- By way of presentation
As a result of the document "Building a vision for the development of the Juan Bautista Pérez Rancier National Park and the National System of Protected Areas of the Dominican Republic" which we will call "Building Vision".
questions-answers-development-system-Dominican-protected-areasWhich I had the pleasure of sending in digital format to several colleagues who work and "live" the conservation and management of "Protected Areas", apparently having a good reception, at the time I received several comments, suggestions and mainly questions.
At first when I was evaluating the feedback individually I thought of answering each of the interlocutors their comments and questions personally, later when the number and depth increased, I modified my original idea and I thought about the need to make a "document" that would bring together the questions and answers in order to provide a “tool” that would allow us to share “concepts” and thereby refine our knowledge about the management of “ Protected Areas”.
Based on the above platform, the "Technical Sheet 1" was born, a model that will be used by me to create a knowledge network that allows strengthening and updating the personnel linked to the "management, planning, conservation, management and administration" of the protected areas in the Dominican Republic and possibly in Mesoamerica.
With this small contribution I am not inferring less indicating that there is a lack of knowledge and technical quality in the management of protected areas, but if the need to homogenize criteria and especially "approaches" than the same "Recommendations and Action Plan" of the "Fifth World Parks Congress" held in Durban South-Africa in September 2003, does not request those in charge of planning, conserving, managing and conserving protected areas.
It is not my interest to also develop a "highly technical" document, in fact I decided in most of the document to use a rather colloquial lexicon, following the same scheme in which colleagues and friends sent me their comments and questions, this in order that some parts of the document can be used for the training of other "technicians" and "operatives" (park rangers).
It is not enough to indicate that this document will be the first part of a series of "Files
Techniques ”, where I will deal with topics of mutual convenience such as: 1. Case Studies of
Socio-environmental Development; 2. Models and Experiences of Zoning in Protected Areas; 3. Conservation Biology; 4. Models of Co-management, Co-administration and Delegation of Protected Areas; 5. Breaking Paradigms in the Planning and Management of Protected Areas; 6. Analyzing the Results of the V World Parks Congress -2003-; and other topics of interest that arise from the technical exchange between the recipients of the technical sheets to be produced.
- Objectives of the Technical Sheet
- Respond to questions and comments as a product of the document "Building a vision for the development of the Juan Bautista Pérez Rancier National Park and the National System of Protected Areas of the Dominican Republic"; Contribute to the strengthening of "Concepts and Technical Criteria" on management, planning, conservation, management and administration of the natural resources of the ecosystems contained in the Protected Areas; Create a network (or space) for the exchange of information that increased the pool of empirical, technical and scientific knowledge within the framework of sustainable resource management nature, biodiversity and ecology in general; Serve as a platform to consolidate the proposal of "Creation of the Biosphere Reserve of the Central Cordillera Madre de las Aguas" of the Dominican Republic,by exchanging information that could strengthen and guide your technical, legal and planning framework;
- Methodology for the preparation of technical data sheet
Despite the fact that "Technical File 1" is a totally theoretical document, following the scientific research framework, a "methodological protocol" was developed that would not only provide quality information, but also ensure the "technical and scientific" trends that Mesoamerican, Latin American and world levels are being followed in the management, planning and management of protected areas.
The methodological steps are presented in the following summary table:
| Methodological step | Description |
| Step 1 | Receipt of questions, comments and recommendations corresponding to the document "Building a vision for the development of the PNJBPR and the SNAP of the Dominican Republic." |
| Step 2 | Preparation of the first generic list of questions and grouping of questions into categories. |
| Step 3 | Development at the manuscript level of the first round of response, based on the conceptual and technical knowledge of the consultant. |
| Step 4 | Review of response manuscript, through review of secondary information, consulted literature from IUCN, WWF, TNC, PROARCAS (various documents and programs), OTS, CONAP, OET, INAB, ILO, etc. |
| Step 5 | Information integration has handwritten secondary information product consulted. |
| Step 6 | Preparation and review of the first draft of "Technical Sheet" in digital format. |
| Step 7 | Final integration of modification and elaboration of "Technical Sheet". |
| Step 8 | Distribution of "Technical Sheet", for analysis and feedback. |
Source: Melgar, M. 2006
- Responses to comments and questions
4.1 What is a Thematic Plan, what is its functionality and its integration into Annual Operating Plans (POAs)?
R / Morales, R. (2002), establishes that a Thematic Plan "… is a " management tool " developed in order to strengthen one or several management programs and / or subprograms considered priorities to strengthen and enhance, a thematic plan It must be prepared in order to become a procedures manual, and the need for its preparation should be identified at the time of the formulation and / or reformulation of the Management Plan.of the Protected Area, generally the thematic plans can have a varied duration of a minimum of 2 years and a maximum of 5 years ”. As an experience, I have had the opportunity to see a series of "Thematic Plans", prepared within the framework of a Management Plan and / or independently, the topics where most of the Thematic Plans coincide, are broken down below:
- Thematic Plan for Environmental Education and Awareness; Thematic Plan for the Control and Surveillance System; Thematic Plan for Public Use (Environmental Interpretation); Thematic Plan for Comprehensive Monitoring and Evaluation; Thematic Plan for Co-management, Co-administration and Delegation Measures; Thematic Plan for the Management of Buffer Zone (and other zoning), Thematic Wildlife Management Plan; yThematic Community Management Plan. (among others) (Melgar, M. 2006)
When they are elaborated outside the scheme of a "Management Plan", they are often nicknamed "EMERGING", being the way in which the administrators of protected areas seek to provide a planning framework to operationalize measures that allow solving a latent problem and high impact on the PA territory, or to maximize a potential that has been managed with limitations or deficiencies. But the elaboration of the "Thematic Plans" within the formulation and / or reformulation of a "Management Plan", can have three connotations, which would be interesting to analyze: (Melgar, M. 2006)
First: on many occasions when developing the "Diagnosis phase", one or more limitations and / or potentialities are determined, within the socio-environmental, management and administrative spheres, which must be prioritized, therefore it is worthwhile that programs and subprograms specific “management tools” are integrated, which allow strengthening and / or supporting medium-term measures. In this case, the Thematic Plans are built to serve as "procedure manuals" where the lines of action, phases and chronologically are established programmatically the activities that the technical and operational staff must develop to comply with the objectives, strategies and goals. established in management programs.
For example, in the Management Plan where the development of
" Environmental education and awareness", planners may say that it is necessary to develop a "Thematic Plan for Environmental Education and Awareness" that allows more specific guidance of the actions of "management programs and / or subprograms" to technical and operational personnel In general, the "Thematic Plans" are prepared first by a "technical team", for their subsequent validation and consensus with social actors with an impact on the PA or on the specific topic where the "thematic plan" is developed.
Second: the approach that in the last five years (2000 - 2005) has been guiding the “Managers and Planners of PAs” in the elaboration of “Management Plans” in a very short term (2 to 8 months) and with a volume In quite reduced size of pages (less than 100 pages), this has caused that many "Managers and Planners" in order to enroll in said trend by not having time and physical space (pages) of analysis, conjecture and proposal, they advocate to the most obvious technical "lifesaver" which is the "elaboration of Thematic Plans".
I recently had the pleasure of reviewing a Management Plan for a Protected Area in Guatemala, which I know of except in the areas: social, economic, ecological and environmental. Having prepared the first thematic, operational and management plans, I can indicate their evolution in the last 15 years, the interesting thing about the case is when I review the new "Management Plan", I was surprised that most of the "Programs and / or Subprograms ”Established as their first strategy “… to formulate a Thematic Plan for Subprogram xxxxx, in order to guide actions in the medium term and… ”.
When I sent the comments, I had the pleasure of talking by phone with the planner and when asked about it, he told me “… unfortunately we had very little time (3 months), few funds and above all very little space, they did not want it to exceed 75 pages and With the approach of Thematic Plans, the donor will provide us with more funds, which will allow us to expand the proposals of the Management Plan, in Thematic Plans… ” when we discussed a little more as my colleague we reached the conclusion that in the new trends to minimize the volume and the amount of information greatly limits the possible approaches that planners can provide to improve or expand the quality of management of PAs.
It is also necessary to argue that for this reason the "planners" have (or have) created strategies with the formation of "Technical Kit", "Toolboxes", "Technical and Operational Compilations", "Thematic Plans", etc. Where instead of having a "large and voluminous document" we have several individual documents, which in the end if we count the covers, back pages, individual indexes and extra presentation sheets, the volume of papers is much greater than that used in the so-called "voluminous plans management ”from the 70s, 80s and 90s of the 20th century.
Third: the last connotation is quite "technical" and "innovative", today it is known that with scarce resources and especially with the different social, environmental and productive pressures that natural resources of PAs have, it is necessary to develop "Synergies", "shared actions", "strategic alliances", "co-management", "co-management", "co-administration", etc. The “Thematic Plans” are key to achieving a “critical path” where socio-environmental actors (public, private and NGOs) empower themselves (appropriate) the operation of a certain segment (program and subprogram) of the Management Plan.
For example, when developing a "Thematic Community Management Plan", aimed at improving agricultural (productive) practices in internal and external communities, it is well known that technical and financial capacities are very limited; ideally, the operationalization of these measures are developed in a coordinated manner and especially delegating actions to key actors. That is why the "Thematic Plan" must be elaborated in a participatory way, in search of consensus, synergy and empowerment with "Government Organizations" of the agricultural and livestock sector, "Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs)" that develop alternative projects at the agroforestry level, organic farming, good agricultural practices, etc.,“Community Organizations” that affect the organization and “Religious Institutions” that mitigate the social speculations of the communities. This will allow the construction of an “institutional sub-architecture” to which the execution of the actions of the “Thematic Plan” can be partially and / or fully delegated, turning the administration into managers, trainers, evaluators of the actions, which would allow (proven) the viability and sustainability of the actions in time and space.
Another interesting example to present is the case of a “Thematic Plan for Control and
Surveillance ”, with the ever decreasing number of operational personnel (Park Rangers and / or Resource Guards) it is necessary to use security personnel from other entities such as: National Army; National (or Civil) Police; Tourist Police and / or Environmental Police. The key piece to effectively coordinate different actors is to follow a coordination “protocol” with clear responsibilities in actions and chronology, based on the generic and specific knowledge of environmental legislation that provides protection to natural resources inside and outside of Protected areas. It is important to indicate that in this case the "delegation" is never givenpartial and / or total, but if it is feasible to achieve a level of synergies and constraints that in the medium term reduces infractions and crimes against the environment and natural resources of the PA, it is important that this level of actions be extrapolated to communities close to the perimeter of the AP (Buffer Zone).
In all cases, the development of "Thematic Plans" has proven to be effective and decisive for the successful implementation of Management Plans and Management Tools, therefore they are recommended, with the recommendation not to abuse in number, it is important to prioritize the number of "Thematic Plans", which should not exceed three for the execution of a Management Plan.
Regarding the integration of the "Thematic Plans" in the annual planning (POAs), the generality indicates that the POA is based on the "General Operating Plan" (POG), which is generally presented in a "framework five-year planning logic ”, from which the activities are taken by program and subprogram for the elaboration and participatory consensus of the POAs. When the development of "Thematic Plans" is integrated among the management (or planning) tools, it is necessary in most cases to readjust the "General Operational Plans" (POGs), considering participatory actions, consensus and co-management, which is fulfilled by the famous phrase of Bermudez F. (2000) “… planning in protected areas should not be considered static, but dynamic, being readjusted annually or periodically, according to the requirements that arise from the implementation of the Management Plan. " The figure below shows the possible integration flow of the "Thematic Plan", which are generally elaborated (formulated) during the first year of execution of the Management Plan.
Download the original file
