR EVALUATING THE MANAGEMENT EFFECTIVENESS OF
AQUATIC COASTAL AND SMALL ISLAND CONSERVATION AREAS | 28
CRITERIA No. QUESTION ANSWER
VERIFICATION
TOOLS EXPLANATION
Yes No Adm Opr
3.1: The result of
the
implementation
of the area
utilization
management on
the condition and
quality of the
habitat within the
area
3.1.1 Does the habitat condition of Core
Zone improve as indicated by the
increase of cover or area of coral reef
and / or seagrass beds and / or
mangrove forest ecosystem?
The condition of t0
(baseline) in each
zone is compared to
habitat monitoring
results in the zones
(shall indicate time
series data).
Self explanatory.
3.1.2 Does the habitat condition of
Sustainable Fishery Zone improve as
indicated by the increase of cover or
area of coral reef and / or seagrass beds
and / or mangrove forest ecosystem?
Self explanatory.
3.1.3 Does the habitat condition of Utilization
Zone improve as indicated by the
increase of cover or area of coral reef
and / or seagrass beds and / or
mangrove forest ecosystem?
Self explanatory.
3.1.4 Does the habitat condition of Limited
Utilization Zone improve as indicated by
the increase of cover or area of coral
reef and / or seagrass beds and / or
mangrove forest ecosystem?
Self explanatory.
3.1.5 Does the habitat condition of Other
Zones improve as indicated by the
Self explanatory.
increase of cover or area of coral reef
and / or seagrass beds and / or
mangrove forest ecosystem?
USAID.GOV REVIEW: TECHNICAL GUIDELINES FOR EVALUATING THE MANAGEMENT EFFECTIVENESS OF
AQUATIC COASTAL AND SMALL ISLAND CONSERVATION AREAS | 30
3.1.6 Is the physical-chemical-geological
quality of the waters in the Core Zone
maintained / preserved?
The condition of t0
(baseline) in each
zone is compared to
the monitoring result
of the physics-
chemical-geological
quality of the waters
in the zones (shall
indicate time series
data).
Self explanatory.
3.1.7 Is the physical-chemical-geological
quality of waters in the Sustainable
Fisheries Zone maintained / preserved?
Self explanatory.
3.1.8 Is the physical-chemical-geological
quality of waters in the Utilization Zone
maintained / maintained?
Self explanatory.
3.1.9 Is the physical-chemical-geological
quality of waters in the Limited
Utilization Zone maintained /
preserved?
Self explanatory.
3.1.10 Is the physical-chemical-geological
quality of the waters of Other Zones
maintained / preserved?
Self explanatory.
CRITERIA No. QUESTION ANSWER
VERIFICATION
TOOLS EXPLANATION
Yes No Adm Opr
3.2: The results
of management
action to utilize
resource areas
(species or
3.2.1 Does the supervision and security
activities improve the user compliance
with rules and area zoning?
The patrol report
contains data on
illegal and not
environmentally
friendly activities as
Self explanatory.
groups of
conserved target
species = fish of
economic value
and important to
ecological
functions)
well as the number of
damaged habitats in
the conservation area
(time series report),
pokmaswas report.
3.2.2 Does the community support and their
active participation to conserve area
management increase?
The report of
community
perception
monitoring results
(indicating the
increase of
community awareness
level as well as actions
supporting
conservation area
management).
Self explanatory.
USAID.GOV REVIEW: TECHNICAL GUIDELINES FOR EVALUATING THE MANAGEMENT EFFECTIVENESS OF
AQUATIC COASTAL AND SMALL ISLAND CONSERVATION AREAS | 32
3.2.3 Is the community involved in the
processes of planning, implementing and
evaluating the activities?
Report on
conservation area
management activities
(indicating community
representation and
involvement in every
management process,
or community
involvement in
community-related
program
implementation).
Self explanatory.
3.2.4 Does supervision and security activities
contribute to maintain or improve
conservation targets related to natural
tourism?
Monitoring report of
conservation target.
Self explanatory.
3.2.5 Does supervision and security activities
contribute to maintain or improve
conservation targets related to caught
fisheries?
Monitoring report of
conservation target.
Self explanatory.
3.2.6 Does supervision and security activities
contribute to maintain or improve
conservation targets related to
aquaculture?
Monitoring report of
conservation target.
Self explanatory.
3.2.7 Resources status and condition
(conservation targets) in core zones, Self explanatory.
sustainable fisheries zones and
utilization zones.
3.2.7.1 Does the quality condition (size / length
/ weight) of dominant fish in the core
zone, sustainable fishery zone,
utilization zone and / or limited
utilization zone, maintain or increase?
Quality monitoring
report (length /
weight) of fish in the
zones concerned.
Self explanatory.
3.2.7.2 Does the number and diversity of non-
fish target species / types in the core
zone, sustainable fisheries zone,
utilization zones and / or limited
utilization zones, maintain or increase?
Quantity monitoring
and variety of species
/ species of non-fish
targets reports.
Self explanatory.
3.2.7.3 Does the population of endemic species
in the area stay or increase?
Monitoring reports of
endemic species
populations.
Self explanatory.
3.2.8 Is the conservation area used as a
research and education sites by
stakeholders?
Report on research
and education
activities in
conservation areas.
Self explanatory.
CRITERIA No. QUESTION ANSWER
VERIFICATION
TOOLS EXPLANATION
Yes No Adm Opr
USAID.GOV REVIEW: TECHNICAL GUIDELINES FOR EVALUATING THE MANAGEMENT EFFECTIVENESS OF
AQUATIC COASTAL AND SMALL ISLAND CONSERVATION AREAS | 34
3.3: The impact
of utilization
management
actions on
condition of
socio-economic-
culture of the
community,
partners and
other
stakeholders
3.3.1 Do the tourism activities within a
conservation area provide socio-
economic benefits to the stakeholders,
especially local community?
Review report on the
impact of tourism
activities within the
conservation area.
Self explanatory.
3.3.2 Do caught fishing activities in
conservation areas provide socio-
economic benefits to stakeholders,
especially local community?
Review report on the
impact of caught
fishing activities within
conservation areas.
Self explanatory.
3.3.3 Do aquaculture activities in conservation
areas provide socio-economic benefits
to stakeholders, especially local
community?
Review Report on the
impact of aquaculture
activities in
conservation areas.
Self explanatory.
3.3.4 Are the catches of fishermen in
sustainable fisheries zones / limited
utilization zones (caught fisheries) in
accordance with JTB / MSY / CPUE
specified by the managing unit?
Monitoring report on
the number of caught
fish by fishermen
(total biomass per
number of fishermen
per unit / certain time
period)
Self explanatory.
3.3.5 Does the total production of
aquaculture farmer in a sustainable
fishery zone / limited utilization zone
(aquaculture) stay or increase?
Monitoring report
aquaculture result
production (total
biomass per number
of fishermen per unit /
certain time period).
Self explanatory.
CRITERIA No. QUESTION ANSWER
VERIFICATION
TOOLS EXPLANATION
Yes No Adm Opr
3.4: Feedback to
improve
management
performance
3.4.1 Does the partnership with stakeholders
work well and have positive impact to
area management?
Activity and
monitoring reports,
and the review result
of independent team
that indicates the
positive impact of the
partnership.
Self explanatory.
3.4.2 Are the result of monitoring,
supervision, research and outreach /
awareness used as the annual planning
reference for next activities?
Review result of
independent team
indicating the positive
impact of
management on the
area resources and
socio-economic
conditions of the
Self explanatory.
3.4.3 Does management have positive
impacts on the management
performance of waters natural tourism?
Self explanatory.
USAID.GOV REVIEW: TECHNICAL GUIDELINES FOR EVALUATING THE MANAGEMENT EFFECTIVENESS OF
AQUATIC COASTAL AND SMALL ISLAND CONSERVATION AREAS | 36
3.4.4 Does management have positive
impacts on the management
performance of caught fisheries?
community, and
feedback to the
organizational unit of
the area management
agency. Using
mutually agreed proxy
indicators.
Self explanatory.
3.4.5 Does management have positive
impacts on the performance of
sustainable aquaculture management?
Self explanatory.
3.4.6 Does management have positive
impacts on the management
performance of education and research
activities?
Self explanatory.
3.4.7 Does management have positive
impacts on the performance of
customary resource protection and
maritime culture?
3.4.8 Is the area research and development
already carried to support management
activities?
Published research &
development report.
Self explanatory.
3.4.9 Does the communications strategy
implemented promote positive
perceptions and support for the area?
The report of survey /
assessment from the
management team
and / or independent
team.
Self explanatory.
3.4.10 Does the community income increase
related to tourism have impacts on
The report of survey /
assessment from the
management team
Self explanatory.
public awareness to support the area
resource conservation?
and / or independent
team.
3.4.11 Does the community income increase
related to fisheries have impacts on
public awareness to support the area
resource conservation?
The report of survey /
assessment from the
management team
and / or independent
team
Self explanatory.