English - Global Environment Facility

More documents

Recommendations

Info

GEF-4 Tracking Tool for Biodiversity Focal Area Strategic Objective One: Catalyzing Sustainability of Protected Area Issue Criteria Score: Tick only one box per question Comment/Explanation Next steps have input to Indigenous and traditional peoples directly contribute to some relevant 2 ethnic group. Said the management decisions? decisions relating to management but their involvement could be improved population concentrated are in the areas of Bajo Boquete, Process Indigenous and traditional peoples directly participate in all relevant decisions 3 Palmira Central, Cerro Punta relating to management, e.g. co-management and Volcán, in conglomerates of over 300 inhabitants, above all, they are dedicated to agrarian activities in the farms of the region. Just likely the remainder of the communities participating, the native groups have participated on some activities of management, but nevertheless, their participation is minimal. 24. Local communities Do local communities resident or near the protected area have input to management decisions? Process Local communities have no input into decisions relating to the management of the protected area Local communities have some input into discussions relating to management but no direct role in management Local communities directly contribute to some relevant decisions relating to management but their involvement could be improved Local communities directly participate in all relevant decisions relating to management, e.g. co-management Additional points Local communities/indigenous people 24 a. Impact on communities 24b. Impact on communities There is open communication and trust between local and/or indigenous people, stakeholders and protected area managers Programmes to enhance community welfare, while conserving protected area resources, are being implemented 27 0 During the elaboration of the management plan through 1 1 workshops information was obtained where groups, 2 organizations and communities participated. Nevertheless, at 3 present, the interest groups participate on some activities that were planned in the area. The results of the PMEMAP 2009, shows this situation; for which it was recommended that annual workdays with the participation of the groups to devise the annual planning. +1 +1 +1
GEF-4 Tracking Tool for Biodiversity Focal Area Strategic Objective One: Catalyzing Sustainability of Protected Area Issue Criteria Score: Tick only one box per question 24c. Impact on communities 25. Economic benefit Is the protected area providing economic benefits to local communities, e.g. income, employment, payment for environmental services? Outcomes 26. Monitoring and evaluation Are management activities monitored against performance? Local and/or indigenous people actively support the protected area The protected area does not deliver any economic benefits to local communities Potential economic benefits are recognised and plans to realise these are being developed There is some flow of economic benefits to local communities There is a major flow of economic benefits to local communities from activities associated with the protected area There is no monitoring and evaluation in the protected area There is some ad hoc monitoring and evaluation, but no overall strategy and/or no regular collection of results There is an agreed and implemented monitoring and evaluation system but results do not feed back into management 28 +1 0 1 1 2 3 Comment/Explanation Next steps 0 The Program of Monitoring of the Effectiveness of Management of the 1 Protected compiles Areas (PMEMAP) information on the 2 management and orients to take decisions of the protected areas.
Page 2 and 3:
PART I: PROJECT INFORMATION GEFSEC
Page 4 and 5:
3. Strengthening of income generati
Page 6 and 7:
E. CONSULTANTS WORKING FOR TECHNICA
Page 8 and 9:
management effectiveness within nat
Page 10 and 11:
een identified among plants, amphib
Page 12 and 13:
trails, 103Km), only two PAs have a
Page 14 and 15:
array of natural, historical and cu
Page 16 and 17:
payments for environmental services
Page 18 and 19:
the International Park “La Amista
Page 20 and 21:
egulatory framework for mainstreami
Page 22 and 23:
of coastal and marine resources. Th
Page 24 and 25:
F. DISCUSS THE VALUE-ADDED OF GEF I
Page 26 and 27:
5. In summary, the incremental reas
Page 28 and 29:
c. Creating the conditions for up-s
Page 30 and 31:
PART IV: EXPLAIN THE ALIGNMENT OF P
Page 32 and 33:
ANNEX A: PROJECT RESULTS FRAMEWORK
Page 34 and 35:
Matrix of Indicators Component 1 Ba
Page 36 and 37:
Component 2 Base Year 1 Year 2 Year
Page 38 and 39:
Page 40 and 41:
Page 42 and 43:
February 23, 2009 Please ensure coo
Page 44 and 45:
Title of the Position $/ Estimat We
Page 46 and 47:
Page 48 and 49:
Page 50 and 51:
Diagnostic of existing ecotourism s
Page 52 and 53:
ANNEX E: Ecotourism resources and p
Page 54 and 55:
Name of Protected Area Resources wi
Page 56 and 57:
Name of Protected Area PN Chagres -
Page 58 and 59:
ANNEX F: SINAP AND PRIORITY PROTECT
Page 60 and 61:
-iii- CONTENT PROJECT SUMMARY .....
Page 62 and 63:
-v- PROJECT SUMMARY PANAMA ABREVIAT
Page 64 and 65:
A. Background - 2 - I. DESCRIPTION
Page 66 and 67:
- 4 - hectare in SINAP is about hal
Page 68 and 69:
- 6 - infrastructure, technology an
Page 70 and 71:
- 8 - carrying capacity 6 , flow ma
Page 72 and 73:
- 10 - # of PA with linked biologic
Page 74 and 75:
C. Fiduciary Risk - 12 - 2.7 Based
Page 76 and 77:
2. Coordination - 14 - 3.3 A Steeri
Page 78 and 79:
GEF-4 Tracking Tool for Biodiversit
Page 80 and 81:
Page 82 and 83:
3 GEF-4 Tracking Tool for Biodivers
Page 84 and 85:
Coiba National Park No 256,195 ha a
Page 86 and 87:
Page 88 and 89:
Annual budget (US$) - excluding sta
Page 90 and 91:
Protected Areas Threats: Data Sheet
Page 92 and 93:
Page 94 and 95:
Page 96 and 97:
Page 98 and 99:
Page 100 and 101:
Page 102 and 103:
Page 104 and 105:
Page 106 and 107:
Page 108 and 109:
Page 110 and 111:
Page 112 and 113:
Page 114 and 115:
Page 116 and 117:
Page 118 and 119:
. Management Objective 1 GEF-4 Trac
Page 120 and 121:
Page 122 and 123:
Page 124 and 125:
Page 126 and 127:
Page 128 and 129:
Page 130 and 131:
Page 132 and 133:
Page 134 and 135:
Strategic Programs for GEF-4 under
Page 136 and 137:
Page 138 and 139:
La Amistad International Park Altos
Page 140 and 141:
Soberania National Park Baru Volcan
Page 142 and 143:
Page 144 and 145:
Page 146 and 147:
Page 148 and 149:
Page 150 and 151:
Page 152 and 153:
Page 154 and 155:
Page 156 and 157:
Page 158 and 159:
Page 160 and 161:
Page 162 and 163:
Page 164 and 165:
Page 166 and 167:
Page 168 and 169:
Page 170 and 171:
Page 172 and 173:
Page 174 and 175:
Page 176 and 177:
Page 178 and 179:
Page 180 and 181:
Page 182 and 183:
Page 184 and 185:
Page 186 and 187:
Page 188 and 189:
Page 190 and 191: GEF-4 Tracking Tool for Biodiversit
Page 192 and 193: 3 GEF-4 Tracking Tool for Biodivers
Page 194 and 195: Coiba National Park No 256,195 ha a
Page 198 and 199: Including: (tick boxes) GEF-4 Track
Page 224 and 225: What are the main values for which
Page 246 and 247: Strategic Programs for GEF-4 under
Page 250 and 251: La Amistad International Park Altos
Page 252 and 253: Soberania National Park Baru Volcan
Page 290 and 291:
Page 292 and 293:
Page 294 and 295:
Page 296 and 297:
Page 298 and 299:
Page 300 and 301:
Page 302 and 303:
Page 304 and 305:
Page 306 and 307:
Page 308 and 309:
Page 310 and 311:
Page 312 and 313:
Page 314 and 315:
Page 316 and 317:
Page 318 and 319:
Page 320 and 321:
7. Natural system modifications GEF
Page 322 and 323:
Page 324 and 325:
Page 326 and 327:
Page 328 and 329:
Page 330 and 331:
Page 332 and 333:
Page 334 and 335:
Page 336 and 337:
Page 338 and 339:
2 registered: number of individuals
Page 340 and 341:
4 project year, which will summariz
Page 342 and 343:
6 1.18 The Project may be asked to
Page 344:
8 Independent Mid-Term Evaluation I
show all

English - Global Environment Facility

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?