Presentation on theme: "Participatory monitoring and evaluation of joint management in the Northern Territory: Challenges and Lessons Central Land Council Natasha Stacey & Arturo."— Presentation transcript:
Participatory monitoring and evaluation of joint management in the Northern Territory: Challenges and Lessons Central Land Council Natasha Stacey & Arturo Izurieta Research Institute for the Environment and Livelihoods Presentation to National Native Title Conference 2011
Partnership not equal in power, capacities and decision- making No or poor shared objectives for management Past focus on biodiversity outcomes Achieving social and cultural outcomes is relatively new in NT park management Communication poor (between and amongst partners) Process can be as important as outcomes Management has to be achieved in a cross cultural partnership Weak or absent monitoring and evaluation practices (Armitage 2003, Olsson et al 2004, Berkes 2009, Cundill & Fabricus 2010, Plummer & Fennell 2009) Issues to consider in joint management of Parks
How Participatory Monitoring & Evaluation (PME) can assist joint management Contributes positively to management, trust building, & knowledge sharing through learning by doing. Has a role in empowerment – addresses power imbalances. Can look at how the partner arrangements work – how the processes are functioning in cross-cultural situations So any monitoring should assess social, economic and biophysical outcomes, partnership arrangements and processes linked to cultural interests and rights of partners (Bellamy et al 2001; Ross et al 2004, Plummer & Armitage 2007) Armitage 2003, Olsson et al 2004, Berkes 2009, Cundill & Fabricus 2010, Bauman and Smyth 2007Mahanty et al 2007)
Project objectives: Identify whether participatory monitoring and evaluation enhances the benefits of Joint Management Determine how PME can be implemented cost effectively in a partnership with significant differences in perspectives and power How to scale up to all (27) Parks and Reserves in the NT. Does monitoring and evaluation improve joint management? The case of national parks in the NT.
Project partners and parks Central Land Council
Participatory monitoring & evaluation process Agreement Identifying indicators together ON COUNTRY CAMPS M&E team Training on M&E and data collection Interviews and documents OFFICE AND ON COUNTRY Assessing joint management progress Communicating results, Validating results, actions OFFICE AND ON COUNTRY
Park joint management themes Governance Managing Country (Cultural & Natural Heritage) Business operations, and Managing visitors Indicators and groups of indicators identified under each management theme. 12 common indicators identified for each Park.
Themes & indicators to monitor and evaluate ThemesIndicators Governance (planning and making decisions together) 1.Satisfaction with representation and participation in the joint management meetings 2. Satisfaction with decision making process and planning 3. Effective communication: a.between partners b.amongst partners c. with other stakeholders.
Management themeIndicators Managing Country (Natural Heritage ) 4. Satisfaction with health of country (park) through fire management, weed control, feral control, protection of native species 5. Increased evidence of traditional knowledge together with western knowledge applied to park management.
Management ThemeIndicator Managing Country (Cultural Heritage) 6. Traditional owner satisfaction with protection of sites of cultural significance 7. Opportunities to visit country using joint management programs to support transfer of cultural knowledge to young ones
ThemeIndicator Business operations (jobs, training, business opportunities, money story) 8. Applicable training and skill-building opportunities and take up for traditional owners and Park staff in : a.governance/decision-making/planning b.park management c.employment & economic business 9. Employment opportunities available and up take of these by traditional owners in park management as: a. park rangers b. community rangers c. contractors (FEP or other mechanism) d. cultural advisors/mentors 10.Traditional owner participation in business enterprises associated with the park (e.g. tour guides, cultural dancers, food/beverage vendors) 11. Sufficient and efficient use of resources allocated to meet annual operational plan regarding: a) financial; b) human; c) Infrastructure and equipment
Themes & indicators ThemeIndicator Managing Visitors (Looking after visitors) 12. Parks, traditional owners and visitors (tourists, hunters, scientists) are satisfied with information provided (e.g. cultural, natural, safety, behavioural)
Common Indicators and Assessment (Jan 2008 – October 2009) VERY GOOD GOOD NOT SO GOOD BAD
What Helps? Defined legal framework & joint management principles Participatory monitoring & evaluation supports the principles & practices of joint management and adaptive management of parks. Long-term approach (e.g. staff, funds, equipment) to build capacity of partners and institutionalise joint management. NT Parks governance coordinator position
What Harms? Different perspectives on joint management and what should be monitored as part of joint management recognising partner values and differences Consultation versus active participation of partners Unsolved disagreements amongst Aboriginal groups and Parks Miscommunication and poor information sharing amongst partners
What Harms…? Limited human capacity to engage in joint management by all partners (e.g. one governance coordinator for 27 Parks) Limited budget projections and adequate funds to support joint management to honour the 2005 agreement and principles Planning and management doesnt include country beyond the park boundaries whole of country
Acknowledgements Arrernte, Wardaman, Wulna, and Anangu traditional owners from the four parks NT Parks and Wildlife Service/NRETAS Northern Land Council Central Land Council Australia Research Council Charles Darwin University Photos: A. Izurieta & NTPWS
More information: Izurieta, A, N. Stacey, J. Karam and contributors (2011) Guidebook for Supporting Participatory Monitoring and Evaluation of Jointly Managed Parks in the Northern Territory, Research Institute for the Environment and Livelihoods, Charles Darwin University, Darwin.