A resource guide to support partnerships that conserve protected areas and promote sustainable and inclusive development Collaborative Management Partnership Toolkit SUPPORTED BY LED BY SUPPORTED BY LED BY © 2021 International Bank for Reconstruction and Development / The World Bank 1818 H Street NW Washington DC 20433 Telephone: 202-473-1000 Internet: www.worldbank.org This work is a product of the staff of The World Bank with external contributions. The findings, interpretations, and con- clusions expressed in this work do not necessarily reflect the views of The World Bank, its Board of Executive Directors, or the governments they represent. The World Bank does not guarantee the accuracy, completeness, or currency of the data included in this work and does not assume responsibility for any errors, omissions, or discrepancies in the information, or liability with respect to the use of or failure to use the information, methods, processes, or conclusions set forth. The boundaries, colors, denomi- nations, and any other information shown on any map in this work do not imply any judgment on the part of The World Bank concerning the legal status of any territory or the endorsement or acceptance of such boundaries. Nothing herein shall constitute or be construed or considered to be a limitation upon or waiver of the privileges and immunities of The World Bank, all of which are specifically reserved. Rights and Permissions The material in this work is subject to copyright. Because the World Bank encourages dissemination of its knowledge, this work may be reproduced, in whole or in part, for noncommercial purposes as long as full attribution to this work is given. Any queries on rights and licenses, including subsidiary rights, should be addressed to World Bank Publications, The World Bank Group, 1818 H Street NW, Washington, DC 20433, USA; fax: 202-522-2625; e-mail: pubrights@worldbank.org. Editors: Thomas Cohen, Alex Behr Graphs and design by Voilà: chezVoila.com Photographies credits: cover © Sutirta Budiman on Unsplash Collaborative Management Partnership Toolkit Acknowledgements Acknowledgements The idea for this Toolkit was sparked at the International Conference on Nature-Based Tourism in Conservation Areas in Mozambique in June 2018. The conference highlighted the demand from governments and implementing partners for tools and resources to support efforts to create effective partnerships to promote conservation of protected areas and inclusive development. The Toolkit focuses on lessons learned from Africa that can be applied globally. T he Toolkit was prepared under the guid- government partners. The Toolkit greatly ben- Ledec, Erik Reed, Nicholas Zmijewski, and Ruth ance of Karin Kemper, and Christian Peter, efited from contributions from African Parks, Tiffer-Sotomayor (World Bank). We thank the World Bank. Iain Shuker, World Bank, pro- African Wildlife Foundation (AWF), Gorongosa peer reviewers and other colleagues who sup- vided invaluable advice during the concept National Park, Frankfurt Zoological Society (FZS), ported the Toolkit analysis, editing, and dissem- phase. The Toolkit received financial support from Wildlife Conservation Society (WCS), World ination, in particular, Lisa Farroway, Caroline the Global Environment Facility (GEF)-funded, Wildlife Fund (WWF), and other NGOs who con- Eric, Nicola Saporiti, Pablo Benitez, Jean-Michel World-Bank led Global Wildlife Program (GWP). tributed case studies and storymaps. In addition, Pavy, James Blignaut, Hasita Bhammar, Nagaraja Various development partners who participated several donors and implementing partners pro- Rao Harshadeep, Isabel Tellez, and Hrishikesh in the conference and others contributed to the vided guidance and insights from their experi- Patel (World Bank). The document was edited by GWP knowledge exchange activities that helped ences supporting these partnerships. Alexandra Behr and Thomas Cohen. shape the design of the Toolkit. The Toolkit draws on the experiences and engagement of We thank the following for their valuable We thank the following for their inputs into the government park and wildlife agencies, non-gov- contributions: Jean Labuschagne (African case studies: Jean Labuschagne (African Parks); ernmental organizations (NGOs), communities, Parks); James Byrne, Greg Carr, Olivia Pereira, Steve Collins (The African Safari Foundation); private landowners, and donors, as well as the Vasco Galante, Marc Stalmans, Grainee Keegan Brian May, Alistair Pole, Tibebu Simegn (AWF); published work of Mujon Baghai, Peter Lindsey, (Gorongosa Project); Sebastien Chatelus Andrew Parker and Mathew Rice (Conserve David Brugiere, Paul Scholte, Anna Spenceley, Sue (European Commission); Rudolf Specht (German Global); Simon Capon, Evious Mpofu, Hugo Van Snyman, Kathleen H. Fitzgerald, and numerous Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature der Westhuizen (Gonarezhou Conservation co-authors. Conservation, and Nuclear Safety); Andy Trust); James Byrne, Olivia Felicio Pereira, Marc Tobiason, Mary Rowen (USAID); Alexandra Stalmans (Gorongosa Project); Chris Roche (inde- The World Bank/GWP team that developed Kennaugh (Oak Foundation); Doreen Robinson pendent expert); Eugene Mutangana (Rwanda the Toolkit was coordinated by Elisson Wright. (UNEP); Daphne Carlson Bremer (USFWS); and Development Board); PJ Massyn (RETURNAfrica); Kathleen H. Fitzgerald was the lead author. Terence Fuh Neba and Ilka Herbinger (WWF). Bruce Simpson (Time + Tide); Rodger Schlickeisen Wendy Li provided significant input and coordi- (The Wildcat Foundation); Andrew Dunn, Paul nated the Toolkit’s production. Enos Esikuri was The team thanks Giles Davies (Conservation Elkan, Geoffrey, Nachamada, Emma Stokes a key contributor to the initial efforts to prioritize Capital), Peter Lindsey (Lion Recovery Fund), (WCS); Luis Arranz, Céline Dillmann, Ilka focal areas and engagement with government and Mujon Baghai (Mujon Baghai Consulting) for Herbinger, Terence Fuh Neba, Nuria Ortega, partners. The case studies were developed with their insights and review. In addition, specific and Jeff Worden (WWF), and Ashley Robson direct input from the implementing NGOs and sections were reviewed by Brian Samuel, George (independent expert). Acronyms Acronyms ANAC National Administration of Conservation Areas (Mozambique) METT Management Effectiveness Tracking Tool ANI Africa Nature Investors MOU Memorandum of Understanding AWF African Wildlife Foundation NBT Nature-Based Tourism CA Contracting Authority NGO Non-Governmental Organization CAR Central African Republic NP National Park CABP Conservation Area Business Plan NRM Natural Resource Management CC Conservation Capital OPEX Operating Expenses CBD Convention on Biological Diversity PA Protected Area CAPEX Capital Expenditure PCU Project Coordination Unit CMP Collaborative Management Partnership PPF Peace Parks Foundation DDD Downgrading, Downsizing, and Degazettement PEC Proposal Evaluation Committee DNPW Department of National Parks and Wildlife (Zambia) PPP Public-private Partnership EMDE Emerging Market and Developing Economies RDB Rwanda Development Board ESS Environmental and Social Standards SDG Sustainable Development Goals ESMS Environmental and Social Management System SPV Special Purpose Vehicle EWCA Ethiopia Wildlife Conservation Authority TFCA Trans-Frontier Conservation Area FPIC Free Prior Informed Consent UN United Nations FZS Frankfurt Zoological Society UWA Uganda Wildlife Authority GCT Gonarezhou Conservation Trust VF Virunga Foundation GDP Gross Domestic Product WBG World Bank Group GMP General Management Plan WCS Wildlife Conservation Society GWP Global Wildlife Program WWF World Wildlife Fund HQ Headquarters ZPWMA Zimbabwe Parks and Wildlife Management Authority HWC Human-Wildlife Conflict ICCN Congolese Institute for the Conservation of Nature All dollar amounts are in US dollars unless otherwise indicated. IUCN International Union for Conservation of Nature IFC International Finance Corporation IGF International Foundation for the Conservation of Wildlife IMET Integrated Management Effectiveness Tool IPLC Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities IWT Illegal Wildlife Trade JMB Joint Management Board KWS Kenya Wildlife Service KNP Kruger National Park M&E Monitoring and Evaluation Liwonde NP, Malawi. © Radek Borovka / Shutterstock Contents Contents ontents Acknowledgements iv s Acronyms v Executive Summary xvi ↘ Section 1 — The Value of Collaborative Management Partnerships 20 Chapter 1 — Why CMPs are important for conservation 23 Chapter 2 — The benefits and challenges of CMPs 35 Chapter 3 — CMP models and principles 51 ↘ Section 2 — How to Establish Collaborative Management Partnerships 74 Chapter 4 — Identifying and screening CMP opportunities 79 Chapter 5 — Preparing for and establishing CMPs 95 ↘ Section 3 — Strengthening and Managing Collaborative Management Partnerships 116 Chapter 6 — Considering environmental and social standards in CMPs 119 Chapter 7 — Recommendations for strengthening CMPs 127 ↘ Appendices 130 A.  PA Management Categories as Defined by IUCN 134 B.  Global PPP Market Assessment 135 C.  Description of PPP Legislation in Selected Countries in Africa 136 D.  Case Studies 137 E.  Description of CMP Models 148 F.  CMP Best Practice 150 G.  CMPs in Madagascar 158 H.  Contractual Parks in South Africa 159 I.  Steps to Identify, Screen, Prepare, and Establish a CMP 160 J.  Sample Business Plans for CMP Bids and Planning 162 K.  Sample Collaborative Management Tendering Information from Rwanda 171 L.  Sample Promotional Materials for CMPs from Uganda 174 Information for an Expression of Interest M.  177 N.  Sample Expression of Interest Evaluation Form 178 O.  Information for a Full Collaborative Management Bid 180 P.  Key Components to Include in CMP Contracts 182 ↘ Figures Figure 1.1 Global Biodiversity Gap 27 Figure 2.1 Majete Wildlife Reserve Annual Expenditure 40 Figure 2.2 Tax and Salary Increases from Akagera National Park CMP, Rwanda 41 Figure 3.1 CMP Governance and Management 52 Figure 3.2 Potential Shift from Governance by Government to Shared Governance 54 Figure 3.3 Risk and Obligation Associated with CMP Models 57 Figure 3.4 Sample Timeline for a 20-year CMP for a PA that Requires Significant Ecological Recovery 65 Figure 3.5 Regional CMP Distribution in Africa 70 Figure 3.6 Number of CMPs per Country 70 Figure 3.7 Share of Types of CMP Models Used in Africa 71 Figure 3.8 Share of Pipeline of CMPs under Active Development 73 Figure 4.1 Government Decision-Making Matrix Tool for CMPs 80 Figure 4.2 Five Steps to Identify and Screen CMP Opportunities 80 Figure 4.3 Malawi PPP Process 82 Figure 4.4 Legal Framework for CMPs 83 Figure 4.5 CMP Variables for Consideration in PA Selection 85 Figure 4.6 Threat Analysis of Selected National Parks, Kenya 85 Figure 4.7 Four Key Drivers for Consideration in CMP PA Selection 86 Figure 4.8 CMP Model Selection Tool to Determine Suitable PA Model 90 Figure 5.1 Seven-Step Process for Preparing a CMP 97 Figure 5.2 General Framework to Inform the Design of a Stakeholder Engagement Strategy 101 Figure 5.3 Guide to Community Engagement in CMPs 102 Figure 5.4 Scale and Depth of Stakeholder Engagement 103 Figure 5.5 CMP Tendering Materials from Mozambique 106 Figure 5.6 CMP Tendering Process 107 Figure 5.7 Project Management Cycle 114 Figure 6.1 International Instruments with Human Rights Implications in a Conservation Context 121 135 Figure B.1 Investment Commitments in Infrastructure Projects with Private Participation in EMDEs, 2011–2020 Figure F.1 CMP Project Logo Example 153 Figure J.1 Three Primary Considerations of a CABP 163 Figure J.2 Annual Operational Expenditures Summary Over 10 Years 165 Figure J.3 Annual Capital Expenditures Summary over 10 Years 167 Figure J.4 Total Protected Area Revenue 169 Figure J.5 10-Year PA Cost and Revenue Summary 170 Figure L.1 Map of Potential CMP Sites in Uganda 175 Figure L.2 Description of CMP Opportunity in Bugungu Wildlife Reserve 176 ↘ Case Studies Figure D.1 Akagera NP Case Study 139 Figure D.2 Dzanga-Sangha PA Case Study 140 Figure D.3 Gonarezhou NP Case Study 141 Figure D.4 Gorongosa NP Case Study 142 Figure D.5 Liuwa Plan NP Case Study 143 Figure D.6 Makuleke Contractual Park Case Study 144 Figure D.7 Nouabale-Ndoki NP Case Study 145 Figure D.8 Simien Mountains NP Case Study 146 Figure D.9 Yankari NP Case Study 147 ↘ Tables Table ES.1 Overview of the CMP Toolkit xviii Table 2.1 PPP Lessons that Might be Applied to CMPs 37 Table 2.2 How CMPs Support the Achievement of the SDGs 43 Table 2.3 Challenges with the Adoption of CMPs in Africa 46 Table 2.4 Challenges in the Management of CMPs 48 Table 3.1 Management and Governance of PAs 52 Table 3.2 The Four Types of Protected Area Governance Models and Examples from Africa 53 Table 3.3 Collaborative Management Models, Governance, Management, and Examples 56 Table 3.4 CMP Models: Strengths and Weaknesses 59 Table 3.5 CMP Model Case Studies 60 Table 3.6 The Six Pillars and 24 Principles for Successful CMPs 62 Table 3.7 Bilateral, Integrated, and Delegated CMP List by Country in Africa 66 Table 3.8 Status of Co-management and Delegated CMPs in Africa 67 Table 3.9 CMP List by NGO in Africa 68 Table 3.10 Number of CMPs and Area of Land Managed by CMP Partner 71 Table 4.1 Embedding CMPs in Laws and Country Level Plans in Mozambique 84 Table 4.2 Sample Protected Area Selection Tool: Drivers, and Deterrents and Risks 88 Table 4.3 Types of CMP Models Used in Africa 89 Table 4.4 Pillars of Kenya’s Vision 2030 Plan that Rely on PAs (Established Pre-COVID-19) 91 Table 5.1 Completed Checklist for Identification and Screening of CMPs 96 Table 5.2 Different Mechanisms That Might be Used by a PA Authority to Establish a CMP 99 Table 5.3 Key Components that Should be Included in an Expression of Interest 108 Table 5.4 Details to be Included in a Full CMP Bid 109 Table 5.5 Standard Headings in a CMP Contract 111 Table B5.1 CMP Risks and Mitigation Measures 112 Table A.1 PA Management Categories 134 Table C.1 PPP Legislation in Selected African Countries 136 Table D.1 Key Aspects of Nine CMP Case Studies 137 Table E.1 Bilateral, Integrated, and Delegated CMP Descriptions 148 Table F.1 Six Core Pillars of CMP Best Practices 150 Table I.1 Steps to Identify, Screen, Prepare, and Establish a CMP 160 Table J.1 Sample 10-year Operational Expenditures Investment Budget 164 Table J.2 10-year PA Capital Expenditures Investment Budget 166 Table J.3 10-Year Revenue Summary 168 Table N.1 Expression of Interest Evaluation Form 178 Table P.1 Governance Elements in CMP Contract 183 Table P.2 Elements of Management in CMP Contract 187 Table P.3 Kenya Park Fees 190 ↘ Boxes Box 4.1 PPP Framework for CMPs in Kenya 81 Box 4.2 Conflict Risk in Virunga NP, the Democratic Republic of Congo 87 Box 5.1 Risk Management 112 Box 6.1 World Bank Environmental and Social Framework 121 Box 6.2 IUCN’s Environmental and Social Management System (EMSM) 122 Box 6.3 Free, Prior, and Informed Consent (FPIC) 123 Box 6.4 Grievance Redress Mechanisms 124 Box 6.5 ESS and CMP Checklist 125 ↘ Resource Boxes Resource Box 1.1 Global Wildlife Program CMP Resource Guide 31 Resource Box 5.1 Stakeholder Engagement 102 Resource Box 5.2 Tendering Concessions 107 Resource Box J.1 Conservation Area Business Plans Tools 162 ↘ Maps Map 3.1 Bilateral, Integrated, and Delegated CMPs with NGOs in Africa 72 Map 4.1 Priority Tourism Development Areas under Tourism Master Plan (2018-2038), Zambia 93 ↘ Figures ↘ Boxes ↘ Case Studies ↘ Resource Boxes Executive Summary xvi Collaborative Management Partnership Toolkit Executive Summary H alf of the world’s gross domestic product in the conservation sector, are increasingly being to support national strategic landscape manage- ($44 trillion) depends on biodiversity deployed globally to enhance PA management ment approaches where governments are inter- and ecosystem services. Animal, plant, effectiveness and bolster green growth strate- ested in bringing on partners to enhance manage- and marine biodiversity comprise the gies. CMPs involve a PA authority (government, ment of PAs and create an enabling environment "natural capital" that keeps our ecosystems func- private, community) entering a contractual for investment and green development. tional and economies productive and provides arrangement with a partner (private or non-gov- the foundation of human well-being. This biodi- ernmental organizations) for the management In Africa, 15 governments have established versity and the ecosystem services it delivers are of a PA (Baghai 2018). There are three types 40 co-management and delegated CMPs with 13 under severe threat and currently face losses both of CMPs: (i) financial and technical support, (ii) NGOs, covering approximately 11.5 percent of material and systemic. co-management, and (iii) delegated manage- Africa’s PA estate. An analysis of these 40 CMPs ment. All three types of CMPs play an important shows they have successfully attracted invest- Well-funded, socially inclusive, and compe- role in supporting governments in PA manage- ments that enhanced biodiversity conservation, tently managed protected areas (PAs) are the ment and development. created local jobs, generated revenues, and stim- most effective tools to conserve biodiversity ulated green development. (Sanderson 2018). PAs also are an integral part CMPs may not be appropriate for all countries of national development and green recovery and all PAs, but in many parts of the world, CMPs There is increasing demand in Africa for two strategies and play a critical role in climate change can be part of a broader array of tools for con- types of CMPs (co-management and delegated mitigation and adaptation. Well-managed PAs serving biodiversity and attracting investment in management) as they offer greater potential for can provide security, governance, stability, and inclusive rural development and green growth. A systemic change in delivering conservation and economic development for under-served and key benefit CMPs offer is potential for additional development outcomes. Therefore, this Toolkit resource-strapped communities and help bolster funding to support conservation of critical PAs. focuses on co-management and delegated CMPs, ecological and social resilience. Researchers found that the median funding for and provides tools and resources intended to PAs in Africa with CMPs is 2.6 times greater than support the design and implementation of these Despite the ecological, social, and economic the baseline of state funding for co-manage- partnerships. To date, the majority of the CMPs value of PAs, PAs are grossly under-valued and ment CMPs, and 14.6 times greater for delegated in Africa are between governments and NGOs; under-funded (Lindsey et al. 2021). Governments CMPs (Lindsey et al 2021). While different CMP thus, the Toolkit mostly focuses on partnerships generally lack the resources and ability to effec- models are used globally, they offer a particular with NGOs. The tools and resources included tively manage such important natural assets, opportunity for Africa. As more countries across in the Toolkit can be leveraged for partnerships putting PAs and their economic development and Africa cope with challenges related to limited with communities, the private sector, and other environmental benefits at risk. New and innova- fiscal space, high debt levels exacerbated by stakeholders. tion solutions and partnerships are needed to the COVID-19 crisis, and the impact of climate prevent biodiversity loss and enhance resiliency. change, many governments are increasingly The Toolkit is designed to help governments, looking for new business models and partnership implementing partners, and other key stakehold- Collaborative management partnerships arrangements to help meet development and ers better understand the role of CMPs and key (CMPs), a type of public-private partnership used conservation objectives. CMPs can be considered features of different models, and to learn lessons xvii from countries that have implemented partner- CMP contracts. As additional efforts are made The Toolkit consists of three sections. The ↗ Contents ships. The Toolkit features case studies that doc- to foster a green economic recovery following first includes relevant background information ument experiences across Africa over the last two COVID-19 and to meet conservation and climate on the state of PAs and biodiversity in Africa, and decades, and provides detailed information and commitments, new experiences and approaches the role of CMPs in addressing some of these technical resources that government leaders and will be tested to increase the value of public challenges. The second section provides detailed implementing partners can leverage to support environmental assets that deliver local and global steps and tools for establishing CMPs. The third the establishment of CMPs. The Toolkit aims to environmental, social, and economic benefits. section highlights environmental and social issues assess CMP models, serve as a reference guide These experiences can contribute to systematic and recommendations for future work (see Table for governments and implementing partners con- learning of CMPs and other partnership models ES.1). sidering CMPs, and raise awareness of CMP expe- as additional countries embark on this journey. ↗ Section 1 riences in Africa to highlight benefits, challenges, Governments and NGO partners should collect and lessons learned. While the case studies and and share lessons learned, including challenges lessons in the Toolkit are derived from national and mistakes, so that future partnerships can PAs in Africa, it can be applied to private and com- benefit from their experiences and knowledge. munity PAs and to PAs around the world. CMPs are one way to drive investments to PAs and generate jobs and income for local communi- ties in rural areas that often have limited develop- ↗ Section 2 ment options and have been pushed further into poverty due to the impacts of COVID-19. During the COVID pandemic, PAs in Africa without CMPs struggled to maintain core operations and in some cases reduced staff, budgets, and sala- ries, which in some places led to a spike in illegal encroachment and poaching of wildlife. The 40 CMPs documented in the Toolkit successfully maintained operations throughout the COVID ↗ Section 3 crisis, did not reduce staff or salaries, and in most cases, provided additional support to help com- munities withstand the COVID crisis. For CMPs to succeed, they require sustained political com- mitment, long-term financial resources, effective local engagement, and an enabling environment that supports a transparent and clear process for establishing the partnerships. ↗ Appendices The Toolkit will be enhanced over time with additional insights and technical resources as more governments, communities, private landowners, private sector, and NGO partners increase collaboration and enter into long-term Niokolo-Koba NP, Senegal. © evenfh / Shutterstock xviii Collaborative Management Partnership Toolkit Table ES.1 Section 1 Section 2 Overview of the CMP Toolkit The Value of Collaborative Management How to Establish Collaborative Section 3 Partnerships Management Strengthening Chapter I Partnerships and Managing Why CMPs are important for conservation Chapter 4 Collaborative Provides an overview of the status of biodiversity, Identifying and screening Management CMP opportunities the significant role of PAs in biodiversity conservation, the biodiversity funding gap, and the Includes the five key steps that governments and Partnerships state of PA management effectiveness in Africa, other PA managers can undertake to identify and Chapter 6 and outlines the purpose and target audience of the screen CMP opportunities, and provides a diversity Toolkit. Considering environmental of tools to help identify PAs suitable for CMPs and and social standards in CMPs determine the most appropriate CMP model. Chapter 2 Highlights the key factors governments and partners The benefits and challenges of CMPs Chapter 5 need to consider around environmental and social standards throughout the CMP process, from Explores the lessons learned from other public- Preparing for and establishing CMPs identification to management. private partnership sectors, opportunities, and the Outlines a nine-step process for establishing a CMP, benefit of CMPs, and challenges with the adoption, from the feasibility study phase to contracting. Chapter 7 establishment, and management of CMPs. Recommendations Chapter 3 for strengthening CMPs CMP models and principles Conclusions and recommendations for improving and scaling up CMPs. Describes the different CMP models and the strengths and weakness of each model, the best Appendices practice principles for successful CMPs, and the status of CMPs in Africa. Provides tools, resources, and additional information, including case studies on existing CMPs in Africa. xix ↗ Contents ↗ Section 1 ↗ Section 2 ↗ Section 3 ↗ Appendices Simien Mountains NP, Ethiopia. © WitR / Shutterstock x Section 1 ↘ Section 1 — The Value of Collaborative Management Partnerships 1 The x Value of Collaborative Management Partnerships Dzanga-Sangha PA, Democratic Republic of Congo © Sergey Uryadnikov / Shutterstock 22 Section 1: The Value of Collaborative Management Partnerships Collaborative Management Partnership Toolkit ↘ Chapter 1 — Why CMPs are important for conservation 23 1.1  Introduction 24 1.2  Value of Protected Areas 25 1.3  Protected Area Funding Gap 27 1.4  Management Effectiveness 29 1.5  Biodiversity at Risk 30 1.6  Target Audience for this CMP Toolkit 31 1.7  Key Terms 32 1.8  Approach 33 ↘ Chapter 2 — The benefits and challenges of CMPs 35 ↘ Chapter 3 — CMP models and principles 51 Chapter 1 — Why CMPs are important for conservation Chapter 1 23 ↗ Contents ↗ Section 1 Why CMPs are Protected areas are the cornerstones of biodiversity conservation and a valuable buffer against the impacts of important for ↗ Section 2 climate change. However, the global PA estate has been largely under-valued conservation by traditional economic and financial systems that do not incorporate the vast service provisions provided by PAs. This chapter outlines the value of ↗ Section 3 protected areas, the financial gap in biodiversity funding, and the resultant decline in biodiversity. It outlines the target audience for the Toolkit, the methodology, and defines key terms. ↗ Appendices ↘ Chapter 1 — Why CMPs are important for conservation 24 Why protected areas are critical for conservation Collaborative Management Partnership Toolkit  ntroduction 1.1 I B iodiversity and ecosystem services are nature-based tourism (NBT), have decreased or dis- CMPs are a type of public-private partnership the foundation of human well-being. They appeared. The fiscal and monetary stimulus policies (PPP). The World Bank has produced numerous underpin our economies, livelihoods, and adopted by governments to keep economies afloat toolkits and reference materials that document health, and yet, they are grossly under-val- will further reduce funding available for environmen- experiences of different countries and sectors ued and not captured in traditional financial models tal conservation (Lindsey et al 2020). In addition, in creating and implementing PPPs. Given the (Lindsey et al 2021). Global biodiversity is under countries are taking on more debt to address the severe gap in PA funding and the role of CMPs severe threat with critical implications for human pressing health and economic impacts of COVID-19, in conservation, this Collaborative Management well-being. The accelerating loss of biodiversity which will further strain already limited resources.1 Partnerships for Protected Area Conservation and and the associated impacts are expected to further Development Toolkit (CMP Toolkit) builds on the weaken economies, exacerbate global food insecu- New and innovative solutions and partnerships World Bank’s PPP efforts and is tailored for the rity, and compromise the welfare of people (World are needed to attract funding and investment, PA sector. In 2018, PA experts published a paper Bank Group 2020c). The World Economic Forum’s prevent the loss of biodiversity, and enhance eco- in Biological Conservation on CMPs in Africa as a 2020 Global Risks Report rated biodiversity loss as logical and social resiliency. Developing countries means of enhancing PA management and attract- the second most impactful and third most likely risk require substantial additional resources and solu- ing investment (Baghai et al. 2018). One recom- for the next decade (World Economic Forum 2020). tions to effectively manage their PAs. Engaging mendation, given the vast area over which CMPs the private sector and non-governmental organi- are deployed and the potential they confer for Well-funded, socially inclusive, and compe- zations (NGOs) to channel additional financial and catalyzing resources for conservation, was for the tently managed PAs are the most effective tools technical resources is critical for the long-term development of best practice guidelines (Lindsey to conserve biodiversity (Sanderson 2018). Their sustainability of PAs and to support the ecosystem et al. 2021). effective management and sustainability is essential services and climate change benefits they provide. to biodiversity conservation, climate mitigation, and This CMP Toolkit aims to assess CMP models, delivery of ecosystem services depended on by Collaborative management partnerships (CMPs) serve as a reference guide for governments and populations and economies (Lindsey et al. 2018). are being deployed globally to enhance PA man- implementing partners considering CMPs, and agement effectiveness and catalyze green devel- raise awareness of CMP experiences in Africa to Despite the recognized role of PAs and the opment, and they are particularly relevant in Africa. highlight benefits, challenges, and lessons learned. systemic risks they face, a report by the Paulson A CMP refers to when a PA authority (government, The Toolkit will be enhanced over time by addi- Institute found that as of 2019, a biodiversity financ- private, or community) enters a contract with a tional insights and technical resources as more ing gap exists of between $598 billion and $824 partner (private or NGO) for the management of a governments, communities, private landowners, billion per year (Deutz et al. 2020). The COVID-19 PA (Baghai 2018). There are three kinds of CMPs: private sector, and NGO partners increase col- pandemic has widened the funding gap by crowd- financial and technical support, co-management, laboration and enter into long-term contracts to ing out investment in biodiversity and PAs in lieu of and delegated management. Approximately increase the value of public environmental assets financing for other sectors at a time when tradi- 11.5 percent of Africa’s PA estate is covered by that deliver local and global environmental, social, tional revenue streams for conservation, such as co-management and delegated CMPs. and economic benefits. 1. For information on the impact of COVID-19 on debt in Africa, visit https://www.brookings.edu/blog/africa-in-focus/2021/02/09/debt-sustainability-and-financing-for-development-a-key-post-covid-challenge/b 25  alue of Protected Areas 1.2 V ↗ Contents P rotected areas are the cornerstones of Africa supports a quarter of the globe’s the economic value of ecosystem services in biodiversity conservation and a valuable biological diversity, nearly 2,000 key biodiver- its PAs is estimated to be at least $325 billion buffer against the impacts of climate sity areas, the second-largest tropical forest in per year, and with improved management, this ↗ Section 1 change (World Bank 2008). They sustain the world, and the most intact assemblages of value could double (Van Zyl 2015). In southern ecosystem services, natural processes, and key large mammals on earth (Lindsey et al. 2020). Kenya, the Chyulu Hills National Park (NP) and the species, and drive economic growth. However, Africa’s biodiversity has been conserved through broader Tsavo conservation landscape provide PAs are at risk. an extensive network of PAs, including 8,601 vital watershed services for the surrounding terrestrial and marine PAs, covering 14 percent area and Mombasa, Kenya’s second-largest city. The global PA estate has been largely of the continent’s land area and 12 percent of the The protection of this forest landscape results under-valued by traditional economic and finan- marine area.3 These PAs support rare, threatened, in 600,000 tons of avoided carbon emissions cial systems that do not incorporate the vast and endangered species, vast and diverse eco- per year,5 valued at almost $5 million per annum service provisions provided by PAs. The depletion systems, and ecosystem services that support (assuming $8 per ton of carbon). ↗ Section 2 of the globe’s natural capital — including natural human well-being and Africa’s economies. assets such as forests, water, fish stocks, min- The Nature Conservancy’s Water Fund in Cape erals, biodiversity, and land — poses a significant Africa’s tourism economy, which is driven Town, South Africa, found that “green” ecologi- challenge to achieving poverty reduction and by its PAs and associated wildlife, contributed cal infrastructure restoration (i.e., the protection the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).2 The 10.3 percent to the continent’s gross domestic of forest, reforestation, and removal of invasive heightened awareness around the value of natural product (GDP) and generated $61 billion in 2019. species) costs five to 12 times less than “grey” capital and the central role PAs play in securing That same year, tourism supported 24.7 million infrastructure (i.e., desalinizing ocean water, ecosystem services and mitigating the impacts jobs, which accounted for 6.9 percent of the total drilling for groundwater, building dams). It also of climate change (Dinerstein 2019) has resulted employment on the continent.4 While the COVID- found that green infrastructure could reclaim ↗ Section 3 in various natural capital accounting systems that 19 pandemic has had a catastrophic impact on more water per year for Cape Town, a city of four aim to value these natural assets. The Changing the travel and tourism industry and its associated million people that has suffered enormous chal- Wealth of Nations report provides 20 years of revenue and employment benefits (Lindsey et al. lenges from lack of water.6 wealth accounting data for 141 countries and 2020), the tourism market is expected to return incorporates natural capital as a key factor in and growth in certain parts of the sector is pro- Over the past three decades, PAs have determining the wealth of countries (Lange et al. jected to continue. increased across Africa. In May 2020, the 2018). Seychelles created 13 new marine PAs protect- Africa’s PA estate contributes to the economy ing 400,000 square kilometers (km2), an area ↗ Appendices in many other ways beyond tourism. In Ethiopia, twice the size of Britain (Vyawahare 2020). The 2. For information on natural capital, visit Wealth Accounting and the Valuation of Ecosystem Services at https://www.wavespartnership.org/en/natural-capital-accounting 3. For information on protected area status, visit the Protected Planet database at https://www.protectedplanet.net 4. For information on tourism trends and economic impact, visit the World Travel and Tourism Council at https://wttc.org/Research/Economic-Impact 5. For information on the Chyulu Hills REDD+ project, visit https://www.everlandmarketing.com/projects/chyulu-hills/ 6. For information on the Nature Conservancy’s Water Fund, visit https://www.nature.org/en-us/about-us/where-we-work/africa/stories-in-africa/new-tool-validates-cape-town-water-fund/ 26 Why protected areas are critical for conservation Collaborative Management Partnership Toolkit expansion of PAs in Africa is due to the recog- nition by governments of the economic and ecological value of PAs, as well as obligations under global treaties such as the Convention for Biological Diversity (CBD). In 2010, the CBD’s Aichi Target 11 established PA targets7 for the ensuing decade: “By 2020, at least 17 percent of terrestrial and inland water, and 10 percent of coastal and marine areas, especially areas of particular importance for biodiversity and ecosystem services, are conserved through effectively and equitably managed, ecologically representa- tive, and well-connected systems of protected areas and other effective area-based conser- vation measures, and integrated into the wider landscapes and seascapes.” According to the CBD, approximately 23 percent of the countries either met or exceeded Aichi Target 11 by 2020, while 56 percent did not report on targets, 16 percent fell short, four percent made no progress, and one percent is unknown. The trend in PA expansion is antici- pated to continue. There are calls from scientists and NGOs to increase the post-2020 CBD targets from 17 percent to 30 percent by 2030, and more than 50 governments have already committed.8 Scientists argue that formal protection of 30 percent of the Earth is required to prevent the average global temperature from rising above 1.5º C, and that securing an additional 20 percent of the planet is needed for climate stabilization by 2050 (Dinerstein et al. 2019). Conkouati-Douli NP, Congo, Rep. © GUDKOV ANDREY / Shutterstock 7. For information on Aichi Targets, visit the CBD’s website at https://www.cbd.int/aichi-targets/target/11 8. For information on CBD targets and campaigns, visit the Campaign for Nature’s website at https://www.campaignfornature.org/ 27  rotected Area Funding Gap 1.3 P ↗ Contents D espite the recognition of the value of bio- Figure 1.1 diversity and the role PAs play in securing Global Biodiversity Gap the world’s natural capital and ecosystem ↗ Section 1 services, a massive funding gap exists for PA management and biodiversity conservation. Global biodiversity conservation financing (US$ billions) Assessing the requirements for maintaining biodi- 0 250 500 750 1000 versity and comparing this with existing budgets, the Paulson Institute, Nature Conservancy, and the Cornell Atkinson Center for Sustainability, found that the global biodiversity financing gap is from $598 billion to $824 billion per year (Deutz et al. 2020) (see Figure 1.1). ↗ Section 2 Financing Gap: US$ 711B Financing Financing need ↗ Section 3 estimate in 2019 estimate in 2030 Source: Deutz et al. 2020. Note: Using midpoints of the current estimates and future needs, current global biodiversity conversation financing (left) may need to increase by a factor of 5-7x to meet the estimated global need for biodiversity conservation (right). ↗ Appendices 28 Why protected areas are critical for conservation Collaborative Management Partnership Toolkit As threats to biodiversity continue to esca- rights, and donor funding. PA funding is not Across Africa, there has been a 60-90 percent late, the cost of protecting and restoring these equally allocated across the PA estate, with some decline in tourism-related revenue for PA manage- vital natural assets will also increase. The Global PAs receiving more resources than others. In ment due to the travel lockdowns. Approximately Futures project estimates that under a business- some cases, a portion of revenue is allocated to 90 percent of African tour operators have experi- as-usual scenario, the costs of biodiversity loss in the PA authorities’ headquarters (IUCN ESARO enced a 75 percent or greater decline in bookings some countries could be as high as four percent 2020a). Most, if not all, PA authorities receive (Lindsey et al. 2020). In 2020, the contribution of of their GDP per year by 2050 (Roxburgh et al. some level of national government support, with tourism to Africa’s GDP decreased by 49 percent 2020). the funding relatively unpredictable and often ($83 billion) and jobs decreased by 29 percent inadequate as governments have competing (7.2 million).10 While donor funding has increased The dearth of biodiversity funding in Africa is needs from other sectors such as infrastructure, during the COVID-19 crisis to address the emer- no different. In 2018, researchers assessed 282 health care, education, and food security (IUCN gency period, the cost of maintaining biodiver- state-owned PAs in Africa with lions and found 94 ESARO 2020a). sity continues to escalate because of increasing percent were funded insufficiently, with avail- pressure, and there are concerns about the ability able funding satisfying only 10-20 percent of PA In East and Southern Africa, many of the PA to maintain funding levels. Simultaneously, there requirements on average. The study concluded authorities rely on revenue generated from is a concerted effort by scientists and conser- that more than $1 billion is needed annually to tourism. In 2017, tourism revenue comprised 50 vationists (see Section 1.2) to increase national secure Africa’s PAs with lions. Overall, sufficient percent of the Kenya Wildlife Service’s (KWS) PA targets post-2020 to up to 30 percent, which long-term financial resources are required for annual budget. In 2019, tourism revenue supplied will require additional resources. More funding Africa’s PA estate to be managed effectively 80 percent of the Zimbabwe Parks and Wildlife and innovative financial solutions are needed to (Lindsey et al. 2018). Management Authority’s (ZPWMA) budget, while ensure the effective management of the existing the South African National Parks (SANParks) and expanding PAs. The PA funding gap varies across the conti- budget also received 80 percent of its funding nent. For example, using existing donor and state from tourism in 2018-19 (IUCN ESARO 2020a). funding, the estimated budget gap for effective External donors, including private and institu- PA management for lions in Angola is 98 percent, tional donors, support approximately 32 percent while in Uganda the gap is estimated to be 67 of the current PA funding in Africa, reaching 70-90 percent (Lindsey et al. 2018). While the exact percent in some countries. PA management scale of the financial gap might be debated, it is requires long-term and reliable funding, which widely accepted that PAs need a reliable source makes reliance on sometimes unpredictable of funding to maintain their management oper- donor funding a management challenge for PA ations, meet conservation targets, and provide authorities (IUCN ESARO 2020a).9 quality visitor experiences where appropriate, and that the current funding available is wholly inade- The COVID-19 pandemic has strained all three quate (IUCN ESARO 2017). sources of PA revenue, dramatically exacerbating the PA funding gap and putting biodiversity at Africa’s PAs are financed from three main greater risk (Lindsey et al. 2020). National govern- sources: budget allocation from national gov- ments have cut, and will continue to cut, conser- ernments, revenue from tourism and other user vation budgets to address COVID-related issues. 9. For information on the biodiversity funding gap, see the Paulson Institute report at https://www.paulsoninstitute.org/key-initiatives/financing-nature-report/, IUCN’s Closing the Gap at https://portals. iucn.org/library/node/49045, and More than $1 billion needed annually to secure Africa’s protected areas with lions at https://www.pnas.org/content/115/45/E10788 10.  For information on the impact of COVID-19 on Africa, visit the World Travel and Tourism Council at https://wttc.org/Research/Economic-Impact 29  anagement Effectiveness 1.4 M ↗ Contents T he lack of adequate PA management While a number of tools are available for PA The effective management of PAs can help finance (see Section 1.3) is resulting in the managers to measure PAME, only 26 percent governments achieve their CBD targets as well underperformance of Africa’s PA network, of Africa’s PAs have completed PAME assess- as other national and global commitments, such ↗ Section 1 putting species, ecosystems, and the ments due to a lack of capacity, meaning there as SDGs. For example, a well-managed PA can network itself at risk. Protected areas manage- is little understanding of actual PA performance enable a government to meet SDG targets 1, ment effectiveness (PAME) relates to the extent by PA managers. Many assessments in East and 2, 8, 9, 10, 13, 14, 15, 16, and 17 as referenced in to which management is effective at conserving Southern Africa were completed only one time or Table 2.2 in Chapter 2. values and achieving goals and objectives, such with a different tool in the subsequent year, which as protecting biodiversity (IUCN ESARO 2017). does not help a PA manager track progress over Effectively managed PAs can help govern- time — the very purpose of monitoring manage- ments achieve national targets. In South Africa, For PAs to fulfill their obligations, they need ment effectiveness. for example, the government established goals adequate resources and capacity. Otherwise, they under its Green Economy Plan. Likewise, Kenya’s ↗ Section 2 become non-performing PAs, commonly referred The CBD Conference of Party 10 Decision X/31 Vision 2030 and Rwanda’s Green Growth and to as “paper parks.” The CBD’s Aichi Target 11 calls for Parties to “… expand and institutionalize Climate Resilience National Strategy for Climate recognizes that increases in PA coverage alone management effectiveness assessments to work Change and Low Carbon Development outline will not halt the loss of biodiversity, highlighting towards assessing 60 percent of the total area targets that effectively-managed PAs can help the need for effective management. of PAs by 2015 … and report the results into the governments achieve. global database on management effectiveness” In 2020, researchers assessed budgets, man- (CBD 2010). agement, and threats for 516 PAs and community conservation areas with lions in savannah Africa ↗ Section 3 to determine conservation performance related to biodiversity outcomes, which they compiled into a Conservation Area Performance Index (CAPI). They found that 82 percent of the sampled area was in a state of failure or deterioration, with only 10 percent in a state of success or recovery. A large proportion of the succeeding or recov- ering PAs have CMPs. The CAPI values varied by ↗ Appendices region and were lowest in central and West Africa, followed by East and Southern Africa. They also found that the CAPI differed by management regime, including state, private, and community conservation areas (Robson 2021). Akagera NP, Rwanda. © Thomas Bartelds / Shutterstock 30 Why protected areas are critical for conservation Collaborative Management Partnership Toolkit  iodiversity at Risk 1.5 B I neffective PA management is exacerbating key 2019).12 Approximately 56 percent of the lion’s exacerbated by the impact of climate change16 threats driving the overall decline in biological range falls in PAs (Lindsey et al. 2018), a propor- (WBG 2020c). diversity in Africa, such as illegal wildlife trade tion that is likely to grow rapidly as wildlife outside (IWT), poaching, habitat conversion, illegal PAs disappears. All of Africa’s great ape species Recognizing the unparalleled decline in bio- logging, unregulated mining, grazing, unsustain- are rare, threatened, or endangered, with trends diversity and intensifying threats alongside the able agriculture and settlement, climate change, indicating a continued decline for all except the severe limitations in PA funding, many African and the spread of invasive species. These threats mountain gorilla.13 From 2007 to 2014, Africa’s governments are partnering with NGOs and the pose a significant risk to Africa’s wildlife, clean elephant population declined by 30 percent,14 private sector in PA management (see Chapter 3) water and air, productive soils, fish stocks, and and from 1980 to 2020, giraffes declined by 30 to attract investment and technical capacity other key environmental services. percent.15 This unprecedented decline of key (Baghai et al. 2018). These CMPs vary in structure species is emblematic of the overall biodiversity and approach. Due to the severe financial impact The Congo Basin, the world’s second-largest and ecosystem service loss in Africa. of COVID-19 that has put additional strain on PA tropical forest, spans six countries in Central authorities, along with the proven success of Africa and is globally significant for climate mit- These trends in Africa mirror global biodiversity CMPs over the past two decades, governments igation. This expansive tropical forest absorbs loss patterns. The Intergovernmental Science- have greater interest in exploring strategic CMPs, approximately 1.2 billion tons of carbon dioxide Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem and there is a growing demand from govern- each year, and its trees store a third more carbon Services (IPBES) report of 2019, the most compre- ments for partners. over the same area of land than those of the hensive of its kind, found that nature is declin- Amazon (Yeung 2021). According to Global Forest ing globally at rates unprecedented in human Watch,11 an initiative of the World Resources history and the rate of species extinctions is Institute, primary rainforest loss in the Congo accelerating, with grave impacts likely on people Basin Forest more than doubled from 2002 around the world. A WWF (2020) report revealed to 2019. In 2019 alone, 590,000 hectares were an average decline of 68 percent in vertebrate lost — an area more than half the size of Jamaica species numbers between 1970 and 2016. The (Yeung 2021). IPBES report also found that the current global response is insufficient, and that transformative Over the last 25 years, Africa’s lion population change is needed to restore and protect nature has declined by 50 percent (Stolton and Dudley (IPBES 2019). These trends in biodiversity loss are 11. For information on deforestation, visit Global Forest Watch’s website at https://www.globalforestwatch.org/ 12. For information on lion conservation, visit the Lion Recovery Fund’s website at https://www.lionrecoveryfund.org/ 13. For information on the Red List for threatened species, visit the IUCN’s website at https://www.iucnredlist.org/ 14. For information on the status of elephant, visit the Elephant Crisis Fund’s website at https://www.elephantcrisisfund.org/ 15. For information on giraffe conservation, visit the Giraffe Conservation Foundation’s website at https://giraffeconservation.org/giraffe-conservation-status/ 16. For information on the projected impacts of climate change on biodiversity, see the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services workshop report at https:// ipbes.net/sites/default/files/2021-06/20210609_workshop_report_embargo_3pm_CEST_10_june_0.pdf 31  arget Audience 1.6 T ↗ Contents for this CMP Toolkit Resource Box 1.1 Global Wildlife Governments NGOs, private sector, Program CMP Resource Guide and community partners The Toolkit is designed to help governments ↗ Section 1 The Global Wildlife Program’s CMP Resource understand and consider whether CMPs are suit- The Toolkit can also help NGOs and private Guide provides descriptions of and links to able for their PA estate and the process for estab- sector partners interested in collaborating with relevant CMP resources from across the world lishing an effective partnership that will result in governments understand CMP best practices. https://www.worldbank.org/en/programs/ enhanced PA management and green growth. While the Toolkit references government PAs, the global-wildlife-program. The target government audience includes staff processes and practices can be adapted and used working for agencies and ministries in charge for private and community conservation areas of PAs, as well as those engaged in PPPs who and PAs I-VI, as defined by the International Union can help leverage existing efforts already widely for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) (see Appendix used in other economic sectors. As the stewards A, Table A.1). A case study of a CMP between ↗ Section 2 of national PA estates, governments have the a community in South Africa, the Makuleke ultimate decision-making authority for entering Community, and a PA authority, SANParks, is CMPs. While the focus of the Toolkit is African provided in Appendix D, Figure D.6. In addition, PAs, the tools and approaches outlined can be while the text refers mainly to terrestrial PAs, applied around the world. Given that CMPs attract CMPs are already being used for marine PAs, investment capital and donor funding, the Toolkit such as Bazaruto Archipelago National Park in will also help relevant ministries, such as the Mozambique. ministries of finance, planning, and procurement, understand the role CMPs play in creating an CMPs are demonstrating positive conserva- ↗ Section 3 enabling environment for investment. tion, social, and economic outcomes, and there is greater scope for their use across Africa and glob- ally. Despite the proven success and heightened interest in CMPs, there are limited resources on CMPs in Africa and frequent misunderstandings regarding their structure (Resource Box 1.1). The Toolkit aims to provide information that will help enhance the use of CMPs to ensure that PAs are ↗ Appendices sustained and thrive in the future. 32 Why protected areas are critical for conservation Collaborative Management Partnership Toolkit  ey Terms 1.7 K C ollaborative management partnerships and create a special purpose vehicle (SPV) to Private partner or party (a non-state actor) refers (CMPs) refers to when a PA authority undertake management, with equal repre- to the private sector partner or an NGO partner (government, private, community) enters sentation by the parties on the SPV board. that engages in a CMP with a government body into a contractual arrangement with a • Delegated CMPs, similar to integrated CMPs, that has jurisdiction over a PA. partner (private or NGO) for the management of but in the case of a delegated CMP, a majority a PA (Baghai et al. 2018). Through a CMP, the PA of the SPV board is appointed by the private Public partner or party refers to the state actor authority devolves certain management obliga- partner. responsible for PA management such as the PA tions to the partner and the partner takes on these authority or the relevant ministry, such as the management responsibilities and in most cases Community partner refers to a community that ministry of environment. This term is used inter- funding obligations. The duration of the contract lives in and/or around a PA and is engaged in a changeably with contracting authority. varies and is dependent on the PA and the goal of CMP in the governance and/or management of the PA authority. While the Toolkit mainly refers a CMP, as a beneficiary, or as the owner of a PA, Public-private partnership (PPP) is broadly to public PAs, the process and principles can be legally or customarily. defined as a long-term contract between a adapted and used for community and private partner (private, NGO, or community) and a conservation area CMPs. The term CMP includes Concession is a term used in PAs to describe a government entity for providing a public asset or two key words that are critical to the long-term contractual arrangement (lease, license, ease- service, in which the partner bears significant risk success of any management agreement — collabo- ment, or permit) between a tourism operator and management responsibility and remuner- ration and partnership (Lindsey et al. 2021). (consumptive and non-consumptive tourism) ation is linked to performance (WBG 2017). The for the use of an area for commercial purposes term is commonly used in the for-profit context There are three kinds of CMPs (Baghai et al. 2018): (accommodation, food and beverage, recre- for large-scale public works projects, which can • Financial and technical support, where the state ation, education, retail, and interpretive services) create confusion when applied to conservation. retains full governance authority and the private (Spenceley et al. 2017). A concession can be struc- PPPs also describes tourism concessions in PAs partner provides technical and financial support. tured as a PPP. in some contexts, as well as blended finance • Co-management CMPs, where the state and models between public and private donors the partner collaborate on the management of Contracting authority (CA) refers to the govern- (Spenceley et al. 2017). the PA. This is further differentiated as follows: ment entity that has the legal authority to enter a • Bilateral CMPs, in which the state and the CMP and, in some cases, depending on PPP legis- Unlike traditional PPPs for large infrastructure partner agree to collaborate on PA man- lation, is the entity tasked with overseeing the PPP projects, conservation PPPs aimed at restoring agement and the two parallel entities and process. In the case of CMPs, the CA often refers and managing PAs are not profit-seeking and the structures (the state and the partner) work to the PA authority or a relevant ministry, such as partner is commonly an NGO. When the NGO side-by-side in the PA with a management the ministry of environment or finance. This term partner engages in profit-making activities, such agreement. is used interchangeably with public partner. as tourism, revenues are re-invested in the con- • Integrated CMPs, in which the state and the servation of the PA or sustainable development of partner agree to collaborate on PA manage- Park or PA manager refers to the warden or the local communities (Baghai 2021). ment through a management agreement conservator of the public PA. 33 Approach 1.8  ↗ Contents T he Toolkit was developed through: (i) a review of existing literature on PA man- agement, CMPs and tourism conces- ↗ Section 1 sions; (ii) consultation with conservation management practitioners (government and PA authorities, NGOs, community members, donors, and private sector partners) with experience establishing and managing CMPs in Africa; and (iii) a review of PPP toolkits and lessons learned from other sectors and regions. ↗ Section 2 ↗ Section 3 ↗ Appendices Yankari NP, Nigeria. © JERRY CHIDI / Shutterstock 34 Section 1: The Value of Collaborative Management Partnerships Collaborative Management Partnership Toolkit ↘ Chapter 1 — Why CMPs are important for conservation 23 ↘ Chapter 2 — The benefits and challenges of CMPs 35 2.1  Lessons Learned from PPPs 36 2.2  Opportunities and Potential Benefits of CMPs 38 2.3  Potential Challenges with CMPs 45 ↘ Chapter 3 — CMP models and principles 51 Chapter 2 — The benefits and challenges of CMPs Chapter 2 35 ↗ Contents ↗ Section 1 The benefits To enhance PA management effectiveness and reverse the trends of biodiversity loss, 15 African and challenges ↗ Section 2 governments have entered into strategic co-management and of CMPs delegated CMPs, and there is growing interest and momentum in CMPs. This chapter outlines the benefits of CMPs, with practical examples from across ↗ Section 3 Africa, and the potential challenges with their adoption and management. ↗ Appendices ↘ Chapter 2 — The benefits and challenges of CMPs 36 The benefits and challenges of CMPs Collaborative Management Partnership Toolkit  essons Learned from PPPs 2.1 L P PPs have been extensively used around some may be more politically or socially challeng- Australia (Manolache et al. 2018; Wilson et al. the world for decades. While infrastructure ing to introduce and implement. Governments 2008). Such partnerships, if properly structured, (transport, telecommunications, energy, run the risk of not having sufficient expertise to can help governments capture the significant water, solid waste management) attracts understand PPP arrangements, carry out their economic value of parks by improving their the most PPPs, such partnerships are also obligations, and monitor partners’ performance economic sustainability, improving the quality increasing in public services such as healthcare (PPP Legal Resource Center 2020). of tourism services, leveraging investments in and education, and in sectors such as tourism conservation, and contributing to biodiversity (concessions in PAs). See Appendix B for more For private partners, the benefits of PPPs are conservation (Saporiti 2006). Though PPPs are a details on the global PPP market. linked to the ability to recoup their initial invest- favored mechanism, they are not always success- ments and satisfy the expected return-on-in- ful. Periodic reviews of PPP performance across PPPs are attractive to governments. Private vestments. In the case of NGO or community sectors and regions offer lessons for the conser- investments enable governments to serve public partners, conservation, social, or economic vation sector. interests without over-extending constrained outcomes may also motivate the PPP arrange- budgets. They also can contribute to achieving ment, with the success of the contract linked In many African countries, the engagement of SDGs by helping to overcome inadequate infra- to those goals. Partners face many of the same a CMP for PA management is guided by PPP leg- structure that constrains growth (WBG 2015). risks as those faced by governments, including islation (see Appendix C ). The process for estab- In the government’s effort to reduce project unexpected costs, lower or different usage that lishing a CMP outlined in the Toolkit is consistent costs and maximize returns-on-investment, the affects revenue collection, and changing political with PPP legislation. partner may introduce better service delivery, or regulatory environments. innovations, and implementation and operational efficiencies, while taking on a significant amount PPPs in Conservation of risk and management responsibility. PAs have long permitted private companies to At the same time, risks associated with PPPs operate commercial concessions — for lodging, can be high and need to be carefully assessed, food, recreational activities, and retail — within mitigated, and allocated if the project continues. their boundaries. A leading example is the U.S. These include unexpected project costs or higher National Park Service, which administers more costs of engaging with a private partner, poor than 500 concession contracts across its parks quality of results, user demand that is different with gross receipts totaling $1 billion annually.17 than expected, changes in the legal or regulatory Management concessions, in which a parks framework that affect the project, and default of authority outsources responsibility for manage- the private partner if it cannot financially or tech- ment or conservation activities to a partner with nically implement the project (WBG 2017). Some greater capacity, have been developed in Europe, projects are easier to finance than others, and Africa, Latin America and the Caribbean, and 17. For information on NP concessions in the U.S., visit the U.S. NPS website https://www.nps.gov/subjects/concessions/authorized-concessioners.htm 37 Table 2.1 ↗ Contents PPP Lessons that Might be Applied to CMPs Key PPP Lesson Learned Description 1. Public sectors need enabling A sector’s market structures (in this case, PAs) must have conditions that allow the private sector to operate; regulatory environments in place to apply PPPs well bodies should be able to protect private partners from political interference; and public authorities should have the capacity to develop PPP projects that interest the private sector (WBG 2015). CMPs can help create the right enabling environment to attract investment, such as tourism and payment for ecosystem service investment. In some cases, the willingness of private sector tourism operators to invest resulted from a CMP ↗ Section 1 2. PPPs perform better in countries Readiness refers to established frameworks (legal, regulatory, and others) in place for preparing and approving PPPs in with a higher level of readiness conservation and a longer track record of PPP transactions (WBG 2015). For those countries that do not have a long track record, having strong and transparent frameworks in place is important 3. Political champions are vital for PPPs Given the public nature of PPPs, securing one or more political champions in government to guide and advocate for the project is essential. A review of International Finance Corporation (IFC) PPP projects found that it is rare for major projects to succeed without advocates (Florizone and Carter 2013) 4. PPPs need to be backed by a Most private partners consider it vital for projects to have sound economic foundations that translate into a sustainable ↗ Section 2 sustainable business case business model (Florizone and Carter 2013). For PPPs in the conservation sector, other motivations may be equally or more important, such as increasing wildlife numbers and improving the integrity of PAs. One factor to consider for the conservation sector is that PPPs may add or increase user charges to recoup costs 5. Partnerships should be structured to Defining the right partnership model to fulfill different objectives can be challenging and requires learning from past achieve public and business objectives lessons as well as innovating for the future (Florizone and Carter 2013). Within conservation, community stakeholders may need to be integrated into the partnership, because the success of the arrangement could depend on their buy-in 6. Communications about the The stories and success of conservation PPPs should be told early and often to people at every level — local, regional, partnership throughout is key national, and international — that can influence the project ↗ Section 3 ↗ Appendices 38 The benefits and challenges of CMPs Collaborative Management Partnership Toolkit  pportunities and 2.2 O Potential Benefits of CMPs T he status quo of wildlife and PA man- is 2.6 times greater than the baseline of state Some donors increasingly require a CMP agement is not adequately addressing funding for bilateral and integrated CMPs, and to be in place before providing funding for PA the conservation crisis, and traditional 14.6 times greater for delegated CMPs (Lindsey management. projects are challenged by their short-term et al. 2021). Funding from CMPs comes from duration and lack of accountability, among other bi-lateral and multi-lateral donors, private foun- “The Wildcat Foundation has been supporting factors. To enhance PA management effective- dations, lotteries, foundations associated with national parks in Africa for nine years, and ness and reverse the trends of biodiversity loss, zoos, philanthropists and individual donors, and currently has substantial grants active in 10 15 African governments (see Section 3.6) and their the private sector through corporate foundations parks in six countries. It is highly unlikely that respective ministries and agencies have entered and corporate social responsibility programs. we would have provided anywhere near this into strategic co-management and delegated In some cases, NGOs can facilitate charitable level of support had our NGO grantees not CMPs, and there is growing interest and momen- donations more easily than governments, can been partnering with African government tum in CMPs. While CMPs have demonstrated mobilize resources quickly to respond to a crisis, agencies that gave them full delegated man- significant positive ecological, economic, and and are able to manage and account for funding agement authority for the parks. The delegated social outcomes, they are not suitable in all cases, in a way that governments may not. NGOs can CMP gives us confidence that the parks will as described in the Toolkit, and should be con- bring financial accountability through professional be expertly managed. We know the NGOs sidered among a suite of conservation tools. In financial management and audit procedures involved and can hold them accountable for addition, coordination between CMP partners that give funders confidence their funds will be how they use our funds and for the results. and other PA managers in the broader landscape accounted for and used for the intended purpose. We know they will implement a park plan that (public, private, and community) is important In addition, the development or improvement of a we’ve pre-approved, and to begin creating for conservation and development outcomes. governance structure as part of the CMP creates good jobs and providing training and mentoring Numerous drivers lead governments to engage additional oversight and a layer of accountability that will elevate the country’s own conserva- in CMPs, as outlined below. Nine case studies are that provides assurance to donors about proper tion professionals to become expert senior included in Appendix D, which describe various budget management. managers.” drivers for each CMP. — Rodger Schlickeisen, Director, Wildcat Gonarezhou National Park (NP) in the south- Foundation19 Economic Drivers eastern part of Zimbabwe is managed through a CMP between the Frankfurt Zoological Society Enhance investment flow Attract donor funding and in some (FZS) and the ZPWMA. Annual funding for the cases are a donor requirement park increased in year one by 50 percent and the A report titled “Mobilizing Private Finance for current annual budget is approximately $5 million, Nature” concluded that public funds are insuffi- PAs with CMPs have higher operational including capital expenditure.18 cient to reverse biodiversity loss and private sector budgets than those without. Researchers find finance can help mitigate the threat (WBG 2020c). that the median PA funding associated with CMPs 18. For information about Gonarezhou Conservation Trust, visit https://gonarezhou.org 19. For information about the Wildcat Foundation, visit https://www.thewildcatfoundation.us/index.html 39 However, the right enabling environment must be support (through park fees), showing immedi- In Senegal, Resolute Mining is engaged in a ↗ Contents established to attract private sector finance. ate economic return, and proving to communi- biodiversity offset around Niokolo-Koba NP, ties and governments the worth of preserving West Africa’s second largest national park. A Properly structured, private sector investment their natural capital. This is evident in the direct CMP was developed between the National Parks in PAs can increase revenue for PA management economic benefits through employment and Directorate and Panthera,22 an NGO based in the and community benefits. Poor PA management, procurement and educational benefits through United States, along with a tripartite agreement often due to a lack of funding and capacity, deters the Time + Tide Foundation. Time + Tide is with Resolute Mining for funding conservation private sector investment and perpetuates a aligned with African Parks and DNPW in our activities in compliance with the biodiversity negative feedback loop. CMPs enhance PA man- interests and approach to conservation and for offset. agement, help to secure the natural assets upon that, the partnership has, and will, continue to ↗ Section 1 which the private sector depends, and provide a strengthen and grow.” Enhanced management and a long-term CMP long-term agreement that instills confidence for — Bruce Simpson, CEO, Time + Tide, 202121 agreement enable partners to optimize ecosys- private sector partners. tem service opportunities, such as payment for A CMP can help create an enabling environ- ecosystem services and REDD+.23 Like nature- The development of a CMP between African ment for biodiversity offsets, which are mea- based tourism, these developments, if properly Parks and the Department of National Parks surable conservation outcomes resulting from structured, can enhance revenue to the local and Wildlife (DNPW) in Liuwa Plains NP (see actions designed to compensate for significant economy and create jobs, as well as support PA Appendix D, Figure D.5) in Zambia enhanced the residual adverse biodiversity impacts due to management budgets. management of the PA, enabled the recovery of project development after appropriate preven- ↗ Section 2 key species (elephants were seen in the Park in tion and mitigation measures have been taken Support government PA budgets 2020 for the first time in 11 years), and as a result, (Business and Biodiversity Offset Programme attracted a new high-end tourism investment.20 2009). Infrastructure development and resource One of the primary reasons governments enter Time + Tide developed a five-star lodge that has extraction is taking place across the continent into strategic partnerships for PA management generated revenue for PA management and the at a significant pace and scale, and some private is to attract new funding, generate sustainable local communities and attracted positive media sector companies are engaging in biodiversity revenue models, and reduce the financial burden coverage from Time Magazine, the New York offsets. Supporting an existing non-operational of PA management on the PA authority. Some Times, and Travel + Leisure. PA or creating a new PA are often the most PA authorities are independent parastatals optimal approaches for offsetting. However, required to raise capital and generate revenue, ↗ Section 3 “The agreement between African Parks and a barrier for implementing biodiversity offsets which puts enormous pressure on the agencies. DNPW is a true partnership with shared results if the PA authority does not have the In some cases, poor management choices can commitment and risk. African Parks’ effec- capacity to manage the offset funding and to be the result, such as engaging a private sector tive management of the area in partnership deliver on the clear and regulated offset targets. A partner that provides upfront funding but lacks with DNPW assisted us with the challenge of CMP can create the right management and gover- the capacity to deliver on long-term commercial operating in such a remote space. We return nance structure to channel offset funds to desired commitments. CMPs can help reduce the financial their efforts with the attraction of tourism conservation actions. burden, enabling PA authorities to make smart, through our brand, boosting conservation long-term management decisions. ↗ Appendices 20. For information about Liuwa Plain NP, visit https://www.africanparks.org/the-parks/liuwa-plain 21. For information about Time & Tide’s Liuwa Plain King Lewanika, visit https://timeandtideafrica.com/camps/#liuwa-plain 22. For information on Panthera, visit https://www.panthera.org/ 23. REDD+ stands for “reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation" and is used in developing countries to support conservation, sustainable management of forests, and enhancement of forest carbon stocks. 40 The benefits and challenges of CMPs Collaborative Management Partnership Toolkit The ZPWMA manages approximately 13 In Malawi, government investment in the PA Increase foreign exchange, percent of Zimbabwe’s total land area.24 Its system is almost negligible. The average annual tax revenue, and employment annual management budget is approximately budget allocated from the government is approx- $30 million, a high portion of which is salaries, imately $325,000. The Department of National A functional and well-managed PA also can leaving little in the way of operational budgets. Parks and Wildlife (DNPW) has four CMPs with stimulate the rural economy, increasing tax Every year, the ZPWMA faces a funding gap (IUCN African Parks that have attracted significant revenue to the government and creating rural 2020a). The ZPWMA has CMPs in place for two funding to the country and converted the PAs employment (Spenceley et al. 2016). This in turn NPs: Gonarezhou (see Appendix D, Figure D.3) into economic engines for the rural and national makes PAs politically relevant. For example, and Matusadona. These parks comprise roughly a economy. The annual operating budget for 2020 nature-based tourism: quarter of the national parks in the country; there- for Majete NP (see Figure 2.1) is six times the • generates 40 percent more full-time jobs than fore, their engagement with partners significantly total budget allocated to the DNPW for all its PAs the same investment in agriculture, supports ZPWMA’s national park budget. ($310,000). • has twice the job creation power of the auto- motive, telecommunications and financial industries, and Figure 2.1 • provides significantly more job opportunities Majete Wildlife Reserve Annual Expenditure25 for women compared to other sectors (Space for Giants et al. 2019). Majete Wildlife Reserve Annual Expenditure (Millions $) NBT, while not suitable for every PA, is also the largest, global, market-based contributor to Capital financing PA systems. NBT is a major multiplier in 2 terms of wider economic impacts. A recent World expenditure Bank study showed that the benefits of invest- Operational ing in protected areas outweighed the costs. In 1.5 expenditure Zambia’s Lower Zambezi National Park, the rates of return on public investment was sixteen times the original investment. Additionally, for every 1 additional dollar spent by a tourist, local incomes increased by $1.82 in the park. Furthermore, before the pandemic, protected areas annu- 0.5 ally provided 7,463 new jobs in Lower Zambezi National Park and 28,210 new jobs in South Luangwa National Park, both in Zambia (World 0 Bank 2021). 2008 '09 '10 '11 '12 '13 '14 '15 '16 '17 '18 '19 '20 COVID-19 has had a significant impact on NBT and PAs (Section 1.3). Support is needed to restore and Source: African Parks Majete Wildlife Reserve Data 2021. adapt the industry to ensure it can withstand future shocks, and to diversify revenue sources for PAs. 24. For information on Zimbabwe Parks and Wildlife Management Authority, visit https://www.zimparks.org.zw/ 25. For information on Majete Wildlife Reserve, visit https://www.africanparks.org/the-parks/majete 41 While the mandate of most CMPs cover the PA, medium-sized enterprise growth from 90 to over Create and catalyze community benefits ↗ Contents many CMP partners invest in the “buffer area,” 900, creating 3,400 direct jobs and 13,000 indirect catalyzing significant benefits for the local com- jobs (Virunga Foundation Ltd 2019).26 In addition to job creation through NBT and munities resulting from micro-finance, agriculture in the PA, CMPs have created substantial social investment, and other enterprises. Payment for salaries in Akagera NP,27 managed benefit by attracting development partners who through a CMP between African Parks and the undertake social development projects or by the Virunga NP, managed through a CMP between Rwanda Development Board (RDB), and taxes to partner undertaking these kinds of projects. In the Virunga Foundation and the Congolese the government of Rwanda increased significantly addition, CMPs have provided support to commu- Institute for the Conservation of Nature (ICCN), from 2010 to 2020 (see Figure 2.2 and Appendix D, nities in times of need. During the COVID-19 crisis, facilitated the development of a hydroelec- Figure D.1). many CMP partners have provided hand-wash- ↗ Section 1 tric power project that stimulated small- and ing facilities and other protective gear. During Cyclone Idai in 2019 in Mozambique, CMP partners Figure 2.2 provided food and helped rebuild villages. Tax and Salary Increases from Akagera National Park CMP, Rwanda The Gorongosa NP CMP, Mozambique28 (see Revenue Generation from Akagera National Park, Rwanda (Millions $) Appendix D, Figure D.4) improved food security 1.4 by engaging approximately 10,000 local farm families, generating 300 additional jobs, and Salaries developing health interventions that allow more ↗ Section 2 1.2 than 100,000 people to be treated per year. In 1 response to Cyclone Idai, Gorongosa delivered Tax revenues to 220 tons of food and water to communities in an 0.8 government operation launched prior to the arrival of interna- tional aid.29 0.6 Technical Support Drivers 0.4 ↗ Section 3 Attract skills not currently represented 0.2 in the PA agency 0 The most effective CMPs involve partners that bring a suite of skills not currently represented 2010 '11 '12 '13 '14 '15 '16 '17 '18 '19 within the PA authority. For example, tourism Source: African Parks Akagera NP Data 2020. development is a skill set that some PA author- ities seek to attract through a CMP. By comple- Taxes revenues to government (Pay As You Earn Tax, Value Added Tax, Rwanda Social Secuirty Board) menting the existing skills from the PA authority, ↗ Appendices Salaries (including Pay As You Earn Tax and Rwanda Social Security Board) each partner brings integral expertise, and the 26. For information on Virunga National Park, visit https://virunga.org/ 27 For information on Akagera National Park, visit https://www.africanparks.org/the-parks/akagera 28. For information on Gorongosa National Park, visit https://gorongosa.org/ 29. “Our Gorongosa - A Park for the People.” 2019. Parque Nacional da Gorongosa. https://gorongosa.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/11-07-2019-Highlights-English_compressed.pdf 42 The benefits and challenges of CMPs Collaborative Management Partnership Toolkit partnership combines and enhances the overall Help transform non-operational PAs • Downsizing is the decrease in size of a PA proficiency for PA management, development, as a result of excision of land or sea area and ultimately sustainability. Many PAs in Africa are considered “paper through a legal boundary change. parks,” meaning they exist on paper, but are • Degazettement is the loss of legal protec- Enhance PA agency capacity non-operational. For example, KWS, one of tion for an entire PA. Africa’s best-funded wildlife authorities, indi- If structured properly, CMPs can and should cated in 2018 that 50 percent of their parks were Avoid downgrading, downsizing, enhance the capacity of PA authorities. CMP con- non-operational (IUCN ESARO 2017). PA author- and degazettement tracts should require, within reason, the devel- ities can target paper parks for CMPs to attract opment of capacity of the PA authority staff and funding and operationalize them, which will Governments need to rationalize land use and the process for doing so. In addition, contracts help stimulate the local economy, decrease the PAs that are not functioning face the risk of down- should include the obligation to share lessons financial burden on the PA authority, and support grading, downsizing, and degazettement (DDD).31 learned across the agency. CMPs can be used as a the government in fulfilling its long-term regional, In 2019, the then-president of Tanzania ordered short-term bridge to help build capacity of the PA national, and global obligations. the government to identify PAs that had no authority and management systems or as a long- wildlife and forests and allocate them to farmers term and, in some cases, a permanent solution. Gorongosa NP, Mozambique (see Appendix D, and livestock keepers (Lindsay et al. 2021). The Regardless of the duration, capacity building of Figure D.4) was non-operational prior to engage- PADDD database,32 which does not include all staff is a key component of long-term success. ment in a CMP with the Greg Carr Foundation. incidents of DDD, shows 296 enacted DDD events Wildlife was decimated during and after the and eight proposed in East and Southern Africa Operational Drivers Mozambique civil war, employment was minimal, across 13 countries as of 2019 (IUCN ESARO and community benefits close to non-exis- 2020b). CMPs can target non-functioning PAs that Enhance governance and decision-making tent. Through concerted effort between the have the potential to become operational, which government of Mozambique and the Greg Carr reduces the risk of DDD (Symes et al. 2015). This CMPs devolve management, which separates Foundation, the park is now an economic engine in turn can help the country fulfill its international the governance structure (whether new or exist- that supports community jobs and livelihoods and national conservation obligations. ing) and oversight from on-the-ground manage- and hosts extraordinary biodiversity following a ment. That helps streamline operations and avoid remarkable ecological recovery. It has attracted Enable governments to fulfill national decisions made for personal gain and can enable positive attention to the country and is a source and global commitments rapid decision-making without the need to refer of pride for the government.30 to the central administration (Brugière 2020). Most African governments have established Some CMPs improve or create formal governance national conservation targets and are party to structures that help clarify decision-making and PADDD stands for PA downgrading, pan-African and global treaties. The engage- management and command lines, enhancing downsizing, and degazettement. ment of qualified partners through CMPs can management effectiveness and resulting in effi- • Downgrading is the legal authorization of help governments meet these targets. For cient operations and rapid implementation. an increase in the number, magnitude, or example, all African governments are signatory extent of human activities within a PA. to the Convention on Biological Diversity. CMPs can support governments in meeting their CBD 30. “Our Gorongosa - A Park for the People.” 2019. Parque Nacional da Gorongosa. https://gorongosa.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/11-07-2019-Highlights-English_compressed.pdf 31. For information on DDD, visit https://www.conservation.org/projects/paddd-protected-area-downgrading-downsizing-and-degazettement 32. For information on the Protected Area Protected Area DDD Tracker, visit https://www.padddtracker.org 43 targets, such as the Aichi Biodiversity Targets.33 targets and the recognition of the significant role carbon-storing ecosystems, could provide up to ↗ Contents These targets are anticipated to increase under effectively managed PAs and healthy ecosys- 37 percent of the reductions in greenhouse gas the post-2020 global framework. tems play in climate mitigation and adaptation. (GHG) emissions needed to stabilize warming to Terrestrial PAs have been estimated to store 2° C by 2030.34 In 2015, all United Nations (UN) member about 12 percent of terrestrial carbon stocks states adopted the SDGs. Table 2.2 outlines how and to sequester annually about 20 percent Numerous African countries, such as CMPs will help African governments achieve of the carbon sequestered by all land ecosys- Rwanda,35 have developed green post-COVID-19 these goals. SDG 13 is particularly relevant given tems. Nature-based climate solutions, including recovery plans that include the sustainable and government commitments to achieving climate protection and restoration of forests and other inclusive development of PAs. CMPs support ↗ Section 1 Table 2.2 How CMPs Support the Achievement of the SDGs SDG How CMPs Contribute SDG How CMPs Contribute CMPs foster economic development and provide income through wildlife CMPs attract investment and support infrastructure and development in based tourism, management, and other businesses sparked by enhanced the PA and surrounding region management ↗ Section 2 CMPs enhance regional stability and security and create an enabling CMPs enhance the effective management of PAs, which mitigate climate environment that spurts agricultural development and revenue from change and enable natural adaptation processes. Employment and employment, tourism, and other businesses enhanced development due to enhanced PA management create more resilient communities living in and around PAs CMPs support improved health care for communities living in and around CMPs enhance marine protected areas and support the sustainable the PA through provision of supplies, support to clinic staff, development development of seascapes of clinics, and ambulatory access ↗ Section 3 CMPs support improved education for communities living in and around CMPs help to protect, restore, and promote the effective management the PA through bursaries, environmental education, school development, of terrestrial ecosystems, sustainably managed forests, combat teacher training, and provision of supplies deforestation, and halt land degradation and biodiversity loss CMPs enhance management of PAs, attract investment, and stimulate CMPs are partnerships (PPPs) that strengthen the means of regional economic development, which promotes economic growth and implementation towards fulfillment of the SDGs employment ↗ Appendices Source: Adapted from https://sdgs.un.org/goals; Lindsey et al. 2021. 33 For information on SDGs, visit www.cbd.int/sp/targets 34. For information on PAs and climate change, visit Protected Planet at https://www.protectedplanet.net/en/news-and-stories/protected-areas-and-climate-change 35. For information on Rwanda’s green recovery strategy, visit http://www.fonerwa.org/blog/rwanda-commits-green-recovery-world-environment-day 44 The benefits and challenges of CMPs Collaborative Management Partnership Toolkit green recovery targets, including jobs, commu- The film “Our Gorongosa,”37 about Gorongosa NP enhances communication and coordination, nity resiliency, and revenue diversification. and the CMP between the Greg Carr Foundation which helps to reduce misinformation that often and the National Administration of Conservation leads to conflict around PAs. In addition, local Enhance brand recognition Areas (ANAC), was shown on PBS. In 2020, it ran communities often have historical knowledge at film festivals around the world and received about the particular landscape and invariably an CMP partners brand and market their partner- multiple awards, creating broad awareness about understanding of dynamics in and around the PA. ship, which helps create awareness of the PA, the Mozambique and Gorongosa. Another documen- If relevant stakeholder communities are effec- partnership, and the country. In addition, tourism tary, “Nature’s Fear Factor”, was shown on NOVA, tively engaged in PA governance, their knowledge partners are attracted to invest in PAs with CMPs, and CNN produced its own film on the park. The can be used to support and enhance manage- and brand, sell, and promote the country, PA, Gorongosa Project has also collaborated with Nat ment of the PA. On the contrary, if communities and their tourism facility, which enhances overall Geo, BBC, and many other broadcast and stream- are excluded, their knowledge can be used to brand recognition for the country. Likewise, the ing platforms and production companies. exacerbate the threats to a PA and conflict with restoration of flagship species, as a result of the management authority. improved management, can garner global recog- nition for the country. Increase security The eastern black rhino was reintroduced into CMPs have helped improve security in certain Akagera NP (see Appendix D, Figure D.1), which locations, and this has garnered local support. brought significant attention and media cover- Unmanaged PAs create an ideal location for rebels age to Rwanda as a tourism destination. Millions and other insurgents, while presence and active of people tracked the rhinos’ progress on social management deter insecurity. For example, media on their journey from South Africa to the African Parks has a management agreement park. These positive conservation stories contrib- in the Central African Republic for the Chinko ute to the country’s brand and attract visitors and Reserve.38 The Central African Republic has investors.36 been riddled by war, and because of the stabil- ity created in Chinko, 380 internally displaced people, mainly women and children, fled into the reserve in 2017 for protection by the rangers. After months of being provided with safety, food, water, shelter, healthcare, and employment, the Reduce conflict displaced people were able to move back to their village with African Park’s support and assistance CMPs that engage relevant stakeholder com- (Stolton and Dudley 2019). munities in the governance model have reduced conflict between government and local communi- ties because they generate increased accountabil- ity upward and increased legitimacy downward (Fedreheim 2017). Inclusion of local communities 36. For information on the rhino translocation to Akagera NP, visit https://www.africanparks.org/campaign/rhinos-return-rwanda 37. For information on the film “Our Gorongosa”, visit https://gorongosa.org/our-gorongosa-film/ 38. For information about Chinko Reserve, visit https://www.africanparks.org/the-parks/chinko 45  otential Challenges 2.3 P ↗ Contents with CMPs O ver the past two decades, African gov- ernment and partners have established 40 co-management and delegated ↗ Section 1 CMPs covering more than 490,264 km2 of diverse habitats (see Section 3.6). The adoption of CMPs is the result of the financial and capacity challenges faced by PA authorities and the suite of benefits outlined in Section 2.2. In addition, some of the early CMPs, such as African Parks’ engagement in 2003 with the government of Malawi in Majete Wildlife Reserve,39 have provided practical examples of successful management ↗ Section 2 partnerships. Despite the interest in CMPs by government, partners, and donors, challenges remain in the uptake of CMPs by governments and partners and in the management of CMPs Challenges with Adoption of CMP as an Approach There has been a relatively slow uptake of ↗ Section 3 CMPs for a host of reasons. These challenges were outlined in an Opinion Piece in Biological Conservation (Lindsey et al. 2021) and are high- lighted highlighted in Table 2.3. Brugière (2020) notes that there is low cultural and political accep- tance of CMPs in French-speaking countries in Africa because of the historical and current role of the central government and the perception that ↗ Appendices CMPs, in particular the delegated model, are an attack on national sovereignty. Bangweulu Game Management Area, Zambia. © Mike Dexter / Shutterstock 39. For information about Majete Wildlife Reserve, visit https://www.africanparks.org/the-parks/majete 46 The benefits and challenges of CMPs Collaborative Management Partnership Toolkit Table 2.3 Challenges with the Adoption of CMPs in Africa Challenges with Adoption of CMPs Clarification and Potential Mitigation Measures 1. Government concern There is a perception that entering into a National PAs are national assets and a CMP does not change its ownership. The government is the ultimate authority that CMP means giving away national assets and determines which CMP model is appropriate for the PA and this in turn determines the level of “control” transferred to the partner relinquishing too much control. and for what duration. Some governments perceive that entering PA authorities across Africa face enormous challenges due to a lack of resources and escalating threats (see Chapter 1). A CMP is a into a CMP is a sign of “failure” or a reflection strategic conservation tool that can help governments improve management of PAs, build national capacity, assist PA authorities on their inability to achieve their own in meeting their national objectives, and support a green recovery after COVID-19. objectives. Concern about revenue retention Retaining revenue at the PA level is an important part of making a PA financially sustainable. The business plan for the PA should at the PA level. be nested under a PA authority’s business plan, which considers the broader economic needs of the authority. Specifically, if governments are to engage in significant numbers of CMPs, they may wish to ensure central funding for the PA authority to remove the requirement for them to derive revenues from the PAs. Revenue retention has a variety of other benefits including attractiveness to donors and positive incentives for PA personnel. Understandably, governments have concerns about “revenue loss” if revenue is retained at the PA level. However, it is important to understand that in some cases, the resultant outcome of a CMP will generate more revenue to the government in taxes, employment, and other revenue. Concern that CMPs do not build capacity of A well-structured CMP should and can build the capacity of the PA authority. When the government is developing the CMP the PA authority. agreement, capacity building of the PA authority can be a key target with clear indicators for measuring success. 2. Lack of qualified private partner The success of a CMP depends on a qualified NGOs that have not engaged in a CMP should start by providing a PA authority with technical and financial support and learn NGO or private partner that shares the about the PA and management needs and build the expertise required. African Parks is mentoring some smaller NGOs to help same vision as the PA authority and has the build capacity for these organizations in CMPs. NGOs engaging in CMPs should share successes and failures so that other NGOs technical capacity and the ability to attract can learn from these experiences. There is a need for a greater focus among NGOs and donors on developing capacity for PA funding. management as the core of conservation and building the capacity of national organizations. 3. Lack of donor funding The success of a CMP depends on adequate There is a huge funding gap in PA management and most donor support is short-term, which is problematic for long-term CMPs. and long-term funding. Ideally, donor funding will increase following increased awareness of the ecological, economic, and social success of CMPs. In addition, CMPs create an enabling environment to attract private sector investment. Source: Adapted from Lindsey et al. 2021. 47 Challenges with CMP Development ↗ Contents and Management While CMPs have demonstrated success (see Section 2.2), there are challenges in the devel- opment and management of such significant partnerships, which are described in Table 2.4. Learning from these challenges is key to ensuring future CMPs can avoid or navigate potential bar- riers. Therefore, it is important that forums and ↗ Section 1 platforms exist for CMP partners to share chal- lenges they faced and how they dealt with them. ↗ Section 2 ↗ Section 3 ↗ Appendices Majete Wildlife Reserve, Malawi. © mhenrion / Shutterstock 48 The benefits and challenges of CMPs Collaborative Management Partnership Toolkit Table 2.4 Challenges in the Management of CMPs Category Element Reasons Mitigation Measures Agreements Agreements Informal or expired agreements that do not give partners and donors Agreements should be legally binding and CMP confidence to make significant investments structure Short-term agreements, which limit the ability of the CMP to define and Agreements should be at least 20 years and, in some cases, longer implement long-term visions and strategies and fail to inspire private depending on the context investor confidence in the long-term prospects of the PA Agreement lacks clear division of roles and responsibilities, leading to Agreements should clearly outline roles, responsibilities, and confusion, conflict, mistrust, blurred accountability, or partners placing accountability of each partner blame Insufficient delegation Weak mandate given to or requested by the partner, with insufficient The mandate for management of programs must be clear in the of authority responsibility to address the scale of challenges facing the PA agreement and adequate to address the challenges, which requires proper planning Government retains (or NGO decides not to assume) authority and Parties must have suitable capacity and resources to fulfill their mandate responsibility for critical aspects of management, but lacks sufficient resources Lack of sufficient authority over PA management, making decision- CMP agreements should delegate sufficient authority for decision-making making vulnerable to political interference and bureaucratic delays and management based on the threats and PA needs Poorly designed Premature withdrawal of a partner before capacity of the PA authority Proper due diligence by the government on the partner’s ability to fulfill its models is sufficiently built mandate. Capacity building of the PA authority should be a core aspect of agreements, and there should be adequate time allocated for transitioning agreements Bilateral CMP models often result in confusion, conflict, and other CMPs must make roles and responsibilities clear. If there are dual challenges in which NGOs and governments operate as separate structures in a PA, the policies of each partner should mirror the other, to entities with parallel authority hierarchies and separate human the extent possible resources policies and pay scales Multiple partners in Multiple NGO partners operating in the same PA and focusing on If the government engages multiple partners, roles and responsibilities the same PA without similar activities, leading to confusion, duplication of effort, and must be clear, and there should be a tripartite agreement to ensure a plan inefficiencies effective communication and coordination Government Insufficient Lack of support from the government relating to permits and other Government support is critical for the success of the CMP support government buy-in administrative elements and support Lack of shared vision at higher government levels regarding sensitive The partner should conduct a detailed risk analysis prior to entering a CMP issues such as settlements and oil and mining inside the PA CMPs negotiated from top down without buy-in at headquarters (HQ) Support from all levels of the PA authority/government needs to be clear level or park level can undermine the functioning of the CMP and genuine prior to engaging in a CMP 49 Category Element Reasons Mitigation Measures ↗ Contents Community Lack of community Lack of support from stakeholder communities can present significant Proper stakeholder consultation, following accepted global standards, support support challenges to the CMP, resulting in delays, expenses, and legal should be conducted prior to engaging a partner, and social standards challenges should be in place. Community engagement in the governance model should be considered to enhance coordination and support Civil society Lack of civil society National PAs involve a diversity of civil society members with strong Proper stakeholder consultation should be conducted prior to engaging a support support opinions about and passion for PAs. Lack of support from civil society CMP partner, and transparent communication about the rationale and CMP members can present challenges to the CMP, resulting in delays, process is needed continuously to ensure a clear understanding by civil expenses, and legal issues society ↗ Section 1 NGO Insufficient NGO Lack of NGO expertise or experience in PA management can translate CMP partner selection must be rigorous to ensure partners have adequate capacity expertise in PA into an inability to effectively attract skilled personnel and provide expertise to fulfill their mandate management necessary support to field staff, as well as the inability of a partner to fulfill legal CMP obligations Finance Insufficient funding Insufficient budgets relative to the size and complexity of the PA and Partners must demonstrate, as part of their bid, proof of finances for the levels of threat initial stage of the CMP and the capacity to develop sustainable revenue streams Funding gaps Short-term CMPs that are periodically renewed, and CMPs that rely Partners must demonstrate, as part of their bid, proof of finances for the ↗ Section 2 exclusively on large institutional funders, can suffer from a lack of initial stage of the CMP and the capacity to develop sustainable revenue continuity in funding, which can lead to staff layoffs and management streams setbacks Context Overly complex Severely complicated scenarios, such as political instability or The PA authority and the partner should conduct a detailed risk analysis contexts high densities of people and livestock inside PAs, can present prior to entering into a CMP and determine the feasibility of achieving challenges beyond the ability of a private partner (and in some cases targets governments) to overcome Relationships Breakdown of Breakdown of relations or trust between partners, leading to paralysis The CMP should outline a clear conflict resolution process ↗ Section 3 and trust relations or the end of the partnership Errant behavior by Partners not fulfilling pledges; issuing inappropriate external The CMP should outline a clear conflict resolution process. Operating one or both partners communications; not acting in the spirit of cooperation; and acting outside of the agreement should constitute a violation with clear means of outside the law. Other issues include a lack of data sharing, joint terminating the agreement as needed planning, budget development, fundraising, and genuine collaboration Enabling Lack of clear process The lack of clear guidelines and process for establishing a CMP leads to Governments interested in CMPs should create the right enabling environment to establish CMPs delays and in some cases, donor fatigue, resulting in a loss of finance environment for the transparent adoption of CMPs ↗ Appendices for the CMP Lack of supportive Legal framework not in place to protect and manage the CMP long- Governments interested in CMPs should create the right enabling legal framework to term without political interference environment for effective management of CMPs manage CMPs Source: Adapted from Lindsey et al. 2021. 50 Section 1: The Value of Collaborative Management Partnerships Collaborative Management Partnership Toolkit ↘ Chapter 1 — Why CMPs are important for conservation 23 ↘ Chapter 2 — The benefits and challenges of CMPs 35 ↘ Chapter 3 — CMP models and principles 51 3.1  Differentiating between Governance and Management 52 3.2  Description of CMP Models 55 3.3  Strengths and Weaknesses of Different CMP Models 58 3.4  Case Studies of the Three CMP Models 60 3.5  CMP Best Practice Principles for Success 62 3.6  Status of CMPs in Africa 66 Chapter 3 — CMP models and principles Chapter 3 51 ↗ Contents ↗ Section 1 CMP models This chapter describes the three primary CMP models used in Africa, and highlights their strengths, weaknesses, and principles ↗ Section 2 and risks. Three case studies are presented to compare the models. Twenty-four best practice principles for CMPs are featured for practitioners to consider in CMP development, management, and closure. The ↗ Section 3 status of CMPs in Africa is provided, highlighting 40 co-management and delegated CMPs, the partners, regional distribution, models used, trends, and projected CMP pipeline. ↗ Appendices ↘ Chapter 3 — CMP models and principles 52 CMP models and principles Collaborative Management Partnership Toolkit  ifferentiating between 3.1 D Governance and Management A CMP requires consideration of the exist- Table 3.1 ing and desired governance and manage- Management and Governance of PAs ment structure for a PA. The governance and management of PAs are closely linked; however, for a successful CMP, it is import- Management Governance ant to understand the difference and to distin- ...is about... ...is about... guish this in the CMP agreement. Governance is about broad, strategic decision-making, while • what is done in pursuit of given objectives • who decides what the objectives are, what to do to management is about implementation (see Table • the means and actions to achieve such objectives pursue them, and with what means 3.1) (Borrini-Feyerabend et al. 2013). • how those decisions are taken • who holds power, authority and responsability Governance goes beyond just understand- • who is (or should be) held accountable ing who makes certain decisions around PAs to Source: IUCN 2013. include interactions among structures, processes, and traditions that determine how power and responsibilities are exercised, how decisions are taken, and how citizens and other stakeholders Figure 3.1 have their say (Borrini-Feyerabend et al. 2013). CMP Governance and Management While CMPs affect the management and gov- ernance structures of a PA, they do not alter a nation’s sovereignty or ownership (see Figure 3.1). Source: Adapted from original source Baghai 2016; Borrini-Feyerabend et al. 2013; IUCN ESARO 2017. 53 There are four types of PA governance struc- ↗ Contents tures: governance by government; shared gov- ernance; private governance; and governance by indigenous peoples and local communities (IPLCs) (see Table 3.2). Table 3.2 The Four Types of Protected Area Governance Models and Examples from Africa ↗ Section 1 Type Description Examples Governance by • Federal or national ministry or agency in charge • The government manages most national PAs in Africa. For example, government • Sub-national ministry or agency in charge (e.g., at regional, provincial, the Kenya Wildlife Service manages Kenya’s national parks and municipal level) national reserves • Government-delegated management (e.g., to an NGO) • Delegated management includes the management agreements with African Parks in Malawi, Rwanda, Republic of Congo, Chad, and other countries in Africa ↗ Section 2 Shared governance • Transboundary governance (formal arrangements between one or • Collaborative governance includes bilateral and integrated co- more sovereign states or territories) management; for example, FZS in Gonarezhou, Zimbabwe and • Collaborative governance (diverse actors and institutions work African Wildlife Foundation in Simien Mountains NP, Ethiopia together) • The Greater Virunga Transboundary landscape has a tripartite treaty • Joint governance (pluralist board or other multiparty governing body) between Rwanda, Uganda and the Democratic Republic of Congo Private governance Conservation areas run by: • Malilangwe Trust in Zimbabwe is privately owned and governed • Individual landowners • Ol Pejeta Conservancy, Kenya, is governed by a private company • Non-profit organizations (e.g., NGOs, universities, etc.) • Mpala Conservancy, Kenya is governed by a non-profit board • For-profit organizations (e.g., corporate landowners) ↗ Section 3 Governance by • Conserved territories and areas established and run by indigenous • Kenya: Imbirikani and Kuku Group Ranch, Il Ngwesi and Westgate indigenous peoples peoples community conservancies and local communities • Community conservation areas and territories established and run by • Tanzania: Enduimet and Burunge wildlife management areas, local communities community-governed • Namibia: ≠Khoadi-//Hoas Conservancy and Torra conservancies governed by community Source: Borrini-Feyerabend et al. 2013. ↗ Appendices 54 CMP models and principles Collaborative Management Partnership Toolkit When a national government governs a PA Figure 3.2 through a governance by government model, Potential Shift from Governance by Government to Shared Governance the engagement in an integrated or delegated Note: A government may choose to shift from governance by government to shared governance without a CMP. CMP with a partner shifts the governance model to shared governance, i.e., the creation of a board that oversees the governance of a PA and includes both government and private partner representation (see Figure 3.2). A bilateral CMP may also result in a shared governance model. This is not to suggest that a CMP is required for shared governance. Governments can and do engage in shared governance for national PAs without a CMP and there are numerous examples in Africa of governments doing this by engaging communities and NGO partners in governance. In some CMPs, the governance board includes representation from IPLCs. For example, Brugière (2020) profiles formal community representa- tion in four CMP governance bodies in Central and West Africa in Odzala-Kokoua, Nouabalé- Ndoki (see case study in Appendix D, Figure D.7), Source: World Bank. Original figure for this publication. Pendjari, and Termit and Tin Toumma. IPLCs are and should be involved in the PA governance by having a seat on the board or participating in the advisory committee. 55 Description of CMP Models 3.2  ↗ Contents T here are three primary CMP models in is the traditional model of conservation support, for the success of the CMP. Table 3.3 describes Africa, one of which, co-management, is which involves the partner implementing proj- bilateral, integrated, and delegated CMPs, and further differentiated into two sub-cat- ects or providing financial support or advice to Appendix E includes a further description of each ↗ Section 1 egories (Baghai et al. 2018; Baghai 2016; the PA authority without, in most cases, a formal model. Lindsey et al. 2021). management agreement. There are some very successful financial and technical support models. Prior to signing an integrated CMP in Gonarezhou • Financial and technical support, where the For example, the FZS has had a successful long- NP, Zimbabwe, FZS provided technical and state retains full governance authority and the term partnership with the DNPW in Zambia for financial support for nine years to the ZPWMA private partner provides technical and financial management of North Luangwa NP and with the (see Appendix D, Figure D.4). The African Wildlife support (usually no management agreement). Tanzania National Parks Authority for the man- Foundation (AWF) provided three years of • Co-management CMPs, in which the state and agement of the Serengeti NP.40 However, there support to the Ethiopia Wildlife and Conservation the partner collaborate. This is further differen- are shortcomings in the financial and technical Authority (EWCA) in Simien Mountains NP in ↗ Section 2 tiated as follows: support model that have been extensively docu- Ethiopia prior to signing a bilateral CMP (see • Bilateral CMPs, in which the state and the mented, such as start-and-stop funding and the Appendix D, Figure D.8).41 partner agree to collaborate on PA manage- lack of long-term project support and accountabil- ment, with the two entities and their struc- ity. This is partially fueling the interest in co-man- tures working side-by-side in the PA under a agement and delegated management models. management agreement. • Integrated CMPs, in which the state and the Bilateral, integrated, and delegated CMPs partner agree to collaborate on PA manage- involve a formal management contract in which ment through a management agreement the public partner devolves certain levels of man- ↗ Section 3 and create an SPV to undertake manage- agement responsibilities to the partner. In many ment, with equal representation by the cases, the adoption of a formal CMP is preceded parties on the SPV board. by the partner providing financial and technical • Delegated CMPs, which are similar to inte- support to the PA authority. While not a neces- grated CMPs but have the majority of the SPV sary factor for entering into a CMP, such prior board appointed by the private partner. engagement can help the partner understand the challenges in the PA, PA authority capacity needs, The Toolkit focuses on co-management and conservation targets, and potential solutions. ↗ Appendices delegated CMP models because of the growing The prior engagement also helps the PA authority interest in them. The provision of technical and understand how the partner works and develop a financial support by a partner to a PA authority relationship and build trust, which is fundamental 40. For information on Frankfurt Zoological Society, visit https://fzs.org/en/ 41. For information about the Simien Mountains National Park, visit https://www.awf.org/country/ethiopia 56 CMP models and principles Collaborative Management Partnership Toolkit Table 3.3 Collaborative Management Models, Governance, Management, and Examples Categories Co-management Models Bilateral CMP Integrated CMP Delegated CMP Structure Partners maintain independent structure SPV created, forming one entity SPV created, forming one entity Governance State leads strategy and oversight with Partner shares governance responsibility with Partner shares governance responsibility with involvement and in some cases, consensus of the state. Generally, a joint entity and SPV (e.g., the state. Generally, a joint entity and SPV (e.g., the partner on certain project-related issues; foundation, non-profit company) is created in foundation, non-profit company) is created in the joint steering committee might appoint project the host country. Representation is split evenly host country. Partner has most of the seats on leadership in the PA between the partner and government. Strategy the board. Strategy and oversight managed by and oversight managed by the SPV board SPV Management PA authority has management authority but Management is delegated to the SPV and shared Management is delegated to the SPV. allocates certain management aspects to to varying degrees between the state and NGO; Partner appoints PA manager; often includes the partner. For example, the PA authority often includes secondment of law enforcement secondment of law enforcement manager by the oversees management of law enforcement and manager by the government; all staff managed government; all staff managed by the SPV, under management of PA staff and shares authority by the SPV, under leadership of the partner, with leadership of the partner with the partner for project-related decisions some government staff seconded such as ecological monitoring and tourism development Secondment is defined as when an employee is temporarily transferred to another department or organization for a temporary assignment Examples • AWF and ICCN, Bili Uele, Democratic Republic • FZS and ZPWMA, Gonarezhou NP, Zimbabwe • African Parks and DNPW, Liuwa Plains, Zambia of Congo • Greg Carr Foundation and government of • WCS and ACFAP (Congolese Agency for • African Nature Investors and the Nigerian NP Mozambique, Gorongosa NP, Mozambique Wildlife and Protected Areas), Nouabale-Ndoki Service, Gashaka Gumti, Nigeria NP, Republic of Congo Source: Adapted from Baghai et al. 2018; Baghai 2016. 57 Each CMP model involves different levels of risk, Figure 3.3 ↗ Contents responsibility, and obligations, outlined in Figure Risk and Obligation Associated with CMP Models 3.3. Both partners should consider all aspects of the CMP and their ability and willingness to take on this commitment. COVERED IN THIS TOOLKIT Technical and/or Bilateral Integrated Delegated financial support ↗ Section 1 No management Co-management agreement model Lower Higher ↗ Section 2 Clarity of roles Delegation of authority to private partners Risk to and financial obligation by private partner Ability to leverage private partner technical capacity Ability to catalyze private sector finance ↗ Section 3 Source: Adapted from WBG 2020b. ↗ Appendices 58 CMP models and principles Collaborative Management Partnership Toolkit Strengths and Weaknesses 3.3  of Different CMP Models P As in Africa are diverse, face a range of threats, and have distinctive needs. Governments and the respective partners should understand the different CMP models and the strengths and weaknesses of each (see Table 3.4), and determine the most appropriate model for the PA authority and the PA under consideration. Researchers found that delegated manage- ment and integrated management CMPs have delivered more clear conservation outcomes than bilateral CMPs. Key reasons include: improved governance and oversight structures; the ability to manage the PA independently; autonomy and insulation from political interference; long-term commitments; the ability to build strong teams by attracting skilled staff via transparent, merito- cratic selection procedures and more flexibility to discipline or dismiss underperforming personnel; and increased accountability (Baghai et al. 2018; Lindsey et al. 2021). Simien Mountains NP, Ethiopia. © Michael De Plaen / Shutterstock 59 Table 3.4 ↗ Contents CMP Models: Strengths and Weaknesses CMP Model Strengths Weaknesses Bilateral Legitimacy of the PA authority’s involvement in management of a Parallel structures, policies, and procedures in human resources state PA; maintaining government responsibility and finance can create frustration, division, financial inefficiency, and tension Capitalize on strengths of each partner — contextual political Potential for conflict, especially with two leaders on the ground if understanding with international capacity and best practices their relationship breaks down ↗ Section 1   Lack of clear accountability and roles and responsibilities if not   clearly outlined in the agreement, leading to conflict Diffuse responsibility can lead to a lack of accountability Co-management Potential for political interference Potential for mistrust if there is not sufficient transparency Integrated All staff employed by the SPV, subject to the same conditions of Political risk/public distrust from high level of independence of ↗ Section 2 employment and same rules and regulations, with clear reporting private partner. Tensions may result from lack of understanding of lines the partnership and misperceptions Innovation, flexibility, and decision-making culture of private sector Potential for conflict and misunderstanding between two entities combined with PA authority experience, knowledge of the PA and work cultures, requiring a leader who can help bridge these High level of autonomy at PA level allows quick decision-making Managing expectations from local communities and other relevant stakeholders Delegated Partner has a very clear mandate that allows for quick decision- Limited reach because governments are reluctant to delegate making and full accountability to partners, especially flagship PAs that produce revenue for ↗ Section 3 government Partnership at governance level ensures government participation Concern of “foreign entities” taking over national PAs and in strategy and oversight, lends itself to transparency compromising state sovereignty All staff employed by SPV, subject to same conditions of Might be perceived as incapacitating the PA authority employment, same rules and regulations, and clear reporting lines Innovation, flexibility, and decision-making culture of private sector Potential resentment by PA authority, which doesn’t have the resources to fulfill mandate, could result in reluctance to cooperate ↗ Appendices Managing expectations from local communities and other relevant stakeholders Source: Adapted from Baghai et al. 2018; Baghai et al. 2018b; Brugière 2020. 60 CMP models and principles Collaborative Management Partnership Toolkit Case Studies of the 3.4  Three CMP Models A ppendix D includes nine case studies from nine countries. Below are three examples of CMPs from three countries with three private partners, covering the three CMP models. Table 3.5 CMP Model Case Studies Category Bilateral CMP Integrated CMP Delegated CMP Protected area Simien Mountains NP Gorongosa NP Akagera NP Size km2 220 3,200 1,122 Country Ethiopia Mozambique Rwanda Government Ethiopia Wildlife Conservation Authority Government of Mozambique Rwanda Development Board partner Private partner African Wildlife Foundation Gorongosa Project African Parks Year contract 2017 (update of 2014 agreement) 2016 (update of 2008 agreement) 2010 signed Duration of 5 Years 4 Years 3 Years negotiation Contract duration 15 Years 25 Years 20 Years Partner engaged Yes, since 2012 Yes, since 2008 No in PA prior to contract 61 Category Bilateral CMP Integrated CMP Delegated CMP ↗ Contents Revenue No. All revenue to national government accounts Yes Yes retention (see note) Number of staff AWF and EWCA manage own staff separately 700 permanent, 400 seasonal, 85 percent local 271, up from 18 in 2010, 99 percent Rwandan Governance Ultimate authority with EWCA. Project Oversight committee composed of one Board of trustees includes seven trustees: three coordination unit (PCU) comprised of one EWCA government representative and one Gorongosa appointed by government; four appointed by representative; one AWF representative; one KfW Project representative African Parks ↗ Section 1 representative Ecological • Removed from the World Heritage Site in • Poaching reduced by 70 percent • Wildlife increase: 5,000 in 2010 to 13,500 in success Danger list • Animal population increased from 15,000 in 2019 • Livestock grazing in the park reduced by 43 2008 to 90,000 in 2020 • 23 eastern black rhinoceros reintroduced. 2020: percent • 781 elephant, 815 wildebeest, 766 hippo, population of 27 • Ethiopian wolf increased from 55 in 2013 to 75 and 1,221 buffalo (in 2020), up from 2000 • Lions reintroduced. 2020: population of 40 by 2021 populations of less than 200 elephant, 20 • Wildlife numbers: From 4,476 in 2010 to 13,442 • Walia ibex population increased from 585 in wildebeest, 100 hippo and 100 buffalo in 2019 ↗ Section 2 2018 to 695 in 2021 Economic • Annual operating budget increased from • $85 million invested, $13.7 million annual • Budget $3.25 million in 2019 success $100,000 to $1 million budget • Revenue: $203,063 in 2010, $2.6 million in 2019 • Ecotourism revenue: $737,132 from Jan-Sept • Average spend per person: $16 in 2010, $46 in 2019, compared to a baseline of zero 2019 • Luxury private sector tourism partners, such as Wilderness Safaris Social success • Modern primary school developed, supporting • Human development budget $1.78 million in • Total community benefit was zero dollars in ↗ Section 3 363 students 2019 2010, $728,435 in 2019 • 1,000 schoolchildren visit the park annually • More than 150,000 people treated per year by • More than 2,000 school children visit Akagera • COVID-19 emergency cash for work program medical services NP annually for free with teachers and local 2020: 6,405 individual laborers, affecting 1,601 • 500 local families engaged in coffee business, leaders households with 200 jobs • 2019 agricultural extension services reached 10,000 farmers Source: African Parks, AWF, Gorongosa, and RDB staff and websites (see Appendix D, Figures D.1, D.4, D.8).42 ↗ Appendices Note: Revenue retention at the PA level, in many cases, includes a percentage of revenue that supports the PA authority. Most PA authorities support non-functional PAs with revenue from functional PAs; therefore, this needs to be considered when developing a revenue model for the CMP. The amount that goes to the PA authority may increase after the initial development and stabilization period, which varies depending on the PA. The CMP contract will stipulate in the event of a surplus, the percentage that goes to the PA authority to create a net benefit for the entire PA estate. In other cases, such as Akagera NP, the government of Rwanda provides funding to the CMP budget annually — rather than taking it out in the form of revenues. This is very attractive to donors. 42. For information on ANP, GNP, and SMNP, visit https://www.africanparks.org/the-parks/akagera, https://gorongosa.org/, https://www.awf.org/country/ethiopia 62 CMP models and principles Collaborative Management Partnership Toolkit CMP Best Practice 3.5  Principles for Success W hen developing, managing, and ending a CMP, governments and Table 3.6 partners should consider a number The Six Pillars and 24 Principles for Successful CMPs of best practice principles that were developed from experiences of government 1. CMP Development 4. Administration and NGO practitioners (see Table 3.6). These 24 principles are organized under six pillars: • Attract a Qualified Partner • Unify Staffing CMP Development; Nature of the Partnership; • Confirm Adequate Funding and Capacity to Generate • Determine Management Leadership Governance; Administration; Operations; Finance • Align Policies and Procedures and Finance (adapted from Baghai et al. 2018; • Develop the Contract Together • Pre-plan Closure/Termination Conservation Capital 2017; Lindsey et al. 2020; • Clarify Roles and Responsibility consultation with CMP partners). Appendix F includes further description of these principles 2. Nature of the Partnership 5. Operations and Appendix P includes key aspects of each of • Trust Between Partners • Develop Work Plans Together these principles that should be included in a CMP • Buy-in at All Levels • Legitimize the Management Framework contract. • Common Goals and Objectives • Respect the Mandate of Law Enforcement • Respect Environmental and Social Standards • Effectively Engage Stakeholder Communities • Respect Transboundary Responsibility 3. Governance 6. Finance • Provide Adequate Duration and Outline Succession • Build Towards Sustainability • Ensure Equitable Representation • Drive Enterprise Development • Communicate the Partnership • Manage Surplus/Deficit • Mitigate Risk Source: Adapted from Conservation Capital 2017 63 CMP Development prior to entering into a CMP, and it is not neces- years is recommended as a minimum. This ↗ Contents sary for success. provides adequate time to attract funding • Attract a Qualified Partner: The selection of a • Buy-in at All Levels: Transparency about the and investment, create standard operating qualified partner with the requisite skills and CMP development process is critical to ensur- procedures (SOPs), stabilize operations, and experience is fundamental to the success of a ing buy-in at all levels. A CMP driven from the transition management at the end of the CMP. Sections 5.5 and 5.7 outline a process for top (ministry or even higher) without buy-in agreement. Figure 3.4 is a hypothetical time- vetting and selecting a qualified partner. at local level risks operational challenges. line for a CMP in a PA that is highly degraded. • Confirm Adequate Funding and Capacity to Likewise, a CMP driven from the PA level or Shorter timeframes, while desirable from some Generate Finance: The ability to financially by a donor without legitimate buy-in from PA governments, do not provide the duration to execute a management agreement is funda- authority HQ risks political meddling. establish policies, procedures, steady funding, ↗ Section 1 mental to its success. As part of the partner • Common Goals and Objectives: Both parties enterprises, capacity, and overall recovery. If selection process outlined in Chapter 5, there need to be moving toward the same objec- the intention of both parties, as defined in the should be due diligence and verification of tives and goals. The partners should discuss CMP, is for the CMP to be used as an interim start-up capital sufficient to address the needs a shared vision, and these aspects should be tool, succession planning and how skills will be of the PA and of the ability of the partner to documented in the management agreement as transferred should be adequately planned. develop long-term viable revenue models. well as the general management plan. • Ensure Equitable Representation: No one party • Develop Contracts Together: Contracts should • Respect Environmental and Social Standards wishes to be dominated or feel dominated follow best practice and be developed col- (ESS): ESS are a set of policies, guidelines and by the other. There are several ways, beyond lectively to foster collaboration, develop joint operational procedures designed to first iden- representation on the board or committee, to ↗ Section 2 ownership, and avoid confusion over content. tify and then, following the standard mitigation avoid this (see Appendix F ). • Clarify Roles and Responsibilities: CMP agree- hierarchy, try to avoid, minimize, mitigate, • Communicate the Partnership: Both parties ments must be explicitly clear about roles, and compensate when necessary adverse are responsible for communicating, internally responsibility, reporting lines, and accountabil- environmental and social impacts that may and externally, about the CMP before and ity to avoid confusion and conflict (Appendix P arise in the implementation of a project. The throughout the life of the project. This includes includes a description of roles and responsibili- partners should jointly agree on a comprehen- communication across national, local, and ties to include in the CMP contract). sive framework that enables staff and project regional governments, local communities, developers and managers to comply with ESS and traditional authorities. Communication (see Chapter 6). between the private partner and the PA author- ↗ Section 3 Nature of the Partnership ity is critical to success and cannot be limited • Trust Between Partners: CMPs can have solid Governance to formal structures (Brugière 2020). contracts, suitable funding, and a highly expe- • Mitigate Risk: Minimizing inappropriate risk and rienced partner. However, they will not work • Provide Adequate Duration and Outlining liability is critical for a CMP and the individuals without trust between the partners. While a Succession: The duration of the CMP depends involved. The partner should complete a risk difficult parameter to measure, building trust on the PA and the PA authority goals. A CMP analysis and mitigation plan, which should be is something both parties should consider can be used as an interim (15-20 year) tool updated and maintained throughout the life of when developing a CMP. No formula exists for or longer term, and in some cases, a more the CMP. ↗ Appendices such vital trust-building. If the private partner permanent solution. The duration is decided is supporting the PA authority prior to the CMP by the government for national PAs, and Administration through financial and technical support, the intentions should be explicit in the beginning engagement is a good opportunity to develop of the partnership to avoid confusion and to • Unify Staffing: The ideal CMP should form trust. However, not all partners work in a PA ensure proper planning. In general, 15 to 20 and represent one unified structure of staffing 64 CMP models and principles Collaborative Management Partnership Toolkit to create efficiencies, clarify management Operations • Respect Transboundary Responsibility: When responsibility, and make standards uniform. In a PA is part of a trans-frontier conservation the case of a bilateral CMP, the partners should • Develop Work Plans Together: Developing the area (TFCA), engagement with international work to mirror standards, procedures, and pol- work plan together is efficient, draws on the neighbors and their PA authority is a sovereign icies to the extent feasible and clearly outline expertise of each party, and creates a sense matter. Therefore, the state authority should roles and responsibilities to avoid confusion. of ownership by both parties. Partners should be the lead agency in international commu- • Determine Management Leadership: The develop an annual schedule that includes the nication, while keeping the private partner caliber of executive leadership is often the review of the prior year’s achievements against abreast of TFCA matters. deciding factor of the success of a CMP. The the work plan and the development of the board should be responsible for appointing subsequent year’s work plan. Finance the senior executive positions from nominated • Legitimize the Management Framework: A employees from each party under secondment CMP must be set within the legal framework • Build Towards Sustainability: While very few or through direct recruitment. Best practice of the host country. A general management PAs are completely self-financing, striving for recommends that the senior position responsi- plan (GMP) and related business plan provide a financial sustainability of a PA is a key objective ble for law enforcement be seconded from the management framework. A GMP is established of a CMP. Building the commercial basis toward state PA authority. under PA and wildlife conservation law as the financial sustainability for the PA also will help • Align Policies and Procedures: Senior manage- required and accepted instrument to frame stimulate the local and national economy, ment will be required to develop policies and the management and development of a PA creating incentives that make a PA socially and procedures related to, among others, human and to implement relevant government policy. politically relevant. resources, finance, and procurement43. To In some places, GMPs take years to develop • Drive Enterprise Development: Linked to the ensure harmonization (and as an important and attain approval. In those cases, a rolling preceding principle, the CMP must be central feature for future succession), these policies five-year business or management plan may be to driving enterprise development within the and procedures should be adapted from preferable. PA and be given the requisite mandate and government policies and procedures, to the • Respect the Mandate of Law Enforcement: authority to promote and develop such conser- extent feasible, without adopting or incorpo- Law enforcement and security is a function of vation enterprise. rating aspects that contribute to operational the state, and this dynamic must be respected • Manage Surplus/Deficit: The CMP partners challenges. within a CMP. Law enforcement undertaken by need a clear understanding of their obligations • Pre-plan Closure/Termination: The parties the private partner without legal authorization and rights from the outset of the agreement must pre-agree on a clear and thorough proce- can pose serious liability for the private partner in the event of operating surpluses and deficits. dure for the closing out of the CMP in the event and risks serious misinterpretation around the of completion, breach, or early termination, to private partner’s role. deal with staff, assets, monies, liabilities, and • Effectively Engage Stakeholder Communities: ongoing third-party agreements (Appendix P Local communities are almost always primary includes details of each of these aspects). stakeholders and beneficiaries of a PA. Engagement with local communities cannot be separated from the PA management. Proper stakeholder engagement and consultation should take place throughout the life of the CMP. 43. The World Bank is currently developing guidelines for PPP procurement and are expected to be completed in 2021. These guidelines will serve as a useful resource for PPPs, including CMPs. 65 Figure 3.4 ↗ Contents Sample Timeline for a 20-year CMP for a PA that Requires Significant Ecological Recovery Note: Timelines will vary depending on context; this is an example, not a guide. ↗ Section 1 5 years 10 ↗ Section 2 years 15 years ↗ Section 3 20 years ↗ Appendices Source: World Bank. Original figure for this publication. 66 CMP models and principles Collaborative Management Partnership Toolkit  tatus of CMPs in Africa 3.6 S G iven the growing interest in co-man- During the COVID-19 pandemic, none of the agement (bilateral and integrated) and 40 CMPs profiled in the Toolkit collapsed or had delegated CMPs, the Toolkit focused to reduce staff or cut salaries. Three delegated on these models. While CMPs may CMPs were signed during COVID-19, with a include management by private sector partners, number in the pipeline. the majority of CMPs in Africa are managed by NGOs; therefore, the Toolkit focuses on CMPs Table 3.7 with NGOs. There are 40 co-management and Bilateral, Integrated, and Delegated CMP List by Country in Africa delegated CMPs in 15 countries in Africa, with 13 NGO partners (see Tables 3.7-3.9 and Map 3.1).44 No Country Number of Co-management Number of NGO CMP This data does not include Madagascar, which has and Delegated CMPs Partners in Each Country more than 20 different delegated management 1 Democratic Republic of Congo 8 6 entities for national PAs, including national and 2 Mozambique 5 5 international NGOs, as well as research orga- 3 Malawi 4 1 nizations (Brugière 2020). Appendix G includes 4 Central African Republic 3 2 a description of the Madagascar management 5 Chad 3 1 models. South Africa does not have any CMPs 6 Republic of Congo 3 2 managed with NGOs. They have CMPs managed 7 Benin 2 1 between PA authorities and communities, which 8 Nigeria 2 2 are referred to as contractual parks and described in Appendix H. Appendix D, Figure D.6 includes a 9 Rwanda 2 1 case study about a contractual park between the 10 Zambia46 2 1 Makuleke Community and SANParks. 11 Zimbabwe 2 2 12 Angola 1 1 Africa supports approximately 8,601 terres- 13 Ethiopia 1 1 trial and marine PAs covering 4.2 million km2 14 Niger 1 1 and approximately 14 percent of the continent’s 15 Senegal 1 1 land area (30,000,000 km2).45 The area under Total CMPs 40 CMP management represents approximately 11.5 percent of the total terrestrial PA estate. Source: Updated from Baghai et al. 2018; Baghai 2016; Brugière 2020; NGO and PA authority websites; and communication with CMP NGO and PA authority partners. 44. Data presented in Section 3.6 is updated from: Baghai et al. 2018; Baghai 2016; Brugière 2020; CMP NGO and PA authority websites; consultation with CMP NGO and PAA partners. Kasanka NP and Nsumba NP are considered bilateral CMPs and managed through an MOU. This confirmation was received as the Toolkit was going to print, therefore, they are not included. 45. For information on PA status, visit the Protected Planet database at https://www.protectedplanet.net 46. Kasanka NP and Nsumba NP are considered bilateral CMPs, though managed through an MOU. Confirmation was received as the Toolkit was going to print; therefore, they are not included 67 CMPs provide substantial support for national Table 3.8 and government partners may better understand ↗ Contents PA budgets. For example, 50 percent of Rwanda’s Status of Co-management and key factors for success, such as a clarity of roles NPs are under CMPs, encompassing 92 percent Delegated CMPs in Africa and responsibilities, and the updated agreement of the national park estate in terms of size, incorporates these improvements. In addition, which significantly offsets the RDB’s manage- Active CM and DM CMPs 40 some of the earlier contracts were entered ment budget.47 In Zimbabwe, the ZPWMA has into urgently due to poaching and other illegal Countries with CMPs 15 CMPs with partners in two NPs — in Matusadona encroachment (Brugière 2020). The updated and with African Parks48 and in Gonarezhou with Number of partners 13 revised versions incorporate lessons learned. FZS — which represents about a quarter of the NP Shortest CMP 5 years estate. The ZPWMA has an annual budget deficit ↗ Section 1 for NP management. These CMPs substantially Longest CMP 50 years offset costs. Earliest CMP signed 1985 The PAs under CMP include some of Africa’s CMP signed between 2015-2021 73 percent most ecologically significant, iconic, and econom- Total PA area in Africa km 2 4.2 million ically valuable conservation areas. Some exam- Km with CMPs 2 490,264 ples are provided below. % PA area under CMPs 11.5 percent African Parks manages the Benin section of ↗ Section 2 Parc W, West Africa’s largest PA, via a manage- Source: : Updated from Baghai et al. 2018; Baghai 2016; ment partnership with the government of Benin. Brugière 2020; NGO and PA authority websites; and communi- cation with CMP NGO and PA authority partners. Parc W safeguards key species for the region.49 WCS manages Nouabalé-Ndoki NP (see The first CMP in Africa was in 1985 in the Appendix D, Figure D.7) in partnership with the Fazao-Malkafassa NP in Togo (Brugière 2020). government of the Republic of Congo. WWF A substantial number of CMPs (73 percent of manages Salonga National Park50 in partnership the 40) have been signed between 2015-2021, with ICCN. The parks represent some of the best due to the demonstrated success of some of ↗ Section 3 examples of an intact forest ecosystem remaining the earlier CMPs and increased government and in the Congo Basin.51 donor interest in CMPs. Some contracts executed during this period were updated, extended, or The Virunga Foundation manages Virunga NP improved existing contracts, or represented the in partnership with ICCN. This is the only park in graduation from a memorandum of understand- the world that supports three species of great ing (MOU) to a more formal agreement. In many apes. cases, updated contracts were due to lessons learned from earlier CMPs. For example, NGOs ↗ Appendices 47. For information on Rwanda’s PAs, visit https://rdb.rw/ 48. For information on Matusadona NP, visit https://www.africanparks.org/the-parks/matusadona 49. For information on Parc W NP, visit https://www.africanparks.org/the-parks/w 50. For information on Salonga NP, visit https://www.wwf-congobasin.org/where_we_work/priority_places/salonga_national_park/ 51. For information on Nouabale-Ndoki NP, visit https://congo.wcs.org/Wild-Places/Nouabale-Ndoki-National-Park.aspx 68 CMP models and principles Collaborative Management Partnership Toolkit Table 3.9 CMP List by NGO in Africa There are 40 co-management and delegated management CMPs between government partners and NGOs in 15 countries in Africa with 13 NGO partners, excluding Madagascar and South Africa. No. NGO Protected Area Country Model Size (km2) CMP Signed* 1 African Parks Akagera NP Rwanda DM 1,122  2010 2 Bangweulu Game Management Area Zambia DM 6,000 2008 3 Bazaruto Archipelago NP Mozambique DM 1,430 2017 4 Chinko Reserve Central African Republic DM 59,000 2014 5 Ennedi Natural & Cultural Reserve Chad DM 50,000 2017 6 Garamba NP Congo, Dem. Rep. DM  5,133  2005 7 Iona NP Angola DM 15,000 2019 8 Liuwa Plain NP Zambia DM 3,369 2003 9 Liwonde NP Malawi DM 548 2015 10 Majete Wildlife Reserve Malawi DM 700 2003 11 Mangochi Forest Reserve Malawi DM 407 2018 12 Matusadona NP Zimbabwe DM 1,470 2019 13 Nkhotakota Wildlife Reserve Malawi DM 1,800 2015 14 Nyungwe NP Rwanda DM 970  2020 15 Odzala-Kokoua NP Congo, Rep. DM 13,500 2010 16 Pendjari NP Benin DM 2,755  2017 17 Siniaka Minia Wildlife Reserve Chad DM 4,260 2017 18 W NP Benin DM 8,000 2020 19 Zakouma NP Chad DM 3,000 2010 20 Africa Nature Investors Gashaka Gumti NP Nigeria BCM 6,402 2018 21 Africa Wildlife Foundation Bili-Uele PA Congo, Dem. Rep. BCM 32,748 2016 22 Simien Mountains NP Ethiopia BCM 220 2017 69 No. NGO Protected Area Country Model Size (km2) CMP ↗ Contents Signed* 23 Greg Carr Foundation Gorongosa NP Mozambique ICM 3,770 2008 24 Forgotten Parks Foundation Upemba NP Congo, Dem. Rep. DM 11,730 2017 25 Frankfurt Zoological Society Gonarezhou NP Zimbabwe ICM 5,053 2017 26 International Foundation for Gile National Reserve Mozambique BCM 2,860  2018 the Conservation of Wildlife ↗ Section 1 27 Noé Termit and Tin Toumma National Nature Reserve Niger DM 90,507 2018 28 Conkouati Douli NP Congo, Rep. DM 5,000 2021 29 Panthera Niokolo Koba NP Senegal BCM 9,130 2019 30 Peace Parks Foundation Zinave NP Mozambique BCM 4,000  2015 31 Virunga Foundation Virunga NP Congo, Dem. Rep. BCM 7,769  2015 32 WCS Nouabale-Ndoki NP Congo, Rep. DM 3,922 2014 33 Okapi Wildlife Reserve Congo, Dem. Rep. DM 13,726 2019 ↗ Section 2 34 Niassa National Reserve Mozambique BCM 42,000 2019 35 Yankari NP Nigeria BCM 2,250  2014 36 Manovo-Gounda St. Floris NP Central African Republic DM 17,400 2018 37 Lac Télé Community Reserve** Congo, Rep. DM 4,389 2018 38 Bamingui-Bangoran NP Central African Republic DM 11,191 2018 39 WWF Salonga NP Congo, Dem. Rep. BCM 36,000 2015 ↗ Section 3 40 Dzanga-Sangha PA Congo, Dem. Rep. BCM 6,866 2019 Total PA coverage (km ) under collaborative management partnerships 2 490,264 Note: BCM=bilateral CMP; ICM=integrated CMP; and DM=delegated CMP. * The year referred to in Table 3.9 is the most recent CMP signed. In some cases, prior agreements were updated. **Lac Tele is a state PA, despite its name as a Community Reserve.52 ↗ Appendices Source: Updated from Baghai et al. 2018; Baghai 2016; Brugière 2020; NGO and PA authority websites; and communication with CMP NGO and PA authority partners. 52. For information about Lac Télé Community Reserve, visit https://congo.wcs.org/Wild-Places/Lac-T%C3%A9l%C3%A9-Community-Reserve.aspx 70 CMP models and principles Collaborative Management Partnership Toolkit Most CMPs (42.5 percent) are in Central Africa, 3.6). The Democratic Republic of Congo had followed by Southern Africa (35 percent) (see some of the earliest CMPs, which were estab- Figure 3.5). Despite challenges in PA management lished in direct response to the elephant poach- effectiveness in East Africa, there is a gap in the ing crisis (Brugière 2020). Recognizing funding uptake of CMPs. This is partially due to a lack of and capacity limitations, ICCN established CMPs an enabling environment in some countries and to mitigate the threats and has continued to resistance to CMPs by governments. expand the CMP portfolio in the country, given the success of some of the early CMPs, the scale Co-management and delegated CMPs are in of the PA estate in the country, and the agency 15 countries in Africa (excluding Madagascar and limitations. In Mozambique, the government rec- South Africa). The Democratic Republic of Congo ognized CMPs as a strategic approach to improve has the highest percentage of CMPs (20 percent) the management of CMPs and proactively sought followed by Mozambique (12 percent) (see Figure partnerships in target PAs. Figure 3.5 Figure 3.6 Regional CMP Distribution in Africa Number of CMPs per Country Democratic Republic of Congo 8 Mozambique 5 Malawi 4 East 7.5% Central African Republic 3 Chad 3 West Congo 3 15% Benin 2 Central Nigeria 2 42.5% Rwanda 2 Zambia 2 Southern Zimbabwe 2 35% Ethiopia 1 Angola 1 Niger 1 Senegal 1 Source: Updated from Baghai et al. 2018; Baghai 2016; Brugière 2020; NGO and PA authority websites; and communication with CMP NGO and PA authority partners. 71 Nineteen of the 40 CMPs in Africa (48 percent) African Parks and WCS hold 26 of the 40 CMPs has CMPs in Niger and the Republic of Congo. ↗ Contents are in partnership with the NGO African Parks, in Africa (see Table 3.10). Currently, there are Interestingly, Noé's CMP in Niger, at 90,507 km2, which enters into partnerships using a delegated more PAs available for partnerships than there covers the same size area as WCS’s seven CMPs management approach. Most of the CMP models are management partners. The barrier for partner (see Table 3.10). in Africa are delegated (67.5 percent) (see Figure engagement includes lack of management 3.7). There is growing interest in the integrated expertise, in particular CMP managers that have Eight NGOs have only one CMP. Most partners management model because of its unifying the requisite experience, and lack of adequate are interested in either expanding the area under structure and balanced partnership between funding. African Parks has a program that sup- their CMP, such as the Greg Carr Foundation in the partner and the PA authority. However, in ports smaller organizations in developing policies Mozambique for the Gorongosa landscape, or many countries, creating an SPV and second- and procedures for CMPs, and mentors organiza- taking on more CMPs in different areas, such as ↗ Section 1 ing state staff to this independent entity takes tions in conservation management to help build FZS. All of the CMPs profiled in the Toolkit are time. Therefore, some organizations start with a capacity for partners. For example, African Parks with international NGOs, which creates some bilateral agreement and eventually transition to an supports Noé,53 a France-based organization that animosity in certain countries and contributes to Figure 3.7 Table 3.10 Share of Types of CMP Models Used in Africa Number of CMPs and Area of Land Managed by CMP Partner NGO Partner Number of CMPs Total km2 Managed Percentage of Total ↗ Section 2 Integrated 5% CMP km2 Managed African Parks 19 173,331 35.4 WCS 7 94,878 19.4 African Wildlife Foundation 2 32,968 6.7 Noé 2 95,507 19.5 Bilateral WWF 2 42,866 8.7 27.5% Africa Nature Investors 1 6,402 1.3 ↗ Section 3 Greg Carr Foundation 1 3,770 0.8 Delegated 67.5% Forgotten Parks Foundation 1 11,730 2.4 Frankfurt Zoological Society 1 5,053 1.0 International Foundation for the 1 2,860 0.6 Conservation of Wildlife Panthera 1 9,130 1.9 Peace Parks Foundation 1 4,000 0.8 ↗ Appendices Virunga Foundation 1 7,769 1.6 Source: Updated from Baghai et al. 2018; Baghai 2016; Brugière 2020; NGO and PA authority websites; and communication Source: Updated from Baghai et al. 2018; Baghai 2016; Brugière 2020; NGO and PA authority websites; and communication with CMP integrated with CMP NGOmodel. and PA authority partners. NGO and PA authority partners. 53. For information on PAs managed by Noé, visit http://parcsdenoe.org/en/home/ 72 CMP models and principles Collaborative Management Partnership Toolkit the challenges of uptake by governments around Map 3.1 delegated management in particular. There are Bilateral, Integrated, and Delegated CMPs with NGOs in Africa governments keen to enter into CMPs; however, there are not enough NGOs with adequate capac- ity and financial means to meet the demand. Significant financial and technical support pro- vided by local and national organizations presents an opportunity for their expanded engagement in bilateral, integrated, and delegated CMPs in the future. For example, in Zambia, Conservation Termit and Tin Lower Zambezi has been supporting the gov- Toummia NNR Ennedi Natural and ernment in management of Lower Zambezi NP. Cultural Reserve Mentorship programs with international NGOs, Nikolo-Koba NP W NP such as African Parks’ incubator program, should Simien Mountains NP Siniaka-Minia WR Zakouma NP focus on national NGOs to build capacity in the Pendjari NP country. Yankari NP Manovo-Gounda St. Floris NP Gashaka-Gumati NP Bamingui-Bangoran NP Chinko NR Bili-Uele PA Garamba NP Dzanga-Sangha NP Nouabale-Ndoki NP Okapis WR Odzala-Kokoua NP Lac Télé Reserve Virunga NP Akagera NP Conkouti-Douli NP Salonga NP Nyungwe NP Upemba NP Niassa SR Bangweulu GMA Nkhotakota WR Mangochi NP Liuwa Plain NP Majete WR Liwonde NP Iona NP Gilé NR Matusadona NP Gorongosa NP Collaborative Management Gonarezhou NP Bazaruto NP Partnership Models Makuleke CP Zinave NP Bilateral Co-management Integrated Co-management Delegated Management Source: Updated from Baghai et al. 2018; Baghai 2016; Brugière 2020; NGO and PA authority websites; and communication Other Protected Areas with CMP NGO and PA authority partners. 73 There are 19 CMPs known to the authors that Figure 3.8 ↗ Contents are under development in 11 countries covering Share of Pipeline of CMPs approximately 85,700 km2. These include CMPs under Active Development that are under negotiation with NGOs or those intended for tendering. This includes South Africa and Madagascar but is not exhaustive as there are certain to be others unknown to the authors West under development; however, it does indicate the 5% significant interest in CMPs. The majority of the CMPs in the pipeline (53 percent) are in Southern Central ↗ Section 1 Africa followed by 26 percent in East Africa. This 16% shows a significant increase in CMPs in East Africa, which currently comprise 7.5 percent of Southern the existing CMPs. 53% East 26% ↗ Section 2 Source: World Bank consultation with NGO and PA authority partners. ↗ Section 3 ↗ Appendices Section 2 ↘ Section 2 — How to Establish Collaborative Management Partnerships 2 How to Establish Collaborative Management Partnerships Matusadona NP, Zimbabwe. © paula french / Shutterstock 77 ↗ Contents Steps to Identify, Screen, Prepare, and Establish a CMP Process Chapter Section Step  Chapters 4 and 5 include the key steps and tools required Identify Chapter 4 4.1 Government decision to engage in a CMP ↗ Section 1 and Screen for establishing a CMP. The CMPs 4.2 Legal review full CMP establishment 4.3 Review agency goals and targets checklist is in Appendix I. 4.4 Screen and select potential PAs for CMPs 4.5 Screen and select CMP models ↗ Section 2 4.6 Review regional plans Prepare for Chapter 5 5.1 Complete a feasibility study Establishing a CMP 5.2 Determine the management partner selection process 5.3 Pre-tendering stakeholder engagement ↗ Section 3 5.4 Formation of a committee to support the partner selection 5.5 Development of criteria for partner selection 5.6 Development of a prospectus and tendering materials to attract and inform partners ↗ Appendices 5.7 Tendering process and selection of partner Contract Chapter 5 5.8 Contract development and Manage CMP 5.9 Contract management and monitoring 78 Section 2: How to Establish Collaborative Management Partnerships Collaborative Management Partnership Toolkit ↘ Chapter 4 — Identifying and screening CMP opportunities 79 4.1  Government Decision 80 4.2  Legal Review 81 4.3  Review Agency Goals and Targets 84 4.4  Screen and Select Potential Protected Areas for CMPs 85 4.5  Screen and Select the CMP Model for the PA 89 4.6  Review National and Regional Plans 91 ↘ Chapter 5 — Preparing for and establishing CMPs 95 Chapter 4 — Identifying and screening CMP opportunities Chapter 4 79 ↗ Contents ↗ Section 1 Identifying and Governments are ultimately responsible for the decision to enter into a CMP for state PAs. There are five key steps that screening CMP ↗ Section 2 governments and other protected area managers can undertake to identify and opportunities screen CMP opportunities. This chapter describes these steps and provides a diversity of tools to help identify PAs suitable for CMPs and determine ↗ Section 3 the most appropriate CMP model. ↗ Appendices ↘ Chapter 4 — Identifying and screening CMP opportunities 80 Identifying and screening CMP opportunities Collaborative Management Partnership Toolkit  overnment Decision 4.1 G T he decision to engage in a CMP for a it is unable to achieve its goals without external Following a government’s decision to consider national PA rests with the government. The management support and is willing to engage CMPs for its PA estate, it would embark on a series process to determine whether to engage in a CMP, it would then embark on a process of of steps to determine the feasibility of CMPs in the with a CMP starts with the PA authority selecting suitable PAs, selecting the appropriate country and the most suitable PA for consideration. strategy and an assessment of its ability to deliver CMP model for that particular PA, followed by the The following section highlights these steps (see on that strategy. If a PA authority determines that sourcing of a qualified partner (see Figure 4.1). Figure 4.2), which mirror the PPP cycle outlined by the World Bank’s PPP Knowledge Lab.54 Figure 4.1 Figure 4.2 Government Decision-Making Matrix Tool for CMPs Five Steps to Identify and Screen CMP Opportunities Does the Government have Does the Government have the Effective a plan for their PA / PAs? Yes financial and technical capacity Yes PA management to effectively manage its PAs? No No Government Is the Government willing Embark on transparent develops a plan, with to enter into a CMP? Yes process to select suitable technical assistance PAs, models, and when needed partners No PA management declines Source: Adapted from Lindsey et al. 2021. Source: Adapted from COMIFAC 2019; Lindsey et al. 2021; WBG 2020b. 54. For information on PPPs, visit the World Bank Knowledge Lab at https://pppknowledgelab.org/guide/sections/51-ppp-cycle 81 4.2 Legal Review ↗ Contents C MPs need to be developed within the Box 4.1 PPP Framework for CMPs in Kenya legal framework of the host country. The contracting authority (CA) — which is the In Kenya, the 2013 Wildlife Conservation and Management Act (WCMA) guides the establishment and ↗ Section 1 government entity that has the legal management of national parks but does not include a reference for CMPs. Kenya has not established a authority to enter a CMP and, in some cases, the CMP. The key government act relevant to the awarding of collaborative management rights over national entity tasked with overseeing the process, such parks is the PPP Act 2013, which designates a contracting authority to engage in collaborative manage- as the PA agency or relevant ministry — should ment. complete a legal review to determine the best way to set up CMPs and the related operational • A CA is defined as a state department, agency, state corporation, or county government, which facets prior to embarking on the selection intends to have function undertaken by it performed by a private party. With respect to national parks process. All legal aspects need to be vetted from in Kenya, the relevant CA would be the Kenya Wildlife Service. attracting a partner and establishing the contract ↗ Section 2 to fulfilling international treaties, but at an initial • Key components of the PPP Act are as follows: stage, the key legal focus should be on how to • Section 19: Provides that the CA may enter into a PPP with a private party in accordance with the establish the CMP, taking into consideration how Second Schedule of the Act. domestic laws apply and which international leg- • Second Schedule: The Cabinet Secretary (National Treasury and Planning) is the key actor in provid- islation needs to be considered. ing for PPPs. • Parts IV, V, VI, and VII: Provide for project identification and approval processes. • General Principles: The PPP Act provides that the CA should: • Conduct pre-qualification procedures, ensuring that the private company has: ↗ Section 3 • Financial capacity to undertake the project. • Relevant experience in undertaking similar projects. • Relevant expertise to undertake the project. • Undertake a competitive bidding process, guided by the principles of transparency, free and fair competition, and equal opportunity. The private partner would want to refer to the WCMA, which outlines in section VII the international treaties, conventions, and agreements ratified by the government of Kenya, and in section VI discusses ↗ Appendices aspects pertaining to the protection of endangered and threatened species and ecosystems, as well as species recovery plans. In addition, the WCMA is the legal framework for the management of wildlife in the country. For example, WCMA (2013) schedule five outlines the requirements of GMPs and the plan- ning framework (WBG 2020b). 82 Identifying and screening CMP opportunities Collaborative Management Partnership Toolkit Some CMPs fall under PPP legislation (see reviewed to ensure compatibility with the PPP Appendix C ). In Kenya, while the Wildlife legislation. In some cases, the steps outlined Conservation and Management Act55 guides the in the Toolkit will provide additional rigor and management of NPs, a CMP would be established transparency. through the PPP Act of 2013 (see Box 4.1). In some countries, there is confusion over whether the PPP legislation guides CMPs, which can delay the rollout of CMPs. Most PPP legislation outlines a process for selecting, reviewing, and vetting potential PPPs. For example, Malawi’s PPP legis- lation outlines a four-phase approach (see Figure 4.3). The steps outlined in the Toolkit align with this standard process but should be Figure 4.3 Malawi PPP Process Phase II Phase IV Phase I Phase III Phase V Source: Malawi PPP Legislation 201156. 55. For information on WCMA, visit http://kenyalaw.org/kl/fileadmin/pdfdownloads/Acts/WildlifeConservationandManagementActCap376_2_.pdf 56. For information on the Malawi PPP Act, visit https://www.mitc.mw/images/downloads/acts/Public-Private-Partnership-Act.pdf 83 In some countries, the PPP legislation does not wildlife and PA management, to determine which ↗ Contents guide CMP contracts. For example, in Tanzania, ministries and agencies should be involved in and the Wildlife Division (WD) and its agent, the made aware of the CMP process. The manage- Tanzania Wildlife Management Authority, are ment or exploitation of these assets, such as min- legally entitled to enter into agreements with erals, carbon, and water could enhance or infringe other organizations to support the execution on a CMP; therefore, it is important to understand of WD’s mandate as provided in the Wildlife these aspects at the onset of a CMP process. The Conservation Act of Tanzania, 2009. government should also review the country's international obligations to ensure compliance In addition to the overall governing frame- and to support the fulfillment of these obligations ↗ Section 1 work for the CMP, the government in the initial through a CMP (see Figure 4.4). stage will want to consider the legal framework for other relevant natural resources, beyond Figure 4.4 Legal Framework for CMPs ↗ Section 2 ↗ Section 3 Source: Spenceley et al. 2016. ↗ Appendices 84 Identifying and screening CMP opportunities Collaborative Management Partnership Toolkit 4.3 Review Agency Goals and Targets T he CA will want to review the wildlife agen- Once an agency determines that it is open to agency, or diversify the tourism product within cy’s goals and strategies to determine if a engaging in a CMP, it will need to consider which the country or restore extirpated species. When CMP is a suitable tool to address particular PAs are most suitable. Some of the key drivers for determining which PAs are suitable for CMPs, the challenges. Some countries have embedded engaging in a CMP are described in Chapter 2 and PA authority should frame its review and selec- the desire for strategic partnerships into the min- include the restoration of natural capital, enhanc- tion criteria on its agency goals. The ZPWMA, for istry or PA authority strategic and financial plans. ing wildlife numbers, and diversifying revenue. example, identified the use of CMPs as a strategy In Mozambique, ANAC states in its financial plan The motivation for engaging in a CMP varies for diversifying funding streams for its PA estate the desire for partnerships to help attract financial and depends on the agency’s vision, goals, and (Lindsey et al. 2021). If a PA authority has an resources (see Table 4.1). In addition to national strategy. For example, a PA authority’s strategy for annual management budget of $50 million and an policies, the government should review these strat- entering into CMPs might be to attract investment annual funding gap of $20 million, and its primary egies, plans, and targets to ensure consistency. and expertise, reduce the financial burden on the reason for considering a CMP is to reduce its finan- cial burden, the selection of a small park with an Table 4.1 annual budget of $500,000 will not substantially Embedding CMPs in Laws and Country Level Plans in Mozambique help the agency achieve its overall objective. Government Law and Policy Section Relating to CMPs Most PA authorities have five-to-10-year strate- gies for the agency and PA network. The selec- Forestry and Wildlife Law of Allows management of PAs to be delegated to the private partner tion of PAs for CMPs should support the agency’s 1999 (Law 10.99, Article 33) strategy. The Uganda Wildlife Authority’s (UWA) Conservation Policy of 2009 Promotes partnerships "involving local and national authorities, local 2013-2018 Strategic Plan57 had very clear targets (Chapter III) and Conservation communities, the private sector and non-governmental organizations" on financial sustainability (UWA 2013): Law of 2014 (Article 4) (NGOs) to "enable the economic viability of this policy" Internally generated revenues funding 80 • ANAC Creation Decree (Decree Identified as one of ANAC’s principle objectives "to establish partnerships percent of the annual optimal budget. 9/2013 of April 10, Article 3) for the management and development of Conservation Areas" Internally generated revenues increasing annu- • ally by 20 percent. ANAC Financial Plan of 2015 Recognizes the limited financial resources of ANAC and declares: "The search for more partnerships is an important strategy for ANAC" These clear targets would guide which PAs ANAC Strategic Plan "Recognizes the need to involve other actors and partners to ensure are most likely to help UWA achieve these goals of 2015-2024 resources needed for the effective and sustainable management of CAs" and where a CMP is the appropriate conservation and specifically identifies management models including "public-private- approach for doing so. partnerships," "management by the private sector," and "management by NGOs," as well as community management and government management Source: Baghai et al 2018. 57. For information on UWA’s 2013-2018 Strategic Plan, visit http://extwprlegs1.fao.org/docs/pdf/uga175147.pdf 85 4.4 Screen and Select Potential ↗ Contents Protected Areas for CMPs T he CA should clearly outline the process Figure 4.6 to be undertaken to identify suitable PAs Threat Analysis of Selected National Parks, Kenya for CMPs. The selection criteria should be ↗ Section 1 documented and shared with stakeholders to ensure a transparent process and that stake- holders understand how decisions are taken. This will help avoid challenges and delays in the future. Once the PA authority’s strategy is reviewed (see Section 4.2) and the goals for considering a CMP are agreed, the PA authority should establish the criteria it will use to select suitable PAs for ↗ Section 2 CMPs. The CA should review and consider three key factors: the status of PAs; key drivers for engaging in a CMP; and deterrents and risks for engaging in a CMP (see Figure 4.5). Figure 4.5 CMP Variables for Consideration in PA Selection ↗ Section 3 ↗ Appendices Source: World Bank. Original figure for this publication. Source: Adapted by the African Leadership University from the Kenya Ministry of Wildlife and Tourism, 2021 (Snyman et al. 2021). 86 Identifying and screening CMP opportunities Collaborative Management Partnership Toolkit Status of Protected Areas Figure 4.7 Four Key Drivers for Consideration in CMP PA Selection COMIFAC (2019) recommends the establish- ment of a diagnostic assessment of all PAs to identify sites for CMPs, with the first step being the status of the PAs. To determine the ecological status of PAs, the CA should complete: Resource Inventory of the PA to determine the • presence and status of key natural resources (species and ecosystems). Threat Analysis to identify and assess the • scope and severity of threats (see Figure 4.6). Performance Audit to assess trends in man- • agement effectiveness. There are various tools available to assess management effec- tiveness, such as the Global Environment Facility Management Effectiveness Tracking Tool (METT) and the Integrated Management Effectiveness Tool (IMET).58 These three analyses (resource inventory, threat analysis, and performance audit) will give the CA a good understanding of which PAs need support. Key Drivers for CMPs To determine which PAs have potential to perform under CMPs, the CA will want to consider four key dynamics: revenue, wildlife, community, and natural capital (see Figure 4.7). All four drivers may not exist in all cases and can be used as a guide for the CMP selection process. Risks and Potential Deterrents There are a number of risks that the CA should consider as part of the park inventory, assess- ment, and ranking. While some risks might be Source: WBG 2020b. 58. For information on the GEF METT tool, see https://www.thegef.org/sites/default/files/documents/GEF7-BD-TrackingTool-Protected%20Area%20Projects.xlsx; and the IMET Tool, see https://biopa- ma-rris.rcmrd.org/pame/tools 87 effectively managed and mitigated, others may management of a PA is improving, a govern- Box 4.2 Conflict Risk in Virunga NP, the ↗ Contents not; therefore, a CMP should not be pursued. ment may opt for a CMP. Democratic Republic of Congo • Security and Safety: Insecurity and instability • Flagship Parks: Every country has flagship can hamper the success of a CMP. There are parks that are recognized by national and Virunga NP is managed through a 25-year CMP examples of CMPs that have achieved success global citizens as national treasures, such as between the Virunga Foundation (VF) and ICCN. despite insecurity, such as in Virunga NP in Serengeti National Park in Tanzania. These PAs Despite armed conflict and Ebola, all three great the Democratic Republic of Congo, which is conjure up strong emotions from stakehold- ape taxa remain present in Virunga. The popula- managed between the Virunga Foundation ers, and careful consideration should be given tion of mountain gorillas has been increasing at and ICCN through a 25-year CMP. Despite the to the perception of entering into a CMP with a natural rate of growth for five years, which led conservation and economic success (see Box a partner. This is not to suggest that flagship IUCN to decrease the threat level from critically ↗ Section 1 4.2), VNP has been severely challenged by parks should not be considered for CMPs; endangered to endangered. Virunga’s moun- insecurity. More than 200 rangers have been however, if this is one of the first CMPs to be tain gorilla population is estimated at over 300 killed in the line of duty.59 Similarly, in Garamba established in a country, a less recognized PA compared to only 58 in 1981. Elephant poaching NP60 in the Democratic Republic of Congo, might be the best approach to first demon- has been steadily declining for 10 years, with managed between ICCN and African Parks, strate success (WBG 2020b). herds now venturing into areas of the park where 23 rangers were killed between 2006 to 2017 • Land Claims: A CA should carefully consider elephants have not been present for several (Brugière 2020). the risks associated with a CMP for a PA that decades. Nine elephant carcasses were found in • External Drivers of Threats: The ecological is subjected to a formal land claim, which may 2017, six in 2018, and three in 2019. degradation of a PA is one of the reasons PA include grievances from IPLCs that have not ↗ Section 2 authorities enter into a CMP. However, if the been collectively resolved through a grievance The total area of the park illegally occupied has driver of the threat is outside the PA, a CMP mechanism. A legal challenge against own- reduced for three consecutive years while the may not be the right tool to mitigate that ership might deter partner engagement and integrity of all major ecological zones within threat. For example, if the polluting of a central donor funding and puts the long-term sustain- the park has been maintained. The number of water body in the PA is leading to the decline of ability at risk. There are cases where the nego- armed groups present in Virunga declined in 2019, key wildlife, and the source of the pollution is tiation of a CMP might be part of a claimant’s allowing rangers to deploy over larger areas and outside the PA, over which the partner has no petition for land rights and can help leverage as a result to protect more effectively against influence, a CMP may not be the right mech- a positive outcome for the community and poaching, charcoal extraction, and illegal land anism to address this particular threat. This is conservation (see the Makuleke case study in occupation. ↗ Section 3 why identifying key threats in a threat analysis Appendix D, Figure D.6). and ensuring a CMP will help mitigate these In relation to the improvement to people’s threats is key in due diligence and pre-planning. Other risks include political interference and quality of life, VF’s wide-ranging projects have • Management Trends: It is important to review changing philosophy around the use of CMPs. reintegrated thousands of people into legitimate the management trends within a PA, ideally Once the PA authority considers the potential work activities, and improved the lives of many through a management effectiveness track- risks and deterrents, the findings can be com- more. These projects include major hydropower ing tool. If the scores show an increase in bined in a table with the drivers for entering into and related electrification activities, support management effectiveness, and effective a CMP (see Table 4.2). The CA can weigh certain for farmers and their supply chains, and micro- ↗ Appendices management is realistically attainable without drivers or detractors to align with its overall credit programs. Thousands of young people are outside support, a CMP may not be the right strategy. working directly and indirectly for VF’s initiatives, tool for shoring up management. Even if the reducing the pool of recruits for armed groups (VF Trustees Report 2019). 59. For information on Virunga NP, visit https://virunga.org 60. For information on Garamba NP, visit https://www.africanparks.org/the-parks/garamba 88 Identifying and screening CMP opportunities Collaborative Management Partnership Toolkit Table 4.2 Sample Protected Area Selection Tool: Drivers, and Deterrents and Risks Table 4.2 is a sample tool that the CA may use to consider different dynamics and to vet potential PAs. Certain criteria can be weighted more than others to align with the PA authority’s goals. Protected Area Selection Matrix Evaluation Evaluation (Weak (+1), Average (+2), Strong (+3) ) Category Drivers Park A Park B Park C Revenue dynamics Current revenue dynamics + + + Presence of commercially successful tourism facilities + + + Potential for wildlife-based tourism revenue + + + Potential for other revenue generating opportunities + + + Community Current community relations + + + Current community cost + + + Current community benefits + + + Potential for community benefits + + + Ecological and Ecological priority for government + + + natural capital Natural capital value + + + Evaluation (Low (-1), Medium (-2), High (-3) ) Category Risks and Detractors Park A Park B Park C Detractors Security and safety - - - and risks External drivers of threats - - - Management trends - - - Flagship parks - - - Land claims - - - TOTAL Score # # # Source: Adapted from WBG 2020b. 89 4.5 Screen and Select the ↗ Contents CMP Model for the PA O nce the CA has selected which PAs Table 4.3 might be suitable for CMP consider- Types of CMP Models Used in Africa ation, it will then want to consider the ↗ Section 1 most suitable model for the respective Country Partner Protected Area Type of CMP PA. PAs are diverse and face a range of unique threats; therefore, the model selected should Republic All Delegated CMPs take all of these aspects into consideration. Some of Congo African Parks Odzala-Kokoua NP Delegated countries utilize one CMP model, such as the Noé Conkouati Douli NP Delegated Republic of Congo, while other countries utilize WCS Nouabale-Ndoki NP Delegated different models, such as Mozambique (see Table Democratic Bilateral and Delegated CMPs 4.3). Having one kind of CMP model might make Republic African Parks Garamba NP Delegated contract oversight and management by the PA of Congo ↗ Section 2 authority easier, and decrease time to develop African Wildlife Foundation Bili-Uele PA Bilateral and execute an agreement, but certain PAs Forgotten Parks Foundation Upemba NP Delegated require different models. Also, being open to a Virunga Foundation Virunga NP Bilateral range of models increases the breadth of poten- WCS Okapi WR Delegated tial partners. WWF Salonga NP Bilateral WWF Dzanga-Sangha NP Bilateral The CA should review the CMP best practice principles in Section 3.5 and review and rank the Malawi All Delegated CMPs relevant principles to determine the most appro- African Parks Liwonde NP Delegated ↗ Section 3 priate CMP model. A sample selection tool is African Parks Majete Wildlife Reserve Delegated provided in Figure 4.8 where the color aligns with African Parks Mangochi Forest Reserve Delegated the ability of the model to meet each criterion. African Parks Nkhotakota Wildlife Reserve Delegated Some of the best practices pillars and principles Mozambique Bilateral, Integrated, and Delegated CMPs were consolidated in this example. African Parks Bazaruto Archipelago NP Delegated Greg Carr Foundation Gorongosa NP Integrated International Foundation for the Conservation of Wildlife Gile National Reserve Bilateral ↗ Appendices Peace Parks Foundation Zinave NP Bilateral WCS Niassa National Reserve Bilateral Source: Compiled with information from: Baghai et al. 2018; Zimbabwe Integrated and Delegated CMPs Baghai et al. 2018b; Baghai 2016; Brugière 2020; NGO and PA African Parks Matusadona NP Delegated authority websites; and communication with CMP NGO and PA authority partners. Frankfurt Zoological Society Gonarezhou NP Integrated 90 Identifying and screening CMP opportunities Collaborative Management Partnership Toolkit It is important that the CA review suitable CMP Figure 4.8 models prior to the tendering process so that it CMP Model Selection Tool to Determine Suitable PA Model understands the pros and cons of each model. However, the CA will not want to limit bids to that The color coding is hypothetical and should be completed for each PA. particular model and instead should keep options open during the concession process.  ⚫⚫⚫ ⚫⚫⚫  ⚫⚫⚫ ⚫⚫⚫ ⚫⚫⚫ ⚫⚫⚫ ⚫⚫⚫   ⚫⚫⚫  ⚫⚫⚫ ⚫⚫⚫   ⚫⚫⚫ ⚫⚫⚫  ⚫⚫⚫ ⚫⚫⚫  ⚫⚫⚫ ⚫⚫⚫ ⚫⚫⚫ ⚫⚫⚫  ⚫⚫⚫ ⚫⚫⚫ ⚫⚫⚫ ⚫⚫⚫  ⚫⚫⚫ ⚫⚫⚫  ⚫⚫⚫ ⚫⚫⚫ Source: WBG 2020b. The shading aligns with the ability to meet each criterion: darker means yes, lighter means no. In this illustrative example, the inte- grated CMP model is most suitable. 91 4.6 Review National ↗ Contents and Regional Plans C As should also consider how PAs might objectives. For example, Kenya’s Vision 2030 the importance of wildlife conservation and fit into national development plans or names tourism as one of six priority sectors that management in supporting its social develop- strategies. Many countries have identified will be tapped to boost economic growth, and the ment pillar (see Table 4.4).62 NBT, research and ↗ Section 1 tourism (namely NBT) as a key pillar for tourism pillar leans on developing and improv- ecological monitoring, and the development of economic development; in these cases, the effec- ing tourism in national parks, reserves, lakes, wildlife linkages are all contingent on effective PA tiveness of PAs is directly linked to development forests, and other PAs. Kenya also recognizes management. Table 4.4 Pillars of Kenya’s Vision 2030 Plan that Rely on PAs (Established Pre-COVID-19) Selected Pillars Examples of Initiatives that Use PAs ↗ Section 2 Economic Pillar: Under-utilized Parks Initiative Tourism Sector Infrastructural improvements and development initiated during the First Medium Term Plan will be continued. Products in Meru, Mt. Kenya, Tsavo East, Tsavo West, Mt. Elgon, and Ruma NPs shall be repackaged to increase the diversity. Specific actions will include: • Marketing the under-utilized parks • Providing incentives such as concessionary land leases and tax incentives • Revamping the KWS ranger force to curb poaching and insecurity (including HWC through installing electric fencing around the parks) Premium Parks Initiative Infrastructural improvements in Amboseli and Lake Nakuru NPs will be undertaken. Segmentation based on product and price in the parks will be sustained. Facilities to be rehabilitated include Lake Nakuru NP observation, picnic/campsites; campsites and visitor facilities across the parks; and upgrading road network of about 300 ↗ Section 3 kilometers. Niche Products Initiative 2 Eco-tourism. Sites for these products will be developed in the western region of Kenya and include Kakamega Forest, Ruma NPs, and Mt Elgon and Mt Kenya Regions. Social Pillar: Wildlife Conservation and Management — This will involve identification, mapping, and documenting hotspots and boosting their connectivity to enhance ecological Environment, integrity of habitats for wildlife. In addition, wildlife research stations will be refurbished and equipped; ecological monitoring programs will be enhanced in all PAs and Water, and a national wildlife research, information, and database will be developed at KWS headquarters. Wildlife security and management will be enhanced. To promote eco- Sanitation tourism among communities living with wildlife, a program of mapping and securing community areas with eco-tourism potential shall be initiated. Secure wildlife corridors and management routes — Most wildlife corridors and migratory routes have been interfered with by human activities. Strategies will be ↗ Appendices developed to reclaim them so that wildlife continues providing the base for the tourism sector. Actions include preparing physical development plans to map and secure the wildlife corridors and migratory routes to minimize human-wildlife conflict. Source: Kenya’s Vision 203061. 61. For information on Kenya’s Vision 2030, visit http://vision2030.go.ke/economic-pillar/#59 62. idid. 92 Identifying and screening CMP opportunities Collaborative Management Partnership Toolkit Tourism-specific plans tend to rely heavily on PAs. For example, Zambia’s Tourism Master Plan (2018-2038)63 is the country’s first national strate- gic framework to guide the development of the tourism sector, which is prioritized for economic diversification under Zambia’s Vision 2030 and Seventh National Development Plan (2017-2021). Much of the plan is anchored in increased invest- ments and enhancements in tourism in PAs, as well as strengthening tourism management (see Map 4.1). The Seventh National Development Plan also cites restocking NPs as one of five key strategies for tourism development. These pri- orities can help guide PA authorities on deciding whether CMPs are right for which PAs. Nkhotakota Wildlife Reserve, Malawi. © Maximum Exposure PR / Shutterstock 63. For information on Zambia’s Tourism Master Plan, visit https://www.mota.gov.zm/?p=5881 93 In addition to national, sub-national, and Map 4.1 ↗ Contents regional integrated development plans, CMPs Priority Tourism Development Areas under Tourism Master Plan (2018-2038), Zambia should be considered in the context of large land- scape planning. Biodiversity protection requires Key NORTH TDA large, intact landscapes and seascapes that Tourism Destination Areas (TDAs) comprise a mosaic of land use and ownership TANZANIA Long Term TDAs schemes. These large areas support natural pro- Mbala Community Heritage Corridor cesses and enable the movement of species. PAs Tourism Circuits NSUMBU TDA alone are not enough to sustain healthy wildlife populations in the face of a changing climate and National Parks ↗ Section 1 Northern Lakes increasing human development64; therefore, CAs Game Management Areas & Waterfall Tourism Kasama Circuit SAMFYA and conservation partners commonly plan at a Rivers and Lakes TDA landscape scale. In Kenya, Amboseli NP is a small, Wetlands NORTH WEST TDA DEMOCRATIC BANGWEULU TDA yet important PA that relies on the surround- Roads REPUBLIC OF Mansa ing community and privately owned lands for THE CONGO Bangweulu Mwinilunga Adventure & wildlife movement and habitat. KWS, rather than COMMUNITY Heritage Mpika HERITAGE planning at park level, developed the Amboseli ANGOLA Solwezi CORRIDOR Tourism Circuit Ecosystem Plan, which takes into consider- ation the larger ecosystem dynamics (Amboseli ↗ Section 2 Kitwe Ecosystem Trust 2020). When planning for a CMP, Serenje LUANGWA the partners should consider how the PA fits into WEST TDA NDOLA VALLEY TDA Zambezi the larger mosaic and if the CMP is compatible KAFUE TDA TDA Chipata with and can advance relevant government strat- egies and land use/development plans. LUSAKA TDA LOWER Mongu ZAMBEZI TDA MOZAMBIQUE ↗ Section 3 Western Kafue KASA Senanga Flats Tourism Ecotourism SIAVONGA TDA Circuit KAFUE Circuit FLATS TDA Kalomo ZIMBABWE Sesheke 0 100 200 300km NAMIBIA ↗ Appendices LIVINGSTONE TDA Source: Zambia Tourism Master Plan 2020. Note: Zambia’s tourism Master Plan is centered on PAs. 64. For information on conserving large landscapes, visit the Center for Large Landscape Conservation https://largelandscapes.org/ 94 Section 2: How to Establish Collaborative Management Partnerships Collaborative Management Partnership Toolkit ↘ Chapter 4 — Identifying and screening CMP opportunities 79 ↘ Chapter 5 — Preparing for and establishing CMPs 95 5.1  Complete a Feasibility Study 98 5.2  Determine the Management Partner Selection Process 99 5.3  Pre-Tendering Stakeholder Engagement 101 5.4  Formation of a Proposal Evaluation Committee 104 Determine Partner Criteria 5.5  105 5.6  Prepare Tendering Materials 106 5.7  Tendering Process and Selection of Partner 107 5.8  Establishing a CMP 111 5.9  Contract Management and Monitoring 112 Chapter 5 — Preparing for and establishing CMPs Chapter 5 95 ↗ Contents ↗ Section 1 Preparing Preparing a CMP involves seven steps that are outlined in this chapter, from completing a feasibility study, to for and ↗ Section 2 determining the selection process, to selecting a CMP partner. There are also establishing two steps in entering into a contract and managing the partnership. All of these steps are outlined in detail. CMPs Tools are provided to help facilitate a ↗ Section 3 transparent and effective process for preparing and establishing CMPs. ↗ Appendices ↘ Chapter 5 — Preparing for and establishing CMPs 96 Preparing for and establishing CMPs Collaborative Management Partnership Toolkit F ollowing the identification and screening Table 5.1 process (see Table 5.1), the CA will start to Completed Checklist for Identification and Screening of CMPs prepare for and establish the CMP, which is guided by the relevant country’s legal framework. Process Chapter Section Step Complete As noted in Section 4.2, in many countries Identify Chapter 4 4.1 Government decision to engage in a  CMPs are guided by PPP legislation, which may and Screen CMP outline a process for engaging a partner. This CMPs needs to be considered along with the process 4.2 Legal review  outlined in the Toolkit, Figure 5.1. 4.3 Review agency goals and targets  4.4 Screen and select potential PAs for  CMPs 4.5 Screen and select CMP models  4.6 Review regional plans  97 ↗ Contents Figure 5.1 Seven-Step Process for Preparing a CMP ↗ Section 1 ↗ Section 2 ↗ Section 3 Source: Conservation Capital 2016; Spenceley et al 2017; Spenceley et al 2016. ↗ Appendices 98 Preparing for and establishing CMPs Collaborative Management Partnership Toolkit  omplete a Feasibility Study 5.1 C D epending on the legislation guiding the establishment of a CMP, a feasibility study might be required by the gov- ernment to demonstrate why a CMP is needed. This is common if the CMP is guided by PPP legislation. Even if not legally required, it is recommended. All of the work undertaken in the identification and screening process (see Sections 4.1-4.6) can be used to complete a feasibility assessment. The feasibility study needs to strike a balance by being specific (which tends to make the remainder of the process much easier), but at the same time avoiding a pre-determination of the outcome, which the market should deter- mine. Additional information might be required under the legislation, which includes the sub- mission and approval process. The subsequent steps follow approval of the CMP by the relevant government authority. Virunga NP, Democratic Republic of Congo © Marian Galovic / Shutterstock 99 Determine the Management 5.2  ↗ Contents Partner Selection Process A pproaches a government can use to The perception exists that a tendering process either delay or derail a CMP. In addition, a tendering engage a management partner include takes longer than direct negotiation with a process helps the government take ownership of public tendering, direct negotiation, potential partner, which is generally incorrect. the process, assess the best bids, and drive the ↗ Section 1 or auction. The Toolkit recommends a A well-prepared and implemented tendering outcome. public tendering process, when a partnership process has a clear timeframe, steps, and proce- opportunity is publicly advertised and a partner dures, while one-on-one negotiations often take Some PPP legislation contains a combined is selected via a competitive and transparent years for CMPs because the process is unclear, approach for when a partner proposes a CMP process. Some countries require a public tender- lacks transparency, and in some cases, govern- to the CA and the CA vets the opportunity and ing process for the engagement of a CMP partner ment representatives stall on making a decision decides to proceed with establishing a CMP. In for a national PA. Table 5.2 outlines the different because of the lack of clarity and fear of negative this case, referred to as the spontaneous option mechanisms that might be used to attract CMP repercussions. An unclear process also can create in Francophone Africa, the CA uses a tendering partners and the pros and cons of each approach. opportunity for corruption. approach and the entity that first proposed the ↗ Section 2 If done properly, a public tendering for national CMP is eligible to bid. and international bidders, even when not legally Even when a partner has been active in a PA required, creates transparency, enables the CA to for a long period, has invested significant capital, If there is not a clear tendering framework in drive the process, and determine the best possi- and knows the PA well, a tendering process will a country, or if the CA does not have capacity ble CMP candidates, providing the highest value help this partner, if selected, avoid mispercep- to shepherd the process, and tendering is not for money. tions about its engagement with government required legally, a hybrid approach could be used and potential challenges in the future that could using the principles outlined in the Toolkit. Table 5.2 ↗ Section 3 Different Mechanisms That Might be Used by a PA Authority to Establish a CMP Process Pros Cons Public Tender Legally required in most cases for public land Competitive process may deter partners because of time required Most transparent process Process can be timely, costly, and complicated Market-based system for selecting the best proposal with the highest Risk of attracting bidders that do not meet the criteria, with little or no ↗ Appendices value proposition experience (can be avoided through pre-qualification) Stimulates investor interest by inspiring confidence in the process Difficulty in developing objective bid evaluation criteria Best candidates can be selected based on multiple criteria (monetary Limited pool of qualified CMP partners and non-monetary) Proper due diligence can be done Transaction cost 100 Preparing for and establishing CMPs Collaborative Management Partnership Toolkit Process Pros Cons Unsolicited Bid Greater flexibility Lacks transparency Investor already interested Prone to external challenges regarding transparency, favoritism, and corruption No marketing and promotion required Does not comply with law for public lands in most cases CA can proactively identify a partner Ad hoc and reactive to bids that are provided PA authority responding as opposed to driving process Inability to determine best partner, given only one is considered Risk is potentially greater for choosing an unsuitable investor, and not getting the best deal Not competitive Direct Negotiation Greater flexibility Lacks transparency (normally with an existing No marketing and promotion required Prone to external challenges regarding transparency, favoritism, and partner that has discussed corruption the submission with the relevant government agency) Relatively simple, quick, and direct Does not comply with law for public lands in most cases Ad hoc and reactive to bids that are provided PA authority responding as opposed to driving process Inability to determine best partner, given only one is considered Risk is potentially greater for choosing an unsuitable investor, and not getting the best deal Not competitive Auction Transparent Proper due diligence cannot be done Competitive Award goes to highest bidder, not necessarily the best partner Quick and easy Difficult to determine shared interest and vision Stimulates investor interest Not possible to negotiate other benefits (community support, job creation) May limit participation from certain parties Potential delays and need to restart the process if winners of the bidding process are unable to make payments Source: Adapted from Spenceley et al. 2017. 101 ↗ Contents Pre-Tendering Stakeholder 5.3  Engagement N ational parks and reserves are national Figure 5.2 assets and have a diversity of stakehold- General Framework to Inform the Design of a Stakeholder Engagement Strategy ers, ranging from citizens who view parks ↗ Section 1 as public resources, IPLCs who rely on and have expertise in managing biodiversity and natural resources, private sector partners oper- ating in and/or around the PA, local government authorities, and conservation and development organizations. Effective CMPs are built on shared trust and understanding among the stakeholders (Spenceley et al. 2016). ↗ Section 2 Because PAs are valuable to different groups and individuals for a variety of reasons, outlining a transparent and clear consultative process is important so that stakeholders understand and feel part of the process (see Figure 5.2). Proactive discussion and dialogue with these stakeholders can help avoid problems and delays and ensure the effective engagement of local stakeholders, including communities, in the process. ↗ Section 3 The first step for the CA is to identify the stake- holders (both project-affected parties and other interested stakeholders), determine the best mechanisms for engagement and participation, and outline a plan for consultation. It is important for the CA to understand stakeholder concerns and to, within reason, address these points to the ↗ Appendices extent feasible, while also ensuring adherence to relevant ESS frameworks, as required. The stakeholder identification process should identify any individuals or groups who may have different concerns or priorities and require different, or separate, forms of engagement. Source: Dovers et al. 2015. 102 Preparing for and establishing CMPs Collaborative Management Partnership Toolkit Special consideration and consultation should Figure 5.3 be given to citizens and IPLCs that are directly and Guide to Community Engagement in CMPs indirectly impacted by the management and gov- ernance of the PA. Chapter 6 discusses environ- 1 mental social standards that must be considered Define purpose of engagement throughout the life of the CMP process. If IPLCs have legal claims, CMPs should not be consid- ered until the claims have been resolved or if the establishment of a CMP is part of the solution put forward by the IPLCs. The role of IPLCs can range 2 from providing input into a management plan to serving on a governance body. Their role in a CMP Decide whom to engage should be thoroughly reviewed and considered in the stakeholder analysis and strategy with a process of meaningful consultation and engage- ment throughout. In addition, the stakeholder engagement process should ensure gender 3 inclusivity to provide for equitable representation Conduct community mapping and participation. The World Bank 2019 Guide to Community Engagement in Public-Private Partnerships outlines a six-step process for engagement of 4 stakeholder communities (see Figure 5.3), which Select method of engagement and implement can be followed for CMPs. Resource Box 5.1 Stakeholder Engagement The World Bank 2019 Guide to Community 5 Engagement in Public-Private Partnerships, a Draft for Discussion Issues tracking and grievance process https://ppp.worldbank.org/public-private-partner- ship/library/guide-community-engagement-pub- lic-private-partnerships-june-2019 6 USAID Resource Guide on Best Practices for Stakeholder Engagement in Biodiversity Reporting and Monitoring Programming https://pdf.usaid.gov/pdf_docs/PA00T9XH.pdf Source: WBG 2019. 103 Partners should follow a rights-based approach involved in project design, including in the The identification of circumstances in which ↗ Contents that includes meaningful participation in the development of mitigation measures, and later in FPIC applies would be determined by the specific formulation and implementation of a CMP by monitoring their implementation (level 3). requirements of any ESS in place (see Chapter 6). the individuals and IPLCs whose lives might be Meaningful consultation tailored to indigenous affected, positively or negatively. A stakeholder In certain circumstances a process of achieving peoples to build local project support or own- engagement process should ensure that: free, prior, and informed consent (FPIC) may be ership should be conducted throughout the needed. For example, if activities take place on process. The project manager should also ensure • Stakeholders’ concerns are captured and land, waters, or territories to which stakeholders gender inclusivity in the consultation process. potential risks are adequately identified. have recognized rights (legal or customary), or • Groups and peoples whose lives might be where there may be adverse impacts or restric- ↗ Section 1 affected by the project are properly consulted tions on land and natural resources subject to tra- to verify and assess the significance of any ditional ownership or use, or on cultural heritage. impacts. • Affected groups and communities participate in the development of mitigation measures, Figure 5.4 decision-making regarding how such measures Scale and Depth of Stakeholder Engagement become operational, and monitoring their implementation. ↗ Section 2 Levels of Stakeholder Engagement The scale (extent of audience reached) and depth (intensity) of stakeholder engagement should be commensurate to the concerns expressed or expected from stakeholders and the magnitude of potential risks. For example, IUCN identifies a process of stakeholder engagement based on the logic of an inverse relationship ↗ Section 3 between the scale and the depth of engagement as the level of risk increases (see Figure 5.4) (IUCN 2016). All stakeholders at a project site should be provided relevant information about the project (see Figure 5.4, level 1). Stakeholders who could potentially be affected by project activities must ↗ Appendices be consulted to verify and assess the significance of adverse impacts (level 2). At this level, fewer people may be involved but they are more deeply involved. If risks and negative impacts are con- firmed and judged as significant, affected stake- holders are not only consulted but are thoroughly Source: IUCN 2016. 104 Preparing for and establishing CMPs Collaborative Management Partnership Toolkit Formation of a Proposal 5.4  Evaluation Committee T he CA should form a proposal evaluation committee (PEC) for CMP partner selec- tion to: • Determine criteria for partner selection. • Review tendering documents prior to publication. • Review expressions of interest and full invited bids from potential partners. In some countries, the gazettement of the PEC is required. It is recommended that the PEC is made public for transparency purposes and to avoid challenges in the future, regardless of the legal requirement. The PEC must contain adequate representation from individuals with the requisite technical skills and experience to properly appraise a CMP bid. Ideally, there should also be independent experts with PA manage- ment experience. The committee should be relatively small to ensure effective operations and management. Membership of the committee should include a representative from the depart- ment within the CA that encompasses commer- cial development and PA planning. All members of the PEC should sign a conflict of interest declaration. Nyungwe NP, Rwanda. © Di Tetyana Dotsenko / Shutterstock 105 Determine Partner Criteria 5.5  ↗ Contents T he PEC will establish criteria for the evalu- • Successful donor fundraising, management, Shared Vision and Philosophy ation of potential partners. The following and networks. criteria are suggested: • Successful, effective public relations and com- • Demonstrated commitment to the agency’s ↗ Section 1 munications systems. vision and philosophy. This can be gauged by • The design and application of contempo- reviewing the potential partner’s work in other Organizational Structure rary corporate governance structures and locations and consulting with references. In protocols. addition, the PEC will interview the partner • Potential ability to operate in the focal country • Proven success applying good governance during the tendering process, which is a good (if a new private operator to a country, they procedures to operations and management. opportunity to assess whether the partner’s may not yet be registered). • Demonstrable professional and rigorous fiscal core values and philosophy align with the PA • Structure enables the partner to accept management and control. authority. donations. ↗ Section 2 • Record of accomplishment of complying with Financial Capacity The PEC can develop an evaluation framework country registration requirements. based on the partner selection criteria for each • Proof of funding required to support the initial member to rank the potential partners. Technical Experience period of the CMP obligation and the skills required to attract additional resources and • Successful PA development and management develop sustainable revenue models. experience is preferred, or else direct exposure • Provision of a detailed, realistic, and pro- to PA management projects. Given the oppor- fessional park management business plan. tunity to scale up CMPs across Africa, limiting Appendix J includes a description of PA busi- ↗ Section 3 the engagement of partners to those that have ness plans and tools for development. already engaged in a CMP will hinder progress. • Proof of the partners’ ability to commit long- Therefore, selection should consider broader term (20 years). management skills. • Proven professional project management skills, Social Impact including budget development, staff manage- ment and oversight, environmental manage- • Proven local community engagement, integra- ment, and human resource development. tion, and related economic development. ↗ Appendices • Progressive nature-based revenue develop- • Proven history of optimizing local employment ment in PAs, with a particular (but not exclu- opportunities and positively engaging, where sive) focus on tourism development. appropriate, with wider local community devel- • Proven knowledge and application of con- opment initiatives. temporary innovative conservation financing • Plan for capacity development of staff. mechanisms. 106 Preparing for and establishing CMPs Collaborative Management Partnership Toolkit  repare Tendering Materials 5.6 P T he tendering materials will include the The government of Mozambique, in col- Figure 5.5 scope of the partnership and a detailed laboration with the World Bank and the GWP, CMP Tendering Materials from Mozambique description of the project and desired held an international conference (International responsibilities of the partner. The CA will Conference on NBT in Conservation Areas) in outline in the tendering materials that it is seeking Maputo in June 2018 to maximize finance for a partner to support the management of the PA nature-based tourism development and to and will include other targeted desired outcomes. promote long-term CMPs. As part of the confer- GOVERNMENT OF MOZAMBIQUE Appendix K is a sample tendering document from ence, the organizers developed a prospectus that the government of Rwanda. In addition to the outlined tourism opportunities in eight PAs and actual tendering notice, the CA should develop CMP opportunities in six PAs. Figure 5.5 is the information on the partnership opportunity that profile provided for a CMP opportunity in Banhine can be included in the advertisement and made NP, which includes a description of and back- available on the CA’s website in order to inform ground on the park, notable wildlife, habitat type, potential partners of a CMP opportunity and infrastructure, size, ecosystem type, threats, attract top candidates. At a minimum, the follow- and tourism potential. Appendix L includes CMP ing information should be included: tendering materials from Uganda. • Park location and map When the RDB advertised for a CMP in • Park size Nyungwe NP in 2019, it provided — in addition to • Access the information referenced previously — a list of • Ecosystem types park staff, salaries, and visitor numbers to help • Wildlife potential partners develop an informed business • Threats plan (see Appendix J). • Commercial operations • Infrastructure • Number of visitors • CMP opportunity description MOZAMBIQUE CONSERVATION AREAS Source: WBG 2018. Note: Developed for the International Conference on Nature- Based Tourism in Conservation Areas. 107  endering Process and 5.7 T ↗ Contents Selection of Partner A fter the PEC is formed and ideally made Resource Box 5.2 Tendering Concessions public (see Section 5.4) and the partner selection criteria and tendering materials The tendering process for a CMP is similar to the process for engaging tourism investment partners. ↗ Section 1 are prepared, the CA will advertise the Spenceley et al. 2017 provides a comprehensive framework for developing effective tourism partnerships CMP opportunity. The advertisement process will and concessions in PAs. be guided in most cases by country PPP legis- lation and is outlined in Figure 5.6. In addition Guidelines for Tourism Partnerships and Concessions for Protected Areas: Generating Sustainable to public notice and advertisement, the CA can Revenues for Conservation and Development proactively notify partners about the opportunity. https://www.cbd.int/tourism/doc/tourism-partnerships-protected-areas-web.pdf For example, when the RDB publicized the CMP opportunity for Nyungwe NP, it sent letters and Spenceley et al. 2016. An Introduction to Tourism Concessioning: 14 Characteristics of Successful information to a list of potential partners. Such Programs ↗ Section 2 direct contact does not replace the public notifi- https://www.researchgate.net/publication/304300673_An_introduction_to_tourism_concessioning_14_ cation process, but it ensures that key partners characteristics_of_successful_programs are aware of the opportunity. Figure 5.6 CMP Tendering Process ↗ Section 3 ↗ Appendices Source: Conservation Capital 2016; Spenceley et al 2017; Spenceley et al 2016. 108 Preparing for and establishing CMPs Collaborative Management Partnership Toolkit Successful CMP tendering process Expression of Interest Table 5.3 (Spenceley et al. 2016): Key Components that Should be Included • Is transparent, fair, and well-governed. Once the CMP opportunity is advertised, in an Expression of Interest • Is based on the legal framework of the country. partners will submit an EOI. The time allowed • Follows a thorough stakeholder engagement for the submission of the EOI is guided by the Key Component  process. legal framework in the country, and generally • Is supported by experienced technical consul- is eight weeks. In PPP legislation, this is com- Partner Description tants and advisors. monly referred to as the pre-selection of bidders Partner identity • Engages an experienced committee with clear phase and an additional step might be required roles and responsibilities. to first preselect bidders (to ensure they qualify Key people’s biographies and CVs • Outlines clear selection criteria for awarding to submit an EOI), followed by the EOI. Where Experience the concession to a partner. feasible, combining these steps is efficient and • Is competitive. saves time and cost. During this phase, the PEC International best practices will be mainly reviewing the credentials of the Experience in target PA bidders, whereas during the review of full bids the PEC will be assessing the plans and proposals. Conflict of interest declaration Table 5.3 includes a list of the key components to References be included in the EOI and Appendix M includes a detailed description. Appendix N includes a Technical Capacity sample EOI evaluation form. Protected area management Local community Revenue Fundraising Conservation finance Start-ups Technology Business and PA planning Environmental and social standards Project management Project Description Key priorities Alignment with PA authority Source: Adapted from: Conservation Capital 2016; Spenceley et al 2017; WBG 2020b. 109 Full CMP Bids Table 5.4 ↗ Contents Details to be Included in a Full CMP Bid After EOIs are submitted, the PEC will review the bids against the criteria. The PEC will use the evaluation framework it developed based on the Key Components  partner selection criteria (see Section 5.5) that Corporate and Governance enables committee members to rank the bids. Proposed corporate structure The PEC will then solicit full bids from qualified partners. Table 5.4 includes the key components Proposed governance structure that should be included in a full CMP bid and Statutory compliance ↗ Section 1 Appendix O includes a detailed description. SWOT analysis of the PA and the proposed CMP Key Policies Ethics that will govern the proposed CMP Key people’s biographies and CVs Conflict of interest declaration or lack thereof PA and Stakeholder Management ↗ Section 2 Proposed goals, impact objectives, and key performance indicators Management and human resources structure description and model Conservation development and management plan Stakeholder management plan PA authority capacity development plan Exit transition plan Finance ↗ Section 3 Operating revenue development model Financing and business plan ESS and Risk ESS policy and strategy Risk management plan (see Box 5.1) Environmental impact plan ↗ Appendices Communications and reporting plan Lesson-sharing plan Marketing plan Source: Adapted from: Conservation Capital 2016; Spenceley et al 2017; WBG 2020b. 110 Preparing for and establishing CMPs Collaborative Management Partnership Toolkit Partner Selection Process Due Diligence Evaluation Process After the evaluation process and once a deci- sion has been made on a preferred bidder, the CA Like the EOI review process, full bids will be will undertake proper due diligence to verify the reviewed against clear criteria established prior claims made in the bid, including but not limited to the invitation for bids. During both steps of the to the provision of proof of financing. This should tendering process, the EOI and the full bid, the CA be done prior to any kind of commitment or con- will want to facilitate field visits so that partners can tracting. A minimum of three references should visit the site and understand the context. In addi- be contacted. Too often this due diligence is not tion, this is an opportunity for the CA to become properly undertaken, significantly increasing the more familiar with the partner. During the review of risk that the concession will not be optimally the full bids, the CA and the PEC will want to have developed (Conservation Capital 2016). a physical presentation session with the partner, giving the PA authority the opportunity to ask further questions and to meet the potential partner. Niassa National Reserve, Mozambique © Gerhardus Kotze / Shutterstock 111 Establishing a CMP 5.8  ↗ Contents CMP Contract Development Table 5.5 Once the PEC selects the partner and the CA Standard Headings in a CMP Contract ↗ Section 1 has completed thorough due diligence on the potential partner, the CA will lead in negotiating • Parties • Law Enforcement and developing the actual legal contract that binds the CMP. The content of the contract will • Background • Community Relations be guided by the legal framework of the country, and contracts will vary depending on the kind • Definitions / Interpretations • Establishing Park Fees of CMP model selected by the PA authority. If • Objectives • Existing Commercial Relationships and New the CA does not have internal capacity, it should Concessions and Enterprise Development contract a CMP expert to support the contracting ↗ Section 2 process. Table 5.5 includes the standard headings • Governance Structure • Assets in a CMP contract, and Appendix P includes a detailed description of the key aspects to include • Geographical Area • Liability and Indemnity in a CMP contract. Contracts should be concise and explicit to avoid any confusion and conflicts • Delegation of Management • Conflict Resolution of interpretation. • Duration, Start Date, and Renewal • Perfomance Review • Integration of Staff • Termination ↗ Section 3 • Staff Recruitment • Data Ownership • Reserved Matters • Communication • Donor Funding and Revenue Management • Other Sections • PA Management Roles and Responsibilities ↗ Appendices • Non-Management Responsabilities Source: COMIFAC 2018; Spenceley et al 2017; WBG 2020b. 112 Preparing for and establishing CMPs Collaborative Management Partnership Toolkit Contract Management 5.9  and Monitoring M anaging a contract helps ensure that a Box 5.1 Risk Management mutually beneficial relationship exists between the PA authority and the Risks in the CMP process (see Table B5.1) can lead The CA should pay particular attention to the partner (Spenceley et al. 2016). Contract to costly delays, work stoppages, threats to the risk management plan outlined by the potential management also enables the partners to swiftly operation, negative publicity, and reputational partner in the bidding process to determine if the mitigate challenges, adapt as needed, and in the harm to both partners. A successful process to risk analysis is extensive and covers all the poten- worst-case scenario, terminate a CMP agreement develop CMP agreements must include effective tial risks, and if the potential partner’s strategies if needed. Contract management and perfor- risk management by identifying, mitigating, and for mitigating the risks are adequate. mance monitoring includes two key components: monitoring risk through stakeholder engagement, monitoring and evaluation (M&E) and audits. The site assessments, regular reporting, adequate PA team generally completes the M&E and an due diligence, and employing experienced/rep- external expert completes the audit. Using both utable technical personnel. This is a continual approaches with a CMP is recommended, as it process throughout the life of a CMP. external assessment of progress against the CMP contract. Table B5.1 CMP Risks and Mitigation Measures Category Risk Mitigation Measure Financial An inability for the partner to secure capital, or to make Proof of funding from the partner in the bid payments. Currency fluctuations also pose a risk Proper due diligence during the bidding process on the partner, and verification of capital and fundraising experience Political Political interference, unrest, or sudden policy changes Transparent and competitive CMP selection process signed off by relevant ministries Effective engagement of relevant government entities, i.e., ministries Solid legal contracts that minimize the ability for political interference Contract termination with compensation Source: Adapted from Lindsey et al. 2021; WBG 2020b. 113 ↗ Contents Category Risk Mitigation Measure Social Lack of or insufficient stakeholder engagement; local Proper stakeholder engagement process ↗ Section 1 communities members are not supportive of the project Effective engagement of communities and delay implementation; or lack of compliance with social standards A partner that is committed to community engagement and has a verifiable record of positive community development Compliance with social standards (see Chapter 6) Inclusion of community representatives in the governance structure External National or international financial or security crisis, disease, Reserve fund to support operations during crisis ↗ Section 2 and other events can impact the ability of a partner and / or Security plan to ensure standard of procedures for security risk the contracting agency to fulfill their obligations Clear standard of procedures to manage crisis Structure that allows for quick and strategic adaptive management Contract Poor quality CMP contracts that are vague, does not provide If the PA authority lacks capacity to develop a high-quality contract, they should engage an expert clarity on roles and responsibilities, does not anticipate to support the contract development challenges, and does not include clear CMP objectives Use best practice for contract development and refer to Annex P Lack of trust between the parties. The best contracts might Proper due diligence on the partner and consultation with references, and shared vision with ↗ Section 3 Trust be in place, but if there is not trust between the parties, the PA authority issues will emerge Regular monitoring and evaluation (see Section 5.9) Conflict mitigation procedures in place and followed Performance Disagreement over performance. Establishment of joint work plans with clarity on roles, responsibility, and accountability Establishment of clear targets (key performance indicators) Routine monitoring and evaluation ↗ Appendices Contract termination without compensation for poor performance Non- Closing out a project early Plan in advance for the project close out Performance Clearly outline in the contract what happens with assets, staff, revenue, and responsibilities in case of an early termination 114 Preparing for and establishing CMPs Collaborative Management Partnership Toolkit Monitoring and Evaluation Figure 5.7 Project Management Cycle Regular Internal M&E should be done regularly by the CMP management team and an M&E officer (if this position exists) covering: the performance of the CMP on i) conservation, social, and ecological targets; and ii) compliance with the obligations ASSESS of the contract. This is part of standard project management (see Figure 5.5). Each component will require different monitoring reports. Reports are provided routinely to the board or committee, depending on whether they involve an inte- grated, delegated, or bilateral CMP. The reporting timeline and frequency should be specified in the CMP and at a minimum, the board or committee should receive monitoring reports twice a year. Monitoring is done against clear targets outlined in the annual work plan and against the annual budget. The management team may also con- sider an internal audit every other year to assess overall performance against targets and obliga- tions within the CMP contract. Source: Conservation Measures Partnership 2020.65 65. For information about Conservation Measures Partnership, visit https://conservationstandards.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2020/10/ CMP-Open-Standards-for-the-Practice-of-Conservation-v4.0.pdf 115 Audit and proceed in good faith, they should follow the ↗ Contents conflict resolution section of the CMP contract. Every Three Years External SMART Targets At a minimum, an external auditor should During the planning phase (see Figure 5.7), review the CMP every three years. The auditor the CMP partners will develop joint annual work should be an internationally recognized PA man- plans, general management plans, and five-to- agement expert and should be jointly selected 10-year business plans. To enable assessment of and agreed on by the partners. The audit should progress and performance, these plans should ↗ Section 1 assess and appraise the implementation and include targets that are specific, measurable, compliance by each partner of their respective assignable, realistic, and time-related (SMART). obligations contained in the CMP contract and Management targets should include targets evaluate the general performance and achieve- within the following categories: i) ecological; ii) ment of the CMP’s intended goals and objectives. financial; iii) social; and iv) operational. SMART The auditor should make specific recommen- targets will enable the partners to adequately dations for areas of improvement. The report assess performance against the contract and help should be submitted to the board or committee to mitigate any claims of non-performance. The for approval, with a presentation made by the establishment of baselines in the beginning of the ↗ Section 2 auditor. The cost of the evaluation should be built CMP, if they do not already exist, is essential to into the operational budget. If there is a challenge enable project monitoring. and/or an issue in implementation, the board or committee may choose to schedule an evalua- tion outside of the routine schedule. COMIFAC recommends in their CMP guidelines an audit every five years, which is somewhat standard (COMIFAC 2018). However, much can happen in five years; therefore, audits every three years are ↗ Section 3 recommended.66 Non-Compliance and/or Non-Performance If M&E or the audit process determines that targets are not being met or a party is not fulfilling its obligations, the board or committee should work collectively to rectify the situation in good ↗ Appendices faith. This may require a change in management at park level, a shift in approach, adaptive man- agement, or realignment of budget. Should the partners not agree on how to rectify the situation 66. Conversation with Andrew Parker, Conserve Global, March 2021, https://conserveglobal.earth/ x Section 3 ↘ Section 3 — Strengthening and Managing Collaborative Management Partnerships x 3 Strengthening and Managing Collaborative Management Partnerships Niokolo-Koba NP, Senegal. © evenfh / Shutterstock 118 Section 3: Cross-Cutting Issues for Collaborative Management Partnerships Collaborative Management Partnership Toolkit ↘ Chapter 6 — Considering environmental and social standards in CMPs 119 ↘ Chapter 7 — Recommendations for strengthening CMPs 127 Chapter 6 — Considering environmental and social standards in CMPs Chapter 6 119 ↗ Contents ↗ Section 1 Considering The identification of potential environmental and social risks, and adherence to applicable Environmental and Social Standards (ESS), environmental ↗ Section 2 is critical to the identification, preparation, development, and management of and social CMPs, and helps public and private partners avoid, mitigate, and manage adverse environmental, cultural, and standards social impacts. The identification and ↗ Section 3 management of environmental and social in CMPs risks is complex and site-specific to CMPs, and should be carefully assessed and incorporated into the life of a CMP project. This chapter provides an overview of ESS ↗ Appendices in CMPs and shares relevant resources so that partners can take responsibility for the potential impacts of projects. ↘ Chapter 6 — Considering environmental and social standards in CMPs 120 Considering environmental and social standards in CMPs Collaborative Management Partnership Toolkit Environmental and Social Standards claim rights in an international forum (African bidding process that they have a relevant ESS and Overview Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights 1981). an environmental and social management system At a global level, 23 countries are signatories to (ESMS) that complies with the (applicable) require- ESS are a set of policies, guidelines, and the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous ments and regulations of the country and of any operational procedures designed to first iden- Peoples (Crawhall 2011). For example, the United CMP donors or partners involved, as required. tify and then, following the standard mitigation Nations declaration includes the right to deter- hierarchy, try to avoid, minimize, restore, and mine institutions for self-government (Articles Potential management partners seeking compensate when necessary adverse environ- 4, 5, 33(1), 34 and 350); the right to free, prior, funding from international donors should also mental and social impacts that may arise in the and informed consent (Articles 18, 19, 29(2–3) be aware of and able to comply with the various implementation of a project. ESS should include and 30(2)); and the right to lands, territories, and standards set by potential CMP donors or sup- a comprehensive framework that enables staff, resources (Articles 8(2), 10, 25, 26(1)-(3), 27, 31(1) porting implementing partners. For example, the project developers, managers, and partners to and 32) (UN 2007). When engaging CMP partners, European Union’s European Parliament resolution clearly identify and avoid social and environmen- governments will want to ensure that partners of January 15, 2020, on human rights and democ- tal adverse impacts. can help it meet national and international stan- racy outlines a comprehensive ESS framework dards, which means first understanding these (European Parliament 2020). An ESS is typically developed and applied requirements. at an organizational level, e.g., multi-lateral development banks, UN agencies, and inter- There are dozens of international laws, treaties, national NGOs. For example, the World Bank and protocols that have implications on conser- Environmental and Social Framework is designed vation projects and human rights. For example, to ensure that the World Bank and borrowers the International Institute for Environment better manage environmental and social risks of Development and Natural Justice in 2016 pro- projects to improve development outcomes and duced a discussion paper on conservation is applied to the institution’s development work standards. It reviewed international instruments (WBG 2016). The framework identifies ten envi- with human rights implications in a conservation ronmental and social standards (see Box 6.1). context and highlighted 25 of them (see Figure 6.1) (Jonas et al. 2016). African governments have committed to national and international treaties that relate to Governments and management partners environmental standards and social and human need to be aware of the legal ESS frameworks rights. At a continental level, for example, 51 in the respective country to ensure that the life countries (all except one) have ratified the African cycle of a CMP, from identification to manage- Charter on Peoples and Human Rights, which ment, complies with national policy, legislation/ sets standards for the protection of human rights regulation, and international best practice. CMP in Africa and formed the basis for individuals to partners should be able to demonstrate in the 121 Box 6.1 World Bank Environmental Figure 6.1 ↗ Contents and Social Framework International Instruments with Human Rights Implications in a Conservation Context 1. Assessment and Management of Environmental 1. Universal Declaration of Human Rights and Social Risks and Impacts 2. ILO Convention No. 169 Concerning Indigenous and Tribal Peoples in Independent Countries 2. Labor and Working Conditions 3. UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples 3. Resource Efficiency and Pollution Prevention and 4. International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights Management 5. International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights 4. Community Health and Safety 6. International Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Racial Discrimination 5. Land Acquisition, Restrictions on Land Use and 7. Convention of the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women ↗ Section 1 Involuntary Resettlement 8. Convention on the Rights of The Child 6. Biodiversity Conservation and Sustainable 9. Declaration on the Rights of Persons Belonging to National or Ethnic, Religious and Linguistic Minorities Management of Living Natural Resources 10. Convention on Biological Diversity, including 7. Indigenous Peoples/Sub-Saharan African a. Nagoya Protocol on Access to Genetic Resources and The Fair and Equitable Sharing of Benefits Arising from Historically Underserved Traditional Local Their Utilization Communities b. Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety 8. Cultural Heritage c. Nagoya-Kula Lumpur Supplementary Protocol on Liability and Redress to the Cartagena Protocol 9. Financial Intermediaries d. Tkarihwaie:ri Code of Ethical Conduct to Ensure Respect for the Cultural and Intellectual Heritage of 10. Stakeholder Engagement and Information Indigenous and Local Communities ↗ Section 2 Disclosure. e. Addis Ababa Principles and Guidelines for The Sustainable Use of Biodiversity f. Akwe: Kon Guidelines Source: World Bank 2016 g. Strategic Plan for Biodiversity 2010-2020 (including the Aichi Biodiversity Targets) 11. UN Conference on Environment and Development Non-Legally Binding Authoritative Statement of Principles for A Global Consensus on The Management, Conservation and Sustainable Development of All Types of Forests 12. UN Forum on Forests Non-Legally Binding Instrument on All Types of Forests 13. Convention on Wetlands of International Importance 14. UN Framework Convention on Climate Change Cancun Agreement 15. UN Convention to Combat Desertification ↗ Section 3 16. International Treaty on Planet Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture 17. Global Plan of Action for Animal Genetic Resources and Interlaken Declaration on Animal Genetic Resources 18. FAO Voluntary Guidelines to Support the Progressive Realization of The Right to Adequate Food in The Context of National Food Security 19. FAO Voluntary Guidelines in The Tenure of Land Fisheries and Forests in The Context of National Food Security (FAO Tenure Guidelines) 20. Convention on the Law the Non-Navigational Uses of International Watercourses 21. Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights ↗ Appendices 22. Convention Concerning Protection of World Cultural and Natural Heritage 23. Convention on the Protection and Promotion of the Diversity of Cultural Expressions 24. Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage 25. Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-Making and Access to Justice and Environmental Matters Source: Jonas et al. 2016. 122 Considering environmental and social standards in CMPs Collaborative Management Partnership Toolkit Potential Social and Environmental • Ensure that the development process fosters Box 6.2 IUCN’s Environmental and Risks of CMPs full respect for the human rights, dignity, aspi- Social Management System (EMSM) rations, identity, culture, and natural resource- Identification, management, and mitigation based livelihoods. 1. Principle on Taking a Rights-based Approach of risks need to cover both environmental and • Avoid adverse impacts of projects on IPLCs, or to guide an organization to respect, protect, social impacts. While CMPs intend to be positive when avoidance is not possible, to minimize, and promote the fulfillment of human rights. for the environment, there are potential environ- mitigate, and/or compensate for such impacts. 2. Principles on Protecting the Needs of mental risks that must be considered, such as • Promote sustainable development benefits Vulnerable Groups to identify, avoid, and miti- water and natural resource use, impacts from civil and opportunities for IPLCs in a manner that is gate adverse impacts, and identify opportuni- works such as roads and tourism facilities, waste accessible, culturally appropriate, and inclusive. ties to enhance livelihood conditions. management, sanitation, invasive species, visitor • Improve project design and promote local 3. Principle on Gender Equality and Women and vehicle impact, human-wildlife conflict, and support by establishing and maintaining an Empowerment is integral to realizing human pest management. Most CMPs strive to increase ongoing relationship based on meaningful rights and social justice. visitors to generate revenue for the PA. If not consultation with IPLCs affected by a project 4. Principle on Stakeholder Engagement calls properly planned, increased visitation can result throughout the project’s life cycle. for meaningful, effective, and informed par- in a diversity of environmental impacts such as • Obtain the free, prior, and informed consent ticipation of stakeholders in the development increased water use, vegetation impact from (see Box 6.3) of affected IPLCs. and implementation of projects. vehicles, waste management issues, introduc- • Recognize, respect, and preserve the culture, 5. Principle on Free, Prior, and Informed tion of invasive species, and wildlife harassment. knowledge, and practices of IPLCs, and provide Consent (see Box 6.3). These potential risks need to be identified and them with an opportunity to adapt to chang- 6. Principle on Accountability to guarantee that managed to avoid and minimize adverse environ- ing conditions in a manner and in a timeframe the principles, standards, and review proce- mental impacts. acceptable to them. dures are consistently followed. 7. Principle on the Precautionary Principle In addition to potential environmental risks, In most cases, CMPs will result in an increase in to ensure that if knowledge gaps or uncer- the development of CMPs might directly and/or formal and informal employment (see Chapter 2). tainties exist, a project will be assigned a indirectly impact stakeholders in and around PAs A majority of the employees in most CMPs come higher-risk level to allow for a rigorous and including IPLCs. For example, a CMP may alter from the local area of the PA. ESS should protect participatory assessment. access to natural resources depended on by local the rights of employees and provide safeguards 8. Principle on Precedence of the Most communities. An ESS policy and management to ensure ethical treatment. Stringent Standards to require adherence to framework will help organizations involved in a the more stringent standards and procedures. CMP identify issues during the project design Key Features of an ESS Framework phase and minimize or avoid identified adverse for CMPs An NGO’s ESMS should result in a unified set impacts throughout the life of the project and of standards, policies, planning, and implementa- apply a process of free, prior, and informed Many NGOs involved in CMPs have devel- tion mechanisms, as well as compliance systems consent as required. oped ESS frameworks to guide project selection, that govern how activities are carried out in the management, and closure that would apply to design, implementation, and evaluation phase of For example, the World Bank’s Guidance Note CMPs they were involved in. For example, IUCN’s a CMP. The ESMS should be adopted by the NGO on ESS7 (Indigenous Peoples/Sub-Saharan African Environmental and Social Management System governance board and all staff to ensure consis- Historically Traditional Local Communities) (WBG (2016) is guided by eight core principles (see tent, comprehensive application of safeguards 2018) provides an example of an ESS framework's Box 6.2). across the CMP. While the exact requirements will requirements that is designed to: be based on the specific ESS framework in place, 123 some of the key features of an ESS framework Box 6.3 Free, Prior, and Informed Consent (FPIC) ↗ Contents include: There is no universally accepted definition of FPIC. The circumstances in which FPIC applies and require- Core principles that guide all behavior and ments for FPIC are outlined in the ESS of an organization. For example, IUCN defines FPIC as: activities. Free. Consent must not be imposed or manufactured but obtained through free consultation and vol- ESS screening by equipped qualified staff with untary expressions of the communities. Consensus should be reached in accordance with the norms of the ability to identify risks, including those related indigenous peoples or communities including customary law and practices, free from any intimidation, to community safety, access to natural resources, manipulation, or coercion. adverse conservation impact, and indigenous ↗ Section 1 people. The screening will determine the level of Prior. Consultation requires time and an effective system for communicating among interest holders. The risk (low, medium, or high) and recommendations emphasis on “prior” underlines the importance of initiating consultations as early as possible and provid- for further assessment, such as an environmental ing adequate time for the decision-making processes of indigenous peoples and communities to inform and social impact assessment.67 steps of the project cycle. No-go activities are outlined to ensure that the Informed. The principle requires that indigenous peoples or other affected communities are informed organization does not engage in activities that about the nature, duration, and scope of the proposed project, the location of areas that will be affected, cause harm or exacerbate risks to the conserva- potential impacts (positive and negative) on their lands and resources, and implications for their eco- tion area and dependent communities. nomic, social, and cultural rights and well-being. Communities should also be informed about their rights ↗ Section 2 under national law and under the standards and procedures of all agencies involved in the proposed Sound actions to address risk through the intervention. development of mitigation plans, implementation measures, and oversight systems. Consent. Communities are asked to consent to a project or an activity, and have the right to give their consent, withhold it, or offer it conditionally. Consultation must be undertaken in good faith. The parties Risk registry to catalogue and track risks, strat- should establish a dialogue to find appropriate solutions in an atmosphere of mutual respect and full and egies, and actions to mitigate risks. equitable participation. Indigenous peoples and communities should be able to participate through their own freely chosen representatives and customary or other institutions, and access technical or legal Community participation throughout project services if needed. Consent should not be limited to individuals but should include the collective voice of ↗ Section 3 design, implementation, and monitoring where indigenous communities through customary institutions, local authorities, formal organizations, or col- applicable. lective decision-making processes. If representation is questioned by communities, complementary pro- cesses may be needed; for example, grassroots consultations with affected groups taking into account Grievance redress mechanism for communi- both gender and age dimensions (IUCN 2013). ties and stakeholders to voice any project-related concerns they have so action can be taken (see Box 6.4). ↗ Appendices 67. For a sample ESS screening checklist, visit the Green Climate Fund at https://www.greenclimate.fund/sites/default/files/ document/sustainability-guidance-note-screening-and-catego- rizing-gcf-financed-activities.pdf 124 Considering environmental and social standards in CMPs Collaborative Management Partnership Toolkit Access to appropriate environmental and obligations around compliance. All staff members Box 6.4 Grievance Redress Mechanisms social safeguards expertise such as an ESS unit/ should sign a code of conduct, confirming their advisor within the organization that is implement- understanding. Staff training, on-boarding, and Early in the project development, the partner ing the CMP to oversee the screening, assess- capacity building should include familiarization should set up a grievance redress mechanism ments, management of safeguard measures, with ESS. that enables stakeholders to confidentially and implementation of mitigation measures, collec- confidently express concerns about the project. tion of the necessary monitoring information, Particular attention needs to be afforded The specific requirements of a grievance mech- quality assurance, and training, as well as other to high-risk situations such as the interaction anism will be determined by the relevant ESS activities needed for effective implementation. between rangers and communities. For example, framework that applies. The size and structure of the CMP and other rangers on patrol could encounter poaching by organizational operations will dictate how best to organized criminals or the potential facilitation The grievance mechanism is designed to enable meet requirements. of poaching activities by community members. the receipt of complaints of affected people and There is also the risk of potential human rights public concerns regarding the environmental An independent ombudsperson/external violations. Careful identification and mitigation of and social performance of the project. The aim advisor that oversees compliance with the safe- risks, including potential security risks, along with of the mechanism is to provide people fearing guards framework across the organization and capacity building and awareness raising of CMP or suffering adverse impacts with the oppor- serves as a means for mediation when disputes staff, rangers, and partners, is essential. There tunity to be heard and assisted without fear of cannot be settled locally. The structure depends are a number of training modules available for retaliation. It is designed to address the con- on the size of the CMP and scale of organizational rangers on human rights. Examples include the cerns of communities with a particular project, work. International Ranger Federation’s “Anti-poaching identify the root causes of the conflicts, and in and around Protected Areas Training Guidelines find options for the resolution of grievances. Procedure for incident management to for Field Rangers”68 and LEADRanger's69 training respond to reports of abuse. Where reports of module on human rights specifically for rangers. The grievance mechanism is an essential tool to abuse directly and indirectly relate to the orga- This is just one aspect of the training and capacity foster good cooperation with project stakehold- nization’s work, including work implemented via building needs for staff. There are many aspects ers and ensure adequate delivery of previously partners that have received support from the and required issues that should be covered in an agreed results. The grievance mechanism organization, a process is needed to investigate, on-going training program, which means having a needs to be easily accessible to stakeholders, take appropriate actions, and take corrective clear understanding of the requirements, proper and the partner needs to ensure that stakehold- measures and/or press the partner or the gov- planning, expertise, adequate funding to conduct ers are fully aware of the process (IUCN 2013). ernment where appropriate to take corrective thorough training, and regular training modules. action. This is linked to the grievance mechanism (see Box 6.4). The WBG’s Environment and Social If the CMP partner does not have in-house Incident Response Toolkit outlines a process to capacity, they should engage an ESS expert address and report on incidents and provides to help ensure that they are following proper tools for documenting and managing incidents. procedures (Box 6.5 includes some key compo- nents for CMP partners to consider) (Conservation Each partner in a CMP is responsible for ensur- International-GEF 2017; WWF 2019). ing its staff members understand ESS and are familiar with the standards, safeguards, and 68. https://www.traffic.org/site/assets/files/2310/anti-poaching-training-guidelines.pdf 69. http://courses.leadranger.org/human-rights-eng/#/ 125 Box 6.5 ESS and CMP Checklist ↗ Contents • Recruit ESS technical expertise if not in place • Be clear on which national laws apply • Understand ESS global best practice and rights-based conservation models • Ensure CMP bidders and potential partners have an ESS policy and an appropriate system and attention on risk identification/mitigation • Staff and partners sign a code of conduct ↗ Section 1 annually • Design and implement a stakeholder engage- ment strategy • Identify stakeholders, including presence of IPLCs and any vulnerable or disadvantaged groups • Complete environmental and social screening of the potential project • Develop a risk management strategy that is ↗ Section 2 routinely updated and includes emergency preparedness and response • Design a grievance redress mechanism • Build capacity and awareness around ESS requirements • Ongoing reporting to IPLC and other relevant stakeholders • Establish clear targets for monitoring • Monitor, update, adapt, and educate ↗ Section 3 ↗ Appendices Gorongosa NP, Mozambique © Anto Dharsono / Shutterstock 126 Section 3: Cross-Cutting Issues for Collaborative Management Partnerships Collaborative Management Partnership Toolkit ↘ Chapter 6 — Considering environmental and social standards in CMPs 119 ↘ Chapter 7 — Recommendations for strengthening CMPs 127 Chapter 7 — Recommendations for strengthening CMPs Chapter 7 127 ↗ Contents ↗ Section 1 Recommendations PAs are central to securing biodiversity and ecosystem services, mitigating climate change, and driving green and for strengthening ↗ Section 2 inclusive development. Africa’s PAs are at risk from intensifying threats and CMPs a dearth in funding, which is leading to ineffective management and non- operational PAs. Co-management and delegated CMPs are being used ↗ Section 3 in 15 countries in Africa, covering 11.5 percent of the PA estate, and can be scaled up to enhance social, economic, and ecological outcomes, and help governments recover from ↗ Appendices the severe impacts of COVID-19. This chapter makes recommendations for supporting and expanding ↘ Chapter 7 — Recommendations for strengthening CMPs CMPs in Africa and beyond. 128 Recommendations for strengthening CMPs Collaborative Management Partnership Toolkit Contract Management 5.9  and Monitoring P As are central to securing biodiversity and development, employment, and growth. Overall, one of the core tools used to support the ecosystem services, mitigating climate co-management and delegated CMPs are prac- effective management of PAs and to stim- change, and driving green and inclusive tical tools being used in 15 countries in Africa, ulate green and inclusive development. development. Africa’s PAs are at risk from covering 11.5 percent of the PA estate, and can intensifying threats and a dearth in funding, which be scaled up across the continent and beyond to 2. Donors is leading to ineffective management and non-op- enhance social, economic, and ecological out- erational PAs. This in turn is escalating the decline comes, and help governments recover from the a. Provide technical and financial assistance of Africa’s exceptional wildlife, landscapes, biodi- severe impacts of COVID-19. to governments to support the design and versity, and ecosystem services, putting econo- deployment of a portfolio of solutions, mies and people at risk. The COVID-19 pandemic To help streamline the process and scale up including CMPs. This could include sup- is further exacerbating these threats. Given the use of CMPs, the following recommendations can porting policy and investment initiatives challenges facing Africa’s PAs, governments are be considered to support government leaders that promote private sector participation considering different tools and approaches for and implementing partners: through CMPs. securing natural assets and delivering benefits b. Support governments in the development to people, including CMPs. These issues are not 1. Governments of the PA authority business plans and exclusive to Africa, and the resources and lessons agency level strategies and help mobilize learned presented in the Toolkit can be consid- a. Create an enabling environment and policy long-term financing for CMPs (both direct ered by countries in other regions. framework, and clear guidelines to facili- grants and concessional loans, and cata- tate the execution of CMPs. In some coun- lyze private sector investments). While CMPs are still relatively new, the evi- tries, the process for establishing CMPs c. Strengthen efforts to promote regional dence over the past two decades indicates that is not clear, which leads to delays and in capacity through continued education and when structured properly, CMPs enhance PA some cases results in loss of funding. higher-level learning on CMPs (including in management effectiveness; stimulate the local b. Adopt the steps and processes outlined in PA management colleges). and national economies; create an enabling envi- the Toolkit to enable transparent and com- d. Support a CMP platform in Africa that ronment for investment; build capacity; protect petitive CMP partner selection processes. enables governments and partners to biodiversity; and increase brand recognition for c. Consider CMPs as part of broader national discuss CMP challenges, opportuni- the country. While there are challenges in the PPP priority efforts to streamline pro- ties, and lessons learned, and support creation and management of CMPs, the model cesses and generate new investments and cross-continental information exchanges is continually improving and there is a growing opportunities, and align the establishment on CMPs. Africa is a leader in CMPs and demand for partners and partnership support of CMPs to the PPP framework if this sharing this experience with other conti- from governments in Africa and around the world. helps to create a transparent and efficient nents will contribute to efforts to address process. the global biodiversity crisis. While CMPs mainly cover the geographic d. Develop a long-term vision and strategic area of a PA, they drive substantial revenue into plans that promote sustainable and inclu- 3. NGOs buffer and community areas and stimulate rural sive development that integrate CMPs as 129 a. Capture and share lessons learned from ↗ Contents positive and negative experiences partner- ing with governments, donors, and other implementing partners on issues related to enabling environments, negotiations, and operational/financing considerations of implementation of CMPs so processes can be streamlined and mistakes avoided. b. Develop and share operating procedures, frameworks, and other tools to help ↗ Section 1 standardize agreements and processes to reduce complexity and costs, and to help local and national organizations engage in CMPs. c. Build local capacity and knowledge (including to promote transparency, best practices in social and environmental frameworks, and business management) to develop and grow local talent and lead- ↗ Section 2 ership in CMP design and management, conservation, and environmental finance/ operations. These recommendations can be considered as part of integrated and long-term planning efforts designed to secure technical, financial, and political support to biodiversity conservation and always have to be applied in a country and ↗ Section 3 PA specific context. CMPs offer the potential to strengthen conservation and development efforts in many countries and PAs, and have a role to play in the portfolio of governments, donors, and NGOs. Further analysis and discussions at a regional/country level and across stakeholders is needed to operationalize the resources presented in this Toolkit in a systematic manner. ↗ Appendices Simien Mountains NP, Ethiopia. © Kjeld Friis / Shutterstock ndices Section x Appendices Appe ↘ Appendices xs endi Appendices Zakouma NP, Chad. © Thomas Clode / Shutterstock 132 Appendices Collaborative Management Partnership Toolkit ↘ Appendices 133 A.  PA Management Categories as Defined by IUCN 134 B.  Global PPP Market Assessment 135 C.  Description of PPP Legislation in Selected Countries in Africa 136 D.  Case Studies 137 E.  Description of CMP Models 148 F.  CMP Best Practice 150 G.  CMPs in Madagascar 158 H.  Contractual Parks in South Africa 159 I.  Steps to Identify, Screen, Prepare, and Establish a CMP 160 J.  Sample Business Plans for CMP Bids and Planning 162 K.  Sample Collaborative Management Tendering Information from Rwanda 171 L.  Sample Promotional Materials for CMPs from Uganda 174 M.  Information for an Expression of Interest 177 N.  Sample Expression of Interest Evaluation Form 178 O.  Information for a Full Collaborative Management Bid 180 P.  Key Components to Include in CMP Contracts 182 133 Appendices ↗ Contents ↗ Section 1 The appendices include a suite of tools and practical information that will help practitioners to identify, screen, ↗ Section 2 prepare for, and establish CMPs. ↗ Section 3 ↗ Appendices Bazaruto Archipelago NP, Mozambique. © Tonis Valing / Shutterstock ↘ Appendices 134 Appendices Collaborative Management Partnership Toolkit  A Management Categories A. P as Defined by IUCN Table A.1 PA Management Categories Protected Area Management Categories PA definition: “A clearly defined geographical space, recognized, dedicated and managed, through legal or other effective means, to achieve the long-term conservation of nature with associated ecosystem services and cultural values.” i) (a) Strict nature reserve Strictly protected for biodiversity and also possibly geological/ geomorphological features, where human visitation, use, and impacts are controlled and limited to ensure protection of the conservation values i) (b) Wilderness area Usually large unmodified or slightly modified areas, retaining their natural character and influence, without permanent or significant human habitation, protected and managed to preserve their natural condition ii) National park Large natural or near-natural areas protecting large-scale ecological processes with characteristic species and ecosystems, which also have environmentally and culturally compatible spiritual, scientific, educational, recreational, and visitor opportunities iii) Natural monument Areas set aside to protect a specific natural monument, which can be a landform, sea mount, marine cavern, geological feature such as a cave, or or feature a living feature such as an ancient grove iv) Habitat/species Areas to protect particular species or habitats, where management reflects this priority. Many will need regular, active interventions to meet the management area needs of particular species or habitats, but this is not a requirement of the category v) Protected landscape Where the interaction of people and nature over time has produced a distinct character with significant ecological, biological, cultural, and scenic or seascape value: and where safeguarding the integrity of this interaction is vital to protecting and sustaining the area and its associated nature conservation and other values vi) PAs with sustainable Areas that conserve ecosystems, together with associated cultural values and traditional natural resource management systems. Generally large, use of natural resources mainly in a natural condition, with a proportion under sustainable natural resource management (NRM) and where low-level non-industrial natural resource use compatible with nature conservation is seen as one of the main aims Source: Dudley 2008. 135 B. Global PPP Market Assessment ↗ Contents While there is no global database that tracks destinations, with $1.5 billion and $1.1 billion, their first private investment infrastructure proj- PPPs across all sectors and regions, the World respectively. Sudan, Chad, the Comoros, ects in five years in 2019. Bank tracks private investments in infrastructure. Mauritania, Cabo Verde, and Malawi recorded ↗ Section 1 In 2019, a total of $96.7 billion in private invest- ments were committed towards 409 infrastruc- ture projects in 62 low- and middle-income Figure B.1 countries (WBG 2020a).70 This represents a three Investment Commitments in Infrastructure Projects with Private Participation in EMDEs, 2011–2020 percent decline compared to 2018, which can be explained by market volatility and reduced invest- ments in energy. In 2020, due to the impacts of 700 COVID-19, investments dipped to $45.7 billion across 252 projects, a 52 percent decrease from ↗ Section 2 investment levels in 2019 (see Figure B.1). 600 In 2019, transport (roads, railways, ports, and airports) was the largest sector, accounting for 500 half of global private investments. Energy (natural gas and electricity) was the second largest sector, representing 41 percent of investment commit- 400 ments. In 2020, transport sector investment com- mitments were the lowest in the past decade, ↗ Section 3 300 reflecting the massive changes in movement caused by lockdowns. Number of 200 The number of countries receiving private Projects investments in infrastructure in 2019, 62 coun- tries, was the highest number in the last decade. 100 Nearly 40 percent of investments occurred in Total Investment Asia, though investments in Latin America and (US$ billions) ↗ Appendices the Caribbean increased. China, Brazil, India, 0 Vietnam, and Russia received the highest levels 2011 '12 '13 '14 '15 '16 '17 '18 '19 '20 of investment. In Sub-Saharan Africa, Ghana and Nigeria were the two biggest investment Source: World Bank 2021. 70. The methodology for the World Bank’s Private Participation in Infrastructure Database can be accessed at https://ppi.worldbank.org/en/methodology/ppi-methodology 136 Appendices Collaborative Management Partnership Toolkit  escription of PPP Legislation C. D in Selected Countries in Africa Table C.1 PPP Legislation in Selected African Countries Country PPP PPP Legislation Date PPP Unit Overseeing PPP Entity Legislation Unit Ethiopia Yes PPP Policy Document and the Public Private 2018 Yes Ministry of Finance and Economic Cooperation Partnership Proclamation No. 1076/2018 Guinea Yes 032 / Public Private Partnerships Act 2017 Yes Ministry of Finance Decree 041, the application of the 2017 PPP Act 2021 Decree 042, the organizational framework applicable 2021 to 2017 PPP Act Kenya Yes The Public Private Partnerships Act 2013 Yes National Treasury and Planning Public Private Partnership Amendment Bill 2017 Malawi Yes Public-Private Partnership Act 2011 Yes PPP Commission under the Office of the President Mozambique Yes Law No. 15/2011, PPP Law 2011 Yes Unit under the Ministry of Finance Decree No. 16/2012, June 4, PPP Regulations 2012 Decree No. 69/2013, 20 December, came into force 2013 on the year of publication. Decree Law No. 15/2010, May 24, governs PPP 2010 Government entities or ministries or municipalities, responsible for the procurement procedures, on a subsidiary basis sector of the project. Financial framework, supervision exercised by the Ministry of Economy and Finance Rwanda Yes Law No.14/2016 of 02/05/2016 Governing Public 2016 Yes Rwanda Development Board Private Partnerships Uganda Yes The Public-Private Partnerships Act 2015 Yes Ministry of Finance Zambia Yes The Public-Private Partnership Act 2009 Public-Private Partnership (Amendment) [No. 9 of 2018 Yes PPP Unit under Zambia Development Agency (ZDA)-PPP Council 2018 223) Zimbabwe No 2010 PPP Policy. 2004 PPP Guidelines No PPPs administered by the Ministry of Finance with the other relevant Ministry (Ministry of Environment, Water and Climate for Protected Areas) 137  ase Studies D. C ↗ Contents Table D.1 Key Aspects of Nine CMP Case Studies ↗ Section 1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Akagera NP Dzanga- Gonarezhou Gorongosa Liuwa Makuleke Nouabale- Simen Yankari NP Sangha PA NP NP Plain NP Contractual Ndoki NP Mountains Park NP Figure D.1 D.2 D.3 D.4 D.5 D.6 D.7 D.8 D.9 Government RDB Ministry of ZPWMA Government of DNPW SANParks Ministry for EWCA Bauchi State Partner Water and Mozambique Forest Economy Ministry of ↗ Section 2 Forest, Hunting Culture and and Fishing Tourism NGO Partner African Parks WWF FZS Greg Carr African Parks Community: WCS AWF WCS Foundation Makuleke Community Country Rwanda Central African Zimbabwe Mozambique Zambia South Africa Congo Ethiopia Nigeria Republic ↗ Section 3 Model DM BCM ICM ICM DM ICM DM BCM BCM Size Km 2 1,122 4,580 5,053 6,777 3,369 265 3,922 220 2,250 CMP Signed 2010 2019 2017 2018 2004 1999 2014 2017 2014 Agreement 20 5* 20 25 20 50 25 15 15 Duration # Year to 3 1 3 2 1 1 1 2 1 develop CMP ↗ Appendices Years NGO 0 30 9 4 0 N/A 20 5 5 worked in PA prior to CMP 138 Appendices Collaborative Management Partnership Toolkit 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Akagera NP Dzanga- Gonarezhou Gorongosa Liuwa Makuleke Nouabale- Simen Yankari NP Sangha PA NP NP Plain NP Contractual Ndoki NP Mountains Park NP Figure D.1 D.2 D.3 D.4 D.5 D.6 D.7 D.8 D.9 NGO 35 .5-1 million / 27 85 20 1 25.5 5 3 Investment $ year million Staff Size 273 150 270 700 127 ~100 196 N/A 100 Annual Budget 3.25 5.5 5 13.7 3 N/A 5.3 1 0.5 $ million (including CAPEX) Notes *Option to extend as foundation. Source: Case studies were developed with the CMP partners listed in the acknowledgements, and information from the CMP partner websites, listed in the references, and Baghai et al. 2001, Brugière 2020, and Lindsey et al. 2021. BCM = Bilateral co-management ICM = Integrated co-management DM = Delegated CMP Akagera National Park 139 Rwanda ↗ Contents Figure D.1 Uganda Akagera NP Case Study Key details Why CMP? Tanzania Type of CMP Delegated Akagera National Park, the only savannah ecosystem in ↗ Section 1 Rwanda, was challenged by poach- ing and encroachment. The park Rwanda was a net loss for the government Size of the park 1,122 km2 of Rwanda and had limited expertise to fulfill its tourism potential. Akagera National Goals of the Partnership: To restore ANP and wildlife; Park CMP timeframe 2010 to 2030 diversify Rwanda’s tourism product ↗ Section 2 and keep people in the country longer; and attract private sector investors. Years to establish a CMP 3 years ↗ Section 3 Public partner: Rwanda Development Board Lessons learned Management Community impact Employment trends • Ranger team increased: • 2,000 school children • 18 people (2010) to 273 (2020) Private/NGO partner: African Parks It takes time to develop a CMP. 42 (2012) to 82 (2019). visit ANP annually. (99 percent Rwandan). Legal structure: Company, Akagera Having examples from other parks • Ranger field days increased from • $604,000 in community Management Company Ltd. and high-profile advocates is 9,719 (2012) to 19,177 (2019). benefits in 2020. Wildlife growth important. • Built 120-kilometer solar-powered • Community guides 2014: • Reintroduced eastern black rhinos: Governance: Board of Trustees predator-proof fence to reduce $22,500; 2019: $160,000. Zero (2010), 25 (2020). (7 Trustees: 3 appointed by the Prioritizing time for community and human-wildlife conflict. • 22 teachers trained and mentors • Reintroduced lions: Zero (2010), government and 4 appointed by ↗ Appendices stakeholder consultations is key. from 11 different schools in 2020. African Parks) 35 (2020). Conduct proper due diligence to Tourism • Community benefits increased Revenues: from $0 (2009) to $604,000 (2019). understand park challenges and • New private sector partnerships Revenue Retention: All revenue properly budget. with Mantis Group (60 rooms) and retained at park Wilderness Safaris (6 rooms). Operational budget Revenue Growth: $203,000 (2010) • < $400,000 (2009 budget), to $2.6 million (2019) (COVID-19 Tourism growth $2.84 million (2020 budget). impacted 2020 tourism revenue) • 15,000 tourists (2010) to 50,000 (2019). 140 Appendices Dzanga-Sangha PA Collaborative Management Partnership Toolkit Central African Republic Figure D.2 Uganda Central African Ngotto Dzanga-Sangha PA Case Study Republic Extension Key details Dzanga-Sangha Type of CMP Protected Tanzania Area Integrated Why CMP? Cameroon Rwanda Size of the park Dzanga To address threats to the DSPA from illegal poaching, habitat destruction, and exploitation Akagera Nouabalé-Ndoki 3,859 km2 — 1,220 km2 Dzanga-Sangha Dzanga-Ndoki NP Boumba Bek National Park of natural resources. National Park National Dense Forest Special Reserve Park Goals of the Partnership: Ndoki CMP timeframe To protect the natural ecosystems of DSPA while promoting sustainable develop- Lobeke National Park 2019 to 2024 prior agreements were in place ment and improving the livelihoods of local communities. Years to establish a CMP Congo 1 year Public partner: Ministry of Water and Forest, Hunting, and Fishing Lessons learned Management Community impact Operational budget • Established technical and financial • Healthcare has been provided • $5,563,688 funded annually (MEFCP) resources necessary to support to local communities (especially from donors. Inclusivity and long-term partner- Private/NGO partner: ships, with a commitment in terms fragile ecosystems. BaAka) with 30,000 patients seen World Wildlife Fund of finance and presence, is essen- • Elephant and great ape populations between 2018-2019. Early warning Employment trends Legal structure: CMP tial to a successful outcome. are stable, including 3 habituated systems were implemented to • DSPA employs 250 staff, most gorilla groups.  mitigate zoonotic diseases. from local communities. Governance: Monitoring Multiple use zones in PAs provide • Park tourism has contributed to Committee composed of WWF unique opportunities, but can also Tourism growth infrastructure improvements that Wildlife growth and MEFCP, chair position held by create challenges for protection • 12,000 tourists since 1992. 9,350 benefit local communities such the government and management. • Elephants stable (averaged 2016- from 2000-2020 and 3,000 from as schools. Community tourism Revenues: 2020): 776 to 830. Great apes 2010 to 2020.  generates $55,000 annually to Revenue Retention: 40 percent of the stable (averaged 2016-2020): directly improve the livelihoods of park entrance fee goes to community 2,412 to 2,702. the BaAka and Bilo people. Revenue Growth: Approximately • Health care, communication, $6,900 was generated in 2019 from education, human rights center, park entrance fees livelihood programs, and transpor- tation have been provided.  Gonarezhou National Park 141 Zimbabwe ↗ Contents Uganda Save Valley Conservancy Key details Mozambique Figure D.3 Zimbabwe Tanzania Type of CMP Integrated Gonarezhou NP Case Study Coutada 4 ↗ Section 1 Why CMP? ZPWMA lacked the resources Rwanda to effectively manage Gonarezhou Size of the park Zinave National 5,000 km2 Gonarezhou National Park (GNP), National Park part of the Greater Limpopo AkagPe a a rrk Transfrontier Conservation Area. Chipise National Park CMP timeframe 2016 to 2036 Goals of the Partnership: Makuleke Protect GNP’s wilderness, Contractual ↗ Section 2 Park biodiversity, ecological processes, and scenic landscapes while supporting its role in the GLTFCA, Years to establish a CMP regional economic development, Kruger and the culture and history of the Shangaan people. South Africa National Park Limpopo National Park 3 years ↗ Section 3 Public partner: Zimbabwe Parks and Wildlife Management Authority Lessons learned Management Community impact Operational budget • Assumed management of Malipati • Establishment of Makonde Training • $5 million. Private/NGO partner: Frankfurt A communication strategy that Safari Area, a key connectivity zone Facility – training chefs and guides. Zoological Society keeps stakeholders and com- in the GLTFCA. • Five groups supporting local enter- Employment trends Legal structure: Gonarezhou munities updated is important • 82 percent increase in ranger patrol prises through group loans and • 218 staff (83 percent Conservation Trust (GCT) for support and to avoid any days between 2017 (6,547) and savings schemes. from local community). misperceptions. 2019 (11,929). • 83 percent of staff from within 15 Governance: Board of Trustees • Trained and employed kilometers of the park boundary. (6 trustees: 3 appointed by the 129 new rangers, increase ↗ Appendices Development of CMPs takes time Tourism • Provided resources to schools: car- government and 3 by FZS) and effort; plan appropriately. from 40 in March 2017. • Renovations of existing lodges, nivore posters and fact books; wild Revenues: dog board games; and books. Requires a competent team to construction of new camps, and Wildlife growth Revenue Retention: All revenue • 42 school libraries surrounding the deal with the challenges of growth tourism marketing of GNP, leading retained at park park stocked with books and solar • Lions increased from 54 (2016) within an organization; capacity to increased tourism revenues and Revenue Growth: 50 percent increase reading lamps. to 112 (2019). development and ability to be agile employment. in investment in year 1 • Education program targets children • Reduction in elephant poaching are critically important. in 44 primary and 17 secondary from 39 (2016) to 2 (2019). (2017: $2.8 million) Tourism growth schools. • Tourism revenue increased from $329,634 (2016) to $513,006 (2019).  142 Appendices Gorongosa National Park Collaborative Management Partnership Toolkit Mozambique Figure D.4 Uganda Gorongosa NP Case Study Coutada 6 Coutada 13 Key details Coutada 12 Type of CMP Tanzania Integrated Gorongosa Why CMP? N Rwanda ational Park Size of the park 3,670 km2 — 370 km2 — 122,730 km2 Gorongosa NP was decimated during Mozambique’s war and the Government lacked the Mozambique Akagera GNP Gorongosa Mountain Coutada resources to restore and rehabilitate National the park. Park CMP timeframe Goals of the Partnership: To protect GNP’s biodiversity Renewed in 2018 to 2043 and ecosystem services and unlock its social and economic potential for the community inhabitants Years to establish a CMP of the Gorongosa Sustainable Development Zone (SDZ). 4 years Public partner: Government of Mozambique Lessons learned Management activities (coffee, cashew, honey, etc.), generating 300 additional jobs. secondary schools. 2019, 64 scholar- ships to girls for high school. • 1 million hectares under biodiversity • Deployed health interventions through Private/NGO partner: protection. Having an integrated conservation • Strengthened capacity and enforce- clinics and community-trained Operational budget Greg Carr Foundation and human development approach programs. Eighty-eight community ment. Increased ranger presence by • < $100,000 in 2004, $13.7 million Legal structure: Gorongosa Project is critical. health workers, 129 traditional birth 72 percent (2018). in 2020, $85 million since 2004. attendants, and 159 model moms. Governance: Oversight commit- • Established CBNRM committees in all Local capacity building is necessary • Invested > $1.78 million in human tee (1 rep from government, 1 for long-term sustainability. 16 communities in GNP’s SDZ.  development for 200,000 people. Employment trends rep from Greg Carr Foundation). • 700 permanent / 400 seasonal staff A long-term agreement is needed Tourism growth Management delegated to GP Education including 300+ rangers (98 percent to achieve social, conservation, and • International and national growth, Mozambican and 85 percent local). Revenues: • Established science research and economic impact.  challenged with cyclone and conflict Revenue Retention: All revenues education/capacity building programs in the country. >1,000 in 2006, up to including masters in conservation Wildlife growth retained at GNP (20 percent to Storytelling, media, and communi- 7,000 in 2011. communities, 80 percent reinvested biology, the only Masters to be con- • Wildlife population grew from 15,000 cation galvanize attention, interest, ducted completely in an NP.  (2008) to 90,000 animals (2020). in the park) and support of decision makers and Community impact • Supports 50 primary schools (45 • 781 elephants (2020) up from Revenue Growth: Tourism: help shape public opinion. • Improved food security by engaging percent of the primary schools in the >200 elephants in 2000. $737,132 January to September 2019 10,000 families in improved agroforestry SDZ) and six (100 percent of existing) (baseline $0) Liuwa Plain National Park 143 Zambia Lukwakwa ↗ Contents Game Uganda Management Figure D.5 Area Liuwa Plan NP Case Study Key details Zambia Tanzania Type of CMP Why CMP? Delegated ↗ Section 1 The Barotse Royal Establishment, representing Angola Rwanda the community, requested the Liuwa Size of the park Plain 3,369 km2 support of African Parks to manage the park, which was non-oper- Ak an Natio el ga ra Park ational, afflicted by poaching, and providing few benefits to National community. Park CMP timeframe 2004 to 2024 ↗ Section 2 Goals of the Partnership: West Zambezi Mavinga National Game To restore the biodiversity of Park Management LPNP as part of the greater ecosys- Area tem and to build a constituency for Years to establish a CMP 1 year conservation with the local commu- nity and government. ↗ Section 3 Public partner: Department of National Parks and Wildlife Lessons learned Management Tourism growth Employment trends • Reintroduced lions and buffaloes. • 291 tourists (2003) to 1,116 (2019). • Largest employer in the region, Private/NGO partner: African Parks Having established community LPNP has the second largest wilde- 127 full-time employees and Community partner: Barotse Royal institutions in place helps facil- beest migration in the world. Community impact 67 rangers (95 percent local), Establishment itate community initiatives and • Rangers conducted 12,243 patrol • African Parks makes payments to 100 seasonal workers. ensures equitable and transparent days (2020) and African Parks community development fund Legal structure: Company engagement. developed a community scout linked to poaching. Wildlife growth with representation from program, creating local employ- • 114 school scholarships/year. 1,890 • Wildebeest: 15,000 (2004) government and African Parks ↗ Appendices It is important to have clear com- ment and community support. students visited LPNP in 2019. to 31,956 (2020). Governance: Zambia Company munication between park level • 28 schools supported, 11,000 stu- • Zebra: 2,000 (2004) with representation from African management and higher level Tourism dents, 71 new scholarships in 2020. to 4,160 (2020). Parks and DNPW. Two members of (ministry) government to share • Luxury lodge from Time+Tide • 600 families supported with maize BRE on African Parks Zambia board successes and failures. (6 villas), 2018 Travel & Leisure’s due to drought in 2020. Revenues: Trust between partners is key and “Its List.” Revenue Retention: All revenue can be enhanced through good • Five community managed Operational Budget retained at park communication. campsites. • $20 million invested by Revenue Growth: $4,518 (2003), African Parks since 2004. $261,743 (2019), $163,536 (2020 impacted by COVID-19) 144 Appendices Makuleke Contractual Park Collaborative Management Partnership Toolkit South Africa Figure D.6 Makuleke Contractual Sengwe Park Case Study Communal Lands Key details Type of CMP Zimbabwe Limpopo River Delegated Why CMP? Size of the park In 1998, the Makuleke com- Makuleke munity, who were removed from their land in 1969 to expand Contractual Park Mozambique 240 km2 — 19,485 km2 Makulele KNP Kruger National Park, regained title to 24,000 hectares and delegated South Africa management to SANParks, creating CMP timeframe a contractual park. Goals of the Partnership: 1999 to 2049 To optimize socio-economic Kruger benefits for the Makuleke commu- National Park Years to establish a CMP nity and to protect the ecological character of KNP. 4 years Public partner: South African National Parks (SANParks) Lessons learned Management Tourism Operational budget • SANParks oversees management. • Makuleke have the right to com- • Part of SANParks overall Community partner: The interplay of tourism and con- Overall increase in wildlife numbers mercialize their land by entering KNP budget. Makuleke Community servation management is complex. and decrease in snares and into tourism partnerships. They Legal structure: Title held by Makuleke have tourism rights and poaching. have agreements with 4 private Employment trends Makuleke Communal Property SANParks manages the land, which • Reintroduction of giraffe, zebra, operators, who employ local • ReturnAfrica tourism facilities sup- Association are interlinked and causes confu- and impala. people and who return 8 percent ports 67 full-time direct local jobs sion on management costs. of profits to the CPA. and the Outpost lodge employs 37 Governance: Joint Management Community impact • Community, through Ford staff.  Board, (3 from Makuleke, 3 from Capacity development of the com- • From 2018-2021 through Foundation and the African Safari SANParks) munity partner is crucial so that ReturnAfrica and the Outpost, the Foundation, acquired equity in the Wildlife growth Revenues: they can be equal decision makers tourism facilities. community earned ~$2.8 million • 6 white rhinos introduced in Revenue Retention: Tourism revenue and monitor the performance of • 95 percent employment from in donations, employment, local 2006 – first in the area goes to the Makuleke, gate fees to the other party. Makuleke. supply contracts, and concession in 120 years. SANParks A master development and conser- fees. Revenue Growth: Zero revenue in 1999, vation plan adopted by both parties • Community benefits declined by up Tourism growth ~$867,000 generated from ReturnAfrica and is needed to ensure clarity of and to 41 percent due to the impact of • 3 tourism facilities (high-end) the Outpost tourism facilities in the 2020 agreement on goals and objectives. COVID-19. and 1 guiding facility. fiscal year (pre-COVID-19). Nouabalé-Ndoki National Park 145 Republic of Congo ↗ Contents Figure D.7 Uganda Central Nouabale-Ndoki African NP Case Study Republic Key details Ngotto Extension Tanzania Type of CMP Delegated Why CMP? To strengthen the capacity Dzanga-Sangha Cameroon ↗ Section 1 and technical and financial Protected Area resources of the NNNP to address escalating threats to the Park’s Rwanda Size of the park 4,200 km2 biodiversity. Nouabalé- Boumba Bek Akagera National Park Ndoki Goals of the Partnership: National To ensure the manage- Lobeke National Park ment and financing of the NNNP; National Park CMP timeframe Park 2014 to 2039 protect its unique biological values; ↗ Section 2 promote ecotourism and other sources of sustainable revenue; and contribute to the sustainable devel- opment of the local communities in Years to establish a CMP 1 year the NNNP’s buffer zone. Congo ↗ Section 3 Public partner: Ministry of Forest Economy Lessons learned Management • Business training and enterprise development (i.e., community Employment trends • Reduction in elephant poaching • 76 permanent employees in 2014 Private/NGO partner: by 69 percent since 2017. tourism). to 196 in 2019 (95 percent local). Strong integration of CMP into Wildlife Conservation Society • 62 convictions of elephant poach- • $1,430,582 invested since 2016. • 80 percent of local households national legal framework is key. Legal structure: Nouabalé-Ndoki ers/traffickers (average 71 percent employed by the park. Equitable community representa- conviction rate), including landmark Tourism growth Foundation (SPV) tion on the Board is important. 30-year conviction in the criminal • Agreement with Congo Wildlife growth Governance: Board of Trustees courts. Conservation Company and the • Stable elephant population in the (2 from government; 3 from WCS; Buffer zone should be included in ↗ Appendices • Five-fold increase in revenue for Ministry of Tourism signed in 2020 park since 2014 and stable great 2 from local NGO; 1 from Central the scope and extent of the CMP the park with 20 percent from for ecotourism development. ape populations. Africa Protected Area Network; and agreement. sustainable financing. Concession agreement with the 1 from  Leadership Conservation NNNP in preparation. Africa)  Community impact Revenues: • Village Development Fund estab- Operational budget Revenue Retention: All revenue lished: health clinic, primary school, • $2.7 million in 2014 to retained at park boreholes, and maternal center $5.3 million in 2019. Revenue Growth: $2.9 million in 2014 constructed to $5.3 million in 2019 146 Appendices Simien Mountains National Park Collaborative Management Partnership Toolkit Ethiopia Gash Eritrea Figure D.8 Uganda Setit Wildlife Reserve Simien Mountains NP Case Study Key details Sudan Tanzania Type of CMP Bilateral Kafta-Sheraro National Park Ethiopia Why CMP? Rwanda SMNP was struggling with Size of the park over-grazing by cattle keepers, fires, farming, and encroachment in the park; and EWCA lacked the Akagera National 412 km2 budget to properly manage the Simien Park park and sought support through CMP timeframe Mountains 2018 to 2033 partners. National Park Goals of the Partnership: Establish SMNP as an effec- Years to establish a CMP tively managed, self-sustaining park supported by local communities. 5 years Public partner: Ethiopian Wildlife Conservation Authority Lessons learned Management Tourism Operational budget • Removed from the World Heritage • Limalimo lodge, 14 room high-end • 100,000: 2017 to $1 million: Private/NGO partner: Government commitment at all Site in Danger List. lodge, financed in part by AWF, 2018 (per annum). African Wildlife Foundation levels and support is vital in all • 73 percent of the habitat in the park with first conservation bed night Legal structure: Each party retains activities. free from grazing 2021, up from 30 fee in Ethiopia, funding the park Employment trends own structure percent in 2013. and community. • Increase in rangers and Local instability affects successful • Village Ways, community-based Governance: Project Management employment in hospitality. past and potential achievements. Community impact trekking tourism product, financed Committee and National Steering • Majority local employment. Unplanned and external factors • 2018 partnership with KFW attract- in part by AWF, 55 percent revenue Committee have a big impact on all programs. ing $13 million to SMNP. to local communities. Wildlife growth Revenues: • 100 percent of people employed in • Ethiopian wolf increase: Revenue Retention: No, all revenue Disaster and risk management is the park are Ethiopian; 99 percent Tourism growth goes to federal government key for CMP projects. 55 in 2013 to 75 by 2021. from local community; all except • 5,000 visitors: 2005, • Walia ibex increase: Revenue Growth: 2000: Grassroots engagement in the one staff member for AWF are >20,000 visitors: 2019. 585 in 2018 to 695 in 2021. 11,290, 2019: 985, 890 development of park plans is key. Ethiopian. • Number of direct beneficiaries: 2000: 724, 2020: 18,867. Yankari Game Reserve 147 Nigeria ↗ Contents Figure D.9 Uganda Yankari NP Case Study Key details Why CMP? Lame-Burra The government of Nigeria Game Reserve Tanzania Type of CMP lacked adequate funding to protect and properly manage Yankari Bilateral ↗ Section 1 Yankari Game Reserve (YCG). National Park Challenged with ivory and Rwanda bushmeat poaching, and lack of Size of the park Nigeria 2,244 km2 community support, the govern- ment sought assistance through a Akagera partnership. National Park CMP timeframe Goals of the Partnership: To improve management, Pai River 2014 to 2028 ↗ Section 2 facilitate the protection of critically endangered wildlife, while contrib- uting to the sustainable develop- ment of surrounding communities. Years to establish a CMP Cameroon Less than 1 year ↗ Section 3 Public partner: Bauchi State Ministry of Culture Lessons learned Management park, are connecting communi- ties with Yankari’s importance in Operational budget • Increased support for ranger • Approximately $3,000,000 has and Tourism (MCT) patrols. conservation. been invested since 2014. Community engagement is Private/NGO partner: • Improved security and reduced • Establishment of Elephant necessary for successful wildlife Wildlife Conservation Society corruption among rangers reducing Guardian program helps to prevent Employment trends conservation. illegal grazing and poaching. crop damage. Legal structure: Each party retains • 100 staff, a majority from local Developing trust and relationships • Increased anti-poaching patrol • Sustainable cook stoves provided own structure communities. with government partners is key days. to 692 women in 37 communities. Governance: MCT is responsible for ↗ Appendices to ensuring effective manage- governance; WCS manages rangers ment and successful conservation Tourism growth Wildlife growth Community impact Revenues: outcomes. • Road openings and bridge resto- • Stable elephant population; • A stabilization of the elephant pop- increased populations of buffalo, Revenue Retention: All tourism rations have facilitated domestic A zero-tolerance approach is ulation and an increased opportu- roan antelope, and hartebeest, revenue is retained by MCT tourism, which is still relatively low. required in cases of corruption. nity for growth of endangered lion 10-20 West African lions. Revenue Growth: WCS support: populations can expand ecotour- $300,000 in 2016 to $400,000 in 2021 ism opportunities. • Multiple school outreach pro- grams, including visits to the 148 Appendices Collaborative Management Partnership Toolkit  escription of CMP Models E. D The Toolkit focuses on three CMP models — bilateral, integrated, and delegated (the first two collectively referred to as co-manage- ment). For a description of financial and technical support see Baghai et al. 2018. Table E.1 Bilateral, Integrated, and Delegated CMP Descriptions Co-management Delegated Bilateral Integrated Description The government authority and partner agree to co- A joint entity and SPV (foundation, non-profit company) A joint entity or SPV (foundation or non-profit company) manage the PA, frequently with two leaders, generally a is created in the host country, and management is is created in the host country government warden or conservator (park manager) and “delegated” from the government authority to that entity the partner’s technical advisor (TA) or manager (partner manager) No independent entity is created to manage the park, Unlike the delegated model, this entity is characterized by Management of the park is fully “delegated” from the except a management and/or oversight committee 50-50 power-sharing, rather than being led by the partner government to the SPV The governance is shared, but authority for the PA management is allocated to the partner Governance A governance body is created with representation from Board with 1:1 representation; often with co-chairs The partner appoints the majority of board members, government and the partner representing each party and/or each party chairs on a including the chairperson rotating basis There are examples, such as Odzala NP in the Republic of Congo, where the NGO nominates other representatives from civil society and the private sector, so the partner may not have the majority but their nominees represent the majority 149 Co-management Delegated ↗ Contents Bilateral Integrated Decision-making is by consensus If there is an even number on the board, it may have an The government appoints a minority of board members independent board member with particular technical expertise, a representative of a stakeholder community, or in the event of a tie, the casting vote may depend on the topic (for example, if it pertains to law enforcement, the PA authority has the casting vote, and if it pertains to funding, the partner may have the casting vote) ↗ Section 1 The board appoints the senior executive management team Management The government typically appoints a PA manager, as is The PA management team is led by the PA manager, who is The partner appoints the park manager, after liaising customary, with authority for the PA (Salonga CMP in the jointly selected by the parties with government Democratic Republic of Congo is an exception where the NGO appoints the manager) The PA manager works alongside the partner’s manager The PA manager’s “second in command” is often someone The PA manager has authority over the PA, including ↗ Section 2 on the ground from the wildlife authority, and specifically charged with hiring and firing of staff overseeing law enforcement Together the warden and TA form a management team The PA manager has authority over the PA, and in The PA manager’s “second in command” is often (which may include other senior departmental staff as consultation with the senior management team, has the someone from the local wildlife authority well) ability to hire, transfer, and discipline staff The two leaders collaborate, but may lead different All PA authority staff are managed under the SPV. New All PA authority staff are managed under the SPV. New departments on a daily basis contracts are issued to qualified staff under the SPV where contracts are issued to qualified staff under the SPV appropriate and some government and NGO staff area where appropriate and some government and NGO seconded to the SPV staff area seconded to the SPV ↗ Section 3 Secondment is defined as when an employee is temporarily transferred to another department or organization for a temporary assignment Generally, the PA manager is responsible for political representation, government and community relations, and law enforcement Generally, the partner’s manager will take the lead on ↗ Appendices operational, planning, and technical activities Source: Baghai et al., 2018; Baghai 2016; Lindsey et al., 2021. 150 Appendices Collaborative Management Partnership Toolkit  MP Best Practice F. C When developing, managing, and ending a Table F.1 CMP, governments and partners should con- Six Core Pillars of CMP Best Practices sider a number of best practice principles. These 24 core principles are based on best 1. CMP Development 4. Administration practice and organized under six core pillars: CMP Development; Nature of the Partnership; • Attract a Qualified Partner • Unify Staffing Governance; Administration; Operations; and • Confirm Adequate Funding and Capacity to Generate • Determine Management Leadership Finance. Finance • Align Policies and Procedures • Develop the Contract Together • Pre-plan Closure/Termination • Clarify Roles and Responsibility 2. Nature of the Partnership 5. Operations • Trust Between Partners • Develop Work Plans Together • Buy-in at All Levels • Legitimize the Management Framework • Common Goals and Objectives • Respect the Mandate of Law Enforcement • Respect Environmental and Social Standards • Effectively Engage Stakeholder Communities • Respect Transboundary Responsibility 3. Governance 6. Finance • Provide Adequate Duration and Outline Succession • Build Towards Sustainability • Ensure Equitable Representation • Drive Enterprise Development • Communicate the Partnership • Manage Surplus/Deficit • Mitigate Risk Source: Adapted from Conservation Capital 2017. 151 1. CMP Development c. Develop Contracts Together 2. Nature of the Partnership ↗ Contents a. Attract a Qualified Partner Contracts should be developed collectively a. Trust Between Partners to foster collaboration, develop joint ownership, The selection of a qualified partner with the and avoid confusion over content. Governments CMPs can have solid contracts, suitable requisite skills and experience is fundamental to and partners should try to develop CMP tem- funding, and a highly experienced partner. the success of a CMP. Sections 5.5 and 5.7 outline plates that based on contract best practice that However, if there is not trust between the part- a process for vetting and selecting a qualified can be adapted for the focal PA. It is important ners, it simply will not work. Developing trust partner. This is fundamental in any CMP. The PA that principles are clearly agreed on between the takes time. This can be developed while a partner authority is engaging in a CMP to fill certain gaps partners, and that there are appropriate contrac- provides technical and financial support or ↗ Section 1 in their management structure. The very nature tual terms around those principles. From there, during the development of the CMP agreement. of a CMP is to provide a value addition to the PA a contract can be adapted to particular circum- Mechanisms should be put in place to quickly mit- authority; therefore, the PA authority should be stances. Each partner needs to be comfortable igate conflict that might lead to mistrust between clear on the objectives and the skills needed to and fully aware of the content of the contract. the partners. achieve these objectives in order to select the Joint-development and discussion provides clarity appropriate partner. on why certain aspects are included in the agree- b. Buy-in at All Levels ment and can help avoid unnecessary delays due b. Confirm Adequate Funding and Capacity to misinterpretation. Transparency and open discussion about the to Generate Finance CMP development process is critical to ensur- ↗ Section 2 d. Clarify Roles and Responsibilities ing buy-in at all levels. A CMP driven from the The ability to financially execute a manage- top (ministry or even higher) without buy-in at ment agreement is fundamental to its success. CMP agreements must be explicitly clear local level risks operational challenges and the Developing a proper CMP can take years. Going about roles, responsibility, reporting lines, and undermining of the partnership in the field. Given through this process only to later find that there accountability to avoid confusion and conflict. hierarchies within wildlife authorities, the field is not adequate funding or the ability to generate (Appendix P includes a description of roles and teams may not communicate their concerns, but revenue wastes already strained resources. As responsibilities to include in the contract.) One of can very easily undercut the partnership in the part of the partner selection process outlined the greatest sources of conflicts in CMP is confu- field. Likewise, a CMP driven from the PA level in Sections 5.5 and 5.7, there should be due sion over roles and responsibilities. or by a donor without legitimate buy-in from HQ ↗ Section 3 diligence and verification of start-up funding. risks political meddling. Transparency and open Partners should provide documentation of ver- Responsibility and ownership of assets is a key discussion about the goals, process, and means ifiable donor pledges for start-up funding. The issue to clarity at the onset of the partnership, of measuring success is vital and will help avoid “intention” to approach certain donors is not ade- including the basis upon which existing and new conflict. In addition, written endorsements from quate. Longer term funding will also be generated movable and immoveable operating assets will be various levels within government will help docu- by the business plan and revenue development treated at the commencement, during, and the ment consultation and communication. model; therefore, the quality of the business plan end of the term. Recommendations for how this (see Appendix J) as well as the partners’ capacity is managed are included in Appendix P. Sometimes there is a sense that because a ↗ Appendices to execute revenue models is a key aspect of CMP is in place, the government does not need partner due diligence. to do much. Government’s role and ability to support CMPs — even delegated ones — is critical. This can be political support, fundraising support, providing permissions and legal approvals for 152 Appendices Collaborative Management Partnership Toolkit import of equipment, and work permits. All of this 3. Governance permanent CMP, they should consider that the requires support and buy-in. long-term devolution of management responsi- a. Provide Adequate Duration and Outline bility to a partner may reduce the incentive for the c. Common Goals and Objectives Succession public sector partner to engage in, or support, the development of conservation related financing Both parties need to be moving toward the The duration of the CMP depends on the PA initiatives that will foster economic sustainability. same objectives and goals and share a common and the PA authority goals. A CMP can be used as vision. This underpins the operations and the an interim (15-20 year) management tool to help In general, 15 to 20 years is recommended as a direction of the partnership. The government a PA authority develop capacity along with the minimum. This provides adequate time to attract wants to select a partner who shares its mission systems and structures needed for the PA author- funding and investment, create SOPs, stabilize and ethos. If for example, the government wants ity to run the PA in the long-term. Alternatively, operations and transition management if this is to use a CMP to build internal capacity, they want a government may view a CMP as a long-term the plan. Figure 3.4 is a hypothetical timeline for a a partner who believes this is the best approach and in some cases a more permanent solution, CMP in a PA that is highly degraded. for the PA and is not going to undermine this to without the intention of evolving the PA man- maintain presence. The partners should discuss agement back to the PA authority. This decision b. Ensure Equitable Representation a shared vision and these aspects should be is vested with the government for national PAs documented in the CMP agreement. Targets and either way, intentions should be explicit in the Equitable representation on the governing and indicators of success should reflect these beginning of the partnership to avoid confusion board or committee of the CMP is paramount. No common goals and objectives. In addition, the and to ensure proper planning. This dynamic may one party wishes to be or feel dominated by the specific goals and objectives should be included shift during the life of a CMP and the decision other. A national PA is a public asset and therefore in the GMP. around this should be guided by clear goals and a sovereign matter with the state PA authority objectives and effective monitoring and evalua- often reluctant to relinquish too much control. d. Respect ESS tion of the partnership and its attainment of clear Nonetheless, the partner is bringing significant targets. finances to the CMP, which requires a justifi- ESS are a set of policies, standards and oper- able equitable stake, and in the case where the ational procedures designed to first identify and Where CMPs are envisioned as an interim tool government opts for a delegated management then, following the standard mitigation hierarchy, to build the management framework of the PA model, often times the private partner has the try to avoid, minimize, mitigate, and compensate and the capacity of the PA authority, a clear time- casting vote. Nonetheless, every effort should be when necessary adverse environmental and line and measurable indicators should be out- made to reach decisions by consensus, without social impacts that may arise in the implementa- lined to ensure the public sector partner is fully relying on the casting vote. tion of a project. The partners should jointly agree equipped to resume full management control. on a comprehensive framework that enables staff The duration of this is dependent upon the local The issue of representation, beyond the and project developers and managers to clearly context and a number of factors such as conflict, number of seats held by each party on the identify, avoid, minimize, and mitigate social and political unrest, corruption, ease of doing busi- governance board, often manifests itself in the environmental adverse impacts (see Chapter 6). ness, and lack of funding mechanisms apart from position of the board chair. One option is for the donor funding. Establishing a realistic timeline for public partner to hold the position of chair within each particular PA is important when developing a minority of the board. The private partner holds a CMP. the majority and therefore if consensus is not reached, holds the balance of power should a A clear timeline with indicators will also help decision go to a vote. Another option is inclusion ensure accountability by all parties. While the of an independent board chair, with expertise, PA authority may opt for a long-term or even influence, and a commitment to conservation, 153 who hails from neither the public nor the private and operations of the CMP. This includes com- can task management of this communication to a ↗ Contents partner. munication across the apparatus of the national member of the senior management team and this government, so other ministries and civil service should be guided by a communication strategy Where there is equal representation between are fully informed and aware; regional/provincial that is approved by both partners. the private and public partners: authorities; and local/district authorities. It also • The board or committee should strive for con- encompasses local communities and traditional While seemingly superficial, appropriate sensus (with or without equal representation), authorities. branding of the partnership is essential and is whereby voting is avoided and matters are one means to effectively highlight in particular deliberated until a decision is mutually agreed Too often communication is lacking and the public sector involvement in the partnership. and consensus is reached. This can certainly misunderstandings and misperceptions arise as All communications materials, including corre- ↗ Section 1 take time. a result. This can manifest itself whereby other spondence, should include specific reference to • The two parties jointly identify and nominate arms of government and the public at large do the public and private sector entities involved, an independent person with relevant skills not realize that this is a partnership with govern- and a logo for the CMP should adequately depict and expertise as chair, effectively acting as a ment through its PA authority and erroneously the partnership between the two partners (see neutral broker between the parties. conclude that the partner is the sole manager of Figure F.1) • Each party appoints a co-chair, which alter- the PA. This can create rumors, falsehoods, and nates at meetings. In the event the board negative political dynamics that undermine the d. Mitigate Risk fails to reach consensus on an issue, the two actual partnership. co-chairs should have the power to deliber- Minimizing inappropriate risk and liability is ↗ Section 2 ate and decide the matter. If the matter still Effective and joint communication is an critical for a CMP and the individuals involved. If remains unresolved at this point, power of veto ongoing process through the life of the CMP and this is not achieved, one or either of the parties, can be assigned to each party on particular is not a one-off activity at inception. The process its directors/trustees, and employees can be matters, i.e., the public sector partner over of communication is initiated first by the govern- exposed to unacceptable levels of institutional matters pertaining to conservation policy or ment authority when they start to consider CMPs and/or personal risk, which can result in legal law enforcement (respecting the government’s and engage in a consultative process with key and/or criminal proceedings. Such risk can also ultimate authority over these matters) and stakeholders. Once the CMP is in place, it should deter investment and donor funding. Moreover, the partner over matters pertaining to finance be a specific responsibility of the board to oversee it is also the fiduciary responsibility of a board (recognizing that this party will be charged with and facilitate this communication ensuring that to protect its partners, directors/trustees, and ↗ Section 3 primary financing responsibility). While not the there is reasonable, regular communication to employees from unacceptable levels of public and norm in the corporate world, this option does government ministries and authorities, local com- personal liability. meet the representation needs of the two munities, and traditional leadership. The board parties. However, ideally in time, this arrange- This is especially important for the partner that ment can evolve as the working relationship, is potentially exposed to a range of risks, which trust, and confidence between the parties Figure F.1 may not affect the public sector partner because embeds itself to the point where the parties CMP Project Logo Example of indemnification. Law enforcement is a case in agree to appoint one chairperson. point, where the private partner could be held ↗ Appendices liable for the injury or death of a staff member or a c. Communicate the Partnership member of the public as a result of anti-poaching operations. This brings serious reputational risk. There is a responsibility of both parties (public Determining the appropriate corporate and private) to effectively communicate, inter- arrangement or structure for a CMP in light of nally and externally, about the establishment this risk and liability is essential. Maximizing the 154 Appendices Collaborative Management Partnership Toolkit protection of the partnership, and therefore its b. Determine Management Leadership the parties) and for further disciplinary action and/ mission, will require consideration of corporate or redeployment elsewhere. options that have not been commonly applied in Like most field-based programs, the caliber the conservation sector; for example, a company of executive leadership will very often be the Without the ability to influence leadership in limited by guarantee, a company limited by deciding factor of success or failure of a CMP. The the PA, financial and technical support and bilat- shares, or even a hybrid structure involving a trust board should be responsible for appointing the eral partnerships can be hamstrung by a leader and a company. In addition, a risk analysis should senior executive management positions, includ- that lacks capacity and underperforms. be completed by the partner as part of the part- ing a chief executive officer (CEO) (in the event of nership development process and reviewed and a joint entity), either from nominated employees c. Align Policies and Procedures updated annually. from each party under secondment or through direct recruitment. The manager is a pivotal Senior management will be required to 4. Administration appointment requiring an individual with skills in: develop policies and procedures related to, amongst others, human resources, finance, and a. Unify Staffing • administration procurement. To ensure harmonization (and as • financial management an important feature for future succession), it The ideal CMP should form and represent one • fundraising is recommended that these policies and pro- single, unified structure of staffing instead of • communications cedures, and subsequent manuals, be based two parallel and separate staffing arrangements • enterprise development on and adapted from government policies and under each partner. This creates efficiencies, clear • PA management knowledge/experience procedures. hierarchy and line management responsibility, streamlined communication, and builds a team Best practice also recommends that the senior In an integrated CMP, both partners are spirit under uniform standards, procedures, and position responsible for law enforcement be responsible for following these policies and policies. Conversely, maintaining parallel, but seconded from the state PA authority. The senior procedures. In a bilateral CMP, each partner may separate staffing structures of the two parties in leader must fully believe in the mission of the have their own policies and procedures; however, a bilateral CMP can result in division and at worst, CMP and support the ultimate goal of building the partners should outline unified and guiding resentment, and tension. If bilateral structures the capacity of the PA authority. They must have policies and procedures to ensure streamlining are in place in a CMP, the partners should work practical management experience in a PA and a and consistency of operations. to mirror standards, procedures, and policies to sincere interest in and respect for differing opin- the extent possible and clearly outline roles and ions and cultures. d. Pre-plan Closure / Termination responsibilities to avoid any confusion. The resultant senior management team should In the event a CMP either fulfills its tenure or Establishing a unified staffing structure can be tasked with the appointment of all remaining is dissolved by mutual consent prematurely or be achieved through planned and coordinated staff (under a board-approved staff organiza- terminated due to a breach or non-performance secondment of staff by the parties to one of tional chart for the PA) through the vetting and of one partner, it is essential the parties pre-agree the partners or direct employment in the event selection of proposed staff for secondment and and understand at the outset a clear and thor- of a dedicated SPV. It is essential that within where necessary direct recruitment. The senior ough procedure for wind-up of the partnership. this unified staff structure that no staff receives management team, based upon approved human It is especially important to outline steps to deal, instructions from, or reports separately to either resource management procedures, shall have inter alia, with staff, assets, monies, liabilities, and of the parties individually, but adheres to the this responsibility to hire and appoint staff, and to ongoing third-party contracts and agreements. agreed line management and reporting structure dismiss. In the event of a dismissal of a seconded A lack of clarity over these matters can lead to of the CMP. staff, the individual concerned would return to discourse and disagreement between the parties direct administration by his/her employer (one of at the time of closure or termination. 155 This procedure should address, for example, partner is not aware of and can lead to misin- can pose serious liability for the private partner. ↗ Contents the following: terpretation. A CMP is a partnership. Therefore, This could result in criminal prosecution of staff of • What happens to staff directly employed (i.e., planning should be done together. the private partner. It also risks serious misinter- not seconded) by the partnership. pretation and misperception around the private • How finances are reconciled and the process of b. Legitimize the Management Framework partner’s involvement with this function. It can dealing with balances held. be perceived as being solely conducted by the • How existing donor grants are managed. The management and development of a PA by private partner, and accusations that the private • What happens to any financial liabilities at the a CMP must be set within the legal framework of partner is effectively operating a private militia time of closure; what and how assets are trans- the host country. This will ensure that subsequent can and have arisen. This is politically dangerous ferred and accordingly how asset insurance is management and development subscribes to the and can disrupt the partnership. ↗ Section 1 addressed. prevailing policies, legislation, and regulations of • What effect closure has on existing third-party the state. The law enforcement mandate of the govern- contracts and agreements, such as contracts ment should be respected and remain vested for tourism facilities and concessions. A general management plan and related with the state within a CMP. This can be achieved business plan for a PA provides a management through the secondment of law enforcement Appendix P includes details of each of these framework. A GMP is established under PA and staff from the PA authority to the SPV, thereby aspects and how to incorporate them into a CMP wildlife conservation law as the required and retaining the state as employer and their employ- contract. accepted instrument to frame the management ees as law enforcement officers with the powers and development of a PA and to implement of: search, arrest, confiscation, etc.; the ability to ↗ Section 2 5. Operations relevant government policy. A GMP needs to be carry more sophisticated (semi-automatic and approved and ratified by the government, in some automatic) firearms; and provide the necessary a. Develop Work Plans Together cases through ministerial endorsement. Once this indemnity. However, they still report through the is achieved, a GMP becomes in almost all jurisdic- SPV, supporting a unified structure. Equally, the Developing the annual work plan together is tions a legal instrument. state can legally grant selected private partner efficient, draws on the expertise of both parties, employers involved with law enforcement with creates a sense of ownership by both parties, Consequently, a CMP operating within the the necessary status, such as honorary rangers and is a useful way of cross-pollinating technical framework of a ratified GMP is implementing a or police reservists, to conduct law enforcement skills into the public partner agency. Partners legal instrument of government and is in turn with similar powers and protection. There are ↗ Section 3 should develop an annual schedule that includes implementing and subscribing to prevailing examples of CMPs that are in remote and insecure the review of the prior year’s achievements policy, legislative, and regulatory frameworks. regions where the private partner has been del- against the work plan and the development of the This establishes legitimacy for the CMP beyond egated full oversight of law enforcement by the subsequent year’s work plan. This will also create the endorsement and ratification of the CMP government, given the situation on the ground. awareness and transparency around budgets agreement. and create joint accountability. In situations d. Effectively Engage Stakeholder Communities where the private partner drives the annual work c. Respect the Mandate of Law Enforcement plan development and “hands” this to the public Local communities are almost always ↗ Appendices partner, this creates resentment and often leads Law enforcement and security is a function of primary stakeholders and beneficiaries of a PA. to conflict. Likewise, when the PA authority the state, and this is a dynamic that must be pro- Engagement and liaison with these communi- develops the work plan and “hands” this to the actively respected within any CMP arrangement. ties cannot be separated from the PA. To do so private partner, there may be some management Law enforcement undertaken by the private would isolate and potentially alienate neighboring decisions required by the state that the private partner without the requisite legal authorization communities. Furthermore, primary engagement 156 Appendices Collaborative Management Partnership Toolkit should not be conducted by a third party or be e. Respect Transboundary Responsibility cost center and be highly attractive to investors undertaken in parallel with the CMP. This can con- and donors in the short to medium term when flict with the strategy, objectives, and activities When a PA is part of a TFCA, engagement with such finance will be necessary. Furthermore, of the PA; cause confusion and tension; create international neighbors and their PA authority is a recognizing that the private partner will bear the inconsistency; and potentially duplicate effort. sovereign matter; therefore, the designated state bulk of the responsibility for financial investment authority should continue to be the lead agency and support to the PA, this will create an import- It is, therefore, critical that the CMP be man- in international communication and coordination ant incentive for the private partner to build the dated to have primary responsibility to engage relating to the TFCA. commercial revenue side of the PA, as it will with identified neighboring communities over reduce the scale of operational shortfalls that it related conservation and livelihood activities; and It is important that the private partner be kept will be required to fund. While striving for sustain- to establish the necessary partnerships with local abreast of TFCA matters so that it can contrib- ability and reducing the funding gap is critical, it government and civil society organizations (if ute fully to the development and success of the is important to acknowledge that all PAs in Africa required) to promote and drive these programs. TFCA. Accordingly, the state designated authority are subsidized and many, despite best efforts, To this end, the CMP will need a dedicated com- should copy relevant senior executive staff of the will not attain financial sustainability because munity liaison or outreach department within its private partner into correspondence pertaining to of remoteness, lack of enabling conditions, and staffing structure. the TFCA, and should invite these staff to attend inability to tap into commercial opportunities. meetings, workshops, and other events relating Establishing clear and realistic financial targets is In this regard, it is important that these to the TFCA. important to not raise unrealistic expectations. “neighboring communities” be clearly identified and defined within a CMP arrangements and 6. Finance b. Drive Enterprise Development the geographical parameters of its engage- ment with these communities are agreed and a. Build Towards Sustainability Linked to the preceding principle, the CMP communicated. must be central to driving enterprise develop- Striving for financial sustainability of a PA is a ment within the PA and be given the requisite Partners should consider representation of the key objective and motivation of a CMP. Reversing mandate to promote and develop such conser- neighboring communities within their gover- the norm of PAs as loss centers and creating vation enterprise. This includes being centrally nance structure, either the Board of the CMP the revenues to support improved conservation involved in and/or managing the tendering, Governance body or the advisory committee, in management are important drivers. Building the awarding, and contracting of enterprise and instances where communities are key stakehold- commercial basis towards financial sustainability related concessions. Enterprise development is ers. This was done, for example, in Niger for the will also help fuel the local rural economy and a specific skillset the PA authority should look for CMP in Termit and Tin-Toumma National Nature provide tax revenues to the government, creating when selecting potential partners. Reserve and in the Republic of Congo for the CMP incentives that can make a PA both socially and in Odzala-Kokoua NP. This will enhance communi- politically relevant. Co-investment by govern- c. Manage Surplus/Deficit cation between key stakeholders, garner support ments helps to leverage funding as it demon- from the local community, and enable the CMP strates a seriousness on the part of the govern- The partners in a CMP need a clear under- to take advantage of local knowledge. Local ment and helps to build sustainability. standing at the outset of their obligations/rights communities know the landscape, understand in the event of operating surpluses and deficits. the threats, and know the dynamics taking place In this regard, it is recommended that the CMP Determination of a projected surplus and short- within the local areas. This would be an asset to retain revenue generated from the PA to support fall needs to be framed within approved (by the the CMP. its operating costs, and over time to reduce and board) and fixed annual budgets, so that expendi- ideally eliminate the need for donor financing over ture is controlled and remains within reasonable, the long term. Such an arrangement will create a acceptable limits. 157 To create additional incentives for the state should be a fixed annual amount and targeted ↗ Contents PA authority to support and facilitate the gen- and ring-fenced for specific operating costs, such eration of commercial revenue streams for the as payment of salaries of the state PA authority PA, consideration should be given for the condi- employees or seconded staff. Consequently, the tional release of annual operating income sur- private partner will be clear on its obligations to pluses (essentially a form of “dividend”) to the PA meet the resultant shortfall against an approved authority. The following is recommended for the annual operating budget as well as its undertak- dividend: ing to fulfill capital development requirements. • Operating Risk Reserve — Distribution only after a reserve fund is established. A reserve Source: Adapted from Lindsey et al. 2020; Baghai et al. 2018; ↗ Section 1 Conservation Capital 2017; consultation with CMP partners. fund should have enough funding to maintain the PA management operations for at least two years. When the reserve fund can be used should be defined in the CMP agreement and will include events such as disease (i.e., the COVID-19 pandemic) or conflict. • Stabilization Period — Distribution only after a fixed period (i.e., five years) following the incep- tion of the CMP concerned. This acknowledges ↗ Section 2 that the first five years (more or less depending on the local context) of a CMP will fundamen- tally be a development phase with significant capital development investment/expenditure and promotion/establishment of the enterprise base that will drive future revenue. Distribution only when the annual surplus of operating income, which should be defined as arising purely from commercial revenues and ↗ Section 3 should expressly exclude any donor income and after provisions are made for capital expenditures (CAPEX), for any given year exceeds (50 percent) of the previous year’s operating expenditure budget. That the undistributed surplus (below the 50 percent threshold) is carried forward as operat- ing reserves. ↗ Appendices Equally, in preparation and in the event of oper- ating deficits the public sector partner needs to agree from the outset its financial annual obliga- tion. Ideally, this contribution for simplicity’s sake 158 Appendices Collaborative Management Partnership Toolkit  MPs in Madagascar G. C Madagascar’s terrestrial and marine ecosys- on behalf of the government. These governance Currently, there are over 1 million hectares of PAs tems are a global conservation priority with structures have evolved iteratively with the initial (26 sites) of “paper parks” that are not managed unparalleled endemism rates at species and management plans at many sites outlining com- (Razafison and Vyawahare 2020). higher taxonomic levels (Waeber et al. 2019). munity management with partner NGOs or agen- In 2003, Madagascar committed to tripling the cies playing a supporting role. In practice, due to extent of the country’s PA network, from under lack of capacity and resources, partners are de 2 million to 6 million hectares (covering approxi- facto co-managers, providing funds, technical mately 10 percent of the national territory), under capacity, and guidance (Waeber et al. 2019). its Durban Vision, Vth World Parks Congress. By 2016, PA coverage in the country had quadrupled, There are also formal management agree- from 1.7 million to 7.1 million hectares (Gardner ments in place with NGO partners. For example: et al. 2018; Rajaspera et al. 2011). To ensure the • Peregrine Fund Madagascar manages four management of the PA estate, the government PAs, including the Tsimembo Manambolomaty actively pursued management partnerships. complex. • WWF manages four protected areas. Madagascar’s PA network includes 147 nation- • WCS has delegated management of Makira ally designated PAs71, of which the ministry Natural Park, in the MaMaBay landscape/sea- responsible for environment directly manages scape northeast of Madagascar. 15; Madagascar National Parks (MNP) (a para- • Conservation International has delegated statal organization) manages 43; and the rest are management of the Ankeniheny-Zahamena managed in partnership with national and interna- corridor and the Ambositra-Vondrozo and the tional NGOs, and local communities (Gardner et Ambodivahibe Marine PA. al. 2018). Approximately 12 percent of Madagascar’s All non-MNP and ministry managed PAs have GDP is supported by tourism and 80 percent of a legally recognized partner (referred to as a the visitors come to visit PAs. Despite the inno- promoter), an international or Malagasy NGO vation around PA governance and collaborative (also universities, mining companies, and private management, Madagascar’s biological diversity individuals), and are generally governed through is severely threatened by high rates of defor- a shared governance arrangement incorporat- estation (driven by shifting cultivation, charcoal ing regional authorities and local communities production, artisanal and industrial mining, bush- through community-based associations referred meat poaching, and over-harvesting of varied to as VOIs (Vondron'Olona Ifotany). The partners resources), resulting in significant species decline are considered as delegated managers of the PA and threats of extinction (Gardner et al. 2018). 71. For information on PAs in Madagascar, visit Protected Planet at https://www.protectedplanet.net/country/MDG 159 H. Contractual Parks ↗ Contents in South Africa South Africa’s apartheid policy introduced in and the Mier communities oversees the manage- With the call by scientists and conservationists 1958 affected every aspect of the lives of black ment (Grossman and Holden n.d.). to increase global land and water conservation South Africans—including where they could live targets, CMPs present a practical and innovative ↗ Section 1 and what they could own. In 1994, when Nelson The Makuleke Contractual Park (see model to ensure that communities are able to Mandela was elected president, white people Appendix D, Figure D.6) was created in 1999 and optimize the economic opportunities on their owned most of the land, while making up a is viewed as a successful innovative solution that land if they lack the capacity and resources to do minority of the population. That same year, the is a win-win for conservation and communities. so on their own. Land Reform Program was launched with an aim In 1969, the Makuleke community was removed of developing equitable and sustainable mech- from its land, which was added to Kruger National anisms of land redistribution, and to rectify the Park. As part of South Africa’s land restitution centuries of discrimination against black South process, the Makuleke regained title to their Africans. Along with the Land Reform Program, 24,000 hectares in 1998, and in 1999, the com- ↗ Section 2 policies were passed to provide more opportu- munity created a contractual park by signing a nities for black South Africans to gain access and 50-year delegated CMP agreement with SANParks legal rights to land (Bosch, 2002/2003; Fitzgerald (Fitzgerald 2010). 2010). The Land Reform Program, still in effect today, has three primary aspects: land restitution/ The land title is held by the Makuleke land claims: land tenure reform; and redistribution Community Property Association, which dele- (Fitzgerald 2010). gated management to SANParks. The Makuleke, in return, guarantee to use the land in a way that At the same time, South Africa recognized the is compatible with the protection of wildlife and if ↗ Section 3 value of its PA system and sought creative mech- the community wishes to sell, they have to offer anisms to secure and expand its PA network, it to the state first. A JMB has three representa- while honoring the Land Reform Program. This tives from each party and oversees the manage- resulted in a number of contractual parks, which ment decisions. The chair rotates annually and are CMPs between communities, private land- decision-making is by consensus (Bosch D. n.d.; owners, and the national PA authority, SANParks. Collins 2021). For example, the Kalahari Gemsbok NP (now Kgalagadi Transfrontier Park) is a CMP between The Makuleke have full rights to commer- ↗ Appendices the ‡Khomani San and Mier communities and cialize their land by entering partnerships with SANParks. The ownership of land is shared the private sector to build and operate game between the communities and management lodges that are consistent with the conservation is delegated to SANParks. A joint management management policies of the JMB. The Makuleke board (JMB) comprising three SANParks officials oversee tourism, while SANParks oversees con- and three to five representatives of both the San servation management (Collins 2021). 160 Appendices Collaborative Management Partnership Toolkit  teps to Identify, Screen, I. S Prepare, and Establish a CMP Throughout the Toolkit there are links to useful references, checklists, and tools. This checklist includes the steps and some of the tools. Table I.1 Steps to Identify, Screen, Prepare, and Establish a CMP Process Chapter Section Step Tool Complete Identify and 4 4.1 Government decision to engage in a CMP Figure 4.1 Decision matrix tool  Screen CMPs 4.2 Legal review  4.3 Review agency goals and targets  Develop PA authority strategy  4.4 Screen and select potential PAs for CMPs Table 4.2 Sample tool for PA selection  Natural resource inventory  PA threat analysis Figure 4.6 Sample threat analysis  Performance audit  Risk analysis Box 5.1 Risk management  4.5 Screen and select CMP models Figure 4.8 CMP model selection tool  4.6 Review regional plans  161 Process Chapter Section Step Tool Complete ↗ Contents Prepare for 5 5.1 Complete a feasibility study  Establishing a CMP 5.2 Determine the management partner Table 5.2. Different mechanisms that might  selection process be used by a PA authority to establish a CMP 5.3 Pre-tendering stakeholder engagement Figure 5.3. Six-step guide to community  engagement in CMPs ↗ Section 1 5.4 Formation of a proposal evaluation  committee 5.5 Determine partner criteria Sample partner criteria  5.6 Prepare tendering materials Figure 5.5, and Appendices J and L.  Sample tendering materials ↗ Section 2 5.7 Tender process and selection of partner Figure 5.6. Tendering process steps and  Resource Box 5.2 5.7 Expression of Interest Table 5.3 and Appendix M. Key components  that should be included in an EOI Appendix N. EOI evaluation form  5.7 PEC reviews EOI against criteria, invites full Table 5.4 and Appendix O. Details to include  ↗ Section 3 proposals, support site visits in a full bid 5.7 Partner selection process  Contract and 5 5.8 Contract development Table 5.5. Standard headings in a CMP  Manage CMP contract and Appendix P. Key aspects to include in a CMP contract ↗ Appendices 5.9 Contract management and monitoring  Environmental 6 6.0 ESS Box 6.4. ESS and CMP Checklist  and Social Standards 162 Appendices Collaborative Management Partnership Toolkit  ample Business Plans for J. S CMP Bids and Planning The CMP partner will submit a detailed busi- if that is in place. If a GMP is not in place, the and innovation around potential revenue sources. ness plan for PA management and community CMP partner will need to identify conservation Below are resources on PA business plans and a development as part of their bid. This will include targets and strategies to secure these targets. sample business plan. operational costs, capital expenditures, and The inclusion of a business plan in the bid will projected revenue. The business plan will guide enable the PA authority to assess familiarity with Sample Business Plan the CMP and should be linked to an existing GMP the PA, level of expertise in PA budget planning, Conservation Capital72 developed a conser- vation area (term used interchangeably with PA) Resource Box J.1 Conservation Area Business Plans Tools business planning (CABP) framework to assess 1. MedPAN Protected Area Business Planning Tool the context and identify conservation needs and An online Excel planning tool for PAs was developed by the Network of Marine Protected Areas managers priorities of focal landscapes, consider commer- in the Mediterranean (MedPAN), WWF, UN Environment Programme, the Regional Activity Centre for cial revenue development opportunities, and Specially Protected Areas, and the Mediterranean Action Plan Barcelona Convention with Vertigo Lab and propose the institutional structuring required to updated in 2020 by Blue Seeds. optimize management performance and related https://drive.google.com/file/d/18ytAEWMCjbELggoAAFq5TOMsRSqSGBjC/view revenue generation. Conservation Capital devel- oped this methodology to help PA authorities and 2. Protected Area Business Plan Database community and private landowners develop more The government of Seychelles, UN Development Programme, Global Environment Facility Protected Area financially efficient and sustainable approaches Finance and Outer Islands projects developed a database containing over 40 examples of terrestrial and to managing PAs. This methodology provides a marine protected area business plans from around the world and guidelines for their development. framework to address the operational cost side of https://www.dropbox.com/sh/h5xb8vgl6tytvif/AABjU4MSEWqorDygFlNO0RZMa?dl=0 management as well as potential revenue devel- opment, and assesses optimal management, 3. Financial Planning Spreadsheet for Activity-based Costing in Protected Areas commercial, and governance structures. The Nature Conservancy; Conservation Gateway An Excel planning tool for PAs. The CABP is driven by three primary consider- https://www.conservationgateway.org/Files/Pages/financial-planning-spread.aspx ations (see Figure J.1): • Needs of the underlying conservation context 4. Guide for Preparing Simplified Business Plans for Protected Areas • Need for supporting conservancy manage- Benjamin Landreau and Charlotte Karibuhoye, 2012 ment actions http://www.nbsapforum.net/sites/default/files/Guidebook%20for%20the%20Development%20of%20 • Opportunity for commercial enterprise-based Simplified%20Business%20Plans%20for%20Protected%20Areas.pdf revenue opportunities 72. For information about Conservation Capital, visit https://www.conservation-capital.com/ 163 Figure J.1 A CABP provides a plan that includes the ↗ Contents Three Primary Considerations of a CABP overall conservation outcomes that the relevant entity seeks to achieve, the strategies, activities, and resources needed to achieve them, and how What is the conservation What management and What revenue generation to measure and share progress. Development context and what are the key actions are required to opportunities are available of a CABP is an involving exercise that typically conservation goals? achieve these goals? to support the required man- includes: agement actions? Status and situational assessment of the PA. • Review of existing plans, strategies, and other • • What are the key conser- • What are the likely man- • How can conservation documents. ↗ Section 1 vation values in the area? agement requirements businesses (tourism and Defining desired outcomes and key indicators. • and priorities? other third-party enter- Defining the goals and strategies to achieve • • What are the most signifi- prises) be optimized? this, and specific actions. cant conservation threats? • How can management be optimally delivered from a • What commercial/ Capacity assessment of the CA team’s expe- • • What are the current con- rience and qualifications, and any additional cost perspective? revenue options are avail- servation priorities? capacity needed and how this could be able to achieve this? • What are the likely addressed. This may include the role of part- • What is the wider conser- financial, administration, • How should revenue ners critical to strategy execution. vation context in which and human resources be managed internally Specific funding and other investment • ↗ Section 2 the conservancy exists? requirements? between management requirements. • What strategies are and landowners? Development of specific performance • • What are the critical part- already in place to address measures. nerships to deliver this • What (if any) other the needs of the conser- and how can these sources of finance are vation context? Part of the CABP is a detailed budget that be achieved? available? includes four key sections: • What are the key commu- • Includes review and • Operational costs nity dynamics and how consultation with existing • Capital expenditure costs can these be managed? and potential enterprise • Revenue ↗ Section 3 partners • Combined cost and revenue Source: Conservation Capital 2018. PA Operational costs (OPEX) are broken down in two ways — management categories (seven in the top section of Table J.1) and activity cate- gories (field and central management, bottom section of Table J.1). There are detailed budgets for each management and activity category. Table ↗ Appendices J.1 is the summary. 164 Appendices Collaborative Management Partnership Toolkit Table J.1 Sample 10-year Operational Expenditures Investment Budget Management Categories Y-1 Y-2 Y-3 Y-4 Y-5 Y-6 Y-7 Y-8 Y-9 Y-10 Total % Staff Costs $ 320,202 $ 329,808 $ 339,703 $ 349,894 $ 360,390 $ 371,202 $ 382,338 $ 393,808 $ 405,623 $ 417,791 $ 3,670,760 Fleet Management $ 71,767 $ 73,920 $ 76,138 $ 78,422 $ 80,775 $ 83,198 $ 85,694 $ 88,265 $ 90,913 $ 93,640 $ 822,731 Conservation & Anti-Poaching $ 36,316 $ 37,405 $ 38,527 $ 39,683 $ 40,874 $ 42,100 $ 43,363 $ 44,664 $ 46,004 $ 47,384 $ 416,320 Field Support $ 32,201 $ 33,167 $ 34,162 $ 35,186 $ 36,242 $ 37,329 $ 38,449 $ 39,603 $ 40,791 $ 42,014 $ 369,144 Administration $ 26,135 $ 26,919 $ 27,727 $ 28,558 $ 29,415 $ 30,298 $ 31,206 $ 32,143 $ 33,107 $ 34,100 $ 299,608 Business Management $ 12,750 $ 13,133 $ 13,526 $ 13,932 $ 14,350 $ 14,781 $ 15,224 $ 15,681 $ 16,151 $ 16,636 $ 146,164 Community Engagement $ 7,599 $ 7,827 $ 8,062 $ 8,304 $ 8,553 $ 8,809 $ 9,074 $ 9,346 $ 9,626 $ 9,915 $ 87,114 Total $ 506,970 $ 522,179 $ 537,844 $ 553,980 $ 570,599 $ 587,717 $ 605,348 $ 623,509 $ 642,214 $ 661,481 $ 5,811,840 100% Activity Categories Field Operations Y-1 Y-2 Y-3 Y-4 Y-5 Y-6 Y-7 Y-8 Y-9 Y-10 Total % Law Enforcement $ 203,573 $ 209,680 $ 215,970 $ 222,449 $ 229,123 $ 235,996 $ 243,076 $ 250,369 $ 257,880 $ 265,616 $ 2,333,731 Transport & Logistics $ 114,485 $ 117,920 $ 121,457 $ 125,101 $ 128,854 $ 132,719 $ 136,701 $ 140,802 $ 145,026 $ 149,377 $ 1,312,442 Commercial Management $ 61,330 $ 63,170 $ 65,065 $ 67,017 $ 69,028 $ 71,098 $ 73,231 $ 75,428 $ 77,691 $ 80,022 $ 703,080 Community Engagement $ 24,387 $ 25,119 $ 25,872 $ 26,648 $ 27,448 $ 28,271 $ 29,119 $ 29,993 $ 30,893 $ 31,819 $ 279,569 Monitoring & Evaluation $ 17,897 $ 18,433 $ 18,986 $ 19,556 $ 20,143 $ 20,747 $ 21,369 $ 22,010 $ 22,671 $ 23,351 $ 205,164 Habitat & Wildlife Management $ 5,483 $ 5,647 $ 5,816 $ 5,991 $ 6,171 $ 6,356 $ 6,546 $ 6,743 $ 6,945 $ 7,153 $ 62,851 Research $ 3,902 $ 4,019 $ 4,139 $ 4,263 $ 4,391 $ 4,523 $ 4,659 $ 4,798 $ 4,942 $ 5,091 $ 44,726 Subtotal field operations $ 431,055 $ 443,987 $ 457,306 $ 471,025 $ 485,156 $ 499,711 $ 514,702 $ 530,143 $ 546,048 $ 562,429 $ 4,941,563 100% Central Management Y-1 Y-2 Y-3 Y-4 Y-5 Y-6 Y-7 Y-8 Y-9 Y-10 Total % General Admin, Compliance & HR $ 38,100 $ 39,243 $ 40,420 $ 41,632 $ 42,881 $ 44,168 $ 45,493 $ 46,858 $ 48,263 $ 49,711 $ 436,769 Stakeholder Management $ 11,462 $ 11,806 $ 12,160 $ 12,525 $ 12,901 $ 13,288 $ 13,687 $ 14,097 $ 14,520 $ 14,956 $ 131,402 Risk Management $ 10,862 $ 11,188 $ 11,523 $ 11,869 $ 12,225 $ 12,592 $ 12,969 $ 13,359 $ 13,759 $ 14,172 $ 124,518 Finance Management $ 6,120 $ 6,304 $ 6,493 $ 6,687 $ 6,888 $ 7,095 $ 7,308 $ 7,527 $ 7,753 $ 7,985 $ 70,159 Revenue Collection $ 4,463 $ 4,596 $ 4,734 $ 4,876 $ 5,023 $ 5,173 $ 5,328 $ 5,488 $ 5,653 $ 5,823 $ 51,158 Donor Management $ 3,761 $ 3,874 $ 3,990 $ 4,110 $ 4,233 $ 4,360 $ 4,491 $ 4,626 $ 4,765 $ 4,908 $ 43,119 Policy Development $ 1,148 $ 1,182 $ 1,217 $ 1,254 $ 1,292 $ 1,330 $ 1,370 $ 1,411 $ 1,454 $ 1,497 $ 13,155 Subtotal central management $ 75,915 $ 78,192 $ 80,538 $ 82,954 $ 85,443 $ 88,006 $ 90,646 $ 93,366 $ 96,167 $ 99,052 $ 870,278 100% Total $ 506,970 $ 522,179 $ 537,844 $ 553,980 $ 570,599 $ 587,717 $ 605,348 $ 623,509 $ 642,214 $ 661,481 $ 5,811,840 Source: Conservation Capital 2018. 165 Figure J.2 Capital Expenditures. Capital expenditures for ↗ Contents Annual Operational Expenditures Summary Over 10 Years a PA are budgeted along program areas, activ- ity categories, and central management. Each Yearly investment ($100,000) program area and activity category has a detailed budget. Table J.2 is a summary of the 10-year 7 CAPEX investment budget. 6 Field Operations 5 ↗ Section 1 4 3 2 1 ↗ Section 2 Central Management 0 Y-1 Y-2 Y-3 Y-4 Y-5 Y-6 Y-7 Y-8 Y-9 Y-10 Source: Conservation Capital 2018. ↗ Section 3 ↗ Appendices 166 Appendices Collaborative Management Partnership Toolkit Table J.2 10-year PA Capital Expenditures Investment Budget Capital Development Categories Y-1 Y-2 Y-3 Y-4 Y-5 Y-6 Y-7 Y-8 Y-9 Y-10 Total % Conservation Infrastructure $ 1,000,000 $ 1,030,000 $ 1,060,900 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $3,090,900 Transport & Road/Construction Machinery $ 173,000 $ 219,390 $ - $ - $ 194,713 $ 130,998 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 718,101 Management Infrastructure $ 250,000 $ 162,740 $ 29,705 $ 8,742 $ - $ 23,185 $ - $ - $ 25,335 $ - $ 499,708 Roads, Bridges and Airstrips $ - $ 103,000 $ 159,135 $ 54,636 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 316,771 Plant Equipment/Infrastructure $ 66,500 $ 68,495 $ 42,436 $ 43,709 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 221,140 Tourism and Enterprise $ 15,000 $ - $ 21,218 $ 109,273 $ 48,397 $ 17,389 $ 25,075 $ - $ 30,402 $ - $ 157,482 Field Equipment $ 10,000 $ 10,300 $ 10,609 $ 10,927 $ 11,255 $ 11,593 $ 11,941 $ 12,299 $ 12,668 $ 13,048 $ 114,639 Communications $ 7,500 $ 7,725 $ 7,957 $ 8,195 $ 8,441 $ 8,695 $ 8,955 $ 9,224 $ 9,501 $ 9,786 $ 85,979 Office and IT Equipment $ 5,200 $ - $ - $ 5,682 $ - $ - $ 6,209 $ - $ - $ 6,785 $ 23,876 Communities $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - Total $ 1,527,200 $ 1,601,650 $ 1,331,960 $ 241,165 $ 262,806 $ 191,860 $ 52,180 $ 21,523 $ 77,906 $ 29,618 $ 5,228,596 100% Activity Categories Field Operations Y-1 Y-2 Y-3 Y-4 Y-5 Y-6 Y-7 Y-8 Y-9 Y-10 Total % Law Enforcement $ 659,500 $ 668,213 $ 613,200 $ 27,865 $ 43,051 $ 24,055 $ 20,896 $ 21,523 $ 25,335 $ 22,834 $ 2,126,471 Habitat & Wildlife Management $ 539,500 $ 587,873 $ 591,452 $ - $ 23,354 $ 9,564 $ - $ - $ 9,501 $ - $ 1,761,243 Transport & Logistics $ 147,250 $ 177,418 $ 53,045 $ 43,709 $ 90,885 $ 111,000 $ - $ - $ 12,668 $ - $ 635,975 Commercial Management $ 25,000 $ 64,375 $ 74,263 $ 163,909 $ 59,652 $ 46,371 $ 25,075 $ - $ 30,402 $ - $ 379,775 Monitoring & Evaluation $ 88,750 $ 20,600 $ - $ - $ 22,510 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 131,860 Community Engagement $ 20,750 $ 59,998 $ - $ - $ 23,354 $ 869 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 104,971 Research $ 22,500 $ 23,175 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 45,675 Subtotal field operations $ 1,503,250 $ 1,601,650 $ 1,331,960 $ 235,483 $ 262,806 $ 191,860 $ 45,971 $ 21,523 $ 77,906 $ 22,834 $ 5,185,970 100% Central Management Y-1 Y-2 Y-3 Y-4 Y-5 Y-6 Y-7 Y-8 Y-9 Y-10 Total % General Admin, Compliance & HR $ 5,200 $ - $ - $ 5,682 $ - $ - $ 6,209 $ - $ - $ 6,785 $ 23,876 Finance Management $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - Revenue Collection $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - Risk Management $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - Stakeholder Management $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - Donor Management $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - Policy Development $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - Subtotal central management $ 5,200 $ - $ - $ 5,682 $ - $ - $ 6,209 $ - $ - $ 6,785 $ 23,876 100% TOTAL $ 1,508,450 $ 1,601,650 $ 1,331,960 $ 241,165 $ 262,806 $ 191,860 $ 52,180 $ 21,523 $ 77,906 $ 29,618 $5,209,846 Source: Conservation Capital 2018. 167 Figure J.3 Revenue. Each revenue source has a detailed ↗ Contents Annual Capital Expenditures Summary over 10 Years analysis that includes costs, projections, and trends. For example, the wildlife-based tourism Yearly investment ($100,000) fees include conservation fees, occupancy rates, and revenue retention. Table J.3 is a summary 16 and includes three revenue sources: tourism, Field Operations payment for ecosystem service (ES), and carbon credits through reducing emissions from defor- estation and forest degradation (REDD+). IF refers 12 to innovative finance. ↗ Section 1 8 4 ↗ Section 2 Central Management 0 Y-1 Y-2 Y-3 Y-4 Y-5 Y-6 Y-7 Y-8 Y-9 Y-10 Source: Conservation Capital 2018. ↗ Section 3 ↗ Appendices 168 Appendices Collaborative Management Partnership Toolkit Table J.3 10-Year Revenue Summary Budget currency USD $ Annual inflation rate 1.03 Innovative Finance Y-1 Y-2 Y-3 Y-4 Y-5 Y-6 Y-7 Y-8 Y-9 Y-10 Total % Interest from Park Bond - - $ 18,082 $ 35,473 $ 113,854 $ 150,720 $ 264,241 $ 298,302 $ 369,892 $ 502,801 $ 1,753,364 51% Interest from Conservation Trust Fund - - $ 17,437 $ 26,941 $ 64,441 $ 104,192 $ 151,136 $ 181,004 $ 236,582 $ 288,600 $ 1,070,334 31% Corporate Sponsors - - $ 10,282 $ 15,886 $ 43,635 $ 49,438 $ 83,325 $ 92,977 $ 137,511 $ 151,753 $ 584,808 17% Total - - $ 45,802 $ 78,300 $ 221,930 $ 304,350 $ 498,702 $ 572,283 $ 743,984 $ 943,154 $ 3,408,505 Tourism Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Year 7 Year 8 Year 9 Year 10 Total % Gate Fees $ 7,870 $ 8,657 $ 9,837 $ 13,294 $ 14,771 $ 16,249 $ 20,695 $ 22,469 $ 23,651 $ 27,607 $ 165,099 5% Accomodation Revenue $ 110,768 $ 125,500 $ 146,892 $ 163,403 $ 187,006 $ 211,877 $ 231,460 $ 258,838 $ 280,635 $ 289,054 $ 2,005,434 57% Concession Fees $ 74,201 $ 84,070 $ 98,400 $ 109,460 $ 125,271 $ 141,932 $ 155,050 $ 173,390 $ 187,991 $ 193,631 $ 1,343,399 38% Total $ 192,839 $ 218,227 $ 255,129 $ 286,158 $ 327,048 $ 370,058 $ 407,205 $ 454,697 $ 492,278 $ 510,293 $ 3,513,932 Payment for Ecosystem Services (PES) Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Year 7 Year 8 Year 9 Year 10 Total % Payment for Water Use $ 92,000 $ 206,000 $ 236,369 $ 284,109 $ 472,714 $ 538,367 $ 501,502 $ 516,547 $ 588,288 $ 548,005 $ 3,983,900 49% REDD+ $ 89,920 $ 298,914 $ 407,470 $ 456,227 $ 432,285 $ 445,254 $ 458,612 $ 513,487 $ 486,541 $ 501,137 $ 4,089,848 51% Total $ 181,920 $ 504,914 $ 643,839 $ 740,336 $ 904,999 $ 983,621 $ 960,114 $ 1,030,034 $ 1,074,829 $ 1,049,142 $ 8,073,748 Total Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Year 7 Year 8 Year 9 Year 10 Total % Total Innovative Finance Revenue - - $ 45,802 $ 78,300 $ 221,930 $ 304,350 $ 498,702 $ 572,283 $ 743,984 $ 943,154 $ 3,408,505 23% Total Tourism Revenue $ 192,839 $ 218,227 $ 255,129 $ 286,158 $ 327,048 $ 370,058 $ 407,205 $ 454,697 $ 492,278 $ 510,293 $ 3,513,932 23% Total PES Revenue $ 181,920 $ 504,914 $ 643,839 $ 740,336 $ 904,999 $ 983,621 $ 960,114 $ 1,030,034 $ 1,074,829 $ 1,049,142 $ 8,073,748 54% Total $ 374,759 $ 723,141 $ 944,770 $ 1,104,793 $ 1,453,977 $ 1,658,029 $ 1,866,021 $ 2,057,015 $ 2,311,091 $ 2,502,589 $ 14,996,185 Source: Conservation Capital 2018. 169 Figure J.4 Combined cost and revenue over 10 years. ↗ Contents Total Protected Area Revenue The last component of the budget brings the costs and revenue together to determine the gap Total protected area revenue (millions $) (see Figure J.6). The budget in Figure J.6 does not include donor funding. A donor funding and 1.2 investment plan could be designed using the Payment from ecosystem services information from the CABP to fill the funding gap. 1.0 Innovative finance ↗ Section 1 0.8 0.6 Tourism 0.4 0.2 ↗ Section 2 0.0 Y-1 Y-10 Y-1 Y-10 Y-1 Y-10 Source: Conservation Capital 2018. ↗ Section 3 ↗ Appendices 170 Appendices Collaborative Management Partnership Toolkit Figure J.5 10-Year PA Cost and Revenue Summary Y-1 Y-2 Y-3 Y-4 Y-5 Y-6 Y-7 Y-8 Y-9 Y-10 3 2 1 Revenues 0 -1 Shortfall -2 Costs -3 Source: Conservation Capital 2018. 171  ample Collaborative Management K. S ↗ Contents Tendering Information from Rwanda Rwanda Development Board, July 12, 2018 and community engagement/development for requirements (law enforcement personnel), each of the national parks of interest. employment opportunities for existing RDB In July 2018, RDB put out a tender notice • A description of the two-to-three priority man- park staff, and transition strategy for the RDB ↗ Section 1 to attract a partner for the management of agement actions for conservation, tourism, employees not deemed to be required by the Nyungwe NP. This was a public tendering and community engagement/development management company should be included in process, which they advertised as per Rwanda that the management company would focus the proposal. law. In addition, they proactively sent letters to on first if a successful agreement was negoti- • The project preparedness of your manage- partners notifying them about the opportunity. ated for the management of any or all of the ment company (or organization) to take on this This approach is recommended for any gov- other NPs. project in terms of capacity and skill assess- ernment considering tendering so that suitable • The proposed management structure and gov- ment for project development, implementa- partners are aware of the opportunity. ernance for the national park, with a descrip- tion, monitoring, and reporting. RDB also provided data on park visitors; tion of how the management company would ↗ Section 2 park revenue; the park organizational structure liaison and work with RDB for both policy Note: Given the success of the Akagera and salary costs; the financial summary; and a development and management operations. National Park governance and management description of the park infrastructure. • The anticipated investments required, includ- structure, it is mandatory for the proponent to ing a preliminary costing / financial plan, a the proposal to use an Akagera National Park-like RDB requested the following information from description of financial and/or economic viabil- governance and management model, with the bidders in its request for proposals. ity, and value for money analysis. following minimum requirements: The projected revenues (revenue forecast), if • Successful management company must • 1. Key elements of a concept proposal / any, that would accrue to the RDB as a result of incorporate as a company under the Rwanda management by the management company, Company Law (2009). ↗ Section 3 expression of interest including sources and any sensitivities (if exist). Financing of the company will be through a • For the management and financing of the • A preliminary list and assessment of risks (if combination of park revenues, contributions national parks identified above should include, but any), risk mitigations required, and manage- from the government of Rwanda, contributions not be limited to some of the following elements: ment of risks. from the successful management company, • A detailed description of the potential financial, • The expectations of the RDB by the manage- and donor support. administrative, human resources, and man- ment company, if any, for ongoing support of The establishment of a board of directors • agement benefits that would be realized for operating funds and infrastructure investments for strategic and policy oversight of national the government and people of Rwanda if the within or adjacent to the national park. park management for which members will be ↗ Appendices RDB was to pursue an extended private-public • Human resources management — the pro- appointed by both the successful management partnership with the interested management posed approach the management company company and the RDB. company. would take for current RDB employees at the Day-to-day management of the park shall be • • A description of the anticipated benefits for national park, as well as for the provision of done by a park management unit under the conservation, enhanced tourism opportunities, new employment opportunities for Rwandans leadership of a park manager, who is also the in the future. Consideration for park ranger CEO of the management company. 172 Appendices Collaborative Management Partnership Toolkit Policy and management activities will be • Experience: Letter(s) of recommendation: guided by a rolling five-year strategic business • Must have a minimum of 10 years of experi- • One or more letters of recommendation plan, annual activity plans, and annual budgets ence in contributing to and/or supporting the from the governments and/or organizations that will be approved by the board of directors management of parks and protected areas, for which the proponent has successfully Law enforcement personnel (rangers) with the • either all for countries within Africa or a combi- managed protected areas outlined above powers of peace officer shall be seconded/ nation of countries outside Africa and countries transferred from RDB. within Africa — mandatory criteria. 3. Proposed Duration of Services • In successfully managing multiple national 2. Requirements of the Potential Partner / parks or protected areas within the African The RDB is willing to consider a park man- Management Company continent (Successful management of multiple agement agreement for up to twenty (20) years, national parks / protected areas — this crite- renewable and to commence after the signing In addition to the elements of the proposal ria is not mandatory, but will be used to rate of an agreement between the successful pro- outlined above, the potential partner/manage- the proposal, with preference / score given tected areas management company and the RDB. ment company will meet and clearly demonstrate to those management companies who can The management company must include in its (describe) in the expression of interest proposal, clearly demonstrate management of up to five proposal, the duration of time for an agreement, that they meet the following interests, knowl- national parks or protected areas.) with a full should they be successful. edge, and abilities/experience factors. range of conservation, protection, sustainable tourism, and community engagement/eco- 4. Submission and Review Process Interest: nomic development responsibilities, including: • Have a genuine interest in the development • In the implementation of ecosystem con- The submission and review process for this and advancement of Rwanda as a nation, servation, restoration, and management of expression of interest will be in two steps: for which conservation-based tourism and protected areas/natural areas. community economic development through • In the development and implementation of Step 1. Preliminary management proposal, the protection of its natural biodiversity and tourism program development and delivery including: ecosystems is a priority. including: meaningful visitor experiences; • Development and submission of a prelimi- promotions and marketing; and working nary proposal by the potential management Knowledge: with tourism industry partners. companies on the basis of preliminary criteria • Of ecosystem conservation, restoration, man- • Developing and managing a healthy, pro- provided by RDB. agement planning, techniques, and practices. ductive workforce. • A presentation of the preliminary proposal to • Of sustainable tourism principles, practices, • The development and delivery of park visitor RDB by the potential management company. and techniques, including marketing and pro- and community education outreach pro- • A more detailed review and evaluation by RDB motions of park and park experiences. grams to build national park/protected areas of the management company preliminary pro- • Of community engagement and economic supporters and constituents. posal and a decision as to whether to request a development principles and practices, within • Working with government and NGOs in the more detailed proposal, or not. an African conservation context. management of conservation-based lands • Communicate results of the RDB decision(s) for • Of financial and human resources principals, and/or programs. Step 1 to the potential management com- practices, and techniques. • Financial management, including private and pany(ies) who have submitted preliminary public sector fundraising to support man- proposals. agement programs. 173 Step 2. A detailed park management proposal, • An indication of the length of time the man- ↗ Contents including: agement company would consider managing • Invitations to develop and submit a detailed the national park should they be successful, as proposal on the basis of preliminary criteria outlined above. provided by RDB (criteria yet to be developed). • Development of a detailed proposal by the potential management companies. • Presentation of proposal to RDB by potential management company. • A more detailed review and evaluation by RDB ↗ Section 1 of the management company’s proposal and decision by RDB. • Communicate results of decisions by RDB to potential management companies. • More detailed contract / PPP Agreement negotiations with the preferred management company selected by RDB. 5. Submission Requirements for ↗ Section 2 Expressions of Interest/Proposal Interested management companies and organizations who meet the above noted require- ments are invited to submit their Proposal, which will include the following information: • Confirmation of interest to be considered for the management and financing of Nyungwe National Park. ↗ Section 3 • General information about the management company / organization that is submitting the proposal, including: main business; country (ies) of establishment, operations and duration of conservation-based business activities. Information related to the key information elements outlined above. • Information related to how they meet the ↗ Appendices interest, knowledge, abilities, and experience elements of request for proposals, as outlined above. 174 Appendices Collaborative Management Partnership Toolkit  ample Promotional Materials L. S for CMPs from Uganda When a CA is embarking on a CMP tendering process, it will need prospectus documents that describe the CMP opportunity and the focal PA. In addition to the sample provided in Section 5.6 from Mozambique, here is a sample from a 2017 Conservation and Tourism Investment Forum in Uganda where CMP and tourism opportunities were promoted to potential investors, donors, Uganda Conservation & and partners. Tourism Investment Forum INVESTMENT FRAMEWORK AND OPPORTUNITIES OCTOBER 2017 1 Source: The Giants Club and the Government of Uganda 2017. 175 Figure L.1 ↗ Contents Map of Potential CMP Sites in Uganda Map of Sites for Co-Management of Protected Areas Budongo Forest Reserve Invest in the long-term development of responsible forest tourism and conservation activities within the largest forest reserve in Uganda, famous for its giant mahogany trees and an important ↗ Section 1 habitat for chimpanzees. Bugungu Wildlife Reserve Invest in management and restoration of a stunning undeveloped buffer reserve along the Albertine rift – a savannah landscape within the globally recognised Murchison Falls conservation area. ↗ Section 2 Toro-Semliki Wildlife Reserve A pioneering investment in private sector management of one of Uganda’s earliest and most iconic protected areas, working with existing tourism partners to continue its rehabilitation. Kalinzu & Kasyoha-Kitomi ↗ Section 3 Kampala Forest Reserves A mandate to invest in development Entebbe Airport of tourism and conservation activities Kyambura Wildlife Reserve and secure the future of Uganda’s most Invest in the management of a valuable medium altitude tropical strategically important reserve within forest reserves – which are important the Queen Elizabeth conservation area habitats for primates and birds. offering a unique variety of habitats ↗ Appendices and strong tourism potential. Source: The Giants Club and the Government of Uganda 2017. 23 176 Appendices Collaborative Management Partnership Toolkit Figure L.2 Description of CMP Opportunity in Bugungu Wildlife Reserve 1. Bugungu 1. Bugungu Wildlife Wildlife Reserve Reserve A western A western buffer buffer to Murchison to Murchison Falls Falls Key Facts: Key Facts: Infrastructure: Infrastructure: Very limited Very limited road access road access the the insideinside reserve, reserve, small patrol small patrol base and base three three outposts and outposts on on National Park,Park, National where the forests where the forests Western Western boundary. boundary. Investment Investment Opportunity: Opportunity: Size: Size: 474 Km 2 Km2 474 of Budongo of Budongo give to give way way savannah to savannah through InvestInvest a PPP a through structure PPP structure with with Landscape Landscape and Habitat: and Habitat: ForestForest and bush bush covered Management: andcovered Management: Managed by UWA Managed as part by UWA asof the of the part UWA UWA to secure to secure co-management co-management and bush and bush stretching stretching to the to the shores shores of of Murchison Murchison Falls conservation area. area. Falls conservation of the of area, theinvest area, invest necessary in the in the necessary escarpment escarpment east in the in thedescending east descending grassland to flat to flat grassland Albert, Lake Lake a habitat Albert, unique a habitat unique to the to the and bush bush plains andplains with riverine forest forest with riverine sections sections to the to the infrastructure infrastructure to support to support west. west. Tourism: Tourism: No current tourism No current tourism activity in the in activity the area. area. conservation conservation and tourism and tourism activities activities Murchison Murchison An open Area.Area. landscape An open landscape and develop and develop enterprise enterprise partnerships partnerships spectacular with with views; spectacular wildlife views; wildlife Wildlife: Wildlife: Important Important habitat habitat for elephant, for elephant, buffalo, Access: buffalo, Access: Road to Road to Kampala Kampala ~4-5 hours, ~4-5 hours, Murchison Murchison forterm for long term revenue. longrevenue. Falls Falls NP NP ~30-45 ~30-45 mins. mins. Nearby Bugungu Nearby airstrip Bugungu airstrip populations populations are increasing are increasing and further Ugandan and further kob, hartebeest, Ugandan kob, hartebeest, and other other mammals and mammals including including endemic red-flanked red-flanked endemic duiker. 270 species duiker. 270 species receives receives scheduled scheduled flights. flights. investment investment will secure will secure its future. its future. of bird. of bird. Source: The Giants Club and the Government of Uganda 2017. 24 24 177  nformation for an M. I ↗ Contents Expression of Interest The following information should be included contexts — with a particular focus on tourism 9. Conflict of Interest: Certification that the in an EOI for engagement in a CMP. development and marketing. partner does not have any conflict of interest • Fundraising: donor fundraising, manage- and/or is declaring a conflict of interest, which ↗ Section 1 1. Potential Partner Identify: The bidding ment, and networks. they believe is manageable. organization’s legal identity, structure, and • Conservation Financing: knowledge and registration information. application of other innovative conservation 10. References: Letters of recommendation from financing mechanisms beyond mainstream at least two credible independent sources rel- 2. Key People: Summary biographies of the key donor fundraising. evant to the interested private sector party’s people behind the bidding organization. • Start-Ups: experience with start-ups — new CMP proposal. project development. 3. Experience: Summary evidence of 10+ years • Technology: progressive use of technology of relevant engagement in biodiversity con- in conservation development. ↗ Section 2 servation, protected area management, and • Business and PA Planning: experience with experience in the relevant country. professional and realistic business plans and PA management plans. 4. International Best Practice: Evidence of con- • Environmental and Social Standards; famil- nections with and exposure to international iarity and experience with ESS and a plan to best practice (in Africa and where possible comply with ESS (see Chapter 6). beyond) in the field of conservation area • Project Management: exceptional organi- management. zational skills and management of complex and dynamic projects. ↗ Section 3 5. Experience in Target PA: A summary of prior operating experience in the targeted PA or its 7. Key Priorities: A summary of the anticipated environs. priority management actions for the PA with specific reference to conservation, local com- 6. Technical Capacity: Specific evidence of prior munity and economic development impacts. successes and positive impact with: • Protected Area Management: conservation 8. Alignment with PA authority: The partner’s development and management of PAs. understanding of the PA authority’s vision ↗ Appendices • Local Community: proactive community and goals and how the CMP will support this engagement and integration and related vision and help the government achieve key economic development. national and international targets and objec- • Revenue: progressive nature-based tives. revenue development in protected area 178 Appendices Collaborative Management Partnership Toolkit N. Sample Expression of Interest Evaluation Form Once an EOI is submitted, the PEC can use the Table N.1 sample evaluation form to rank the submissions Expression of Interest Evaluation Form and determine which potential partners should submit a full bid. Expression of Interest Evaluation Form Name of Bidder: CMP Partner Bidder Name of Evaluator: Member of the PEC Date of Evaluation: Day / Month / Year Category Key Component Yes =1 / No = 0 Overall Submission Submission on time 1 Well-written 1 Professional 1 Includes all requirements 1 Partner identity 1 Lack of conflict of interest 1 References 1 Subtotal (Highest Score Possible = 7) 7 179 Expression of Interest Evaluation Form ↗ Contents Experience Qualification High=2 / Med=1 / Low=0 Key people’s biographies and CVs 1 Experience 1 International best practice 1 Experience in target PA 0 ↗ Section 1 Technical Capacity PA management 1 Local community 1 Revenue 1 Fundraising 1 ↗ Section 2 Conservation finance 1 Start-ups 1 Technology 1 Business and PA planning 2 Environmental and social standards 2 Project management 0 ↗ Section 3 Project Description Key priorities 2 Alignment with PA Authority 0 Subtotal (Highest Score Possible = 32) 12 Total (Highest Score Possible = 39) 19 ↗ Appendices Evaluator Signature: 180 Appendices Collaborative Management Partnership Toolkit  nformation for a Full Collaborative O. I Management Bid After EOIs are submitted, the PEC will review anti-trust; whistleblowing; diversity; anti-mod- • Wider Structure: Proposals for the wider and thereafter, solicit full bids, which should ern slavery; code of conduct; environmental human resource structure and key reporting include: and climate sustainability; health and safety; lines (including a presentation of a compre- related party transactions; data protection and hensive organizational chart). Corporate and Governance confidentiality, etc. • Integration: Specific proposals for how exist- • Key People Biographies ing PA staff will be integrated into the new • Proposed Corporate Structure Provision of detailed biographies for each staffing structure and on what basis. Description of the proposed corporate structure. member of the founding SPV board repre- • Organization Chart: Staffing and reporting lines. • Planned Governance Structure senting the private sector partner and for the • Human Resources: A description of how the • Principal Structure: Description of the gov- proposed founding CEO. partner proposed to manage staff, descrip- ernance structure, including representation • Conflict of Interest tion of contracts, gender inclusivity, and on the board; appointment of chairperson; The partner should declare that they do not respect for employment standards. voting powers (and vetoes); and liaison with have a conflict of interest, or if they are declar- • Conservation Development & Management Plan PA authority leadership and relevant govern- ing a conflict of interest that they deem to be • Zonation: Proposed high-level zonation and ment stakeholders. manageable. basis thereof for the target PA. • Meeting Schedule. Proposed schedule for • CAPEX: Buildings, vehicles, aircraft and governance body meetings. PA and Stakeholder Management other operating equipment, roads, airfields, • Local Community Integration: Specific ref- fencing, power, water, energy access, and erence to the methodology (and associated • Proposed Key Goals communications needs and requirements. timelines) to enable meaningful and active Principal impact objectives and related key • OPEX: Revenue development and manage- local community participation within the performance indicators (KPIs) (including basis ment; habitat and wildlife management, planned governance structure. of measurement) for each of the following wildlife reintroductions, research and moni- dynamics: (conservation, social, economic, toring; community engagement and devel- Key Policies and People operations and capacity development); and opment; law enforcement; finance, adminis- time frames: (priority: years 1-3; medium term: tration and compliance; fund raising; PR and • Statutory Compliance up to year 5; longer term: up to year 10). communication needs and requirements. Summarize the key statutory compliance • Management and Wider HR Structure • Integration: Proposed basis upon which any requirements (licenses, authorizations, approv- • Leadership: Proposals for the structure existing GMPs or their equivalents will be als, legal contracts, etc.) that will be secured and appointment of the senior leadership integrated into the new plan. / entered into by the partner to ensure the team with a particular emphasis on the CEO • Stakeholder Management proper and legal operation of the proposed (warden or manager) and head of security. • Methodology: Basis upon which key stake- structure. • Illegal Wildlife Enforcement. Proposal for holders have been and will continue to be • Key Policy Framework how illegal wildlife trafficking, anti-poaching identified and prioritized by the partner with Key policy frameworks including but not and other violations will be managed. a special emphasis on national and local limited to those relating to: anti-bribery; government agencies; local communities; 181 donors and other potential financial and • Impact Based: Description of additional lessons and ideas emerging from the manage- ↗ Contents commercial partners. conservation financing mechanisms e.g. ment of the target PA under the CMP arrange- • Management: Summary plans for managing conservation / park / green bonds; out- ment are collated and shared with the wider each of the priority stakeholders. come-based financing mechanisms; impact PA authority as well as other conservation area • Integration: Proposed basis for the inte- investment funds etc. and prior success in managers. gration of existing NGOs / conservation implementing successful fundraising and • Social Safeguards organizations already active in (or around) conservation financing mechanisms. Description of how the partner will fulfill social the target PA. • Business Plan. A five-year business plan for safeguard requirements and ensure all staff are • Exit Transition Plan the PA with cash flow projections. familiar with ESS. Proposals for managing the transition back to • Proposed Pricing. A description of the pro- • Ethics ↗ Section 1 sole PA authority management at the end of posed pricing model for PA entry, user fees and Summary of the ethical framework that will the CMP term including but not limited to the: other concessions in the PA and the rationale. govern the operation of the proposed CMP transfer of all operational HR roles; transfer of • Revenue Retention Model. Proposed struc- together with any management tools that will assets; transfer of all third-party contracts; and ture for revenue retention, management be used to apply and monitor this framework. the transfer of revenue streams and working and distribution. • Environmental Impact Management capital balances. Summarize what measures that will be taken • PA Authority Capacity Development ESS and Risk to ensure that all operations will assess and Description of how the CMP will build the minimize or eliminate their potential for nega- capacity of PA authority staff and enhance • ESS tive environmental impact. Specific reference ↗ Section 2 organizational management. • ESS Policy and Guidelines: Copy of the part- should be made, but not restricted, to: ner’s ESS policy and guidelines. • Construction materials and methods Finance • ESS Plan: An ESS strategy that ensures com- • Water management pliance with global best practice. • Waste management • Operating Revenue Development • Risk Management (Box 5.1) • Road development • Tourism: Proposed tourism development • Key risks: Analysis of the range of potential • Methods of power and energy generation and related marketing support plan, includ- risks that may impact the CMP and prioriti- • Marketing ing plans to develop in-house versus out- zation of risks. • A description and/or marketing plan that sourced tourism operations. • Mitigating Actions: Proposed mitigating outlines marketing and sales tools / infra- ↗ Section 3 • Alternatives: Proposed plans for investigat- actions (both preventative and curative) for structure will be developed / used. ing the development of alternative revenue each of the identified risks. • An analysis of the marketing and sales streams such as carbon and biodiversity • Communications and Reporting activities through which the tools will be offsets, and payments for ecosystem services. • Communications: Proposed communica- deployed to leverage brand awareness for • Integration: Integration of existing tourism tions plan for the CMP operation including the PA and partnership. or other third-party operator concessions public relations (PR) strategy, internal and • Description of any proposed third party mar- within the target PA including plans (if any) external communication. keting and partnerships that will be entered for migrating commercial terms towards • Reporting into to optimize the business and financial ↗ Appendices planned new fee structures. Proposed reporting framework within manage- performance of the operation. • Financing ment and to the governance body–including • Donor Based: Description of donor commit- schedule, content structure, key audiences and Source: Adapted from: Conservation Capital 2016; WBG 2020b. ments, amount and duration, and proposed proposals for managing sensitive data. donor fundraising plan, including associated • Lesson Sharing sums, use of funds and priority target donors. Proposals for ensuring that all important 182 Appendices Collaborative Management Partnership Toolkit  ey Components to P. K Include in CMP Contracts Appendix P includes a description of key sec- CMP Contract Table of Content tions that should be included in a CMP contract. Each management contract is different; however, • Parties this information can be used as a guide for a CMP • Background contract. Given the difference between bilateral, • Definitions / Interpretations integrated, and delegated management partner- • Objectives ships, specific recommendations are made for • Governance Structure each model. If the CA does not have the internal • Geographical Area technical capacity to develop a CMP contract, • Delegation of Management they should seek external support from a techni- • Duration, Start Date, and Renewal cal expert.73 • Integration of Staff • Staff Recruitment • Reserved Matters • Donor Funding and Revenue Management • PA Management Roles and Responsibilities • Non-management Responsibilities • Law Enforcement • Community Relations • Establishing Park Fees • Existing Commercial Relationships and New Concessions / Enterprise Development • Assets • Liability and Indemnity • Conflict Resolution • Performance Review • Termination • Data Ownership • Communication • Other Sections 73. Appendix P was compiled by the authors having reviewed existing and draft CMP contracts, experience developing CMP contracts, and from WBG 2020b. 183 1. Parties 5. Governance Structure In addition to the main governing body, some ↗ Contents CMPs have advisory committees. This enables A description of the parties, their legal struc- A description of the governance model, key the inclusion of other key stakeholders, such as ture, address, and identification. A CMP involves: decisions to be made by the governance body community members and NGO partners, and • The contracting authority (government (special purpose vehicle [SPV] board or com- their mandate is to advise and provide nonbinding agency, ministry, private landowner, company, mittee), and oversight responsibilities of the PA support to the management entity. While the and/or community). management senior staff. While the governance establishment of an advisory committee may be • A partner with experience and expertise in PA structure should include adequate representation referenced in the CMP, its creation can be estab- management (NGO or private sector). of the key partners, it should be small and avoid lished through a different agreement. Their role structures that will limit timely decision-making. and mandate should be very clear to avoid any ↗ Section 1 2. Background Section (Whereas Clauses) The governance body has oversight over strategy confusion. and senior staff. They should approve the GMP, This section sets the overall context for the annual budget and work plan, and longer-term If an SPV is created, there should be a separate agreement. strategies. They should receive biannual reports. section describing the SPV, outlining the name This should be explicit in the agreement, with and its branding. • Confirmation that the CA has the legal respon- deadlines and responsibility. sibility over management of the PA. • Brief description of the PA, challenges, and Table P.1 outlines the governance elements opportunities. that should be specified in a CMP contract. ↗ Section 2 • Confirmation that the private partner has the skills and capacity to support the CA in manag- Table P.1 ing the PA. Governance Elements in CMP Contract • Reference to the legal framework within the country, which permits CMPs. Governance • A statement confirming that both parties agree Elements Examples to work together to enhance the management and ecological, social, and economic sustain- Strategy and Priority Setting Who approves long-term management and business plans? ability of the target PA. ↗ Section 3 Who approves annual work plans? Oversight Who is represented on the governance body? 3. Definitions / Interpretations How are decisions at governance level made? (i.e. consensus, majority vote?) Definitions for key words in the agreement. Who receives reports and monitors progress of the partnership? Finance Who is responsible for fundraising? 4. Objectives Who approves annual budgets? A very clear articulation of the principal objec- Who pays for that? ↗ Appendices tives of the partnership and for the target PA. This Appointment of Senior Who selects the senior management? (i.e. park warden, conservator, manager) section is critical because in the event that there Management How is this decision made? (i.e. consensus, majority vote?) is a conflict or an accusation of nonperformance, the partners will refer to the original objective of the CMP. Source: Baghai et al. 2018b. 184 Appendices Collaborative Management Partnership Toolkit Recommendations for specific CMP models This section, for integrated and delegated CMP Refer to the integrated model section for what contracts, should also include: should be included in the contract. Bilateral: The governance body may be a • How often the SPV meets. program management committee (PMC) created • Process for key decisions and voting Akagera Company, Rwanda, a delegated CMP at PA authority HQ level involving senior manage- procedures. between African Parks and RDB, is governed by ment in the CA and partner. • Who nominates the chair and duration of role. a board of seven trustees. Four are appointed by • Communication and information sharing AP and three by RDB. The board chair is the CEO This section in the CMP contract will also mechanisms. of RDB or an appointee of the CEO. African Parks include: • Nomination process for trustees. nominates the CEO of the company. Decisions are • Members of the PMC. • Duration of terms. made by consensus; otherwise, a vote is taken, • How often the PMC meets. • How many terms trustees can serve. one vote per director, with a simple majority to • Process for key decisions and voting proce- • If the trustee role voluntary / paid (in most carry the vote. dures (who decides, how, and when). cases this is voluntary, with some funds for • Who serves as the chair and the term duration. travel provided as needed). • Communication and information sharing mechanisms. The Gonarezhou Conservation Trust (Zimbabwe) (an integrated CMP) is governed by a board of For the bilateral CMP in the Simien Mountains NP six trustees, nominated in equal numbers by the between AWF and EWCA, the PMC comprises ZPWMA and FZS, who meet a minimum of two the Director General of EWCA; AWF’s Senior times per year. Trustees serve three-year terms, Conservation Director; and a representative of with the ability to serve two terms. Trustees are KfW, the donor partner. not paid for their services. Casting vote in the case of a tie depends on the topic. For example, Integrated: The governance body in an inte- for an issue pertaining to conservation, the grated CMP, where an SPV is formed, is the board ZPWMA will cast the vote, for an issue on funding, of the SPV, which includes equitable represen- FZS will cast the vote. tation from the CA and the partner. Some SPV governance boards have independent experts to create an odd number, provide expertise, and The governance structure in Gorongosa NP, an split the vote as needed, and some may have integrated CMP between the ANAC and the Greg community representatives as recommended in Carr Foundation in Mozambique is referred to as this Toolkit. Where there is an even number, the an oversight committee and composed of one casting vote can be determined by the topic (see representative from each partner. Gonarezhou NP example). Delegated: The majority of the board of The SPV board is normally accountable to the SPV is held by the private partner and the the parent ministry of the PA authority and is minority held by the public partner. The SPV responsible for providing updates, which is often board is normally accountable to the parent done through the public partner in the case of an ministry of the PA and is responsible for providing integrated CMP. updates. 185 6. Geographical Area 9. Integration of Staff the SPV will be required to remunerate the public ↗ Contents partner for all seconded staff and the public A clear description of the PA and the geograph- When an SPV is created and staff is integrated partner will be required to notify the private ical boundaries over which the CMP extends. under the new legal entity (integrated and dele- partner in advance of any salary increments of Some CMPs cover the PA and buffer lands, which gated CMPs), the basis for integrating the staff seconded staff for incorporation into annual might include forest reserves or hunting conces- needs to be outlined. How and when this is done budgets. sions. The partner needs explicit clarity on the varies depends on the context but the following is coverage of their mandate. generally recommended (WBG 2020b). The state partner will not have the right to uni- laterally promote or terminate any staff seconded 7. Delegation of Management For all senior management positions within the to SPV. ↗ Section 1 SPV for which designation rights have not been This section is relevant when an SPV is created predetermined (i.e., the CEO and the head of The private partner will have a right to transfer and the CA delegates certain management law enforcement) the private partner will (within back to the state partner any nonperforming staff responsibility to the SPV (integrated and del- two months of the start of the term) provide job seconded to the SPV. egated CMPs). Management is guided by the descriptions for which the public partner will have governance body (see Section 5) and the delega- an opportunity to submit nominee resumes. 10. Staff Recruitment tion of management does not impact ownership These will be assessed by the private partner of the PA. An earlier section of the contract will together with a state partner designated human CMP contracts should give preference to hiring recognize the SPV or outline how and when the resource (HR) professional for final determination from the local community and should prescribe ↗ Section 2 SPV will be created, along with the objective and by the private partner. Any position for which a the number of expatriates to be recruited. purpose of the SPV. public partner’s nominee is not selected will be subsequently filled on the open market at the 11. Reserved Matters 8. Duration, Start Date, and Renewal CEO’s election. Listing of the reserved matters over which the There are approximately 40 active co-man- With respect to the wider HR establishment, public partner will have a sole right of discretion agement and delegated CMPs in Africa (excluding the private partner will decide (within six months or veto. This is contextually specific but is likely to Madagascar and South Africa). The longest is 50 of the start of the term), which of any existing include: naming rights over the target PA; security years and the shortest is five years. The dura- state partner employees will be suitable for management issues; and changes to preexisting ↗ Section 3 tion of the agreement depends on the context. retention within the SPV. Those that are retained concession arrangements or contracts. The ideal duration of a CMP is 20 years, with will be seconded by the state to the SPV with the option for renewal based on performance the remainder being redeployed by the public 12. Donor Funding and Revenue standards. This duration allows for proper park partner elsewhere and the remaining outstanding Management planning, assures and attracts potential investors, positions being filled on the open market by the and enables long-term donor funding. private partner. This section outlines key funding aspects, such as who is responsible for supporting the The renewal of the agreement is linked to For any new position created by within the SPV, operating budget, what happens if fundraising or ↗ Appendices the achievement of key results as verified by an the public partner will be given a right to nomi- development of revenue sources is not success- independent auditor (Brugière 2020). The contract nate candidates. ful, how revenue is collected at PA level, and how should specify when the renewal process should revenue is managed. This section should refer to start and who needs to initiate the process and If feasible, the PA authority pays the salaries a business plan or budget that is included in the approve the renewal. and benefits on seconded staff as their contri- appendix of the CMP contract and outlines spe- bution to the project. Where this is not feasible, cific funding obligations of each party. In general, 186 Appendices Collaborative Management Partnership Toolkit the private partner takes the lead in fundraising, from functional PAs; therefore, this needs to be political conflict, and whose management is financial management, and revenue develop- considered when developing a revenue model for defined in the definition section (the reserve ment, but the contract should stipulate how the the CMP. The amount that goes to the CA may fund should cover a minimum of two years parties coordinate on fundraising. increase after the initial development and stabili- of operations). Thereafter, it could be split zation period, which normally requires significant between the partner and the PA authority Recommendations for specific CMP models capital and varies depending on the PA. The CMP for conservation management of other PAs contract will stipulate in the event of a surplus, (see Appendix H ). Bilateral: The CA will generally pay public the percentage that goes to the CA to create a c. Which party is responsible for tax obligations staff salaries and the partner commits to paying net benefit for the entire PA estate. Some general and insurance. In a bilateral CMP, each party certain operational costs. It is important to indi- recommendations follow. is generally responsible for their own tax and cate how much the partner is responsible for per insurance costs. In an integrated and dele- annum and what happens if they do not succeed a. Revenue (which should be clearly defined in gated CMP, the SPV covers these costs. in raising the funds. In most cases, if funding is the definitions section of the contract and d. Audit procedures and any financial reporting not raised, the governance body should be noti- generally includes PA entry fees, tourism obligations. Financial reports are generally fied, and annual budgets adjusted. However, if concession fees, and other user fees) will be provided to the SPV board in the case of an this happens in subsequent years and there is no collected at PA level and sent to the CA HQ integrated or delegated CMP and to the PMC likely prospect for funding, the CA may consider in a bilateral CMP or retained at PA level in an in the case of bilateral CMP every six months canceling the CMP contract. integrated and delegated CMP. at a minimum in addition to the annual audit. b. If revenue is retained at PA level the following e. A 10-year management budget should be Integrated / Delegated: Costs are covered needs to clearly outlined: included in the appendix of the CMP contract by the SPV. Within the SPV, the partner in most • How revenue is collected and managed. (see Appendix J). cases commits to raising a certain amount of • What percentage, if any, goes to the CA HQ. money for operations and developing revenue In the Democratic Republic of Congo, for models. As with bilateral agreements, it is example, the CMP contract stipulates that important to indicate how much the partner is an annual payment “fixed by mutual agree- committing to raise and/or generate through ment” is made to ICCN (Brugière 2020). enterprise development and what happens if they • Other revenue allocation obligations (for do not succeed in raising/generating the funds. In example, if there is a formal community some cases, the public partner pays for salaries of revenue share program, such as in Rwanda seconded staff, which can be used for leverage in where 10 percent of all park revenue goes to raising funds, as donors like to see a government communities). contribution and view this as a strong sign of • How revenue is spent at PA level. This is commitment. normally guided by an annual budget that is approved by the board, which includes PA Revenue retention management and clearly defined commu- nity programs. Retaining revenue at the PA level is import- • If there is a surplus after management and ant for ensuring capital is reinvested in the other approved budget costs are covered, PA, incentivizing performance, and attracting how “profit” is allocated. A percentage investors. Revenue retention at the PA level may should go into a reserve fund that will include a percentage that goes to the CA. Most be used for future management costs in CAs support non-functional PAs with revenue the event of a crisis, such as COVID-19 or 187 13. Management Responsibilities Table P.2 ↗ Contents Elements of Management in CMP Contract Table P.2 includes management elements that should be specified in the CMP contract. The con- tract needs to be very clear in terms of who has Management ultimate responsibility for each aspect. Elements Examples PA Authority Who has overall authority for the PA on a daily basis? With all models, management should be guided by a GMP, which is ideally developed by Who does the PA manager report to? both partners. When the GMP already exists, it When is consultation with the Board required? ↗ Section 1 should be reviewed by both partners and when Human Resources Who pays, hires and fires general staff? needed updated as part of the CMP. If a GMP (normally covering 10 years) does not exist and it How and when are policies integrated in the case of an SPV? will take a while for development and adoption, a Operations Who is responsible and accountable for operations, such as ecological monitoring, five-year management plan and budget should be park planning, tourism development and community engagement jointly developed and followed. Source: Baghai et al. 2018b. Recommendations for specific CMP models • How often the PMC meet. Integrated / Delegated: ↗ Section 2 Bilateral: As opposed to the integrated / • Key decisions made by the PMC, the PA • The partner appoints the CEO and ideally, the delegated CMP, in a bilateral CMP, there are two manager, and the TA. If joint decisions are PA manager should be second in command, independent entities working side by side in the made, the process must be clearly outlined. assuming adequate capacity. This will enable PA. It is essential that roles and responsibilities • When the annual work plan / budget is the transfer of knowledge to the CA long- are clear, as well as who makes key decisions. developed and shared with the PMC. term. If the existing PA manager does not • The PA manager continues to oversee man- have capacity for this post, the CA should find agement of the PA, working closely with the One of the challenges with a bilateral CMP is a replacement who is vetted by the private technical advisor (TA) appointed by the private the retention of qualified PA public staff. Funding partner. partner. by the private partner might be used to train staff • Law enforcement staff (see Section 15). ↗ Section 3 • A PMC is created to coordinate and oversee PA and then the CA transfers these qualified and • The CEO will make all other management management, which includes at a minimum newly trained staff to another PA. Staff change- appointments in delegated CMPs. the PA manager and the TA, and other key over in the CA will delay progress and is problem- • In an integrated CMP, management positions, staff. atic for continuity. While a partner does not want such as HR, community engagement, finance • The PMC jointly develops an annual work plan to limit growth of key CA staff, it is reasonable and operations, and tourism management and budget (which is ideally nested under a for the private partner to request senior staff should be split between the private partner five-year work plan and budget and a GMP) that retention of qualified individuals for three years. and the CA, depending on capacity. goes to the governance entity for approval. The alternative is that the CA consults with the • A PMC may be created, composed of the top ↗ Appendices • The following should be included in the CMP partner if senior staff are to be transferred. This three staff, to coordinate management and agreement: however does not legally enable the partner to day-to-day operations. • Roles and responsibility of the PA manager. stop a staff transfer. • The CEO is responsible for the development • Roles and responsibility of the TA. of an annual work plan and budget, (which is • Composition of the PMC. ideally nested under a five-year work plan and • erms of Reference for the PMC. budget, and a GMP), which goes to the SPV 188 Appendices Collaborative Management Partnership Toolkit board for approval. The CEO may develop 14. Non-Management Responsibilities Recommendations for specific CMP models the annual work plan with the PMC and other relevant staff. In addition to outlining management roles and Bilateral: The CA shall: • The SPV will develop SOPs, policies, and responsibilities (see Section 13), other obligations • Provide the partner with office space at no cost operational procedures. To the extent possi- should be specified, some examples below. at the park office and / or at the PA authority ble, these should mirror the policies of the CA HQ. to ensure consistency and ease in the case of Both parties shall: • Grant full and free unfettered access to the transfer back to the PA authority (see CMP Best • Share information promptly and openly. partner to the PA. Practice Appendix F ). • Ensure staff of each respective organization • The following must be included in the CMP understand the nature of this agreement. 15. Law Enforcement agreement: • Ensure lessons learned are shared with the • Roles and responsibility of senior staff. public partner for cross-site learning within the Given the legal aspects around law enforce- • Composition of the PMC. agency. ment such as the right to arrest poachers, for • Terms of reference for the PMC. • Operate in good faith. example, this section outlines who has the • How often the PMC meets. responsibility for law enforcement within the • Deadlines for annual budgets and reports. The CA shall: PA, who bears the liability, and any procedures. • Help the partner as needed with immigration Law enforcement and security is a function of All staff report to the SPV; therefore, the roles documents for staff as needed. the state, and this is a dynamic that must be and responsibility section of an integrated / dele- • Support the partner in securing any kinds of proactively respected within any CMP arrange- gated CMP contract outline the roles of key staff, required approvals from the government, ment. The very nature of a CMP is the allocation such as the CEO of the SPV. which may relate to the CMP and the partner’s of certain responsibilities and rights to a partner. ability to fulfill its obligations under the CMP. However, law enforcement undertaken by the The senior management of the integrated • Support any restocking of wildlife, including private partner without the requisite legal autho- Gonarezhou Conservation Trust (see Appendix D, facilitating the required permits. rization can pose serious liability for the private Figure D.3) consists of three key staff: trust direc- • Where feasible provide tax exemption on partner. The government needs to consider tor, area manager, and finance and administration procurement and grant funding, as well as the most suitable mechanism for ensuring law manager. incentives for investors in the project, such as enforcement is effectively implemented in a tourism investors. CMP while respecting the legal framework of the country and preventing liability risks. In Salonga National Park in the Democratic The Partner shall: Republic of Congo, a CMP between WWF and • Provide technical expertise to the PA authority Recommendations for specific CMP models ICCN, the CMP contract specifies the distribution network on PA planning, management, and of the six heads of department between the two operations; tourism development, etc. Bilateral: In most bilateral CMPs, the CA contin- partners (three for each partner) (Brugière 2020). • Maintain operations in full compliance with the ues to maintain full responsibility and liability for laws of the country. law enforcement. The partner may support this, • Build capacity of the CA staff in ecological but the PA manager or law enforcement officer, if monitoring, PA planning, etc. this exists, has the primary responsibility. Integrated / Delegated: While the SPV employs all staff, in most cases, the CA appoints the law enforcement lead and/or the CA seconds law enforcement staff to the SPV. Likewise, the law 189 enforcement staff will continue to be employed ↗ Contents by the CA and formally seconded to the SPV; giving them the ability to retain the required rights of a public servant, but requiring them to be part of the unified SPV and in some cases report to the private partner in the form of the CEO. In some cases, the CA may choose to allo- cate full responsibility and oversight to the private partner because of the situation in the field. ↗ Section 1 16. Community Relations The engagement of stakeholder communities is vital to the success of a CMP. The CMP contract should outline who is responsible for community relations, depending on the capacity of each party. If the private partner in a bilateral CMP is responsible for engaging with the community and overseeing community development, there ↗ Section 2 must be a clear coordinating mechanism with the CA so that communities draw the direct linkage between community benefits to the PA. A repre- sentative of stakeholder communities should be considered for representation on the governance structure or advisory board, and they can help determine how community engagement and communication is undertaken. Compliance with social safeguards should also be referenced in this ↗ Section 3 section. 17. Park Fees In some countries, the CA sets the PA entrance fees, while in other countries, such as Ethiopia, the national government sets the PA entrance fees. PAs in East and Southern Africa in par- ↗ Appendices ticular generate the majority of their revenue from entrance fees; therefore, setting appro- priate entrance fees that reflect the product is critical to attracting visitors and supporting PA management. 190 Appendices Collaborative Management Partnership Toolkit Recommendations for specific CMP models Table P.3 Kenya Park Fees74 Bilateral: The CA sets the entry fees. However, the partner should support and advise the CA Citizens Residents Non-Residents on determining the appropriate park fees and submitting the request with justifications and Adult Child/ Adult Child/ Adult Adult comparisons from other PAs. Fees for a particular (Kenyan Student (Kenyan Student (US $) (US $) PA should take into consideration other park fees Shilling) (Kenyan Shilling) (Kenyan in the country. Shilling) Shilling) Premium Parks 860 215 1,030 515 60 35 Kenya’s parks are grouped in different categories Ambroseli / Nakuru to reflect the product and experience, and price. Wilderness Parks (A) 515 215 1,030 515 52 45 Any changes to entrance fees in one park should Tsavo East and Tsavo West be consistent with the national structure, to the Wilderness Parks (B) extent feasible (see Table P.3). Meru / Kora 300 215 1,030 515 52 35 Aberdare 300 215 1,030 515 52 26 Mt. Kenya – Kihari gate 300 215 1,030 515 43 26 Integrated / Delegated: If the CA is able to set Urban Safari the entrance fee rates, this right will be granted Nairobi 430 215 1,030 515 43 22 to the SPV. Similar to bilateral CMPs, the rates should be reflective of the product and experi- Sanctuaries ence, and consistent with the national PA system Nairobi Orphanage / Kisumu 215 125 300 170 22 13 where feasible. While the SPV board may approve Impala / Nairobi Safari Walk the recommended entrance fee rate, in most Mountain Climbing cases the CA will need to take responsibility to Mt. Kenya (Day Trip) 430 215 775 515 52 26 gazette the rates, which should be stipulated in Mt. Kenya (3 Day Package) 1,290 645 2,325 1,545 156 78 the contract. Mt. Kenya (4 Day Package) 1,720 860 3,100 2,060 208 104 Mt. Kenya (5 Day Package) 2,150 1,075 3,875 2,575 260 130 Mt. Kenya (6 Day Package) 2,580 1,290 4,650 3,090 312 156 Scenic/Special Interest (A) Hells Gate / Elgon / Ol- Donyo Sabuk 300 215 600 300 26 17 Mt. Longonot Scenic/Special Interest (B) All Other Parks 300 125 600 255 22 13 Marine Parks Kisite Mpunguti 215 125 300 170 17 13 Malindi / Watamu / 130 125 300 170 17 13 Mombasa / Kiunga 74 For information on Kenya’s parks and rates, visit www.kws.go.ke 191 18. Assets • Any retained assets previously owned by the concessions should also be guided by the GMP ↗ Contents public partner that are disposed of during the and zonation plan. This section outlines who owns any assets that term shall be disposed of with consent of the are acquired during the CMP. public partner and in line with relevant regula- Recommendations for specific CMP models tions in force for the disposal of state-owned Recommendations for specific CMP models assets; all proceeds shall be reinvested in the Bilateral: The public partner holds the existing SPV. concession contracts and will maintain these Bilateral: Assets acquired by the partner with • In the event that the agreement is terminated relationships. They will also hold future tourism funding raised by the partner for the CMP, may as a result of a material breach by the private contracts. Tourism development, if structured be donated to the CA and used by the partner partner then all assets acquired by the SPV properly, can generate revenue for the PA. ↗ Section 1 (agreed in a donation agreement) or used by the during the completed term will vest with Tourism development and management exper- partner for the duration of the CMP and donated the public partner. In the inverse, all assets tise is a unique skill set that that partner can at the end of the CMP to the CA. acquired by the SPV during the completed term bring. They can help develop a tourism plan and will vest with the private partner and the public a tendering process, help the public partner vet Integrated / Delegated: Assets acquired using partner will commit to facilitating their removal suitable operators, and support the development funds generated through the CMP will be owned from the target PA. of contracts that generate revenue for the PA. by the SPV and in most cases retained at park level once the CMP is complete. The following is 19. Liability and Indemnity Integrated / Delegated: Existing contracts are recommended (WBG 2020b): held by the public partner. The public partner shall ↗ Section 2 • At the commencement of the term the public Recommendations for specific CMP models consult with the partner prior to any amendment partner will provide the private partner with and the partner shall have the right to review any an inventory of all operating assets allocated Bilateral: Each party bears the responsibility for amendments and contracts. to the target PA and the CA will select those it liability and indemnify the other. wishes to retain. Retained assets will be trans- Future concessions: ferred to the SPV and assets not retained will Integrated / Delegated: Each party bears the • The SPV shall have the right, in close consulta- be redeployed elsewhere by the public partner. responsibility for liability and indemnifies the tion with the public partner, to grant conces- • Disposal of any assets belonging to the CA other, and in addition, both parties indemnify the sions in the PA. This must be done in compli- during the CMP must be approved by the CA SPV. ance with a tourism and business plan that has ↗ Section 3 and if sold, the allocation of proceeds should been approved by the SPV and the GMP, and in be agreed prior to the sale, with funds going, in close coordination with the public partner. most cases, to either the SPV or the CA. 20. Existing Commercial Relationships • The public partner shall agree that once the • All retained assets and any new assets and New Concessions / Enterprise CMP contract expires, they will honor the acquired by the SPV shall become the respon- Development concession agreements and renew them, if sibility of the SPV in terms of deployment and performance has been favorable, as per the maintenance during the term. This section of the contract will outline how concession agreement. • At the end of the term all operating assets the parties engage with existing tourism and ↗ Appendices will revert to the public partner at no charge other commercial partners, and how future The SPV shall have the rights to ecosystem (unless instructed otherwise through a donor concessions are granted. Any future tourism services, including but not limited to carbon agreement, which may be the case for special concessions should be guided by a tourism plan rights, water rights, non-timber forest rights, and assets acquired by the partner through donor that includes zonation and identification of suit- biodiversity offset rights, and shall have the right funding). able tourism facilities and a business plan that is to develop commercial opportunities around nested under the GMP. Other non-tourism related these natural assets. 192 Appendices Collaborative Management Partnership Toolkit 21. Audit and Evaluation 22. Conflict Resolution Recommendations for specific CMP models Clear timelines, responsibilities, and processes In the event of a conflict, the CA and the Bilateral: All data should be owned by and for reporting are outlined for M&E and auditing. partner should use all efforts to settle the dispute stored with the CA. The partner should have full The management team generally does M&E and amicably through negotiations. A timeframe access to the data and any publication of the data an external expert agreed by both parties should should be established, such as 60 days, for said should be guided by communication guidelines complete the audit. negotiation, and if unsuccessful, it will trigger (see Section 25). the next phase of the conflict resolution process. M&E should be done on an annual basis by the If the conflict is at PA level, they should try to Integrated / Delegated: All data should be CMP management team on the performance of resolve it at park level. If unsuccessful after a owned by and stored with the SPV. the CMP on conservation, social, and ecological certain period clearly defined in the contract (30 targets; and on compliance with the obligations of days), the conflict should be brought to the PMC 25. Communication the contract. There are a suite of M&E tools, such or the SPV board. as the Management Effectiveness Tracking Tool This section outlines the rights of both part- and the Integrated Management Effectiveness If the conflict cannot be resolved through ners to communicate the work of the CMP and Tool, which can be used by the management negotiations, the parties should undertake arbi- their role within it. Communications should team to track progress. Reports are provided rou- tration. The parties should agree to an arbitrator acknowledge that the public partner is the over- tinely to the board, in the case of integrated and and the outcome shall be binding. arching custodian of the target PA and working in delegated CMPs, and the committee, in the case partnership with the private partner. of bilateral CMP. The termination of a CMP agreement should be considered a last resort. This will require the This section will also outline policies around • At a minimum, every three years, an external closeout of the partnership, guided by the con- external communication, such as: auditor should review the CMP. The auditor tract, and the PA authority would need to decide • Use of logos in the PA and in materials. In prin- should be an internationally recognized PA if they will resume direct management or try to ciple both logos should be included, as well as management expert and jointly selected attract another partner. a partnership logo if created. and agreed upon by the partners. In the CMP • Recognition of both parties in materials. contract, both parties should agree to the 23. Performance Review • Approval of any communications prior to publi- outcome of the audit. The audit should assess cation (guidelines should be developed so that and appraise the implementation and com- On an annual basis, the SPV and/or the PMC unnecessary approvals are not required). pliance by each partner of their respective will review performance, budgets, and delivera- • Recognition of the parties in scientific obligations contained in the CMP contract, bles. This will take into consideration the M&E as publications. and evaluate the general performance and well as any audits. • Allowing the partner to display their logo in achievement of the CMP’s intended goals and appropriate locations and in compliance with objectives. The auditor should make specific 24. Data Ownership the PA branding guidelines. recommendations for areas of improvement. • The M&E or the audit process may determine This section outlines who owns data that is A communication plan will be developed by that targets are not being met or either party is collected during the CMP, such as ecological data, both parties to guide communication. not fulfilling their obligations. In this case, the i.e., wildlife numbers, ecological threats, and land contact should refer to the dispute mechanism use change data. (see Section 25). 193 26. Environmental and Social Standards • Promote the use of local supply chains wher- • Amendments. Amendments should be only ↗ Contents ever possible across its procurement needs. allowed with the written approval of both The CMP agreement should clearly outline • Promote gender diversity across its employ- parties. how the CMP will meet international ESS (see ment and contractor base and including within • Entirety of Agreement. This CMP agreement Chapter 6). In addition, the obligation of the its main board of directors. shall replace any and all prior agreements. partners to use their best possible endeavors to • Promote the engagement of youth wherever For example, a CA and a partner may have honor environmental covenants in the execution possible within its operational base. been operating under an MOU, the CMP of its operations within the CMP. These covenants • Develop and enforce compliance with a com- contract shall make that null and void. should be incorporated into the contract. Some prehensive set of health and safety protocols • Governing Law. The CMP agreement shall examples are listed below and will depend on the across its operational base. be governed by the law of the country ↗ Section 1 context. • Promote best-in-class worker welfare stan- where the PA is located. dards across its employee and sub-contractor • Partner NGOs. This section should stipulate Sample environmental covenants, to: base. how decisions are made regarding the role • Comply with international environmental safe- of other NGOs and partners in the PA; i.e., guards and standards. 27. Termination who decides and how activities are coordi- • Promote the use of sustainable energy and nated. In general, with delegated and inte- energy efficiency technologies across its oper- A CMP contract may be terminated, prior to grated management CMPs the CEO of the ational base. the expiration of the contract, by: SPV makes this decision. In bilateral CMPs, • Promote sustainable water use and related • Agreement in writing by both parties. the PA manager will make this decision in ↗ Section 2 technologies across its operational base. • Material breach by the partner, in which case consultation with the PMC; however, the • Promote the use of reduce, reuse, and recycle assets would go to the CA. CMP may stipulate that the partner will have practices across its operational base. • Material breach by the CA, in which case assets approval of any NGO whose expertise is • Promote the use of sustainable waste man- would go to the partner. similar to that of the partner. agement technologies and practices across its • If either party is unable to fulfill their obli- operational base. gations (linked to the annual review as per • Limit visual, light, and noise pollution across its Section 23), such as raising adequate funding. infrastructural design and operational base. • Limit the use of chemicals and pesticides ↗ Section 3 28. Other Sections to Include in a CMP across its operational base. Contract • Not interfere with any natural watercourses or natural vegetation within the target PA without • Force Majeure the approval of the PA authority. • Assignment to Other Parties. The assign- • Develop and enforce compliance with an envi- ment of a CMP agreement must be with the ronmentally driven code of conduct applicable express written permission of the CA. to all operations within the target PA. • Notices. How (mail, email, fax) and to whom communication should be directed for each ↗ Appendices Sample social covenants party. • Comply with international environmental safe- • Non-representation. The agreement should guards and standards. reflect that the parties are in a partnership, • Promote local employment (including local however, they do not have the right to rep- contractors) wherever possible within the SPV resent the other party. and its operations. 194 Appendices Collaborative Management Partnership Toolkit References African Commission on Human and Peoples' Baghai, M., Lindsey, P., Everatt, K., and A. COMIFAC (Commission des Forêts d’Afrique Rights. 1981. African Charter on Human and Madope. 2018b. “Regional Best Practices, Current Centrale). 22 Juillet 2019. “Guide sous-régional Peoples' Rights, Banjul, The Gambia: https:// Models in Mozambique and a Framework for de bonnes pratiques pour la gestion durable www.achpr.org/legalinstruments/detail?id=49. Enhancing Partnerships to Protect Biodiversity des aires protégées en mode partenariat pub- African Parks. 2021. Akagera National Park Assets and Promote Development. Supporting lic-privé (PPP) en Afrique Centrale.” https:// 2010-2020 data. Obtained from African Parks, the Policy Environment for Economic static.wixstatic.com/ugd/22a750_d2f6ca6944e- South Africa. Development (SPEED+).” BioFund and USAID. 0475993022cb16256633c.pdf African Parks. 2021. Liuwa Plains National Park Baghai, M., Agnangoye, J.P., and B. Conservation Capital. 2018. Conservation Data. Obtained from African Parks, South Africa. Pongui. 2021. “Assessment of Protected Area Area Business Plan Planning Framework and African Parks. 2021. Majete Wildlife Reserve Management Partnerships in Central Africa. Draft Methodology. London, UK. Data. Obtained from African Parks, South Africa. Preliminary Find and Recommendations.” U.S. Conservation Capital. 2017. Protected African Parks. n.d. The African Parks Model. Forest Service International Programs and USAID. Area Public Private Partnership Principles and PowerPoint presentation to the Global Wildlife Business and Biodiversity Offset Programme. Description. London, UK. Program, Washington, DC. 2009. “Biodiversity Offset Design Handbook” Conservation Capital. 2016. Concession guide- Alexandra, J., Bonacci, M. and C. Riddington. Forest Trends, Conservation International and lines for nature based tourism. London, UK. 2007. “Public-Private Partnerships for Wildlife Conservation Society: https://www. Conservation International and the Global Reforestation – Potential Frameworks for forest-trends.org/wp-content/uploads/imported/ Environment Facility. 2017. Environmental and Investment.” Rural Industries Research and biodiversity-offset-design-handbook-pdf.pdf. Social Management Framework (ESMF). Version 6. Development Corporation. Kingston, Australia: Borrini-Feyerabend, G., Dudley, N., Jaeger, T., Washington, DC: https://www.conservation.org/ RIRDC. B. Lassen, N. Pathak Broome, A. Phillips, and T. docs/default-source/gef-documents/ci-gef-en- Amboseli Ecosystem Trust. 2020. Amboseli Sandwith. 2013. Governance of Protected Areas: vironmental-and-social-management-frame- Ecosystem Management Plan. Loitokitok, Kenya: From understanding to action. Best Practice work-(esmf)-version-06 https://www.amboseliecosystem.org/wp-con- Protected Area Guidelines Series No. 20, Gland, Convention on Biological Diversity. 2010. tent/uploads/2020/12/AE-Management-plan-1. Switzerland: IUCN. xvi + 124 pages. Decision Adopted by the Conference of the pdf. Bosch, D. n.d. Land conflict management in Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity Baghai, M. 2016. “Of Parks and Partnerships: A South Africa: lessons learned from a land rights at its Tenth Meeting. Nagoya Japan: https://www. Review of Collaborative Approaches to Improving approach. Food and Agriculture Organization. cbd.int/doc/decisions/cop-10/cop-10-dec-31-en. Management of Africa’s State Protected Areas.” http://www.fao.org/3/j0415t/j0415t0a.htm. pdf University of Oxford. Brugière, D. 2020. “Public-Private Partnership Crawhall, N. 2011. Africa and the UN Baghai, M., Miller, J., Blanken, L., Dublin, H., for Protected Areas: Current Situation and Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. Fitzgerald, K., Gandiwa, P., Laurenson, K., Milanzi, Prospects in French-speaking Africa.” Papaco, 31 The International Journal of Human Rights. J., Nelson, M., and P. Lindsey. 2018. “Models pages. 15(1):11-36: 10.1080/13642987.2011.529687: https:// for the Collaborative Management of Africa's Collins, Steve. March 2021. The African www.researchgate.net/publication/241713893_ Protected Areas.” Biological Conservation. 218, Safari Foundation. Electronic and telephonic Africa_and_the_UN_Declaration_on_the_Rights_ 73-82. communications. of_Indigenous_Peoples. 195 Deutz, A., Heal, G. M., Niu, R., Swanson, E., Fitzgerald, K. 2010. Land Tenure, Reform and IUCN. 2013. The IUCN Project Grievance ↗ Contents Townshend, T., Zhu, L., Delmar, A., Meghji, A., Conservation Tools in South Africa and Their Mechanism. Gland, Switzerland: https://www. Sethi, S. A., and J. Tobin-de la Puente. 2020. Potential Application in East Africa. African iucn.org/sites/dev/files/content/documents/ “Financing Nature: Closing the Global Biodiversity Wildlife Foundation, Nairobi, Kenya: https://abcg. iucn_project_complaints_management_system_ Financing Gap.” The Paulson Institute, The Nature org/files/documents/AWF%20SA%20Land%20 december_2013.pdf. Conservancy, and the Cornell Atkinson Center for Tenure%20Reform%20and%20Conservation%20 IUCN Eastern and Southern Africa Regional Sustainability. 32 pages. Options%20KHF.pdf. Office (ESARO). 2020a. Closing the gap: The Dinerstein, E., Vynne, C., Sala, E., Joshi, A.R., Florizone, Richard, and Laurence Carter. April financing and resourcing of protected and Fernando, S., Lovejoy, T.E., Mayorga, J., Olson, D., 2013. “A Winning Framework for Public-Private conserved areas in Eastern and Southern Africa. Asner, G.P., Baillie, J.E.M, Burgess, N.D., Burkart, Partnerships: Lessons from 60-Plus IFC Projects” Nairobi, Kenya: IUCN ESARO; (Biodiversity and ↗ Section 1 K., Noss, R.F., Zhang, Y.P., Baccini, A., Birch, T. SmartLessons. International Finance Corporation: Protected Area Management Programme). Hahn, N., Joppa, N and Wikramanayake, E. 2019. Washington, DC. BIOPAMA: https://portals.iucn.org/library/ A Global Deal for Nature: Guiding principles, mile- Gardner, C.J., Nicoll, M.E., Birkinshaw, C., node/49045. stones and targets. Science Advances. Vol. 5, No. Harris, A., Lewis, R.E., Rakotomalala, D., Anitry, IUCN ESARO. 2020b. The State of Protected 4, eaaw2869, DOI: 10.1126/sciadv.aaw2869. N. and L. Ratsifandrihamanana. 2018. “The Rapid and Conserved Areas in Eastern and Southern Dovers, S., Feary, S., Martin, A., McMillan, L., Expansion of Madagascar's Protected Area Africa. State of Protected and Conserved Areas Morgan, D. and Tollefson, M. 2015. “Engagement System.” Biological Conservation; 220: 29-36. Report Series No. 1. Nairobi, Kenya: https:// and Participation in Protected Area Management: Government of Mozambique. Nature Based portals.iucn.org/library/node/49133. Who, Why, How and When?” in G.L. Worboys, Tourism International Conference. 2018. Nature IUCN ESARO. 2017. State of Protected Area ↗ Section 2 M, Lockwood, A. Kothari, S. Feary and I. Based Tourism - Mozambique conservation areas. Report East Africa. Nairobi, Kenya: https://portals. Pulsford (eds) Protected Area Governance and Grossman, D. and Holden, P. n.d. Contract iucn.org/library/node/49133. Management. Canberra. ANU Press: 413-440. Parks in South Africa. https://conservation-de- Jonas, H., Makagon, J., and D. Roe. 2016. Dudley, N. (Editor). 2008. Guidelines velopment.net/Projekte/Nachhaltigkeit/CD1/ Conservation standards: from rights to respon- for Applying Protected Area Management Suedafrika/Literatur/PDF/Grossmann.pdf. sibilities. IIED Discussion Paper. IIED, London: Categories. Gland, Switzerland: IUCN. x + 86pp. International Finance Corporation (IFC). http://pubs.iied.org/14666IIED. WITH Stolton, S., P. Shadie and N. Dudley IFC Performance Standards on Environmental Lange, G.M., Wodon, Q., and Carey, K., (2013). IUCN WCPA Best Practice Guidance on and Social Sustainability. Effective 1 Eds. 2018. The Changing Wealth of Nations Recognising Protected Areas and Assigning January 2012. https://www.ifc.org/wps/ 2018: Building a sustainable Future. The World ↗ Section 3 Management Categories and Governance Types, wcm/connect/c02c2e86-e6cd-4b55-95a2- Bank, Washington, DC: https://www.world- Best Practice Protected Area Guidelines Series b3395d204279/IFC_Performance_Standards. bank.org/en/news/infographic/2018/01/30/ No. 21, Gland, Switzerland: IUCN. 143 pages. pdf?MOD=AJPERES&CVID=kTjHBzk. the-changing-wealth-of-nations. European Parliament. 2020. European IPBES. 2019. Global assessment report on Lindsey, P., Miller, J., Petracca, L., Coad, L., Parliament resolution of 15 January 2020 on biodiversity and ecosystem services of the Dickman, A., Fitzgerald, K., Flyman, M., Funston, human rights and democracy in the world and Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform P., Henschel, P., Kasiki, S., Knights, K., Loveridge, the European Union’s policy on the matter – on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services. E. A., Macdonald, D., Mandisodza-Chikerema, R., annual report 2018. Strasbourg, France: https:// S. Brondizio, J. Settele, S. Díaz, and H. T. Ngo Nazerali, S., Plumptre, A., Stevens, R., VanZyl, ↗ Appendices www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/ (editors). IPBES secretariat, Bonn, Germany. 1,148 H., and L. Hunter. 6 November 2018. “More Than TA-9-2020-0007_EN.html pages. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3831673. $1 Billion Needed Annually to Secure Africa's Fedreheim, E.G. 2017. “Co-management IUCN. 2016. Environmental and Social Protected Areas with Lions.” PNAS 115 (45) of Protected Areas to Alleviate Conservation Management System Manual Version 2.0 –May E10788-E10796. Conflicts: Experiences in Norway.” International 2016. Gland, Switzerland: https://www.iucn.org/ Lindsey, P., Allan, J., Brehony, P., Dickman, A., Journal of the Commons. Vol. 11, no 2: 754–773. sites/dev/files/iucn_esms_manual.pdf. Robson, A., Begg, C., Bhammar, H., Blanken, L., 196 Appendices Collaborative Management Partnership Toolkit Breuer, T., Fitzgerald, K., Flyman, M., Gandiwa, Ankeniheny- Zahamena Corridor in Madagascar, nature-based tourism in Africa’s state protected P., Giva, N., Kaelo, D., Nampindo, S., Nyambe, Human Dimensions of Wildlife, 16:4, 244-258: areas. Nairobi, Kenya. N., Steiner, K., Parker, A., Roe, D., Thomson, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10871209.2011.585509. Spenceley, A., Snyman, S. and P.F.J. Eagles. P., Trimble, M., Caron, A., and P. Tyrrell. July 29, Razafison, R. and M. Vyawahare. 2020. 2017. “Guidelines for Tourism Partnerships and 2020. “Conserving Africa’s Wildlife and Wildlands “Madagascar Minister Calls Protected Concessions for Protected Areas: Generating Through the COVID-19 Crisis and Beyond.” Nature Areas a ‘Failure,’ Seeks People-Centric Sustainable Revenues for Conservation and Ecology & Evolution: 1300-1310. Approach.”Mongabay. https://news.mongabay. Development.” Convention on Biological Diversity Lindsey, P., Baghai, M., Bigurube, G., Cunliffe, com/2020/08/madagascar-minister-calls-pro- (CBD) - Secretariat, IUCN World Commission on S., Dickman, A., Fitzgerald, K., Flyman, M., tected-areas-a-failure-seeks-people-centric-ap- Protected Areas (WCPA), Tourism and Protected Gandiwa, P., Kumchedwa, B., Madope, Al, Morjan, proach/. Areas Specialist Group (TAPAS Group). M., Parker, A., Steiner, K., Tumenta, P., Uiseb, K., Robson, A., Trimble, M., Bauer, D., Loveridge Spenceley, A., Nevill, H., Coelho, CF., and and A. Robson. 2021. “Attracting Investment for A., Thomson P., Western G. and P. Lindsey. 2021. M. Souto. 2016. “An Introduction to Tourism Africa’s Protected Areas by Creating Enabling Over 80% of Africa's savannah conservation land Concessioning: 14 Characteristics of Successful Environments for Collaborative Management is failing or deteriorating, in preparation. Programs.” The World Bank. Washington, DC: Partnerships.” Biological Conservation. Volume Roxburgh, T., Ellis, K., Johnson, J.A., Baldos, 10.13140/RG.2.1.1916.3764. 255. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2021.108979. U.L., Hertel, T., Nootenboom, C., and S. Polasky. Stolton, S. and N. Dudley. 2019. The New Lion Manolache, S., Nita, A., Ciocanea, D., Popescu, 2020. Global Futures: Assessing the global Economy. Unlocking the value of lions and their V., and L. Rozylowicz. 2018. “Power, Influence and economic impacts of environmental change to landscapes, Equilibrium Research, Bristol, UK. Structure in Natura 2000 Governance Networks. support policy-making. Summary report, January Symes, W. S., Rao, M., Mascia, M.B. and R.L. A Comparative Analysis of Two Protected Areas in 2020. https://www.wwf.org.uk/globalfutures. Carrasco. 2015. “Why do we Lose Protected Romania.” Journal of Environmental Management Rwanda Development Board. July 2018. Call Areas? Factors Influencing Protected Area 212 (April): 54–64: https://doi.org/10.1016/j. for a concept proposal and expression of interest Downgrading, Downsizing and Degazettement jenvman.2018.01.076. for the management and financing of Nyungwe (PADDD) in the Tropics and Sub-tropics.” Global MacKinnon, K., Sobrevila, C., and V. Hickey. National Park. RDB. Kigali, Rwanda. Change Biology. DOI:10.1111/gcb.13089. 2008. Biodiversity, Climate Change and Sanderson, E., Walston, J., and J. Robinson. Tuxill, J., Mitchell, N., and J. Brown. 2004. Adaptation Nature-Based Solutions from From Bottleneck to Breakthrough: Urbanization “Conservation and Collaboration: Lessons the World Bank Portfolio. The World Bank, and the Future of Biodiversity Conservation. 2018. Learned from National Park Service Partnerships Washington, DC. NIH. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29867252/ in the Western U.S.” Conservation and Namaga, S.A., Tadele, H., Tessema. M. and Z. Saporiti, N. 2006. “Managing National Parks: Stewardship Publication No. 6. Woodstock, Tefera. 2020. “Underfunding, the Challenge of How Public-Private Partnerships Can Aid Vermont: Conservation Study Institute. Federally Managed Protected Areas of Ethiopia.” Conservation.” Public Policy for the Private Sector, The Giants Club and the Government of Advances in Environmental Studies. 4(2): 307-317. June 2006. Washington, DC: IFC: https://open- Uganda. Uganda Conservation & Tourism Vol knowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/11185. Investment Forum. October 2017. Investment Public-Private Partnership Legal Resource Snyman, S., Sumba, D., Vorhies, F., Gitari, E., Framework Opportunities. Kampala, Uganda. Center. 2020. “Government Objectives: Benefits Enders, C., Ahenkan, A., Pambo, A.F.K., and N. UN 2007. United Nations Declaration on the and Risks of PPPs.” World Bank Group. https:// Bengone. 2021. State of the Wildlife Economy in Right of Indigenous Peoples. Resolution adopted ppp.worldbank.org/public-private-partnership/ Africa. African Leadership University, School of by the General Assembly on 13 September overview/ppp-objectives. Wildlife Conservation, Kigali, Rwanda. 2007: https://www.un.org/development/desa/ Rajaspera, B. Raik D.B. and H. Space for Giants, UN Environment Program indigenouspeoples/wp-content/uploads/ Ravololonanahary. 2011. Developing a and Conservation Capital. 2019. Building a sites/19/2018/11/UNDRIP_E_web.pdf. Resilient Co-Management Arrangement for wildlife economy: Working Paper 1: Developing Van Zyl, H. October 2011. “Business Plan and Protected Areas: Field Experience From the Sustainable Financing Strategy for the Dorob 197 National Park, Namibia.” Independent Economic Switzerland: http://www3.weforum.org/docs/ World Bank Group. 2017. Public-Private ↗ Contents Researchers, prepared for NACOMA/MET: https:// WEF_Global_Risk_Report_2020.pdf. Partnerships Reference Guide, Version 3. www.researchgate.net/publication/270899646. World Bank. 2021. Banking on Protected Areas: Washington, DC: World Bank Group. Van Zyl, H. 2015. The Economic Value Promoting Sustainable Protected Area Tourism to World Bank Group. 2016. World Bank and Potential of Protected Areas in Ethiopia. Benefit Local Economies. Washington, DC: World Environmental and Social Framework. Prepared for The Sustainable Development of Bank: https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/ Washington, DC: https://pubdocs.worldbank. the Protected Areas System of Ethiopia (SDPASE) handle/10986/35737 org/en/837721522762050108/Environmental-and- project and the Ethiopian Wildlife Conservation World Bank Group. 2021. Private Participation Social-Framework.pdf. Authority (EWCA). www.independentecon.co.za. in Infrastructure (PPI) 2020 Annual Report. World Bank Group. 2015. World Bank Group Vause, J. 2019. “Building a Wildlife Economy: Washington, DC: World Bank: https://ppi.world- Support to Public-Private Partnerships: Lessons ↗ Section 1 Developing Nature-Based Tourism in Africa’s bank.org/content/dam/PPI/documents/PPI_2020_ from Experience in Client Countries, FY02-12. State Protected Areas.” Conservation Capital and AnnualReport.pdf. Washington, DC: World Bank Group. Space for Giants. Working Paper 1. Nairobi, Kenya. World Bank Group. 2020a. Annual PPI World Wildlife Fund. 2019. Environmental and Virunga Foundation (A Company Limited Database Global Report, 2019. Washington, DC: Social Safeguards Framework. Gland, Switzerland: by Guarantee). 2019. Trustee’s Report and World Bank: https://ppi.worldbank.org/content/ https://wwfint.awsassets.panda.org/downloads/ Consolidated Financial Statements for the Year dam/PPI/documents/private-participation-infra- essf_overview_document___public_v_1_0_ Ended 31 December 2019. Government of UK structure-annual-2019-report.pdf. aug_2019__1_.pdf. Charity Commission. World Bank Group. 2020b. Collaborative World Wildlife Fund. 2020. Living Planet Vyawahare, M. 30 March 2020. “Seychelles Management Partnerships (CMPs). Kenya’s Report 2020 - Bending the curve of biodiver- ↗ Section 2 Extends Protection to Marine Area Twice the Size Protected Areas: The Potential, Key Dynamics and sity loss. Almond, R.E.A., Grooten M. and of Great Britain.” Mongabay: https://news.monga- Recommended Method. The World Bank Group, Petersen, T. (Eds). WWF, Gland, Switzerland. bay.com/2020/03/seychelles-extends-protection- Washington, DC. https://files.worldwildlife.org/wwfcmsprod/files/ to-marine-area-twice-the-size-of-great-britain/. World Bank Group. 2020c. Mobilizing Publication/file/279c656a32_ENGLISH_FULL. Waeber, P.O., Rafanoharana, S., Rasamuel, Private Finance for Nature. World Bank Group, pdf?_ga=2.18233649.985534678.1628106108- H.A. and W. Lucienne. 2019. “Parks and Reserves Washington, DC: https://pubdocs.worldbank.org/ 1591225813.1593290948 in Madagascar: Managing Biodiversity for a en/916781601304630850/Finance-for-Nature-28- Yeung, P. 2021. “The Bold Plan to Save Africa’s Sustainable Future.” 3 April 2019. Open access Sep-web-version.pdf. Largest Forest.” Future Planet https://www.bbc. peer-reviewed chapter. DOI: 10.5772/inte- World Bank Group. 2020d Tools and Resources com/future/article/20210107-congo-basin-a-bold- ↗ Section 3 chopen.85348. https://www.intechopen.com/ for Nature-Based Tourism. World Bank, plan-to-save-africas-largest-rainforest. books/protected-areas-national-parks-and-sus- Washington, DC: https://openknowledge.world- tainable-future/parks-and-reserves-in-madagas- bank.org/handle/10986/34433 License: CC BY 3.0 car-managing-biodiversity-for-a-sustainable-fu- IGO. ture. World Bank Group. 2018. Guidance Note for Wilson, E., Noah, N., and J. Buultjens. 2009. Borrowers: Environmental & Social Framework “From Lessees to Partners: Exploring Tourism for IPF Operations. ESS7: Indigenous Peoples/ Public–Private Partnerships within the New Sub-Saharan African Historically Underserved ↗ Appendices South Wales National Parks and Wildlife Service.” Traditional Local Communities. Washington Journal of Sustainable Tourism 17 (2): 269–85. DC: http://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/ https://doi.org/10.1080/09669580802495774. en/972151530217132480/ESF-Guidance-Note-7- World Economic Forum (WEF). The Global Indigenous-Peoples-English.pdf. Risks Report 2020, 15th Edition. 2020. Cologny, 198 Appendices Collaborative Management Partnership Toolkit Protected Area Website References The following websites were accessed between June 2020-June 2021 for information about PAs and CMPs, and used to inform the Toolkit and the case studies. Park, organization, and agency annual reports were also accessed from the websites.   Public Partner NGO CMP Private Protected Area Country Website Reference Partner 1 Rwanda Development Board African Parks Akagera NP Rwanda https://www.africanparks.org/the-parks/akagera 2 Zambia Department of National African Parks Bangweulu Game Zambia https://www.africanparks.org/the-parks/bangweulu Parks and Wildlife Management Area 3 Mozambique National Administration African Parks Bazaruto Mozambique https://www.africanparks.org/the-parks/bazaruto of Conservation Areas Archipelago NP 4 Government of Central African African Parks Chinko Reserve Central African https://www.africanparks.org/the-parks/chinko Republic Republic 5 Government of Chad African Parks Ennedi Natural & Chad https://www.africanparks.org/the-parks/ennedi Cultural Reserve 6 Congolese Institute for the African Parks Garamba NP Congo, Dem Rep https://www.africanparks.org/the-parks/garamba Conservation of Nature (ICCN) 7 Government of Angola African Parks Iona NP Angola https://www.africanparks.org/the-parks/iona 8 Zambia Department of National African Parks Liuwa Plain NP Zambia https://www.africanparks.org/the-parks/liuwa-plain Parks and Wildlife 9 Malawi Department of National Parks African Parks Liwonde NP Malawi https://www.africanparks.org/the-parks/liwonde and Wildlife 10 Malawi Department of National Parks African Parks Majete Wildlife Malawi https://www.africanparks.org/the-parks/majete and Wildlife Reserve 11 Malawi Department of National Parks African Parks Mangochi Forest Malawi https://www.africanparks.org/the-parks/mangochi and Wildlife Reserve 12 Zimbabwe Parks and Wildlife African Parks Matusadona NP Zimbabwe https://www.africanparks.org/the-parks/matusadona Management Authority 199   Public Partner NGO CMP Private Protected Area Country Website Reference ↗ Contents Partner 13 Malawi Department of National Parks African Parks Nkhotakota Wildlife Malawi https://www.africanparks.org/the-parks/nkhotakota and Wildlife Reserve 14 Rwanda Development Board African Parks Nyungwe NP Rwanda https://www.africanparks.org/the-parks/nyungwe 15 Republic of the Congo’s Ministry African Parks Odzala-Kokoua NP Congo https://www.africanparks.org/the-parks/odzala-kokoua of Forest Economy, Sustainable Development and Environment ↗ Section 1 16 Government of Benin African Parks Pendjari NP Benin https://www.africanparks.org/the-parks/pendjari 17 Government of Chad African Parks Siniaka Minia Chad https://www.africanparks.org/the-parks/siniaka-minia Wildlife Reserve 18 Government of Benin African Parks W NP Benin https://www.africanparks.org/the-parks/w 19 Government of Chad African Parks Zakouma NP Chad https://www.africanparks.org/the-parks/zakouma 20 Nigeria National Park Service African Nature Investors Gashaka Gumpti NP Nigeria http://www.africanatureinvestors.org/nigeria-projects/ ↗ Section 2 21 Congolese Institute for the African Wildlife Bili Uere Protected Congo, Dem Rep https://www.awf.org/country/drc Conservation of Nature Foundation area 22 Ethiopia Wildlife Conservation African Wildlife Simen Mountains Ethiopia https://www.awf.org/country/ethiopia Authority Foundation NP 23 Mozambique National Administration Greg Carr Foundation Gorongosa NP Mozambique https://gorongosa.org/ of Conservation Areas 24 Congolese Institute for the Forgotten Parks Upemba NP Congo, Dem Rep https://forgottenparks.org/project/ukc/ Conservation of Nature Foundation ↗ Section 3 25 Zimbabwe Parks and Wildlife Frankfurt Zoological Gonarezhou NP Zimbabwe https://gonarezhou.org/ Management Authority Society 26 Mozambique National Administration International Foundation Gile National Mozambique https://fondationfrancoissommer.org/projets/ of Conservation Areas for the Conservation of Reserve mozambique/ Wildlife 27 Government of Niger Noé Termit and Tin Niger http://parcsdenoe.org/en/parcs-niger/ Toumma National ↗ Appendices Nature Reserve 28 Republic of the Congo’s Ministry Noé Conkouati Douli NP Congo, Republic http://parcsdenoe.org/en/parcs-congo/ of Forest Economy, Sustainable Development and Environment 200 Appendices Collaborative Management Partnership Toolkit   Public Partner NGO CMP Private Protected Area Country Website Reference Partner 29 Senegal Department of National Panthera Niokolo Koba NP Senegal https://www.panthera.org Parks 30 Mozambique National Administration Peace Parks Foundation Zinave NP Mozambique https://www.peaceparks.org/parks/zinave-national- of Conservation Areas park/ 31 Congolese Institute for the Virunga Foundation Virunga NP Congo, Dem Rep https://virunga.org/ Conservation of Nature 32 Republic of the Congo’s Ministry WCS Nouabale-Ndoki NP Congo, Republic https://congo.wcs.org/Wild-Places/Nouabale-Ndoki- of Forest Economy, Sustainable National-Park.aspx Development and Environment 33 Congolese Institute for the WCS Okapi Wildlife Congo, Dem Rep https://congo.wcs.org/ Conservation of Nature Reserve 34 Mozambique National Administration WCS Niassa Special Mozambique https://mozambique.wcs.org/Wild-Places/Niassa- of Conservation Areas Reserve Special-Reserve.aspx 35 Nigeria National Park Service WCS Yankari NP Nigeria https://nigeria.wcs.org/Wild-Places/Yankari-Game- Reserve.aspx 36 Government of Central African WCS Manovo-Gounda St. Central African https://www.wcs.org/our-work/regions/sudano-sahel Republic Floris NP Republic 37 Republic of the Congo’s Ministry WCS Lac Tele Congo, Republic https://congo.wcs.org/Wild-Places/Lac- of Forest Economy, Sustainable Community T%C3%A9l%C3%A9-Community-Reserve.aspx Development and Environment Reserve 38 Government of Central African WCS Bamingui-Bangoran Central African https://www.wcs.org/our-work/regions/sudano-sahel Republic NP Republic 39 Government of Central African WWF Salonga NP Congo, Dem Rep https://www.wwf-congobasin.org/where_we_work/ Republic priority_places/salonga_national_park/ 40 Congolese Institute for the WWF Dzanga-Sangha NP Congo, Dem Rep https://www.wwf-congobasin.org/where_we_work/ Conservation of Nature central_africa_republic/dzanga_sangha_protected_ area/ 201 ↗ Contents ↗ Section 1 ↗ Section 2 ↗ Section 3 ↗ Appendices 202 Appendices Collaborative Management Partnership Toolkit 203 ↗ Contents ↗ Section 1 ↗ Section 2 ↗ Section 3 ↗ Appendices Ennedi Natural & Cultural Reserve, Chad. © Torsten Pursche / Shutterstock Collaborative management partnerships are increasingly being used to improve the management of protected areas and contribute to sustainable development. For more information, visit the Global Wildlife Program at www.worldbank.org/en/ programs/global-wildlife-program or contact gwp-info@worldbank.org. SUPPORTED BY LED BY IN PARTNERSHIP WITH: