Protected Areas Governance in Saint Lucia: A Situation Analysis

1
Protected Areas Governance in Saint Lucia A
Situation Analysis

• by
• Lavina Alexander
• November 14, 2006

2
Presentation Outline

• Existing situation
• Key players, decision-making, goals
• SWOT Analysis
• PA Governance Goals
• Desirable Changes

3
Existing Situation

• Management
• Multi-stakeholder approach (Govt departments,
  NGOs, CBOs, Advisory Committees, resource users,
  etc)
  
• Single entity management (e.g. SLNT and Pigeon
  Island Natl Landmark)

4
Existing Situation, contd

• Decision-making
• Ultimately by the Government of Saint Lucia
  through its Cabinet of Ministers.
  
• In some cases Ministers have the sole authority
  to designate PAs under relevant legislation.
  
• Responsibility for specific PAs is defined in
  legislation or in the Cabinet decision to
  designate a site.

5
SWOT Analysis

• Strengths
• Weaknesses
• Opportunities
• Threats

6
STRENGTHS

• Strengths of PA management
• System of Protected Areas exists
• Management plans or guidelines in place for some
  sites
  
• Increased efforts to involve stakeholders in
  decision-making

7
WEAKNESSES

• Weaknesses include
• Fragmented policy, legal and institutional
  frameworks
  
• Lack of operational guidelines for PA management
  
  
• Inadequate political support
• Lack of public support

8
WEAKNESSES, contd

• Capacity deficiencies
• Human
• Institutional
• Policy
• Resources/ materials
• Financial
• Lack of ME management effectiveness

9
THREATS

• Threats include
• Lack of public support (due to public perception
  of PAs)
  
• Coastal development
• Increased population and demand for critical and
  limited resources
  
• Invasive species vs. endemic species

10
OPPORTUNITIES

• Opportunities for addressing threats and
  weaknesses exist through
  
• Increased communication collaboration
• Fostering partnerships (increases resources
  capacity)
  
• Project initiatives (e.g. OPAAL)

11
PA Governance Goals

• A System which
• encourages and facilitates dialogue among all
  involved management agencies and institutions
  
• ensures that decisions are made based on
  availability of information and access to
  resources

12
Goals, contd

• enforces capacity development on all levels
  (human, financial, resource, institutional, etc)
  
• enforces adequate legislative instruments
  governing protected areas
  
• is flexible and resilient enough to adapt to
  change

13
Desirable Changes

• Increased and improved participatory
  decision-making
  
• Strengthened and integrated policy, legal and
  institutional frameworks
  
• Identification/ designation of a
  lead/coordinating agency for PA management

14
Desirable changes, contd

• Improved access to budgetary support for
  management agencies
  
• Enhanced capacity knowledge, skills,
  competencies, financial and material resources
  
• Monitoring of management decisions and management
  effectiveness

15
Desirable Changes, contd

• WHO can take action?
• Central Government
• Agencies of government with legal responsibility
  and authority to designate PAs
  
• Agencies with legal mandate to manage PAs
• NGOs and CBOs

16
Desirable Changes, contd

• HOW?
• Legal designation of PAs
• Development and implementation of PA Management
  plans
  
• Financing of relevant interventions

17
Desirable Changes, contd

• HOW?
• Establishment of coordinating and reporting
  mechanisms
  
• Periodic assessments of PAs
• Better coordinated legal and policy framework

18
Desirable Changes, contd

• WITH WHAT RESOURCES?
• Technical
• Financial
• In-kind contributions

19
Thank You!