|
|
|
|
|
|
|
PHASE I (Round 2) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
OUTCOME 1: Ecological gap assessment, especially for marine |
|
|
|
Specific actions |
Description |
Progress snapshot |
Steps taken this quarter (if any) |
|
|
|
Activity 1.1 |
Identify a set of key biodiversity elements |
4 = activity completed |
The key elements have been already identified. Based on these elements (besides other data) the final reports of national experts of PAs and biodiversity, as well as the final report of the international expert of MPAs have been accomplished |
|
|
|
Activity 1.2 |
Collect information on the status of the biodiversity elements |
4 = activity completed |
The necessary information has been collected and presented in the submitted reports. Additional information on marine habitat, which was missing for the targeted area as the first MPA has been already collected through a field trip at the sea in July, with the participation of national and international experts of marine biodiversity and MPAs. |
|
|
|
Activity 1.3 |
Develop map of element occurrence and distribution |
4 = activity completed |
Four maps has been already prepared: 1) the updated map of protected areas of Albania; 2) map of most important marine biocenosis; 3) map of marine key species; 4) map of the proposed MPA together with the subzones and management categories. The last one has been submitted to the Ministry of Environment in order to be attached to the Decison for the MPA proclamation. The Ministry is reviewing the final version of the relevant Decision. |
|
|
|
Activity 1.4 |
Overlay existing PAs onto map of occurrences; identify protection gaps |
3 = significant progress, nearly complete |
The map of the proposed area as MPA (Sazani-Karaburuni-Vlora bay) and its subzoning has been prepared by considering also the protection status of the surrounding terrestrial areas (already proposed since 2006), in order to have a logical continuum of terrestrial, coastal and marine protected areas in the relevant region. This issue will be finalized after the review of drafted map of the proposed MPA (also mentioned in 1.3). Identification of protection gaps has been done in the respective reports (already submitted) on the assessment and gap analysis in the system of PAs in Albania. |
|
|
|
Activity 1.5 |
Develop detailed recommendations for PA boundaries |
4 = activity completed |
Detailed recommendations about the boundaries in the existing system of PAs and for the proposed MPA have already been given from the respective reports (also mentioned in other points here). The final report of the project Protected Areas for a Living Planet – Dinaric Arc Ecoregion (PA4LP DAE, 2007 – 2011), which was a WWF contribution to this project, has made an analysis and has given recommendations on the most important habitats of international concern. |
|
|
|
Activity 1.6 |
Summarize and distribute report |
3 = significant progress, nearly complete |
All expected reports have been submitted. An informative workshop about current project progress and results has been organized in the Ministry of Environment with the participation of relevant experts, Ministry and UNDP and NGOs. A consolidated report has beeing prepared, as a synthetic form of the all submitted reports. It will be distributed to the interested institutions. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obstacles faced in implementing Activity 1: |
Due to a very complex MB in the proposed zone, a second MPA option was proposed lately, to allow for better habitats representation, species and aquatic life conservation. The Ministry of Environment, Forestry and Water Administration is reviewing the draft Decision taking into account the difficulties of the management. |
|
|
|
Lessons learned in implementing Activity 1: |
The project is working on GIS mapping of the proposed zone an subzones (to derive also the exact coordinates and areas concerned) as well as on specific explanations in terms of the activities that are allowed or prohibited in the area and management principles to be suggested. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
OUTCOME 2: Lay foundation for regulatory basis for marine protected areas |
|
|
|
Specific actions |
Description |
Progress snapshot |
Steps taken this quarter (if any) |
|
|
|
Activity 2.1 |
Establish a multi-stakeholder committee and develop 2-year plan |
1 = just started, limited progress |
Recently, UNDP started the implementation of the Inter-ministerial Council project. Based on this new development, it has been proposed the establishment of a sub-committee on MPAs conservation which will be functioned as a working group under the Inter-ministerial Council. The relevant terms will be elaborated based on the new expected developments. |
|
|
|
Activity 2.2 |
Hire an expert group to draft amendment to 2002 Law on PAs and other legislation |
4 = activity completed |
The relevant report has been prepared by the national and international experts. After the analysis and reviews within the project team the final version has been prepared and submitted to the Ministry of Environment. |
|
|
|
Activity 2.3 |
Hold multi-stakeholder workshop and agree on legislation |
4 = activity completed |
Partial analysis of the existing legislation, identified gaps and proposed measures for its improvement and approach to the EU legislation have already been done during the trainings with stakeholders in Lezha, Durresi, Vlora and Saranda, as well as in a seminar organized by INCA with relevant experts in Tirana. Another discussion in experts' level has also been done in the workshop mentioned under the "Activity 1.6" above. |
|
|
|
Activity 2.4 |
Submit legislative amendment to Cabinet of Ministers for approval |
3 = significant progress, nearly complete |
The draft decision for the proclamation of the MPA has been submitted to the Ministry of Environment. The Ministry has reviewed the draft and has proposed some changes regarding the size of the proposed MPA. This issue has been largely discused in the workshop mentioned under the "Activity 1.6" above. The Ministry is preparing the final version of the Decision and the necessary procedures to submit it for approval to the Cabinet of Ministers. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obstacles faced in implementing Activity 2: |
a) The biodiversity status (incl. expected MPA management ) and legal status to be proposed, had to match at best possible. b) Due to general parliamentary elections, there is a new government; changes happened in the MEFWA structure which cause delays on the establishment of the MPA committee/ sub-committees. |
|
|
|
Lessons learned in implementing Activity 2: |
a) Intensive discussion has been allocated for biological and legal match for the proposed MPA b) Participation and active involvement of all relevant bodies, institutions and interested groups is crucial in properly addressing gaps and discrepancies in technical, institutional and legal terms. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
OUTCOME 3: Remove threats in at least one highly threatened marine area |
|
|
|
Specific actions |
Description |
Progress snapshot |
Steps taken this quarter (if any) |
|
|
|
Activity 3.1 |
Identify one marine area |
4 = activity completed |
For the already identified area to be proposed as the first MPA (Sazani Island - Karaburuni Peninsula - Vlora Bay) a detailed analysis has been done on natural, biodiversity, historic, archaeological, cultural and socio-economic values, as potentials to meet the needs and criteria for its conservation as a MPA, as well as for its sustainable use in legally defined subzones. |
|
|
|
Activity 3.2 |
Identify key threats |
3 = significant progress, nearly complete |
Main key threats have been identified for the proposed area as MPA. They have been analyzed in the reports of biodiversity and MPA experts, addressing these threats and proposing measures for improvement and sustainable conservation of the area. Based on this analysis, the principles of conservation and management for the minimization of threats and protection of the MPA have been described in the relevant reports. |
|
|
|
Activity 3.3 |
Consult on threat removal measures and document results |
2 = activity fully underway |
Threat analysis and possible threat removal has been discussed with local stakeholders, such as local government, Regional Environment Agency, Fishery Inspectorate, fishermen community and NGOs. The preparation of a priority action plan for threat removal has already started and will be finalized wihtin May 2010. Within this framework, further consultations and discussions will be organized at experts' level and decision maker institutions. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obstacles faced in implementing Activity 3: |
The main obstacle related to lack of experience in MPA management. Consequently difficulties were faced to elaborate well-tailored removal measures. |
|
|
|
Lessons learned in implementing Activity 3: |
a) Very complex and sustained financila tools are indespensabile for MB and MPA research and studies. b) Concerted efforts in exchanging information with experienced experts and reference into successful MPA cases. |
