Assessment of management effectiveness in MPAs in the Western Indian Ocean

1. Assessment of management effectiveness in MPAs in the Western Indian Ocean Nyawira Muthiga and Sue Wells for IUCN-EARO with Kenya Wildlife Service Tanzania Marine Parks and Reserves Unit, Nature Seychelles

2. Supported by: • UNEP/ICRAN • NORAD • Coastal Zone Management Centre of the Netherlands A contribution to IUCN WCPA’s initiative to assess management effectiveness of protected areas

3. Evolution of WIO initiative • Awareness raising workshop 2001 • Workbook based on WCPA/METF methodology • Experience from Enhancing our Heritage Project (Aldabra/St Lucia) • South Africa COMPARE method • Testing workbook in pilot sites

4. Assessment framework Adapt and learn Context Outcomes Planning Outputs Inputs Process

5. Assessment Process • Introductory training workshop, Malindi • Emphasis on self-assessment with participation of stakeholders • Establish implementation teams • Use existing data and knowledge to complete worksheets; • review by stakeholders;

6. Worksheets

7. Sample WorksheetReview of National Context Worksheet

8. Pilot sites • Kenya: Kiunga MNR Malindi MNP/MNR Watamu MNP/MNR Mombasa MNP/MNR Kisite/Mpunguti MNP/MNR • Tanzania: Mafia I. MP Mnazi Bay-Ruvuma Estuary MP • Seychelles: Cousin I. Special Reserve

9. Preliminary Results - Kenya • Marine parks making progress towards meeting objectives; marine reserves less so • Revision of management plans needed (2004) • Research and monitoring activities should be better linked to management • Training and awareness activities better linked to management

10. Preliminary Results - Tanzania • Mafia I. MP starting to make good progress; data from WCPA-Marine assessment will allow more in-depth analysis of extent to which objectives are being met; METF methodology is providing recommendations for improving management • Mnazi Bay MP – assessment was a capacity building exercise to help with development of their management plan

11. Preliminary Results - Seychelles • Good progress towards meeting management objectives for terrestrial component of Cousin I. Reserve; more attention needed to marine environment • Results to be used in forthcoming revision of management plan

12. Lessons learned 1. Difficulty understanding the concept of ME assessment • Required extensive training and technical support • We used the analogy of a journey by public bus (Matatu)

13. Does your MPA look like this?:

14. or this:

15. Lessons learned 2. Methodology too complex for some sites (requires computer skills and ability to analyse information) – • workbook should be revised; include questionnaire for use at sites with less capacity and academic training

16. Lessons learned 3. Stakeholder participation is essential: • MPA staff tend to rate progress too highly; stakeholders provide an objective view; • Assessment provides good opportunity to build relationships with stakeholders – first time at some sites for their involvement during an assessment • Stakeholders provide good suggestions for improved management

17. Lessons learned 4. Assessments cost time and money but this need not be excessive: • Each site had $2500-3000; assessment period was c. 6 months; • In-kind support provided by each MPA; • Mainstreaming of assessments in management cycle should be possible (e.g. as part of review process for management plans) but additional funds may be necessary given funding problems of MPAs in WIO (apart from Cousin I., none of the pilot MPAs are financially self sufficient)

18. Conclusions • Assessments were useful – MPA staff increased knowledge their MPAs and links with stakeholders • Workbook should be revised • Need to link research and monitoring more closely with management • A strong national co-coordinating agency facilitates assessment (e.g. KWS) • Expand assessments to other WIO sites • Translate workbook e.g. French, Kiswahili • Both this method and the WCPA-Marine approach are useful and complementary – develop better links between the two

19. Asante sana