Management Effectiveness
Evaluation (MEE)
of Protected Areas in India
Dr. V. B. Mathur
Dean, Faculty of Wildlife Sciences,
Wildlife Institute of India
Chandrabani, Dehradun (Uttarakhand). INDIA
Email: [email protected]
Approaches to assessing
management effectiveness
♦ Protected areas management effectiveness evaluation has
been conducted in many countries using range of
methodologies/ approaches emanating from the global MEE
framework. These approaches vary considerably in their scale,
depth, duration and data collection methods (Ervin, J. 2006).
S.No.
Type of Approach
Application in India
1
Comprehensive system-wide,
Peer-based assessment
28 Project Tiger
Reserves
2
In-depth, Evidence based
assessment
02 World Heritage Sites
3
Rapid Expert-based scorecard
30 National Parks and
Wildlife Sanctuaries
MEE of Project Tiger
Reserves in India
♦ India has established 28 Project Tiger Reserves in 17 States
covering an area of 37,761 km2.
♦ Though the main focus
is on flagship species
tiger, the project strives
to maintain the stability
of ecosystems.
♦ An independent
assessment, based on
WCPA-MEE framework
adapted to Indian
conditions, was carried out in 2005 by 8 independent
experts, using 45 parameters.
♦ The results were peer-reviewed by IUCN experts in 2006.
MEE of Project Tiger Reserves in India
MEE of Project Tiger Reserves in India
Results at a Glance…
S. Name of the Tiger
No.
Reserve
Score Category
S. Name of the Tiger Reserve Score
No.
Category
1
Kanha
166
Very Good
15 Pench (Maharashtra)
125
Good
2
Dudhwa
154
Very Good
16 Buxa
124
Good
3
Corbett
152
Very Good
17 Dampa
121
Good
4
Sunderbans
152
Very Good
18 Bhadra
117
Good
5
Pench (M.P.)
144
Very Good
19 Nameri
112
Good
6
Palamau
141
Very Good
20 Pakke
106
Satisfactory
7
Simlipal
140
Very Good
21 Valmiki
106
Satisfactory
8
Melghat
137
Very Good
22 Kalakad-Mundanthurai
104
Satisfactory
9
Panna
135
Very Good
10 Tadoba-Andhari
134
Good
23 Manas
102
Satisfactory
11 Bori-Satpura
128
Good
24 Namdapha
95
Satisfactory
12 Bandhavgarh
127
Good
25 Nagarjunasagar-Srisailam
91
Satisfactory
13 Periyar
127
Good
26 Ranthambhore
89
Satisfactory
14 Bandipur & Rajiv
Gandhi N.P. (Nagarhole)
126
Good
27 Indravati
70
Poor
28 Sariska
61
Poor
more…
Enhancing our Heritage (EoH) Project
Monitoring and Managing for Success in Natural World Heritage Areas
EoH Project sites…
Aldabra Atoll,
Seychelles
Kaziranga, India
Rio Platano,
Honduras
Bwindi Impenetrable,
Uganda
Serengeti, Tanzania
Keoladeo, India
Royal Chitwan, Nepal
Sangay, Ecuador
Canaima, Venezuela
EoH Project – Final Reports
MEE of World Heritage Sites
Conclusions…
♦ MEE for a continuous period (2003-2007) has
provided a very valuable understanding of the
management processes and their dynamics
♦ The EoH Project Workbook and Worksheets
containing the 12 Toolkits greatly facilitates the
MEE process.
♦ There is a need to include ‘Social Indicators’
while conducting MEE. Currently, there is a
bias towards ‘Ecological Indicators’.
MEE of National Parks and
Wildlife Sanctuaries
♦
The trigger for this came from the Prime Minister’s
Office. All PAs (National Parks and Wildlife Sanctuaries)
should be subjected to an independent audit periodically
and the outcomes should be placed in the parliament.
♦
The Ministry of Environment and Forests (MoEF) has
constituted six independent teams to conduct MEE,
which is being currently done at 2 levels:
i. Site (National Parks and Wildlife Sanctuaries)
ii. State (States/ UTs)
♦
An analyses of Strengthens-Weakness-OpportunitiesThreats (SWOT) is being done of the Protected Area
Network in India
MEE of National Parks and Wildlife Sanctuaries
Site Level
Element
Name
No. of
Criteria
Criteria
Context
03
Site values, Threats, Biotic pressures
Planning
09
Zonation, Management Plan, Stakeholders,
Habitat Management, Protection, HumanWildlife Conflict, Landscape Management
Inputs
05
Human Resources, Infrastructure, Funds,
NGO inputs
Process
05
Trained Manpower, HRD, Livelihoods
04
Dissemination, Visitor Services,
Maintenance schedule
Outputs
Outcomes 06
Population Trends, Threats abatement,
Community relationship
MEE of National Parks and Wildlife Sanctuaries
Site Level: Results
MEE of National Parks and Wildlife Sanctuaries
State Level
Element
Name
Context
Planning
Inputs
Process
Outputs
Outcomes
No. of
Criteria
Criteria
04
03
01
05
03
01
PA Vision & Goals; Organizational set-up;
Administrative framework; Regional
cooperation
Representativeness, Management Plans,
Revenue sharing
Resource availability
Trained manpower, Performance evaluation,
Complaints, HRD
Dissemination (website, brochure etc),
Maintenance schedule
Populations trends, Threats abatement
MEE of National Parks and Wildlife Sanctuaries
State Level: Interim Results
Lessons Learnt…
The major lessons that have been learnt from developing and
implementing the MEE process in India are:
♦ Creating an understanding towards the concept and
practice of ‘performance evaluation’ amongst all
concerned with the MEE process is the critical first
step.
♦ Creating ‘independent’ teams for MEE and
reducing/ removing any ‘conflict of interest’ helps
in increasing the acceptability of the evaluation
results.
♦ Participatory evaluation helps the process as well
as the final product.
more…
Lessons Learnt…
♦ Effective dissemination of results of the MEE
process to a range of stakeholders is important
to bring in ‘changes’ and ‘improvements’ in the
management processes at the site level.
♦ Methodological refinements, where needed and
pragmatic analyses of results is required to
make the evaluation process effective.
MEE of Protected Area Network in India
The Way Forward….
♦ Continue to bring in methodological and
process refinements, as required.
♦ Enhance the participation of a range of
relevant stakeholders.
♦ Disseminate the findings and bring in
appropriate changes in policy, governance
and management to enhance effectiveness
of management of PAs.
Thank You