Transcript People Centered Conservation

People Centered
Conservation
Environmental progress comes from
responsible human choices, not
sacrifice. It is our core belief that
together, people and nature can thrive
White Oak
January 9, 2008
CHALLENGES
 No consistent framework for integrating People Centered Conservation into





our work
 systemization for addressing people centered conservation lots of
activity and experience but no institutional way of expressing and
sharing the information
 Human well-being goals- will engage in biodiversity projects that will
provide a benefit to people
Insufficient methodological approach in comparison with strict natural
sciences
Not broad based thinking enough to do the work effectively
Haven’t fully defined the human well-being metrics or incorporated them into
our outcomes
We don’t share enough across regions/learned from past experiences
 Lack of baseline data – where we were, where we are now
Communications: Linking what we are saying and what we are doing.
Internally and externally of importance to incorporate people into conservation
OPPORTUNITIES
 Define guiding principles
 Develop funding opportunities and constituencies presently
not available to us
 Address big picture issues on multiple scales
 Climate change, ecosystem services, human/wildlife conflict, invasive
species, agriculture, conflict/response, etc.
 Community benefit sharing
 Influence national and international policies in context of human wellbeing
CI ROLE
 Show that people benefit from biodiversity
conservation
 Working at landscape/seascape level planning and
bringing stakeholders together
 Influence partner engagement at all levels
 What is our role? Do we build capacity internally?
Do we outsource? Can we link with development
NGOs?
OUR STRENGTHS
 Catalyzing partnerships
 Conservation Outcomes that have potential
to incorporate human well-being
 Ability to do large landscape planning
 In-country leadership capacity
 Communication capacity
 Fundraising ability
GAPS
 Communication strategy
 Language
 Institutional transformation
 Effective Coordination of our internal
approach to people centered conservation
 Conflict/response strategy in conservation
 Sharing Lessons learned
 Restoration of fragile ecosystems
What are we doing now?
Ecotourism
Incentives/stewards
Agroforestry
Land-planning
Concessions
Empowerment
Rights
Population
Enterprise development
Sustainable agriculture
Biodiversity offsets
Evaluation Criteria for Efficacy of
Human Well-being Interventions
 R&D innovation
 Proof of concept
 Consolidated message
 Linking outcomes to human wellbeing
 Value adding – what is conservation doing for people
 Empowerment – are we giving knowledge and building
capacity?
 Rights
 Governance
RECOMMENDATIONS
 Global Team to develop framework
 Institutional needs-assessment for training




capacities for people centered conservation
Learning Network – synthesize and share
information across the organization/field programs
Partner with institutions who do development
work?
Incorporate Human Welfare goals into new
Strategic Plan
Community benefit sharing – carbon, ecosystem
services
Allocation of resources
Invest a XX% of total CI budget in
Mainstreaming Human Well-being in CI
Outcomes
 Staff time
 Capacity building
 Community livelihood
 Learning network/Global Team
 Partner with UN? Conflict strategies
 Indigenous peoples initiatives to show more clearly
 Approach rights carefully, ensure communities are empowered and
have capacity to manage their lands as they gain title
 Investment In staff capacity in people c. conservation
 Focus on ecosystem services and linking to people – benefit sharing
 Much focuses on people around where we work –but need to link with
broader global society
 Work well at local scale –but need to work better at macro level.
Greater attention on climate change and water scarcity to show
success at higher level
 How do we ensure application of lessons across institution are applied


















Look more closely at existing instruments in human well-being, MDG
Mainstream conservation into economics and social policies – done through environmental services
Buffet foundation gave 150 million for watershed protection for poor, hunger, care, etc. only 450,000 went to IUCN – need to access these
funds
Role CI Can play in linking ecosystem services, economics etc. with development organizations and agendas
We have methodology –but we don’t have a habit of getting the information out within organization. We demonstrate projects but to whom?
Where? Policy making, decision-makers
Develop a new family of metrics that allows us to demonstrate and measure the benefits that biodiversity provides to people. This will help us
communicate more clearly
Have huge array of projects and ways to create incentives but not yet a way to identify which are most iimportant, which will really work
Can’t give impression that we are taking on the whole economic situation in the country – we have to be honest about what we can provide,
what the initiatives are etc. we can’t resolve all of the issues
We all work with people in countries-but are we really working at the scale we need?
are we delivering information to the right people? Are we providing this information to development agencies and governments and people in
the right way?
CIs internal incentives are based on areas under protection – we need areas and numbers but don’t incorporate partnerships with people – so we don’t
get internal credit for these things
We may need to change our language, and the way we are working to scale up and work with partners
Difference of scale - big challenge was to start planning at same scale of development, but if we wantnto talk abuthuman wellbeing-it is how do we
reconcile people and environment
We have some projects that are great, some don’t work – field programs have developed
2 of our outcomes – Pas and species protection actually happen at site level. These are site based, we need to continue to build incentives at the local
level. We can’t walk away from the small activities. We need to be sure we have tools available to do that for the field
We have to link global activities with scaled up activities – if we work at global issues like climate change and there are no linkages and benefits to
communities we will get nowhere
We have to continue working at local level and bring it up to scale – we have apportunity through REDD to take this to a bigger scale – linking
conservatoin and economic development…but we have to be careful
We must continue to be effective at local levelLook more closely at existing instruments in human well-being, MDG

Mainstream conservation into economics and social policies – done through environmental services

Buffet foundation gave 150 million for watershed protection for poor, hunger, care, etc. only 450,000 went to IUCN – need to access these



funds
Role CI Can play in linking ecosystem services, economics etc. with development organizations and agendas
We have methodology –but we don’t have a habit of getting the information out within organization. We demonstrate projects but to whom?
Where? Policy making, decision-makers
Develop a new family of metrics that allows us to demonstrate and measure the benefits that biodiversity provides to people. This will help us
communicate more clearly