THE 2017-2021 NPAS STRATEGIC PLAN; 2017-2021 PACT ...

World Exchange Plaza | PO Box 81119 Ottawa |Ontario | Canada K1P 1B1

tel.: +1.613.742.7829 fax: +1.613.742.7099

www.i-financialconsulting.com [email protected]

CONSULTANCY TO DEVELOP

THE 2017-2021 NPAS

STRATEGIC PLAN; 2017-2021

PACT STRATEGIC PLAN & THE

2017 PACT INSTITUTIONAL

ASSESSMENT

Strategic Plan for the National

Protected Areas System (NPAS)

2017-2021

Submitted to: Protected Areas Conservation Trust

14 April 2017

Strategic Plan for NPAS | 17 April 2017

ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................... 1 1.1. Background to the Assignment ................................................................................ 1 1.2. Methodology ........................................................................................................... 1 1.3. Structure of Report .................................................................................................. 2

2. BACKGROUND ..................................................................................................................... 4

2.1. The National Protected Areas System (NPAS) ............................................................... 4

2.2. The National Protected Areas System Plan (NPASP) ..................................................... 5

2.3. Progress to Date on NPASP Implementation ................................................................. 6

3. CURRENT STATUS ................................................................................................................ 8

3.1. New Legislation: NPAS and PACT Acts ............................................................................ 8

3.2. National Protected Areas Advisory Council.................................................................... 8

3.3. Implications of New PACT Act on NPASP and Strategic Plan ...................................... 10

3.4. NPAS Stakeholders ......................................................................................................... 10

4. STRATEGIC CONTEXT ......................................................................................................... 13

4.1. SWOT Analysis ................................................................................................................ 13

4.2. NPAS Implementation Framework ............................................................................... 14

4.3. Key Challenges ................................................................................................................ 15 4.3.1. Clarifying Stakeholders’ Roles ............................................................................................. 15

4.3.2. Absence of Regulations to Support the NPAS Act .............................................................. 16

4.3.3. Lack of Supportive Policies and Incentives to Better Facilitate Co- Management and Protected Areas Management ............................................................................................ 16

4.3.4. Accessing New Revenue Sources to Fill the Financing Gap ............................................... 16

4.3.5. Lack of Financial Sustainability ........................................................................................... 16

4.3.6. Determining the Value of NPAS .......................................................................................... 17

4.3.7. Establishing Monitoring and Evaluation Systems.............................................................. 17

4.3.8. Building Management Capacity ......................................................................................... 17

5. STRATEGIC FRAMEWORK .................................................................................................. 19

5.1. Preparing the Strategic Plan .......................................................................................... 19

5.2. NPAS Strategic Plan 2017-2021 Focus Areas................................................................ 19

6. IMPLEMENTATION ............................................................................................................ 22

6.1. Strategic Focus Area 1: Framework for Strategic Management NPAS ....................... 22

6.2. Strategic Focus Area 2: Enabling Conditions ................................................................ 25

6.3. Strategic Focus Area 3: Financing ................................................................................. 30

6.4. Strategic Focus Area 4: Communication and Marketing ............................................. 35

6.5. Strategic Focus Area 5: M&E Systems .......................................................................... 36

ANNEX A: TERMS OF REFERENCE ............................................................................................... 42

ANNEX B: STAKEHOLDERS CONSULTED ..................................................................................... 48

ANNEX C: LIST OF DOCUMENTS CONSULTED ............................................................................. 52

International Financial Consulting Ltd.

Strategic Plan for NPAS Strategic Development Plan | 27 March 2017

iii

LIST OF FIGURES & TABLES Figure 1: NPAS Stakeholder Map ............................................................................................... 11 Figure 2: Implementation Framework for NPAS ......................................................................... 15 Figure 3: Strategic Focus Areas for NPAS Strategic Plan ............................................................. 19 Table 1: NPASP 2015 Goals and Intermediate Outcomes ............................................................. 5 Table 2: Progress to Date on NPASP 2015 Implementation ......................................................... 6 Table 3: SWOT Analysis of the NPAS .......................................................................................... 13 Table 4: Strategic Initiatives....................................................................................................... 20 Table 5: Roles, Responsibility and Priority for NPAS Strategic Plan ............................................. 38



iv

LIST OF ACRONYMS

APAMO Association of Protected Areas Management Organizations

BAPPA Belize Association of Private Protected Areas

BDF Belize Defense Force

BTB Belize Tourism Board

CBO Community-Based Organization

EIA Environmental Impact Assessment

FDI Foreign Direct Investment

GDP Gross Domestic Product

GOB Government of Belize

MFFSD Ministry of Forestry, Fisheries and Sustainable Development

MMM Maya Mountains Massif

MPA Marine Protected Area

M&E Monitoring and Evaluation

MOU Memorandum of Understanding

NICH National Institute of Culture and History

NGO Non-Governmental Organization

NPA National Protected Area

NPAAC National Protected Areas Advisory Council

NPASA National Protected Areas System Act

NPAS National Protected Areas System

NPATC National Protected Areas Technical Committee

NPASP National Protected Areas System Plan

NPSA National Parks System Act

PA Protected Area

PACT Protected Areas Conservation Trust

PESTLE Political, Economic, Social, Technological, Legal and Environmental

PPA Private Protected Area

SWOT Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, Threats

UB-ERI University of Belize Environmental Research Institute



1

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1. Background to the Assignment

This National Protected Areas (NPAS) Strategic Plan is one deliverable of a suite of three required by the “Consultancy to Develop the 2017-2021 NPAS Strategic Plan; 2017-2021 PACT Strategic Plan and the 2017 PACT Institutional Assessment undertaken by International Financial Consulting (IFCL). These documents are necessary to support the implementation of changes required by key pieces of legislation concerning the financing of the protected areas system of Belize and the management of Belize’s National Protected Areas System (NPAS). The National Protected Areas System of Belize is a network of sites designed to protect and preserve Belize's biological diversity and to contribute towards Belize's sustainable development. The system includes 103 terrestrial and marine protected areas managed and administered by a variety of Government agencies and through partnerships between the Government of Belize and co-management NGOs and CBOs. The National Protected Area System Plan (2005) was endorsed by the Government of Belize (GOB) in 2006. Since then, many key activities outlined in the plan have been implemented. The Plan was updated in 2015 via a process that involved numerous expert consultancies and widespread consultations, and represents the consensus view among those people directly involved or affected by protected areas in Belize. As of late 2015, the main legal underpinnings for the management and conservation of Belize’s protected areas system are now based on the Protected Areas Conservation Trust (Amendment) Act 2015 and the National Protected Areas System Act 2015. The NPAS Act (2015) “provides for the maintenance of coordinated management of a system of protected areas that is representative of internationally agreed categories, effectively managed, ecologically based, consistent with international law, and based on best available scientific information and the principles of sustainable development for the economic, social and environmental benefit of present and future generations of Belize”. It repeals the National Parks System Act, Chapter 215 (2011) and amends the Fisheries Act and Forests Acts. The PACT Act No. 18 of 2015 provides for a significant expansion of the functions of the Trust including the responsibility for facilitating, as prescribed by the amended PACT Act, the preparation of a five-year strategic plan for the National Protected Areas System.

1.2. Methodology This strategic plan has been prepared based on (i) a review of the new legislation and the current National Protected Areas System Plan (ii) feedback from a series of consultations involving stakeholders of the National Protected Areas System; (iii) strategic planning sessions with PACT’s Board and Staff; (iv) a review of relevant background and operational documents; and (v) results of a SWOT analysis.



2

The 2017-2021 NPAS Strategic Plan considers, integrates and builds upon: i. The National Protected Areas System Act (2015); ii. The National Protected Areas System Plan (2015); iii. The Rationalization Exercise of Belize’s PAs (2013); iv. The PACT legislation (1996, 2003, 2015); and, v. All other relevant documents.

Stakeholder consultations took place between January 25 and February 15, 2017 (inclusive of a field mission January 25-February 4 and subsequent remote Skype meetings. Seventy-seven (77) persons participated in consultations. The consultations were undertaken following an approved Consultation Strategy prepared by IFCL. The principle was to engage as many critical stakeholders as possible, grouped according to stakeholder function or interest, and:

ascertain the Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats surrounding the implementation of the National Protected Areas System Plan, and the effective operation of PACT, particularly to identify where these applied to the new mandate of PACT under the amended PACT Act. (SWOT Analysis)

identify the external political, economic, social, technological, legal and environmental influences that can enable or inhibit the effective implementation of the NPAS Plan, and the mandate of PACT (PESTLE Analysis)

The results of the Consultations were documented in a Consultation Report prepared by IFCL.

1.3. Structure of Report This report is composed of six chapters, including the introduction. Chapter two looks at the history and objectives of NPAS, as well as looking at its current systems planning cycle. The chapter defines the goals and objectives of the NPAS plan and reviews NPAS progress to date on implementation of activities. Chapter three looks at the current context within which this Strategic Plan is being developed. It reviews the content of the new legislation, the creation of the National Protected Areas Advisory Committee, the implications of the change in the legislation and the current stakeholder map of the NPAS. Chapter four summarizes the strategic context, including a SWOT Analysis and the implementation framework required under the new legislation to support the NPAS. It also identifies the key challenges which need to be addressed in the strategic plan. Chapter five provides the strategic framework, identifying five Strategic Focus Areas and associated strategic initiatives. Chapter six presents in detail, the Strategic Focus Areas and Strategic Initiatives, each of which have a set of discrete activities to achieve the objectives of each initiative. It also summarizes the



3

roles and responsibilities and priorities which can guide stakeholders to structure an implementation schedule and budget.



4

2. BACKGROUND This chapter provides an overview of the NPAS and takes a look at its current systems plan – the NPAS plan. The chapter outlines the goals and objectives of the NPAS plan and reviews NPAS progress to date on the implementation of activities.

2.1. The National Protected Areas System (NPAS) Belize has long recognized that its economic development has been underpinned by the environment, its natural resources and the ecosystem services that they provide. The objective of the declaration and implementation of Protected Areas is to have a mechanism to protect the country’s natural resources and ensure their benefits and use are sustainable. The NPAS was established as individual sites and were being declared under various statutes; some sites having been declared over 70 years ago. Efforts of the last thirty years have seen Belize establish a strong portfolio of 103 terrestrial and marine protected areas considered within the NPAS. These protected areas encompass nine different management categories, dependent on the legislative framework under which they were designated. There is also a single mangrove reserve. In addition, there are 7 bird colonies (few of which are actively monitored or managed) and four public reserves, both categories established under the Lands Act. Fifty-two (52) protected areas lie under the administration of the Forest Department, with a further 9 marine reserves and 12 spawning aggregation sites (many of which overlap existing marine reserves), being administered by the Fisheries Department. Sixteen (16) archaeological sites are also considered part of the NPAS, and administered under the Institute of Archaeology (under the National Institute of Culture and History). Eight (8) private protected areas are also recognized by Forest Department as being part of the NPAS, though are not as yet legally embedded within the national framework. Additional private lands in the Maya Mountains Marine Corridor are legally committed to conservation and are part of the NPAS. The protected areas in the NPAS have international, regional and national significance and include two large forest nodes (the Maya Mountain Massif (MMM) and part of the Selva Maya), two RAMSAR Sites (Crooked Tree Wildlife Sanctuary and Sarstoon-Temash National Park), and the Belize Barrier Reef. It has been estimated that in 2010, the Belize protected area system received funding equivalent to about 2.6% of the Government of Belize’s annual budget or about US$3.35 per acre.1 In exchange for that investment, the NPAS has contributed the lion’s share of attractions that generate around 20% of the country’s GDP through tourism alone, sustained the timber industry and protected the resources on which the fishing industry depends. It has also provided recreational and educational experiences for large numbers of Belizeans and been part of Belize’s international image in the world.

1 National Protected Areas System Plan (NPASP) 2015



5

Belize’s NPAS provides critical ecosystem services of water catchment to supply the national need for clean water, provides protection against storm impacts, resilience to the negative impacts of climate change, is representative of the majority of the ecosystems present in the country, actively supports livelihoods in both the marine and terrestrial environments, and makes Belize a leader in the region in biodiversity conservation.

2.2. The National Protected Areas System Plan (NPASP) The NPASP was created to establish an effective protected areas system for Belize. The first NPASP was drafted in 2005 and was ratified by the Government in 2006. The 2015 NPASP built upon the 2005 document and articulated Goals and Strategic actions to be covered within a 5-year period (2015-2019). The 2015 Plan has tried to address the fact that the network of sites and the various agencies responsible for their administration have evolved organically over many decades and continues to do so, reflecting changing attitudes and approaches to addressing environmental issues. It attempts to answer the questions: (i) how should the NPAS be conserved for the best effect; and (ii) how should it be integrated more effectively with the national economy despite its conflicting demands? The 2015 iteration of the Plan acknowledges the need for continuous improvement in the management and biological representation of NPAS. Essentially the Plan widens the scope of, and stakeholder participation in, protected areas management; and changes the focus from individual sites to that of the System. The plan articulates four goals with associated intermediate outcomes. These are shown in Table 1.

Table 1: NPASP 2015 Goals and Intermediate Outcomes

GOALS INTERMEDIATE OUTCOMES

1. Formal recognition and integration of the fundamental role of protected areas and natural resources as a pillar in national economic development

1.1 MFFSD as the champion has the institutional capacity to carry out its oversight mandate pertaining to the NPAS

1.2 A pilot system of environmental accounting reflects the contribution and value of the MMM’s hydrological resources to Belize’s GDP

1.3 Proper enabling institutional structures for integration established and made functional

1.4 Effective partnerships in natural resources management are better harnessed

2. Inter-sectoral buy-in, participation and support for PAs in both public and private sectors

2.1 An integrated inter-sectoral communications strategy involving all agencies involved in natural resources management, use and development is developed and implemented.

3. Establishment of an enabling environment for private sector involvement in protected areas management

3.1 Clear strategy, rules and guidelines for investing in protected areas established.

3.2 Private sector efforts to enhance sustainability of productive activities are supported.



6

GOALS INTERMEDIATE OUTCOMES

4. Integration of protected areas as a tool in the holistic management approach of landscapes and seascapes

4.1 The work within protected areas aligned with the broader sustainable natural resource management

2.3. Progress to Date on NPASP Implementation The NPASP 2015 is now about half way through its period of implementation. Progress in undertaking the activities outlined in the System Plan is summarized in Table 2, as determined by the IFCL team arising out of the Consultations. The Strategic Plan will therefore take into account the fact that progress has been made in implementing the current NPASP. A significant output of the Plan has been the promulgation of the two major pieces of enabling legislation — the National Protected Areas System Act (2015) and the PACT Act (2015). These Acts allow for the changes that are necessary to streamline the administration and management of NPAS. Goals 2, 3 and 4 which require an effective functioning administrative framework are much further behind in implementation. The strategic plan therefore addresses the enabling conditions which are required for the associated activities to be undertaken.

Legend: Not Started – Fully Implemented/Achieved

Table 2: Progress to Date on NPASP 2015 Implementation 2

NPAS STRATEGIC ACTIVITIES PROGRESS TO DATE

GO

AL

1

Forestry and Fisheries to remain in one ministry

Strengthen the key Regulatory Agencies (Forestry and Fisheries)

Dependent on protected areas administrative structure to be determined.

Produce evidence that the watershed management value of the Maya Mountain Massif contributes significantly to Belize’s GDP – Green Accounting

Establish and operationalize an effective and functional administrative structure for the NPAS

PACT and NPAS Acts established. Institutional assessment of PACT undertaken and consultations proposed to discuss new administrative structures.

2 As determined by IFCL team and noted through communications with and provided from PACT, Current as of March 2017



7

NPAS STRATEGIC ACTIVITIES PROGRESS TO DATE

Reform the National Protected Areas Technical Committee (NPATC) as an advisory body to ensure inter-sectoral dialogue and coordination in protected areas management

National Protected Areas Advisory Council (NPAAC) designated in Law

Develop and enact co-management agreements to ensure multi-stakeholder participation in PA management

Co-management agreements done but some stakeholders dissatisfied; backlog in some approvals.

Define and integrate unrepresented areas within private lands required to complete the NPAS

Develop and implement pilot landscape and seascape management plans

GO

AL

2 Build better communication strategies and frameworks for cooperation and collaboration in communication regarding natural resources management, use and development

Communication plan not yet developed

GO

AL

3

Develop and promulgate national prospectus of opportunities available for development and investment in protected areas

Secure multilateral and international financing for protected areas with a comprehensive plan and clear objectives.

Comprehensive plan not yet developed. Some international financing through Adaptation Fund and World Bank projects.

Explore low carbon development and climate change financing to approach private sector involvement

GO

AL

4

Consolidate subunits and streamline protected areas to enhance coordinated management and increase system functionality

Requires regulations to be written

Strengthen the management effectiveness of protected areas

Define and integrate unrepresented areas within national land required to complete the NPAS

Rationalisation plan developed but implementation not yet started



8

3. CURRENT STATUS This chapter discusses the new legislation and its effect on the institutional, administrative and management framework and the impact on the NPASP and the creation of the NPAS Strategic Plan.

3.1. New Legislation: NPAS and PACT Acts The National Protected Areas System Act, 2015 provides for the coordinated administration and management of a system of protected areas that is representative of internationally agreed categories, effectively managed, ecologically based, consistent with international law, and based on best available scientific information and the principles of sustainable development for the economic, social and environmental benefit of present and future generations of Belize. The objectives of the NPAS Act (2015) are to:

(a) establish a national protected areas system; (b) promote long-term conservation, management, and sustainable use of Belize’s

protected areas; (c) promote conservation of ecologically viable areas representative of Belize’s biological

diversity and its natural landscapes and seascapes; (d) ensure maintenance of genetic diversity and the diversity of species and habitats within

these areas, including but not limited to threatened species and species of economic, social or cultural value;

(e) ensure sustenance of the provision of ecosystem goods and services important for national development, including but not limited to timber and non-timber forest products, fish and other marine resources, genetic resources, water catchment services, removal of pollutants, soil regeneration, pollination, carbon storage, resilience and adaptability to climate change, protection against natural disasters, and natural environmental features of touristic, recreational, cultural or spiritual value;

(f) promote the strengthening of coordination and collaboration between nature-based protected areas, and archaeological reserves, where deemed necessary

3.2. National Protected Areas Advisory Council The NPAS Act provides for the establishment of a National Protected Areas Advisory Council. The Council advises the Minister on issues related to the management of protected areas, advice on the maintenance and extension of the National Protected Areas System and appropriate criteria for protected areas. The Council was established in 2017, as prescribed by the legislation and members have been advised of their appointment. The members of the Council are:

1. The Chairman, appointed by the Minister 2. Fisheries Administrator 3. Chief Forest Officer



9

4. Director of the Institute of Archeology 5. Executive Director of PACT 6. Chief Executive Officer of the Coastal Zone Management Authority 7. Commissioner of Lands 8. Chief Tourism Officer 9. Representative of the largest umbrella organization for non-government agencies

involved in protected areas management, nominated by the organization 10. Representative of the largest umbrella organization for non-government organization

representing private protected areas, nominated by the organization or in the absence of an organization functioning as such, a private protected area land-owner selected by the Minister

11. Representative from the University of Belize, nominated by the President of the University of Belize

12. Representative of the National Security Council 13. Person from the private sector with experience in private sector investment in a natural

resource based sector The main function of the Council is to provide advice to the Minister responsible for NPAS on:

(a) the development of partnerships with co-managers and stakeholders for participatory protected areas management;

(b) the development of the necessary tools and framework for multi-disciplinary capacity development for protected areas management;

(c) the development of appropriate human resource capacity for managing the National Protected Areas System; and

(d) the efficient and effective coordination with other governmental bodies to minimize conflict and address issues pertaining to protected areas;

(e) Belize’s obligations under international and regional conventions relating to the National Protected Areas System;

(f) matters pertaining to the illegal trans-boundary incursions into the National Protected Areas System; and

(g) effective and strategic ways in which to strengthen the coordination and collaboration for the management of nature-based protected areas and culture-based protected areas, such as the Archaeological Reserves, where deemed necessary.

The Council is also to:

h) advise on the maintenance and extension of the National Protected Areas System, in particular, by including underrepresented ecosystems in the National Protected Areas System, in accordance with the approved process or mechanism and criteria for declaration, classification, modification, category reclassification, management and de-reservation of private and public marine and terrestrial protected areas;

i) assess whether areas proposed as private protected areas meet the criteria for participation in the National Protected Areas System and advise the Minister accordingly;

j) discharge such other advisory functions generally or relating to the National Protected Areas System as may be assigned to it by the Minister under this Act.

When this strategic plan was being developed, the Council had not been officially constituted and the stakeholders assembled felt any discussion of an agreed mandate would be premature. They



10

were therefore unwilling to discuss matters pertaining to the Council and its role in the preparation of the plan. As a result, there has been no input from the Council as a body into the preparation of this Strategic Plan. Members of the Council who participated in the Consultation in their substantive capacities however provided feedback on the NPAS and the SWOT analysis which has fed into this strategic plan.

3.3. Implications of New PACT Act on NPASP and Strategic Plan The 2005 NPASP noted the urgent need for close coordination between the departments responsible for protected areas, and indicated that a formal arrangement reinforced by statute was needed. The favoured approach was the establishment of a statutory National Protected Areas Authority which would amalgamate the Fisheries Department and Forest Department. While this recommendation was never implemented, the fundamental changes to the PACT Act in 2015 did establish an alternate legal and administrative arrangement to the proposed National Protected Areas Authority. As a result of the Act, PACT is now responsible for the coordinating and financing of NPAS, but not active management. The change is an attempt to align financing with the management needs of the system, which it is hoped will lead to greater impact and more efficient and targeted use of resources. It allows PACT to channel resources for the management of the System rather than just individual sites; and allows financing to be targeted towards the rationalization of the NPAS and the creation of landscapes, seascapes and corridors to avoid fragmentation. Furthermore, the new legislation transfers responsibility of monitoring and evaluation of the System to PACT at two levels: (i) measuring management effectiveness and (ii) measuring the effectiveness of investments in the NPAS in meeting its primary objective of protecting biodiversity. Additionally, the new Act requires PACT to coordinate the development of an NPAS Strategic Plan to support the implementation of the NPAS System Plan. As a result of the changes to both Acts, the institutional and administrative arrangements for management of the NPAS have been modified with the elevation of PACT to a more central and active role. The NPAS Stakeholder map which reflects these changes to the legislation is shown as Figure 1. These institutional arrangements are discussed and shown in Figure 2 of the following Chapter.

3.4. NPAS Stakeholders The effective management of the National Protected Areas System requires a coordinated national effort involving a diverse range of agencies. It also requires three distinct types of overarching activities as indicated in the Stakeholder map in Figure 1. These are: 1. Creation of enabling conditions (as shown in green) 2. On-the-ground management of individual sites (as shown in blue) 3. Managing the system as a whole (as shown in yellow)



11

Each activity engages a set of stakeholders. Because of the integrated nature of the activities there is overlap of stakeholders across different activities as shown on the stakeholder map.

Figure 1: NPAS Stakeholder Map

Creating Enabling Conditions The Government is responsible for setting legislation and policies that are required to enable effective management of the system. The PACT Board and Technical Committee, and National Protected Areas Advisory Council provide advice to the Government to inform policy decisions. A second enabling condition must be the availability of financing for the System. In this regard, the critical stakeholders are the Government of Belize, PACT, International Donors, International NGO Partners, the Private Sector, and Private land owners. The donor community while important, sits outside the administrative and management structures of the NPAS. Potentially, financial institutions could become investors in protected areas sites that can sustainably generate income from tourism or other appropriate economic activities. On The Ground Protected Area Site Management The NPAS is composed of 103 sites that are actively managed by either the Fisheries or Forest Department, NICH, NGOs/CBOs or private land owners. The Forest Department is mandated by legislation to provide management and regulatory oversight for all protected areas designated under the Forest Act and the NPAS, as well as regulatory oversight for the nation’s forest resources. Similarly, the Fisheries Department is mandated by legislation to provide for the establishment and management of marine reserves, as well as regulatory oversight for the nation’s marine and fisheries resources. NGOs and CBOs co-manage individual protected areas and operate under co-management agreements brokered with the Fisheries and Forest Departments. They are an important tool for management of the system as they discharge the Government’s responsibility for protected areas site management, removing the burden from the



12

Government which allows them to focus on managing the entire system, and allows for management at the local level. The Association of Protected Areas Management Organization (APAMO), is an umbrella organization composed of NGO and CBO protected areas managers. APAMO plays a key role as an important network to facilitate the sharing of thoughts and ideas from civil society and co-managers for the administration and management of NPAS.

Private land owners are also key stakeholders. The NPAS Act now allows for private protected areas to be declared in law and included in the NPAS. Private landowners finance conservation activities on private land. The inclusion of private lands within the NPAS will enable ecological connectivity between sites and will be subject to the protection afforded by the NPAS Act. They are represented by their own umbrella organization BAPPA (Belize Association of Private Protected Areas). International NGOs also support management activities through technical and research support or discrete projects at individual sites. An important function of protected areas management is enforcement. This is carried out by the Fisheries and Forest Departments, as well as the Belize Defense Force, which is also a key stakeholder. Enforcement is also delegated to NGOs and CBOs who often employ park wardens. System Management Management of the System involves the planning, coordination, monitoring and evaluating the effectiveness of implementation and the impact of management activities on the biological integrity of the system, and the ecosystem functions the NPAS provides. Under its new legislated mandate, PACT becomes a critical stakeholder in the NPAS planning and coordination where it was not before. The planning function to be coordinated by PACT, has critical stakeholders that include the Advisory Council, NPAS Secretariat, technical and academic experts, and researchers. The NPAS Secretariat is currently located in the Ministry of Forestry Fisheries and Sustainable Development. It was established as an ad hoc unit in 2010 to coordinate the implementation of the NPASP and has been assigned specific implementation responsibilities in the System Plan. Some of these responsibilities however, overlap with PACT’s new mandate and will have to be rationalized. At present, it has limited staff and capacity. Implementation of the NPAS rests with entities managing individual sites, but also agencies that play a role in associated activities such as public awareness and research. Coordination of the system takes place at a high level and will now be led by PACT, as designated by the new legislation; with the support of the NPAS Advisory Council and the NPAS Secretariat. Monitoring and evaluation which were originally under the purview of the NPAS Secretariat are now under the oversight of PACT, but must involve technical experts, researchers and specialized NGOs.



13

4. STRATEGIC CONTEXT The NPAS Strategic Plan is underpinned by the review of progress to date on the NPASP, a SWOT analysis on the NPAS, an elaboration of the new institutional relationships suggested by the legislation, and an identification of the critical challenges to be overcome. This Chapter provides a summary of the SWOT analysis3, the NPAS Implementation Framework and the Key Challenges.

4.1. SWOT Analysis The analysis provides a guidepost as to priority areas of focus (through the strengths and opportunities), areas for improvement (weaknesses) and the development of mitigating actions to overcome threats.

Table 3: SWOT Analysis of the NPAS

STRENGTHS WEAKNESSES

INTE

RN

AL

Existing and growing national capacity for science and research

Existing frameworks to assess management effectiveness

NPASP supports Belize’s commitment to and compliance with international conventions

Strong support from tourism industry.

Strong NGO and CBO commitment, despite insufficient resources and capacity

Shift from site management to system management

Viable models of privately managed sites

NPAS recognized as a major contributor to Belize’s GDP

More defined roles and responsibilities to facilitate better coordination and system oversight through the Act

Insufficient Stakeholder buy-in to the new Acts

Dissatisfaction with and delays in co-management agreements

Insufficient incentives for private land owners

Weak enforcement Limited capacity of some co-

managers to meet administrative requirement

Limited access to core funding Limited diversification of financial

resources Leakage of revenue Lack of clarity by Stakeholders as to

role, responsibilities and location of the Council

Insufficient integration of economic development planning and protected areas management in practice

Insufficient public awareness of Belizeans about protected areas

POSITIVE NEGATIVE

3 A more detailed presentation is available in the Consultation Report prepared in conjunction with the Strategic Plan.

S

W



14

OPPORTUNITIES THREATS

EXTE

RN

AL

Monitoring and evaluation assigned to PACT, should now have a reliable source of financing

System fragmentation can be reduced with integration of private lands

Standardized policies and procedures can be applied across the system

Coordination can allow for identification of priority areas that are either in critical need of management, or which may attract targeted investments.

Options to maximize and diversify income generation and funding sources to finance the system

Continued need to build NGO/CBO capacity to manage grants and execute co-management agreements.

Increased utilization of technology The Central Corridor could be an

immediate investment priority for a multi-partner, system approach

Lack of clarity about roles and responsibilities may undermine Stakeholder buy-in

Conversion of protected areas to alternate uses

Insufficient science base to make management decisions

Physical threats to the PA system CBO capacity and participation in

NPAS management may weaken even further

Continued reduction in budgets of regulatory agencies diminishes capacity to manage protected areas

There may be difficulties in reaching co-management agreements between Government and Stakeholders

4.2. NPAS Implementation Framework As a result of the changes to the Acts and the articulation of changes in roles and responsibilities, the institutional relationships to fulfil these roles need to be understood by all stakeholders. Figure 2 illustrates the inter-relationships between the functions required to implement the National Protected Areas System Plan, the key guidance documents and the critical stakeholders.

O T



15

Figure 2: Implementation Framework for NPAS

A critical success factor for successful management of the NPAS is the policy framework within which the NPAS and enabling conditions are established. These include national policies such as the National Policy on Protected Areas Policy, Belize National Development Framework, Growth and Sustainable Development Plan; other GOB policies which pertain to natural resources management. Other critical enabling conditions include relevant regulations, financial mechanisms such as those prescribed in the PACT Act, and any other initiatives to encourage and incentivize protected area management. The NPAS and PACT Acts establish parameters for the critical financing mechanisms and allow for the development of necessary regulations. Furthermore, the Acts prescribe the development of strategic plans for NPAS and for PACT to facilitate implementation of the NPASP. NPASP implementation requires the input of a range of stakeholders at the site and system management levels in inter-related activities as shown in Figure 2.

4.3. Key Challenges In addition to the SWOT, the critical challenges facing the implementation of the NPASP were identified.

4.3.1. Clarifying Stakeholders’ Roles

While some consultations took place during the development of the Acts, they were perceived to be inadequate in clarifying the roles of the key stakeholders under the new Acts. Some key stakeholders expected the new Act to be more prescriptive than enabling with respect to roles and responsibilities, and was therefore open to interpretation. Resolution can be achieved



16

through discussions and agreement between the key stakeholders to arrive at their respective roles, responsibilities, linkages and coordination. These conversations must present the law as an enabling instrument and be facilitated by a trusted third party.

4.3.2. Absence of Regulations to Support the NPAS Act The new NPAS Act builds upon the experiences and reports of the past, most notably the NPAS (2015), Drumm Consultants (2011) and the Wildtracks Rationalization (2013) reports, and their collective recommendations. As much as the parent Act attempts to be enabling under Belizean jurisprudence, it requires the associated Regulations to become prescriptive. These are at present absent and require drafting. Lack of good regulations under the NPAS Act may result in administrative and management challenges. An example of the Regulations needed are those for the declaration of private protected areas within the NPAS. There also may be a need to enact Regulations under the Fisheries and Forestry Acts as some sections were changed.

4.3.3. Lack of Supportive Policies and Incentives to Better Facilitate Co-

Management and Protected Areas Management As well as Regulations, there is a need for supportive policies to be put in place. Examples of these policies are those that might address the following:

Tax incentives for private protected areas would help to encourage more private involvement as the current tax structure penalizes setting aside land for the protection of biodiversity as compared with putting it into ‘productive’ use.

The current timeframe of the co-management agreements is a disincentive for long-term investment in site management.

Co-managers do not receive any financial concessions (e.g. duty concessions, gas tax concessions) to reduce management operating expenses although they are doing the government’s business.

The requirements for co-managers to meet conditions for co-management are onerous particularly for CBOs.

There is no policy to support the payment for environmental services.

4.3.4. Accessing New Revenue Sources to Fill the Financing Gap Despite studies identifying additional revenue streams, or enhancement to existing ones, there has not been sufficient attention or action to securing additional financial resources to fill the financing deficit to fund System Plan implementation. For example, Stakeholders believe there was a lost opportunity of a US$100 million debt-for-nature swap not taken up by Government. Also, additional financial mechanisms such as revenue-sharing between co-managers and private sector beneficiaries of the commercialization of environmental services generated by effective protected areas management (e.g. water) have not been pursued.

4.3.5. Lack of Financial Sustainability Belize certainly has been a world leader in financing protected areas. However, there is a clear need for additional and diverse sources of funding. The revenue from the departure tax has not increased since it was first introduced, and therefore has not kept pace with inflation or the NPAS management demands. This, and the cruise ship concessions, are the only permanent sources of



17

funds for the NPAS, and are subject to the volatility of the tourism market. On the other hand, there is also a need to ensure that investments in NPAS are better targeted and that administration and management of NPAS are more cost efficient. There is also the opportunity of re-visiting the investment of the Trust Fund to realise better rates of return on investment both the endowment portion of the Trust Fund as well as those funds invested in the protected areas through partnerships with private sector investors.

4.3.6. Determining the Value of NPAS There is a need to do specific ecosystem valuation studies for the protected landscapes and seascapes that make up NPAS to arrive on an agreed economic value based on standardised and agreed methods of valuation. There is also a greater need to communicate the results of those studies to government, key stakeholders and the public at large. This would hopefully engender more support and investment for the NPAS. Drumm Consultants (2011) indicated that Belize’s protected areas are a major asset to the national economy, contributing hundreds of millions of dollars in ecosystem goods and services each year. The tourism industry is largely dependent on protected areas. In 2011, tourism generated nearly a quarter of Belize’s GDP, providing not only direct revenues but also fueling growth in other industries, such as construction. Furthermore, the timber industry is sustained by the land based protected areas and the US$100 million fisheries sector benefits from the health of the marine protected areas. Other ecosystem goods and services such as fresh water also depend on the well-being of the NPAS. Additionally, it is estimated that up to US$347 million is provided by reefs and mangroves in protection of coastal properties for erosion and wave-induced damage. It is also important to bear in mind that they increase the quality of life for large numbers of Belizeans by providing recreational and educational experiences. They also constitute part of Belize’s national identity and its image in the world. Although the numbers from the two reports are significant, they are just estimates based upon high level analysis. Site level analysis is non-existent but also required.

4.3.7. Establishing Monitoring and Evaluation Systems In general, there has been no agreed upon standardised approach for monitoring and evaluation (M&E) of the status of the biodiversity and ecosystems in Belize’s protected areas. The marine environment does have a more standardised approach than the terrestrial areas. This provides a challenge on two levels. The first, is that the status of each protected area in terms of its biodiversity and ecosystem health is not being measured. The second, is if the biodiversity and ecosystem status is not being measured we have no idea whether the grants or investments or management methods are achieving the desired objective of protecting biodiversity and ecosystem services in the NPAS. Improved coordination and administration of the system must use better M&E practices.

4.3.8. Building Management Capacity Drumm Consultants (2011) identified that all aspects of on-the-ground management of protected areas have investment deficits. This results in a management capacity deficit and inevitably in sub-optimum management effectiveness in the protected area. This management capacity gap may affect educational programmes, enforcement and protection programmes, support for



18

research programmes, and the development of attractions for realising financing through capitalizing on business and tourism opportunities. There is also an enforcement deficit due to limitations in the presence of enforcement personnel (regulatory agencies, BDF or park wardens); and sporadic education initiatives. Patrolling in protected areas is often compromised which may lead to encroachment and loss of biodiversity.



19

5. STRATEGIC FRAMEWORK

5.1. Preparing the Strategic Plan The PACT Act (2015) requires the preparation of a Strategic Plan for the NPAS, which already has a detailed implementation plan for its management in the form of the National Protected Areas System Plan. In general, a strategic plan would precede implementation as the strategy would guide implementation. In this case, since the reverse is occurring, the approach taken was to review the implementation plan, its progress to date, changes in context and map these against the SWOT analysis, while taking into account the political, economic, social, technological, legal and environmental trends. The strategic plan therefore focuses on the outstanding activities and prioritizes the strategic interventions necessary to support the implementation of the Plan, given the changes in (a) legislation and (b) roles and responsibilities and (c) institutional arrangements. The Vision for the NPAS as defined in the National Protected Areas Policy and System Plan, 2015 is as follows:

“An effectively managed NPASP that maintains healthy ecosystems and maximizes its social, cultural and economic contribution to local and national development.”

5.2. NPAS Strategic Plan 2017-2021 Focus Areas From the NPASP, SWOT and assessment of challenges, the NPAS Strategic Plan will address 5 Strategic Focus Areas as demonstrated in Figure 3. Each area will require the involvement and participation of NPAS key stakeholders. Lead agencies are identified. These are further elaborated in Chapter 6.

Figure 3: Strategic Focus Areas for NPAS Strategic Plan

Strategic Management Framework

Enabling Conditions Financing

Communication & Marketing

Monitoring & Evaluation



20

1. Establish a Framework for Strategic Management of NPAS The aim of this strategic focus area is to finalize the institutional relationships and administrative structure to manage protected areas in Belize, through a shared understanding of all stakeholders of their roles and responsibilities.

2. Develop Enabling Conditions for Protected Areas System Management

The aim of this strategic focus area is to ensure that policy impediments and gaps are addressed, and missing or deficient management frameworks necessary to implement the NPASP are developed.

3. Identify and access additional sources of financing to close the gap

The aim of this strategic focus area is to ensure that sufficient financing is obtained to cover the basic management costs of the NPAS.

4. Communicate and market the value of NPAS The aim of this strategic focus area is to generate awareness of the importance of NPAS to Belize and encourage public and private participation and support of the NPAS through investment, co-management, and individual action.

5. Establish systems to monitor and evaluate protected areas management effectiveness The aim of this strategic focus is to ensure that the impact of the implementation of the NPASP is measurable, and systems are in place to undertake management effectiveness assessments of the NPAS which are used to inform management and financing decisions.

Each strategic focus area has strategic initiatives that are required to achieve the aims of each strategic focus area. These are shown in Table 4. The specific activities under each Strategic Initiative are elaborated in Chapter 6.

Table 4: Strategic Initiatives

FOCUS AREAS STRATEGIC INITIATIVES

Strategic Management Framework

1.1 Seek key stakeholder buy-in of the new legislation and proposed institutional arrangements

1.2 Undertake institutional capacity building within PACT & NPAS Secretariat

1.3 Develop NPASP 2020 and update NPAS Strategic Plan

Enabling Conditions

2.1 Ensure alignment to GOB Policy Framework

2.2 Review co-management agreements

2.3 Develop framework to integrate private protected areas within NPAS

2.4 Prioritize and draft Regulations

2.5 Reduce fragmentation of NPAS

2.6 Develop and institute NPAS Enforcement Strategy

Financing 3.1 Develop Resource Mobilization Strategy



21

3.2 Design a responsive investment strategy that finances critical needs of the NPAS

3.3 Design framework for private sector partnerships and investment in NPAS

3.4 Target financial sustainability

Communication & Marketing

4.1 Build national awareness of NPAS and its value to Belize

4.2 Link marketing and promotion of Belize tourism product with NPAS

4.3 Develop and encourage enjoyment of NPAS by Belizeans

Monitoring and Evaluation

5.1 Develop biodiversity scorecard for NPAS

5.2 Link and correlate M&E to investments in NPAS



22

6. IMPLEMENTATION

Strategic Focus Area 1: Framework for Strategic Management

NPAS Strategic Focus Area 1 seeks to clarify the roles of key stakeholders in the administration and management of the NPAS, reduce or eliminate the trust deficit among the key stakeholders, develop regular communication mechanisms, synchronise NPAS planning (System Plan and Strategic Plan), and facilitate the evolution of focus from individual sites to protected landscapes and seascapes management.

Strategic Initiative 1.1: Seek key stakeholder buy-in of the new legislation and proposed

institutional arrangements

The updated PACT Act gives the responsibility to PACT for the coordination of NPAS and seeks to align investment in NPAS with its administration and management. The NPAS Act and the PACT Act do not prescribe the roles and functions of the key stakeholders, with the exception of PACT and the NPAAC. These are financing, advisory, oversight and coordination roles – not management of NPAS. There is a lack of clarity about the roles of the key stakeholders, and in particular PACT and its relationship with the Regulatory agencies. This has resulted in a trust deficit with the potential to become wider, which could seriously impact the efficacy of the administration and management of the NPAS.



23

Strategic Initiative 1.2: Undertake institutional capacity building within PACT & NPAS

Secretariat

As the new PACT Act significantly expands the functions of the Trust beyond protected areas financing via grants to more direct responsibility for protected areas system planning, financing,

Activities

1.1.1 Stakeholder mapping exercise and broad-based stakeholder consultations. The

stakeholder map in this report (Fig.1) can be used as a template or starting point for discussions which would ideally be facilitated by an experienced third party. The process will engage these critical stakeholders through structured and independently facilitated consultations to bring clarity to (a) the intent and contents of the Act; (b) the nature of the optimal institutional arrangements to bring effect to the Act and (c) assuage the fear of change. The objective of the process is to arrive at a collectively prepared and agreed institutional arrangements and clear roles and responsibilities for all stakeholders. This includes the relationships and interactions between the NPAAC and PACT Board and Technical Committee. This will allow for areas of agreement and disagreement to be identified and a mechanism to resolve the areas of disagreement going forward. Through this mechanism, PACT’s role as “coordinator” of the system would be defined and agreed upon.

1.1.2 Individual meetings between PACT and Fisheries, Forestry and NPAAC to discuss and arrive at details on how the NPAS will be administrated and managed The meetings will elucidate the roles of each organization as seen from their individual perspectives with the objective of agreeing to the details of roles and responsibilities for NPASP implementation, taking into account the agreed institutional arrangements. Disagreement on the details would be addressed through continued discussion with the objective of resolving these areas of disagreement in a timely fashion. Where this is not possible, the Minister would be asked to intervene to break any stalemate.

1.1.3 Documentation of institutional arrangements and interagency MOUs

The stakeholder consultations and the agreed institutional arrangements will be documented in order to hold stakeholders accountable for their roles and responsibilities in NPAS management, and to formalize the agreed inter-agency cooperation required to implement the NPASP.

1.1.4 Establishment of stakeholder coordination mechanisms This might include quarterly meetings or as determined otherwise, in which stakeholders communicate work plans and any issues hampering the successful implementation of the NPAS. Regular communication will allow for the reduction or elimination of the trust deficit. These meetings would also be useful to identifying constraints to the successful implementation of NPAS and the development and implementation of solutions with the commitment of the key stakeholders to work together for the successful implementation of NPAS.



24

coordination and monitoring and evaluation, this requires that PACT prepares itself institutionally to undertake these new functions. The Institutional Assessment undertaken for PACT identifies institutional capacity gaps to fulfil its new mandate, and recommends that PACT should restructure. Similarly, the new NPAS Act demands specific advice and recommendations from the National Protected Areas Advisory Council. In order for such advice to be given however, assessments and studies will need to be undertaken and coordinated so that the Council can consider the findings and make the appropriate recommendations to the Minister. This requires technical and administrative support. Similar to PACT, an assessment should be undertaken to determine the capacity of the NPAS Secretariat to provide the necessary technical and administrative support to the Council. There may be benefit to an amalgamation of the proposed NPAS Secretariat facilitative and coordination roles under PACT, which already significantly finances the Secretariat. This will be explored.

Activities

1.2.1. Institutional analysis of NPAS Secretariat to assess capacity gaps to fulfil new

mandate. This includes identifying core competencies required and appropriate organizational structure including financial resources required to do so.

1.2.2 Identification of core business competencies and develop and approve a new PACT

organizational structure, based on this ‘core business’ analysis.

1.2.3 Exploration of potential to amalgamate all NPAS administrative, technical and coordination functions within PACT. This would include clarifying reporting relationships within PACT and between the Secretariat, the Council and the Ministry. If this option is deemed unfeasible, the financing and staffing of the NPAS secretariat as a separate unit will be determined by the Ministry.

1.2.4 Development of job descriptions and recruit and staff new organizational structure(s)

Strategic Initiative 1.3: Develop the National Protected Areas System Plan (NPASP 2020)

and update the Strategic Plan (2017-2021)

The NPAS is about half way through its current period and will therefore need to be revised before implementation of this strategic plan is concluded. The updating of the NPASP will be undertaken within a context of changed institutional arrangements and hopefully, achievement of the main goals and expected outcomes. As a result, the new System Plan may require more than an ‘updating’ of the 2015 version. It therefore makes sense for the NPAS Strategic Plan to be revised as the 2020 NPAS Plan is developed. In this way, the System Plan and the Strategic Plan can be perfectly aligned.



25

Activities

1.3.1 Development of an updated NPAS Plan in early 2020 using a consultative process

facilitated by PACT. The key stakeholders will be engaged to agree on the approach for its development. It is likely that the development process will culminate in a final workshop to consider and agree the draft final update. At that workshop, additional time will be allocated to review the NPAS Strategic Plan. Therefore, the System Plan and Strategic Plan would be synchronized. The development of the System Plan and Strategic Plan will be facilitated by external Consultants.

Strategic Focus Area 2: Enabling Conditions Strategic focus area 2 activities seek to build the framework to enable the successful implementation of NPAS. The activities include the alignment of NPAS with the Government’s development agenda, improving co-management agreements, integrating private protected areas into NPAS, developing the required Regulations under the NPAS Act, reducing encroachment and conversion of land within and adjacent to NPAS sites, improving enforcement effectiveness, and combating fragmentation by the implementation of integrated management of corridors and private lands.

Strategic Initiative 2.1: Ensure Alignment with Government of Belize Development Policy

Framework

The SWOT identified insufficient integration of economic development planning and protected areas management in practice. Stakeholders noted general inconsistencies between environmental and other legislation supporting economic development and promotion of FDI. This can lead to ‘perverse incentives’ inimical to protected areas management such as balancing regulation of extractive industries with maximizing revenues. This can also result in incompatible land use and investment decisions inimical to achievement of System Plan objectives. There is no mechanism for cost-benefit studies to be financed to inform economic investment decisions that may affect protected areas. An analysis is required to identify the current mechanisms to align protected areas management and economic development planning. This analysis should include how development planning is guided and whether or not the NPAS administration or management is represented on the different committees and boards. The development and use of Environmental Impact Assessments (EIAs) and environmental standards in helping development initiatives to be environmentally benign must be mainstreamed and transparent. An assessment of new development initiatives should include a section that describes the impact on the environment (in general) and the NPAS (in particular). Globally, signaling to the developer early in the planning cycle has been shown to be useful not only to environmental protection but often brings benefits to the development.



26

Activities

2.1.1 Assessment of the factors constraining alignment with development initiatives,

facilitated by NPAAC. The assessment would include assessing the current use of EIAs, the use of environmental valuation, land use planning, cost-benefit analysis, green accounting, environmental risk assessments, development and environmental policy analysis, representation on development committees, etc.

2.1.2 Recommendations to ensure alignment of Government of Belize policies and

processes and protected areas management. Arising out of the assessment will be recommendations from the NPAAC to the Minister, proposing a raft of initiatives to ensure alignment between protected areas management and economic development decision-making at policy and practical levels. This might include representation of key NPAS stakeholders on planning and development boards, committees, councils, etc. and perhaps reciprocal ad hoc representation on NPAAC (or sub-committees of NPAAC). NPAAC would also recommend to the Minister the creation of policy documents, Regulations and amendments of laws affecting development planning and approvals that could be an effective way to guide developers and development in Belize.

2.1.3 Inter-Ministerial Task Force. Matters needing inter-ministerial attention would be

brought to the CEO Caucus which meets on a weekly basis via the MFFSD for guidance as to how best to address the issues.

Strategic Initiative 2.2: Review Co-Management Agreements

Co-managers of the Belizean NPAS operate on behalf of the Government under co-management agreements that effectively outsource the Government’s responsibility for the management of protected areas. Although most co-managers have signed the revised co-management agreements in use since 2012, there is some dissatisfaction with the new agreement. Stakeholders perceive the revised agreement as a “one size fits all approach” which is not tailored to the specific circumstances of each site or the capacity of the co-management entity. They also feel the agreements hold CBOs/NGOs responsible for management, but provide insufficient authority or financing to co-managers to manage effectively. The NPASP identifies the areas of contention and the weaknesses of the current arrangements and also identifies the desired features of a more effective and equitable co-management agreement.

Activities

2.2.1 Review the concerns of co-managers by NPAAC and identify key changes that need

to be addressed by new co-management agreements. This would be a consultative process resulting in recommendations to the Minister to address agreed deficiencies in the current co-management agreements.



27

Strategic Initiative 2.3: Develop framework to integrate private protected areas

Prior to the NPAS Act 2015, private protected areas were not included as part of the NPAS. The Act now enables this to happen and is a key strategy in stopping fragmentation of the NPAS and increasing management cost-effectiveness across the NPAS. The activities outlined below are meant to ensure that private protected areas are integrated into NPAS.

Activities

2.3.1 Development of drafting instructions to develop Regulations under the new Act to

declare the private protected areas as part of NPAS and to be subject to the new NPAS Act. This would be facilitated by Fisheries and Forest Departments in consultation with BAPPA.

2.3.2 Review of the management plans for the private protected areas prior to their

Declaration under the NPAS Act to ensure that they are standardised against requirements for all sites within the NPAS. The Forest and Fisheries departments will work with the co-managers to ensure these management plans are updated and per the Act, will be reviewed by PACT.

2.3.3 Development of Co-management agreements. This would be undertaken by Forestry

and Fisheries with the involvement of the managers of the private protected areas. These agreements should be signed immediately after the Declaration of the private protected area.

Strategic Initiative 2.4: Prioritize and Draft Regulations

The new Acts are without Regulations. Regulations are important to the operationalization of the Laws. An important issue for the NPAAC to address very early in its tenure is identifying the key issues in the NPAS Act and PACT Act that may require Regulations. The preceding Strategic Initiatives have already identified some gaps where regulations are necessary. This strategic Initiative builds on the preceding and develops a prioritized list of required regulations.



28

Activities

2.4.1 Analysis of the new Laws to ensure complementarity with other Laws that relate to

the NPAS, including the Forestry and Fisheries Acts, facilitated by NPAAC. This would include the identification of the most urgent gaps that need to be filled to ensure implementation of the NPASP.

2.4.2 Based on the legal analysis described above, presentation of a prioritized list of

recommendations to the Minister, on the necessary Regulations that are needed under the NPAS Act to effect successful administration and management of the NPAS. This may include work to be done on Drafting Instructions for Regulations by Fisheries and Forest Departments. NPAAC would also recommend to the Minister, any policy or legal changes that are necessary for the Laws to be aligned for the successful implementation, administration and management of the NPAS.

Strategic Initiative 2.5: Reduce Fragmentation of NPAS The NPASP (2015) and Wildtracks Rationalization Report (2013) indicate that the protected areas system is fragmented, not cost-effective and not financially sustainable. Biodiversity within the protected areas is becoming increasingly isolated as historically connecting landscapes are transformed while surrounding communities remain indifferent, or even opposed, to the PAs and their conservation goals. Additionally, Private Protected Areas (PPAs) are isolated from the broader NPA network, with few incentives or mechanisms for their establishment or effective management for conservation. Other significant contributors to system fragmentation are encroachment and conversion of land use for lands in or adjacent to NPAS sites, particularly for agriculture. Then there are some lands that are slated for development. Some developments are not suited to biodiversity protection (e.g. heavy industry) and negotiations need to happen in order for those developments to be done elsewhere. Other threats arise from squatting, illegal activities, or misplaced development initiatives. Other developments may lend themselves to being environmentally benign or can even provide management to the corridor (e.g. sustainable agro-forestry). Land use planning must be dovetailed with corridor management; and the terms of development approvals have to be determined under strict planning guidelines. This requires a mechanism for inter-ministerial cooperation. This relates to Strategic Initiative 2.1 The use of corridors that connect protected area sites has been identified as a valid strategy to combat fragmentation. The Rationalization report identifies 3 corridors (North, Central and South) that could effectively do this. However, some of the land where the corridors are identified are private land. The NPAS Act gives one mechanism to incorporate the private land into the NPAS with the consent of the owners. It may prove useful to focus on one corridor at a time to allow for lessons to be learned to fine tune the roll out to the other corridors. The Central Corridor should be first because of the impending threats that would affect the usefulness of the corridor if implementation be delayed. Movement from investment in individual sites to landscapes and seascapes with the involvement of the private protected areas is therefore key in combatting fragmentation of sites and improving the cost-effectiveness of management initiatives.



29

Integrated protected areas and landscape/seascape management plans are an approach for multiple protected areas to work within an ecologically interconnected and interdependent biodiversity corridor area to achieve both conservation and sustainable development objectives, thereby catalysing the sustainability of Belize’s NPAS.

Activities

2.5.1 Identification and mapping by the Forest Department, of the areas within the NPAS

where conversion of land and encroachment are happening. The Department would also identify the reasons for the land use change and encroachment taking place, and develop strategies to combat the reasons for land use change and encroachment. Strategies could include land use policy and planning controls, enforcement activities, educational and awareness activities, occupation of degraded areas by using it to show “ownership” and tenure, etc. Any strategies that require system, policy or legal changes would be brought to the attention of NPAAC by the Forest Department.

2.5.2 Modification and update of management plans where mitigating strategies can be

implemented by localized management. 2.5.3 Develop a protocol for corridor management by piloting management of one

corridor. Key stakeholders involved in the administration and management of the central corridor area (e.g. Forestry, Fisheries, Planning, Department of Environment, Coastal Zone Management Institute, and co-managers) will develop a management plan/strategy including an implementation plan for the Corridor. This would be reviewed by NPAAC and recommendations presented to the Minister for any policy, legislative, system level changes or strategies, and inter-agency partnerships that are required for the successful implementation of the management plan. This might include the legal declaration of the corridor.

2.5.4 Development and implementation of landscape and seascape (eco-regional)

management plans for the two areas identified in the NPASP. These are the Maya Mountains Massif and the Southern Belize Reef Complex. Conservation action plans have already been developed for these areas. The eco-regional management plans will build on these. It is expected that protected area management authorities and other stakeholders throughout Belize will benefit from, and will begin to apply, lessons learned to other landscapes and seascapes within the NPAS.

Strategic Initiative 2.6: NPAS Enforcement Strategy

The System Plan identifies the challenge of the lack of enforcement capacity, particularly within co-managers and regulatory agencies, and a lack of clarity in responsibility for enforcement. While the regulations will always place ultimate responsibility for the protection of national resources on the regulators the de facto situation is that in many cases, enforcement becomes the sole responsibility of co-managers. Many co-managers rely on intermittent funding for enforcement activities and therefore have varying levels of enforcement capability. At the same



30

time, they receive no special consideration for government concessions to reduce enforcement costs (such as gasoline, boat/vehicle duties). Thus, in the case of many CBOs, the assumption of enforcement responsibility is unjust and unrealistic. As a result, in general, the level and effectiveness of enforcement is low and slow to react in urgent cases. The problem is exacerbated by personnel lacking the necessary training and authority. Illegal activity is therefore often left unchecked to the detriment of the ecosystem. Additionally, enforcement efforts of the Forestry and Fisheries Departments are hampered by insufficient resources, and are perceived by some Stakeholders to overlook breaches of the regulations.

Activities

2.6.1 Development and implementation of an enforcement strategy for the system that

clarifies roles and responsibilities, and identifies all the major stakeholders (Belize Defense Force, police, regulators, border officers, co-managers, etc.). Coordinated and integrated enforcement plans for the NPAS and each of its sites should be developed by the major stakeholders. The integrated enforcement plans should clearly define responsibility for CBOs with limited enforcement capacity, identify the critical resources needed to strengthen enforcement throughout the system, identify clear institutional responsibility for enforcing regulations, and ensure that the enforcement plan is written into new co-management agreements. This integrated enforcement strategies would include activities to show “tenure or ownership” for key areas under threat.

Strategic Focus Area 3: Financing The diversification and sustainability of financing for protected areas management has been a persistent challenge. The Drumm Consulting (2011) report already details a diversification of income streams to support the sustainable financing of the NPAS. The NPAS cannot achieve the desired level of implementation and its management objectives without the financing gap being covered. Under the new PACT Act, PACT is responsible for financing the NPAS. With PACT’s new responsibilities, it will also need additional funds to finance these new functions.

Strategic Initiative 3.1: Develop Resource Mobilization Strategy

PACT has not yet been able to grow the Trust Fund and its only revenue sources are the conservation fee, cruise ship concession fee, interest income and fiduciary management fees despite the widening gap between revenue and NPAS financing needs. The conservation fee of US$3.75 has been unchanged for over 20 years. Between 2013 and 2016 revenues from these sources increased by 35%; this was largely driven by an extraordinary increase of 27% in cruise ship revenue in 2015. This volatility illustrates the dependence of PACT on the tourist arrivals, which can be considerably affected by exogenous events or market trends. Indeed, with the decreased allocation from the cruise ship head tax and additional functions now assigned to PACT



31

such as M&E, planning and oversight, PACT must begin to source and mobilize additional sources of revenue to finance the NPAS.

With PACT’s new mandate, financing the NPAS will require a more proactive approach to resource mobilization. The NPASP has already identified more innovative financing mechanisms such as payment for environmental services. Normal economic accounting practices value these services from nature at zero. Water distribution companies take water from streams, rivers or ground water and pay nothing for it. The cost of treatment (for potability) and distribution is used to calculate the cost to the end user. If forests are removed it changes the amount and flow of rivers, streams and groundwater. Therefore, the water companies receive less water which affects both the consumer and the profitability of the company. When the watershed is in a protected area the management of the NPAS does the watershed management for the water supply company. The charge of supplying water to the water company therefore is a mechanism to ensure this ecosystem service is preserved.

Activities

3.1.1 Preparation and execution of a new resource mobilization strategy by PACT with the

objective of closing the financing gap of NPAS. The resource mobilization strategy would include consideration of the mechanisms outlined below. It must be complemented by an efficient communication strategy.

3.1.1.1. Increase in entrance fees to NPAS sites. An increase in entrance fees must be

coupled with an analysis of the visitation experience of the protected areas guest. Everyone wants value for money. Having higher quality attractions and experiences will both enhance the visitation experience and allow for the charging of higher entrance fees. Another option would be to keep the entrance fees the same and as the attractions or experiences are developed charge an additional fee. The creation of partnerships is crucial for creating and operating these attractions and experiences. The Ministry of Tourism or the Belize Tourist Board can play a role in creating operating frameworks and standards for attractions to be created or improved, and advising on an appropriate fee structure commensurate with the quality of the attraction and market rates.

3.1.1.2. New sources of Government bi-lateral and multi-lateral external funding. This

may include modalities similar to PACT serving as the National Implementing Entity for the Green Climate Fund.

3.1.1.3. Exploration of Debt for Nature Swaps. PACT was initially established through a

debt for nature swap. The high level of Belizean debt may make possible other Debt for Nature swaps as a possible means of garnering more investments into the NPAS. A proactive and concerted effort to broker partnerships to make this a possibility will be considered in conjunction with the Ministry of Finance.

3.1.1.4. Donations: The NPAS is visited by foreigners during their stay in Belize where

they would have been informed of its importance (nationally, regionally and globally) and provided with a nature experience not available in their homeland.



32

They should also be made aware of the threats to the system, the need to invest in its sustenance, and the visitor’s role in contributing to the management of the NPAS. As such, mechanisms to capture donations from individuals that have already experienced NPAS and who would like to continue to support the mission will be explored. Electronic technology could be used to make donating to NPAS easy and quick.

3.1.2 Framework for Ecosystem Valuation and Payment for Ecosystem Services. Studies

are required on each of the ecosystem services provided by NPAS in partnership with the agencies that commercialize these services, so that there can be an agreed valuation process. Users of the service will need to be engaged as to how they can help to pay for the sustainability and continuous enjoyment of these services. Financial mechanisms for each of the services will need to be worked out and negotiated so that the environmental service fee is fair, efficiently collected and distributed to the managers that work to provide the ecosystem service. As this is not likely to be voluntary on the part of the service providers, policies or regulations should be developed to facilitate this framework.

Strategic Initiative 3.2: Design a responsive investment strategy that finances critical

needs of the NPAS

PACT’s traditional approach to financing the NPAS was based on a responsive, competitive approach to financing individual grants. The grant programme was categorized by size (for conservation projects) and by various categories of capacity development activities. Investment priorities were broad and until 2016, provided grants to single entities for site specific activities. The PACT Act requires PACT to set strategic priorities for the development, mobilization and allocation of financial resources for NPAS; and to allocate resources across the NPAS, based on established criteria. This requires a more strategic grant making/investment strategy that looks at the System’s requirements as indicated in the NPASP and indicated by the Wildtracks Rationalization report. This strategy must ensure however, that critical needs of NGOs and CBOs who have limited access to funding or revenue generation opportunities are met. The strategy will have to assess where cross subsidies are required, whereby income generated from ‘profitable’ sites can be apportioned and invested in sites that cannot generate income.



33

Activities

3.2.1 Establish with key stakeholders, an agreed process to determine priorities and investment criteria to finance NPAS management activities. Out of this process will arise investment criteria and priorities for a specified period (e.g. annually/semi-annually).

3.2.2 Assess the potential for sites that can generate sufficient income to cross-subsidize

the system, and identify those critical sites requiring prioritization in the grant process. Determine through consultation, a mechanism for transfer of surpluses from one site into the system.

3.2.3 Establish annual envelops for PACT’s investment programme and publish investment

strategy to ensure transparency.

Strategic Initiative 3.3: Design framework for private sector partnerships and investment

in NPAS

Sectors such as tourism and sustainable forestry can provide much-needed financial resources for biodiversity conservation, however in the Belize the main source of revenue for the protected areas system is through tourism. PACT has supported the development of business plans for some sites. Commercial agreements between private entities and protected area managers to operationalize these business plans should be explored as the private sector already has strengths and experience in operating lodges, attractions, gift shops, and the movement of visitors. These kinds of partnerships can generate funds for financing the NPAS and free the managers, co-managers, community groups and NGOs to focus on their strengths and mission rather than trying to create business persons out of protected areas managers. Long-term funding for such investments can be explored with the Development Finance Cooperation. However, if these relationships are not developed within a coordinated strategic framework, such private sector interventions can result in increased pressures to the NPAS and perhaps insufficient returns to the sites. Additionally, the private sector may need external financing to invest in these commercial opportunities. In this regard, players such as banks, investment houses and the Development Finance Cooperation should be brought to the table with a view to financing private sector investments in commercial opportunities. A generic framework for such private investment agreements between co-management entities and financiers needs to be established.



34

Activities

3.3.1 Identification of opportunities for commercial development. To begin direct

engagement with the private sector in terms of investments, specific investment opportunities will be clearly identified and communicated to relevant private sector interests. This means clarifying what type of use and extraction is permissible and under what conditions within the entire protected areas network. “Low hanging fruit” opportunities will be identified and prioritized, for example protected area sites where commercial tourism opportunities exist and are best managed by the private sector (e.g. gift shops, hotels, lodges, marketing, attraction development and management, logistics (visitor movement), etc.

3.3.2 Facilitating development of a framework for the private sector to partner with co-

managers/regulators. This involves identifying suitable private sector partners and investors and bringing them to the table with co-managers. Identification of suitable potential private sector partners would be based on criteria aimed at identifying the “best fit” between private sector entities with the aims and objectives of the System Plan. Discussions would be held to (a) understand the private sector’s terms and conditions for investment; and (b) gauge compatibility with co-management plans and co-managers’ capacity. Where there is the potential for partnerships, a generic framework agreement to ensure private sector viability, safeguards for the protected areas, profit sharing, mutual obligations etc. would be developed, facilitated by PACT. This framework would include monitoring and evaluation mechanisms to ensure the integrity of the NPAS and that it is not compromised by the commercial activity.

Strategic Initiative 3.4: Target Financial Sustainability

The conservation fee and the cruise ship head tax are the only long term sources of revenue for the NPAS. They are however subject to the volatility of the tourism market. Furthermore, the revenue from the departure tax has not increased since it was first introduced, and therefore has not kept pace with inflation or the NPAS management demands. Inflation over that period has eroded the value of the contribution and so it might be timely to consider an increase. This would represent the most effective way to raise funds to immediately pay for the increased demands on PACT. This would have to coincide with Strategic Focus Area 4: marketing and promotion of NPAS that raises awareness of its conservation importance and value to the country, the region and the world. Central bank instruments (Treasury Bills) are currently the only source of investment of the Trust Fund. However, as interest rates decline, PACT will have to identify new more lucrative investment opportunities. Although some options were identified in the current strategic plan, but these were not followed through. Other investments are possible (e.g. property, overseas investment, etc.) and must be explored, taking into account, however, the risk that monies from international investments may not be able to be transmitted or repatriated if correspondent banking relationships collapse.



35

Activities

3.4.1 Seek an increase the departure tax and cruise ship head tax. This must be done in

conjunction with the communication and marketing strategy.

3.4.2 Recruit an investment analyst to develop an investment strategy for the Trust Fund, through a competitive bidding process. The investment strategy should include the development of a diversified investment portfolio as a specific strategy specifically for growing PACT’s Endowment Fund. As part of the sustainable financing strategy the returns from investing the endowment portion of the Trust Fund should be re-visited. A determination should be made of the optimal size of the endowment portion to fund the equivalent of PACT’s administrative operations in perpetuity.

Strategic Focus Area 4: Communication and Marketing Efficient communication is necessary for better coordination among key stakeholders and to build trust, public support for NPAS, for resource mobilization and support to NPAS institutions.

Strategic Initiative 4.1: Build National Awareness of NPAS and Its Value to Belize

An NPAS communication plan created by the key stakeholders will ensure that messages about the NPAS are clear, concise, consistent and targeted. This will assist all the organisations to send a powerful and consistent message on the NPAS to a variety of stakeholders. The goal of the strategy is to raise public awareness of the benefits of NPAS and the investment that is required to ensure its sustainability. The plan would target for example, private sector investors, the government, tourism interests and the general public. The information and data gleaned from the assessments proposed under this Strategic Plan where appropriate would be communicated to these stakeholders in an accessible way via a variety of consultation events and media platforms.

Activities

4.2.1 Development and implementation of a multi-stakeholder comprehensive

communication plan, facilitated by PACT. The plan would target specific stakeholders with specific messages and build on studies and assessments undertaken as part of this strategic plan.

Strategic Initiative 4.2: Link Marketing and Promotion of Belize Tourism With NPAS

The mutual objectives of NPAS management and tourism growth could be improved by linking the awareness and promotion of the NPAS with tourism marketing of Belize through partnerships with Ministry of Tourism and the Belize Tourist Board. The marketing program would elaborate on the features of each landscape and seascape and the features of NPAS (attractions, tours, research information, etc.). PACT already has existing video footage that can be used. The “Pure Grenada” Campaign developed by the Grenada Hotel and Tourism Association in association with



36

the Grenada Tourist Board is an interesting marketing model that combines eco-tourism marketing, primarily via social media that could be explored. The development of a marketing strategy may be useful in gaining popular support and mobilizing resources for NPAS. It builds on the effective communication strategy developed under Strategic Initiative 4.1. A marketing campaign must address branding or re-branding of the NPAS and its individual sites. Improved marketing could lead to an increase in visitation and revenue, increased fund raising and awareness of the NPAS. One idea worth examining is a “Friends of Belize” NPAS membership, which for a single annual membership fee, entitles residents of Belize to enter all of the protected areas in Belize. This would allow for some funds to be invested in the NPAS as well as allowing Belizeans and residents to explore their NPAS in a cost-effective way. This would result in a connection with the NPAS in a tangible way. In essence, this would encourage visitation and support the growth of local tourism.

Activities

4.2.2 Develop partnership agreement with the Belize Tourist Board and the Ministry of

Tourism and PACT with regards marketing and promotion of the NPAS. The objective of the agreement is to achieve branding of the NPAS and improving the visitor experience to the NPAS. This would involve the provision of information from PACT about the NPAS to the Ministry of Tourism and the Belize Tourist Board for use in their marketing and promotions campaigns. This may result in an increase in visitors to Belize as well as the NPAS.

4.2.3 Creation of a membership platform “Friends of Belize” for residents which could be

aligned with PACT’s social media programme. The membership card would allow residents of Belize to enter all of the sites in the NPAS for 12 months for a single annual and discounted fee. As well as the obvious fund-raising aspects of the organization it will also serve to encourage the development of local tourism and increased visitation to the NPAS by residents.

Strategic Focus Area 5: M&E Systems The responsibility for monitoring and evaluation now rests with PACT under the amended PACT Act. PACT is to monitor and report on the National Protected Areas System by: (i) establishing a system for monitoring and evaluation to determine if the National Protected Areas System is meeting its objectives; and (ii) reviewing and approving reports to be conducted at least every five years on the performance of the National Protected Areas System including the financial scorecard and management effectiveness of the national protected areas system. PACT must coordinate this with specialist organizations as strategic partners. Already the University of Belize – Environmental Research Institute (UB-ERI) in partnership with Forestry and Fisheries and other stakeholders have started to think about how a biodiversity scorecard could be developed. It requires more concerted effort to arrive at a mechanism (standardized method, implementation, reporting) that can be implemented. However, the



37

prognosis is that it is doable and achievable within 3 years when an initial report on the status of NPAS biodiversity could become available. This initiative requires more and continued support.

Strategic Initiative 5.1: Develop Biodiversity Scorecard For NPAS

There is no agreed standardized method of measuring the status of the NPAS biodiversity. This means that it is unknown whether all the investments, management and co-management initiatives undertaken by stakeholders is effective in meeting the primary objective, which is to preserve the biodiversity and ecosystem functioning of NPAS.

Activities

5.1.1 Development and implementation of an agreed and standardized methodology to

measure status of the biodiversity in NPAS. This would be implemented by Fisheries, Forestry, UB-ERI and co-managers, facilitated by PACT. A partnership agreement would be developed to establish the time frame for development and deployment of the methodology. The results of this effort would culminate in the publication reporting the status of the NPAS biodiversity. The agreement would also establish the frequency of measuring and monitoring the biodiversity contained in the NPAS.

Strategic Initiative 5.2: Link and Correlate M&E Results to Investments In NPAS

With the establishment of the State of NPAS biodiversity information, and the analysis of management effectiveness these data can be correlated with the investments made in NPAS. It will allow for an analysis to see if the expenditure of funds realizes the protection of biodiversity. The analysis could result in improvements in how much and where investments are programmed within the NPAS, and improvements in the management initiatives taken. It would allow for NPAS administrators and managers to stop doing the things that don’t work. The results can also be used to inform the development of the NPAS System Plan and Strategic Plan updates.



38

Activities

5.2.1 Commission a management effectiveness study across the NPAS. The study would

answer the question whether management of NPAS sites is effective in meeting the objectives. The study would include an identification of initiatives that are working and scope for replication across the system. The study would also include impediments to effective management and make recommendations of what needs to be changed to enable effective management, and this should include an assessment of the co-management agreements. This assessment will be further improved once the biodiversity assessment methodology is concluded and the status of biodiversity scorecard for the NPAS is known. Fisheries and Forestry should participate in the management effectiveness study and be prepared to improve the management plans and co-management agreements based on the findings of the study. This should result in the identifying the desirable features of more effective co-management framework that can be modified and applied on a site by site basis.

5.2.2 Analysis of the amount spent at NPAS sites including landscapes and seascapes,

identifying where exactly the money is spent and the expected outcomes for the investment of resources. This data would be correlated with baseline data for biodiversity. Regular monitoring (annually, bi-annually, every 5 years) of the investments made, summary of management initiatives, and the change in biodiversity status would indicate whether the investments and management being done result in the protection of biodiversity at a given site, or landscape or seascape or totalized for NPAS.

Summary Table 5 summarizes the plan as described in the previous Chapters. It shows the lead responsibility for each activity assigned to the appropriate stakeholder. The priority assigned reflects the importance and urgency of the action to facilitate successful implementation of the System Plan. To a great extent, these strategic activities involve study/research, policy and regulatory development and dialogue, planning, consultation and institutional partnerships and cooperation, and to a smaller extent, institutional capacity building.

Table 5: Roles, Responsibility and Priority for NPAS Strategic Plan

Strategic Initiatives Activities Lead

Responsibility Priority

Focus Area 1: Framework for Strategic Management of NPAS

1.1 Seek key stakeholder buy-in of the new legislation and proposed

1.1.1 Stakeholder mapping exercise and broad-based stakeholder consultations

MFFSD High

1.1.2 Individual meetings between PACT and Fisheries, Forestry and NPAAC to discuss and arrive at details on how the NPAS will be administrated and managed

MFFSD High



39



institutional arrangements

1.1.3 Documentation of institutional arrangements and interagency MOUs

MFFSD High

1.1.4 Establishment of stakeholder coordination mechanisms

MFFSD High

1.2 Undertake institutional capacity building within PACT & NPAS Secretariat

1.2.1 Institutional analysis of NPAS Secretariat to assess capacity gaps to fulfil new mandate

MFFSD High

1.2.2 Identification of core business competencies and develop and approve a new PACT organizational structure, based on this ‘core business’ analysis.

PACT High

1.2.3 Exploration of potential to amalgamate NPAS administrative, technical and coordination functions within PACT

MFFSD High

1.2.4 Development of job descriptions and recruit and staff new organizational structure(s).

PACT High

1.3 Develop NPASP 2020 and update NPAS Strategic Plan

1.3.1 Development of an updated NPAS Plan in early 2020 using a consultative process facilitated by PACT

PACT High

Focus Area 2: Develop Enabling Conditions for Protected Areas System Management

2.1 Ensure alignment to GOB Policy Framework

2.1.1 Assessment of the factors constraining alignment with development initiatives, facilitated by NPAAC

NPAAC Medium

2.1.2 Recommendations to ensure alignment of Government of Belize policies and processes and protected areas management

NPAAC Medium

2.1.3 Inter-Ministerial Task Force MFFSD Medium

2.2

Review Co-Management Agreements

2.2.1 Review of concerns of co-managers by NPAAC and identify key changes that need to be addressed by new co-management agreements

NPAAC Medium

2.3 Develop framework to integrate private protected areas within NPAS

2.3.1 Development of drafting instructions to develop Regulations under the new Act to declare the private protected areas as part of NPAS and to be subject to the new NPAS Act

NPAAS Medium

2.3.2 Review of the management plans for the private protected areas prior to their Declaration under the NPAS Act to ensure that they are standardised against requirements for all sites within the NPAS

PACT Medium

2.3.3 Development of Co-management agreements

Forestry Medium



40



2.4 Prioritize and Draft Regulations

2.4.1 Analysis of the new Laws to ensure complementarity with other Laws that relate to the NPAS, including the Forestry and Fisheries Acts, facilitated by NPAAC

NPAAC High

2.4.2 Based on the legal analysis described above, presentation of a prioritized list of recommendations to the Minister, on the necessary Regulations that are needed under the NPAS Act

NPAAC High

2.5 Reduce fragmentation

2.5.1 Identification and mapping by the Forest Department, of the areas within the NPAS where conversion of land and encroachment are happening

Forestry Medium

2.5.2 Modification and update of management plans where mitigating strategies can be implemented by localized management

Forestry Medium

2.5.3 Develop a protocol for corridor management by piloting management of one corridor

Forestry Medium

2.5.4 Development and implementation of landscape and seascape (eco-regional) management plans for the two areas identified in the NPASP

PACT, Forestry and Fisheries

Medium

2.6 Develop and institute NPAS Enforcement Strategy

2.6.1 Development and implementation of an enforcement strategy for the system that clarifies roles and responsibilities, and identifies all the major stakeholders.

NPAAC Medium

Focus Area 3: Identify and Source Additional Sources of Financing to Close the Gap

3.1 Develop Resource Mobilization Strategy

3.1.1 3.1.2

Preparation and execution of a new resource mobilization strategy by PACT with the objective of closing the financing gap of NPAS Development of Framework for Ecosystem Valuation and Payment for Ecosystem Services.

PACT PACT

High Medium

3.2 Design a responsive NPAS investment strategy

3.2.1 Agreed process to determine priorities and investment criteria to finance NPASP management

PACT High

3.2.2 Assess the potential and mechanism for cross-subsidization

PACT Medium

3.2.3 Establish and publish annual NPAS investment envelops

PACT High

3.3 Design framework

3.3.1 Identification of opportunities for commercial development

PACT High



41



for private sector partnerships and investment in NPAS

3.3.2 Facilitating development of a framework for the private sector to partner with co-managers/regulators

PACT High

3.4 Maintain Current Income

3.4.1 Seek an increase in the departure tax and cruise ship head tax

MFFSD Medium

3.4.2 Recruit investment analysts to develop an investment strategy for the Trust Fund, through a competitive bidding process.

PACT High

Focus Area 4: Communicate the Value of and Create a Marketing Campaign for the NPAS

4.1 Build national awareness of NPAS and its value to Belize

4.1.1 Development and implementation of a multi-stakeholder comprehensive communication plan

PACT High

4.2 Link marketing and promotion of Belize tourism product with NPAS

4.2.1 Develop partnership agreement with the Belize Tourist Board and the Ministry of Tourism and PACT with regards marketing and promotions of the NPAS

PACT Medium

4.3 Develop and encourage enjoyment of NPAS by Belizeans

4.2.2 Creation of a membership platform “Friends of Belize” for residents which could be aligned with PACT’s social media programme

PACT Medium

Focus Area 5: Establish Systems to Monitor and Evaluate Management Effectiveness

5.1 Develop Biodiversity Scorecard For NPAS

5.1.1 Development and implementation of an agreed and standardized methodology to measure status of the biodiversity in NPAS

PACT High

5.2 Link and Correlate M&E Results to Investments In NPAS

5.2.1 Commission a management effectiveness study across the NPAS.

PACT High

Analysis of amount spent at NPAS sites including landscapes and seascapes.

PACT Medium



42

ANNEX A: TERMS OF REFERENCE

Consultancy to Develop the 2017-2021 NPAS Strategic Plan;

2017-2021 PACT Strategic Plan &, the 2017 PACT Institutional Assessment

1. BACKGROUND In October 2015, the National Protected Areas System (NPAS) Act became law. The NPAS Act repealed the National Parks System Act, Chapter 215 of the Substantive Laws of Belize, Revised Edition 2011. The purpose of the NPAS Act is to provide for the maintenance of coordinated management of a system of protected areas that is representative of internationally agreed categories, effectively managed, ecologically based, consistent with international law, and based on best available scientific information and the principles of sustainable development for the economic, social and environmental benefit of present and future generations of Belize. The Board of Directors (Board) of the Protected Areas Conservation Trust (PACT) is charged with the responsibility to facilitate the development and implementation of a Five-Year Strategic Plan for the NPAS. The PACT was established by law in 1996 with legislative amendments in 2003 and 2015. The general function of the Trust, according to the 2015 amendment, shall be to contribute to the sustainable management and development of Belize’s natural and cultural assets for the benefit of Belizeans and the global community, both now and for future generations. The 2015 Amendments significantly expanded PACT’s functions to now include the following: facilitating the development of a five-year strategic plan for the National Protected Areas System (NPAS) and its implementation; reviewing the management plans for each protected area to ensure consistency with the National Protected Areas System Plan and priorities set for the National Protected Areas System; promoting the coordination of, and collaboration within, the National Protected Areas System; monitoring and reporting on the National Protected Areas System; promoting public understanding, appreciation and awareness of the National Protected Areas System through the implementation of a communication strategy for the national protected areas system; funding activities included under the Schedule; serving as the national implementing entity for multilateral and international funding sources related to the sustainable management of natural resources, climate change and other environment related issues, in collaboration with other relevant agencies as necessary; accessing regional and international funds in regard to natural resources, biodiversity and



43

other related matters; and, performing such other functions that are necessary or expedient to enable it to carry out its functions under the Act. The 2015 PACT Act (Amendment) comes at an opportune time as the PACT Board embarks on preparing the 2017-2021 NPAS Strategic Plan, from which will then follow the realignment of existing PACT Strategic Plan (2011-2016) to position the PACT to deliver on the strategic objectives identified in the NPAS Strategic Plan (2017-2021) followed by an institutional gap assessment to transform the PACT to deliver on its mandate. 2. PROJECT OBJECTIVE The overall objective of the PACT contracting with a consultancy is to develop three integrated deliverables: A. The 2017-2021 NPAS Strategic Plan, that must fully consider, integrate and build upon: i. The National Protected Areas System Act (2015);

ii. The National Protected Areas System Plan (2015);

iii. The Rationalization Exercise of Belize’s PAs (2013);

iv. The PACT legislation (1996, 2003, 2015); and,

v. All other relevant documents. B. The 2017-2021 PACT Strategic Plan, that must fully consider, integrate and build upon:

i. The NPAS (2017-2021) Strategic Plan;

ii. The 2011-2016 PACT Strategic Plan;

iii. The 2010 PACT Institutional Assessment Report;

iv. The PACT legislation (1996, 2003, 2015); and,

v. PACT’s 2016 Willingness to Contribute to Conservation Study. C. The 2017 PACT Institutional Assessment Report, that must fully consider, integrate and build upon:

i. The NPAS (2017-2021) Strategic Plan;

ii. The PACT (2017-2021) Updates Strategic Plan;

iii. The 2010 PACT Institutional Assessment Report and performance management scorecard;

iv. The PACT legislation (1996, 2003, 2015);

v. PACT’s 2016 Willingness to Contribute to Conservation Study. 3. CRITICAL DESIGN CRITERIA FOR THE DELIVERABLES

a) There has been considerable work done (e.g., plan, studies, assessments) in the recent past regarding Belize’s National Protected Areas and the PACT. Therefore, the Board, via the ToR, wants to make clear that the consultancy will not “reinvent the wheel” by gathering large amounts of information that already exist. The consultancy must consider and integrate the existing plans and assessments. The existing documents must be viewed as a platform on which to develop



44

b) “more effective documents” in terms of content, structure, format, tools, usability, detail, and clarity. If the consultancy identifies missing information or a better way to structure the deliverable(s), they are expected to submit deliverables based upon their expert opinion and best practices, and not be constrained by previous plans and assessments.

c) There are many different types of plans. The consultancy should note that a five-year

strategic plan is a detailed “internal” document that gives direction and guidance to the PACT Board and Staff. A strategic plan is not an “encyclopedia” of all things about Belize’s protected areas, but rather a focused working document that can be implemented during the timeframe between 2017-2021. In this instance, the PACT Strategic Plan must position PACT to both deliver on the NPAS strategic objectives as well as transform the PACT in order for it to deliver on its mandate.

d) A strategic plan is intended to be a clear, concise, detailed, and an easily useable

action document which helps to guide and justify various Board and Staff decisions in a given year (e.g., budgets, annual work plans, communications, staffing, equipment, construction). Most of all, a strategic plan must be strategic.

e) A strategic plan tends to use matrices and visuals to present key strategic objectives

linked to actions/activities and details such as where, when, why, how, level of priority, responsible person, resources needed to implement, assumptions, and sequence over the five-year period. An effective strategic plan is often a reasonably short document.

f) The level of time and money allocated to this TOR does not permit independent

activities for each of the three documents. It is expected, for example, that the inception meeting, stakeholder meetings, interviews and data collection, will contribute to all three documents referenced in the Project Objectives to the extent practicable.

g) Where practicable, the NPAS Strategic Plan, the update of the 2011-2016 PACT

Strategic Plan and the PACT Institutional Assessment should be done concurrently.

h) Both the NPAS and PACT Strategic Plans must include a monitoring/performance tracking tool to assess annual progress and for adaptive management during the five-year life cycle of plans.

4. TASKS and ACTIVITIES A. Tasks i. Attend an Inception Meeting with the PACT Board to: (1) discuss the scope of the Terms of Reference (TOR) and deliverables to be produced and (2) discuss and finalize the work-plan and proposed consultation schedule.



45

ii. Conduct a meeting with the National Protected Areas Advisory Council to discuss their role and contribution as it pertains to the ToR. iii. Conduct meetings with relevant Government Ministries/Departments and Non-Governmental Organizations including, but not limited to: *Ministry of Natural Resources *Ministry of Tourism *Ministry of Culture *Departments of Forestry, Fisheries, and the Environment *Coastal Zone Management Authority Institute *Belize Tourism Board *National Institute for Culture and History *Non-Government Organizations and Community Based Organizations who serve as co-managers, stakeholders, including the private/public sector, such as the Belize Tourism Industry Association; the Belize Hotel Association, and the Belize Chamber of Commerce and Industry. iv. Review all relevant literature, to include but not be limited to those sources referenced in Section 2 of this ToR. B. Specific Activities The consultancy team, in their response to this ToR, will be expected to develop a work plan, which details specific activities, timeline, and their sequence. 5. DELIVERABLES The deliverables will be submitted by the consultancy in hard copy (15 copies) and digital format to the Chair of the PACT Board. All timeframes/schedules for delivery shall be outlined in an approved Inception Report with specified due dates agreed upon between the consultancy firm and the PACT Board. Deliverables and Estimated Timeline Deliverables Timeline (Calendar Weeks) Inception Meeting Report—brief executive summary of meeting

No later than 2 weeks after signing of contract

Report on consultations and draft outline of SPs and Assessment


Draft NPAS SP, PACT Assessment and presentation to Board


Draft PACT SP and presentation to Board No later than 12 weeks after signing of contract

Final NPAS SP, PACT Assessment, and PACT SP No later than 14 weeks after signing of contract



46

6. APPROACH An interactive and participatory approach is a requirement. The consultancy firm will be responsible to propose a work plan to undertake the assignment. Access shall be given to the consultancy firm to actively engage the PACT Board and Staff, members of the NPA Advisory Council, co-managers, other stakeholders and the public.

7. QUALIFICATIONS AND EXPERIENCE The selected consultancy team shall consist of both international and local experts. Resumes of individuals on the consultancy team must be submitted with specific reference to previous work with PACT and/or in the development of five-year strategic plans for similar institutions to the PACT. Other similar work experience on plans intended to affect change and make management improvements to areas similar to PACT administered government property will be considered. Resumes of the consultancy’s individual team members must be submitted along with the proposal. The proposal should indicate the principal person (by name) that will be responsible for the consultancy and day-to-day availability for PACT to communicate with the consultancy. This includes organizational structure, roles and responsibilities, person-days of involvement for each consultant and can answer questions about the consultancy meeting the established timeline for completion of the project. The PACT draws the attention of interested applicants to Section 28 (4) of the PACT Act Amendment (2015) which addresses evaluations of the Trust, inclusive of the development of strategic plans, which states the following: Any person who is, or was during the period under evaluation, in any way associated with the Trust, such as a member of the Board, Staff or the Finance and Audit Committee appointed under section 18 of the Act or any administrative, technical, scientific or other Board committee or as a direct or indirect beneficiary of the Trust, shall not be appointed to the evaluating team. a. MINIMUM PROFESSIONAL QUALIFICATIONS The consultancy team bidding on this project must have demonstrated excellence and experience in strategic planning or other similar institutional assessments, institutional monitoring (tracking) and performance evaluation, project management, adaptive planning/management, stakeholder engagement, group facilitation and meeting management, technical writing, and active listening. It is expected that the consultancy team will include international expert(s) who meet the minimum professional qualifications or have the desired demonstrated experience. b. DESIRED DEMONSTRATED EXPERIENCE It is highly desirable, but not required, that the consultancy firm and team members have demonstrated experience and knowledge of PACT and the Belize’s NPAS----its history, programs, strategic plans, legislation and amendments, accomplishments, funding streams, and organizational structure.



47

Other desired professional qualifications may include expertise in sustainable finance management/revenue generation, institutional assessment and Belize’s environmental laws and legislative process.

8. DURATION OF THE CONSULTANCY The expected start date of the consultancy is November 21, 2016. The total duration of the Consultancy should not exceed 90 person days over a 14 week period. 9. PAYMENT SCHEDULE Payments will be made on the basis of the review and acceptance of deliverables as stipulated below:

Deliverables Payment schedule

Inception Meeting Report—brief executive summary of meeting 10%

Report on consultations and draft outline of SPs and Assessment

10%

Draft NPAS SP and PACT Assessment and presentation to Board 30%

Draft PACT SP 30%

Final NPAS SP, PACT Assessment, and PACT SP 20%

10. REPORTING The consultancy will report to the PACT Board or as directed.

11. SUBMISSION AND APPROVAL OF REPORTS All drafts and final reports and deliverables shall be written in English. Draft reports shall be submitted digitally in Microsoft Word format on a flash drive. Final reports shall be submitted in the following manner: fifteen (15) bound copies and two digital copies on flash drives (Microsoft Word and printable version) and must be submitted by the consultant to the Chair of the Board of Directors of PACT. The PACT Board is solely responsible for approving the final versions of all deliverables.

12. MONITORING AND EVALUATION The results to be achieved by the consultancy team are specified above. Progress towards achieving these results will be measured by the following Monitoring and Evaluation indicators: a. Timeliness of the submission of deliverables and other services provided;

b. Technical outputs prepared, finalized and approved by PACT Board;

c. Meetings and consultations completed with all relevant stakeholders;

d. Meeting objectives and activities outlined in the ToR; and,

e. Final strategic plans and assessment documents.



48

ANNEX B: STAKEHOLDERS CONSULTED

Non-Government and Community Based Organizations

1. Anthony Hislop Chairman Steadfast Tourism and Conservation Association

2. Dwight Montero Board Member Steadfast Tourism and Conservation Association

3. Rochelle Daly Board Member Mayflower Bocawina Development Group

4. Ellen McRae Member Forest and Marine Reserves of Caye Caulker (FAMRACC)

5. Heron Moreno Executive Director Corozal Sustainable Future Initiative

6. Lester Delgado Head Ranger Corozal Sustainable Future Initiative

7. Marcial Alamina President Friends of Swallow Caye (FOSC)

8. Arreini Morgan Acting Executive Director Southern Environmental Association (SEA)

9. Angelia Lane Development Officer Ya'axche Conservation Trust

10. Jacob Marlin Director Belize Foundation for Research and Environmental Education

11. Sipriano Canti Chief Ranger Belize Foundation for Research and Environmental Education

12. Joel Verde Executive Director Sarteneja Alliance for Conservation and Development (SACD)

13. Leomir Santoya NRM Program Manager Sarteneja Alliance for Conservation and Development (SACD)

14. Zoe Walker Director Wildtracks

15. Matthew Miller Managing Director Monkey Bay Wildlife Sanctuary

16. Valdemar Andrade Director Turneffe Atoll Sustainability Association

17. Arvin Coc Parks Manager Belize Audubon Society

18. Jose Perez President Association of Protected Areas Management Organizations

19. Edilberto Romero Executive Director Programme for Belize

20. Kenny Cal Project Coordinator C'ac'alelenel Car Sa Nima

21. Gilberto Co Executive Director C'ac'alelenel Car Sa Nima

22. Christina Garcia Representative BAPPA

23. Oswaldo Sabido Representative BAPPA



49

Government of Belize

24. Wilber Sabido Chief Forest Officer Forest Department

25. Hannah St. Luce Martinez

BIOFIN PROJECT Climate Change Project/Forest Department

26. Rashead Garcia Officer In charge Forest Department - San Ignacio

27. Victoria Chi Forest Officer Protected Areas Program - Forest Department

28. Raul Chun Forest Officer/Officer In charge

Forest Department – Punta Gorda

29. Beverly Wade Fisheries Administrator Fisheries Department

30. Rigoberto Quintanna

Fisheries Officer Fisheries Department

31. Adriel Castaneda Fisheries Officer Fisheries Department

32. Maurio Gongora Fisheries Officer Fisheries Department

33. Sandra Grant Project Manager MCCAP

34. Eugene Waight Project Manager KBA

35. Ansel Dubon Program Director National Protected Areas System Secretariat

36. Colin Young Chief Executive Officer Social Security Board

37. Adele Catzim Sanchez

Chief Executive Officer Ministry of Youth, Sports and Culture

38. Yashin Dujon Chief Executive Officer Ministry of Tourism & Civil Aviation

39. Colin Mattis National Climate Change Office

40. Herbert Haylock Director of Quality Assurance

Belize Tourism Board

41. Marco Salon Representative National Security Council

42. Martin Alegria Chief Executive Officer Department of Environment

43. Hon. Omar Figueroa Minister of State Ministry of Forestry, Fisheries and Sustainable Development

University of Belize

44. Cecy Castillo Chair Faculty of Science and Technology (NRM)

45. Leandra Ricketts Administrative Director University of Belize Environmental Research Institute

46. Abil Carreras Lecturer – Marine Biology Faculty of Science and Technology (NRM)

International Partners and Projects



50

47. Leonel Requena Coordinator COMPACT/GEF-SGP

48. Jennie Garcia-Saqui National Coordinator GIZ/Selva Maya

49. Nicole Auil Gomez Director Wild life Conservation Society

50. Nadia Bood Director World Wildlife Fund

Private Sector

51. Osmany Salas President Belize Tourism Industry Association

Private Citizens

52. Valerie Woods Designated Rep. People's United Party

53. Lisl Alamilla Former Minister Ministry of Forestry, Fisheries and Sustainable Development

PACT Board

54. . Raineldo Guerrero Representative, Belize Tourism Industry Association

PACT BOARD

55. Elma Kay Representative, President – University of Belize

PACT BOARD

56. Abil Castañeda Alternate Representative, Ministry of Tourism and Civil Aviation

PACT BOARD

57. Anthony Hislop Representative, Community Based Organizations

PACT BOARD

58. Eric Eusey Finance Expert PACT BOARD

59. Artemio Osorio Representative, Ministry of Finance

PACT BOARD

60. Ruth Meighan Representative, National Emergency Management

PACT BOARD

61. Yvonne Sharman Hyde

Ministry of Economic Development

PACT BOARD

62. Amanda Burgos-Acosta

Belize Audubon Society PACT BOARD

63. Dennisia Francisco Executive Director PACT BOARD Secretary/Executive Director

PACT Staff

64. Arceni Lizama Accountant PACT

65. Darrel Audinette Grants Officer PACT



51

66. Michael Pipersburgh

Accounts Clerk PACT

67. Vanessia Burke Executive Assistant PACT

68. Lorena Ramirez Administrative Assistant PACT

69. Kevin Maddison Office Assistant - Driver PACT

70. Ellen Arnold Office Attendant PACT

71. Nayari Diaz-Perez Associate Director-Grants PACT

72. Modesta Cal Administrative Officer PACT

73. Mary Tun-Quewell Grants Officer PACT

74. Mark Zelaya Accounts Clerk PACT

75. Farrah Tingling Junior Accounts Clerk PACT

76. Andrea Tillett Procurement Officer PACT

77. Lauren Burn Communications Officer PACT



52

ANNEX C: LIST OF DOCUMENTS CONSULTED Drumm Consulting (2011) Sustainable Finance Strategy and Plan for the Belize Protected Area System. NPAS (2015) National Protected Areas System Plan. Ministry of Forestry, Fisheries and Sustainable Development. Government of Belize. Wildtracks (2013) Rationalization Exercise of the Belize National Protected Areas System. Horizon 2030: A national development framework for Belize 2010 – 2030

THE 2017-2021 NPAS STRATEGIC PLAN; 2017-2021 PACT ...

Documents

Transcript of THE 2017-2021 NPAS STRATEGIC PLAN; 2017-2021 PACT ...