United States Agency for International Development - (PDF, 101 mb ...

Executive Summary
The Luzon Regional Consultation was held last September 27-29, 2000 at the Punta Baluarte,
Calatagan, Batangas. This was the third of the series of regional consultations in preparation for
the National Biodiversity Conservation Priority Setting Workshop (NBCPSW). A joint effort of the
Protected Areas and Wildlife Bureau, Department of Environment and Natural Resources (PAWB-
DENR), Conservation International - Philippines (CI-Phil), and the Biodiversity Conservation
Program of the University of the Philippines Center for Integrative and Development Studies
(BCP UP-CIDS), the Regional Consultations' purpose was geared towards optimizing data
gathering and consolidation for the region, strengthening participation among experts and
stakeholders, and facilitating network initiatives for future actions on Biodiversity cdnservation.
With funding support from the United States Agency for International Development (USAID),
Foundation for Philippine Environment (FPE), Asian Development Bank (ADB) and Haribon
Foundation, the workshop had specific objectives, similar to what it had for the Visayas and
Ivlindanao, namely:
0
0
To convene a small group of scientists, representatives from the NGOs and the government
(PAWB, BFAR, LGUs, etc.), and academic institutions to make a preliminary assessment on
the status of biodiversity conservation work in the region; and
To agree on a work plan and responsibilities for the work ahead up to the national
workshop.
A total of 74 participants, including local experts, staff, facilitators and guests attended the
Mindanao Regional Consultation. Experts and representatives of 26 institutions from the Luzon,
Mindoro and Palawan islands provided, consolidated and validated information enthusiastically,
making the Luzon Consultation a successful endeavour. Although the expected outputs were
similar in form hith the Visayas and Mindanao consultation, such as updated information and
data sources, results of the Luzon consultation was far more extensive due to the availability of
more working maps and a high number of experts. The output consisted of a) corrected and/or
additional map information, b) additional data sources, c) additional bibliography d) directory of
experts in the Luzon region, e) commitment to submit data and positive response from the
participants, f) nominations of Luzon representatives for the national workshop and lastly g)
each working group defined the criteria for priority-setting.
This three-day workshop went through an updating of available data presented by the working
group leaders, worked on through the maps by the different thematic groups who also added on
and refined the criteria to be used for prioritization. On a scale of 1 to 5 (five being the highest,
a relatively high rating of 4.4 resulted from a number of evaluation returns with suggestions that
include advance in-~itations, invitations did not reach the regional office/concerned personnel
they only received verbal communication from PAWB, more experts and strictness on time.
Verbal commendations that was not explicit in the evaluation form was however common,
clearly indicating that the Consultation was a success.