|
|
|
|
|
|
PHASE I (Round 2) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
OUTCOME 1: National PA targets, indicators and monitoring guidelines |
|
|
|
Specific actions |
Description |
Progress snapshot |
Steps taken this quarter (if any) |
|
|
|
Activity 1.1a |
Terms of reference and hire consultant |
2 = activity fully underway |
TORs were developed and validated by the Technical Working Group responsible for monitoring the project since February 2009. The consultant has not yet been recruited. We are awaiting the results of the evaluation methods of management of protected areas and the proposal for a new innovative model to test. |
|
|
|
Activity 1.1b |
Finalize amendment of the national PA strategy |
0 = not yet begun, no progress |
Not started |
|
|
|
Activity 1.1c |
Identify long-term measurable objectives and indicators for a PA system |
0 = not yet begun, no progress |
Not started |
|
|
|
Activity 1.2 |
Strengthen existing national processes |
1 = just started, limited progress |
The development process has begun with the establishment of a Technical Working Group responsible for monitoring the process of drafting the National Strategy for Protected Areas in Mali |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obstacles faced in implementing Activity 1: |
The results of the evaluation study of current management methods protected areas have received August 10, 2009. The creation of community-managed area was proposed as part of shared governance. We expect the final version of the report évalaution methods of management area of Mali. All this determines the recruitment of national consultant for 6 months (phase 2) to assess the effectiveness of management of a number of protected areas, identification of indicators for monitoring and evaluation, test the new management model in an area etc. ... |
|
|
|
Lessons learned in implementing Activity 1: |
The development of a national strategy plan for protected area with well defined objectives and indicators for monitoring and evaluation |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
OUTCOME 2: Promote innovative form of PA governance and management |
|
|
|
Specific actions |
Description |
Progress snapshot |
Steps taken this quarter (if any) |
|
|
|
Activity 2.1 |
Elaborate Terms of Reference |
4 = activity completed |
TORs were developed and validated in February 2009 by the Technical Working Group monitoring the project |
|
|
|
Activity 2.1b |
Evaluate current forms of PA governance and identify potential new types |
4 = activity completed |
The evaluation of management methods was conducted in March 2009 by consultants from the NGO Afrique Nature International in Côte d'Ivoire recruited by IUCN - PAPACO. The charge of the project to DNCN a participated in all stages of the mission |
|
|
|
Activity 2.2 |
Present results in 4 regional workshops |
3 = significant progress, nearly complete |
We await the filing of the final report of the study after the holding of the validation workshop in September 2009 and the review of comments on the report content |
|
|
|
Activity 2.3a |
Start co-management model in one PA |
1 = just started, limited progress |
The creation of 3 conservation areas, community-managed Class V or VI of IUCN with opportunities for ecotourism development has been proposed by the consultant. These sites include: falls from Gouina, the Aire Soroba and the village of chimpanzees Galamadji |
|
|
|
Activity 2.3b |
Provide training and institutional steps to local community members |
1 = just started, limited progress |
Through the implementation of the training program of 5 years of those responsible for the management of protected areas, members of local communities will be recycled in some areas of protected area management. This activity has not started during the quarter |
|
|
|
Activity 2.4a |
Collect results of workshop and trial |
0 = not yet begun, no progress |
Not started |
|
|
|
Activity 2.4b |
Elaborate new forms of governance for government to consider and adopt |
1 = just started, limited progress |
The proposed establishment of 3 community conservation areas has been issued. We now formalize the process by hiring a national consultant for 6 months. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obstacles faced in implementing Activity 2: |
We are awaiting the final report of the study no later than the month of January 2010 |
|
|
|
Lessons learned in implementing Activity 2: |
After conducting a national workshop to validate the study of management styles, management problems of protected areas in Mali are generally known (institutional, organizational, legislative, inadequate staff, equipment, capacity building staff and poor mobilization of internal and external funding required). |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
OUTCOME 3: Assess PA management effectiveness |
|
|
|
Specific actions |
Description |
Progress snapshot |
Steps taken this quarter (if any) |
|
|
|
Activity 3.1 |
Gather data on PAs and analyze |
2 = activity fully underway |
During some missions evaluation of protected areas in Mali, Kongossambougou Park (Biosphere Reserve of the Loop Baoule), retention of elephants through the conservation area of Haïré, protected areas of Niénendougou, Forest Segue (Bankass) were evaluated sumarily. The Kouroufing and Wango Parks, Reserve Wildlife of Mande Wula and Conservation Area Community Yarayo were assessed with the tool METT. Their data exist. |
|
|
|
Activity 3.2 |
Conduct management effectiveness evaluations in each PA |
2 = activity fully underway |
During the evaluation mission of sustainable management of protected areas in Mali, Kongossambougou Park (Biosphere Reserve of the Loop Baoule), retention of elephants through the conservation area of Haïré, protected areas of Niénendougou, Forest Segue (Bankass) were evaluated sumarily. Within the framework of project preparation and capacity expansion of the system of protected areas in Mali, The Kouroufing and Wango Parks, Reserve Wildlife of Mande Wula and Conservation Area Community Yarayo were assessed with the tool METT. |
|
|
|
Activity 3.3 |
Train DCFH to enable future assessments |
1 = just started, limited progress |
Through the implementation of the training program of 5 years of those responsible for the management of protected areas, management of DCFH be recycled in the use of METT assessment tool to ensure the regular assessment of protected areas in Mali |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obstacles faced in implementing Activity 3: |
The national consultant for 6 months is not recruited. The finalized report of the evaluation of management methods is not yet available. |
|
|
|
Lessons learned in implementing Activity 3: |
The problems Areas assessed are known and solutions are proposed. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
OUTCOME 4: Training and capacity-building program for protected areas |
|
|
|
Specific actions |
Description |
Progress snapshot |
Steps taken this quarter (if any) |
|
|
|
Activity 4.1a |
Hire experts |
4 = activity completed |
The consultant was recruited in April 2009 and started the diagnostic surveys, field visits, research literature and development of various forms of survey actors responsible for the management of protected areas in the same month. |
|
|
|
Activity 4.1b |
Develop training syllabus and detailed proposal |
4 = activity completed |
The assessment of training needs of those responsible for the management of protected areas in Mali has been made. The training program over 5 years and plan of operation in 2009 are developed. The reports are submitted for analysis and validation by DNCN and the Technical Working Group, IUCN, UNDP and various stakeholders. |
|
|
|
Activity 4.2a |
Finalize curriculum |
4 = activity completed |
The national workshop to validate the results of the evaluation study of training needs of those responsible for the management of protected areas in Mali was held July 13, 2009. Final reports were received September 4, 2009. |
|
|
|
Activity 4.2b |
Invite target audience and plan training sessions |
1 = just started, limited progress |
The terms of reference of the training on "Planning and management of wildlife and its habitat" of 25 Engineers of Water and Forests are developed. The Project Officer attended from 11 to 22 January 2010 the training module on "tools and methods of managing resources in protected areas" organized by IUCN-PAPACO as part of its continuing education program management protected areas (FOCOGAP). This session was held in Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso. |
|
|
|
Activity 4.2c |
Deliver training |
1 = just started, limited progress |
The terms of reference of the training on "Planning and management of wildlife and its habitat" of 25 Engineers of Water and Forests are developed. The Project Officer attended from 11 to 22 January 2010 the training module on "tools and methods of managing resources in protected areas" organized by IUCN-PAPACO as part of its continuing education program management protected areas (FOCOGAP). This session was held in Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso. |
|
|
|
Activity 4.3 |
Submit training syllabus to DNCN for adoption |
4 = activity completed |
Interim reports on the training needs of those responsible for the management of protected areas have been validated by the DNCN and the Technical Working Group, IUCN, UNDP and representatives of different stakeholders during a national workshop held July 13, 2009 subject to amendments to the reports. Final reports were received September 4, 2009. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obstacles faced in implementing Activity 4: |
Failure to start training sessions. We are currently preparing the TOR for the recruitment of trainers and target participants. |
|
|
|
Lessons learned in implementing Activity 4: |
Developing a training program for those responsible for protected areas over 5 years (nationally recognized as the only reference document for training on protected areas). |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
PHASE 2 (Round 5) |
|
|
|
OUTCOME 1: Strengthen PA management effectiveness efforts |
|
|
|
Specific actions |
Description |
Progress snapshot |
Steps taken this quarter (if any) |
|
|
|
Activity 1.1 |
Identify 3-5 PAs for testing METT feedback models |
1 = just started, limited progress |
To evaluate sites were chosen by the Technical Working Group monitoring the project during the workshop held in February 2009 to validate the different terms of reference for which were submitted by the DNCN (project). |
|
|
|
Activity 1.2 |
Travel to 3-5 PAs to discuss results with local stakeholders |
0 = not yet begun, no progress |
Not started |
|
|
|
Activity 1.2a |
Provide in-depth METT training |
0 = not yet begun, no progress |
Not started |
|
|
|
Activity 1.2b |
Agree on a 3-4 year plan of action |
0 = not yet begun, no progress |
Not started |
|
|
|
Activity 1.2c |
Agree on means and resources for filling effectiveness gaps |
0 = not yet begun, no progress |
Not started |
|
|
|
Activity 1.3 |
Work with government and UNDP to refine METT scorecard |
0 = not yet begun, no progress |
Not started |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obstacles faced in implementing Activity 1: |
The results of the evaluation study of current management methods protected areas viennenet to be validated. The final report is not available. The national consultant for 6 months is not recruited (phase 2) to assess the effectiveness of management of a number of protected areas, identification of indicators for monitoring and evaluation, test the new management model in an area etc. ... |
|
|
|
Lessons learned in implementing Activity 1: |
Creating community conserved areas through shared governance and evaluate this community management and making duplictaion other country sites |
|
|
|
|
|
|
