SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT OF THE PROTECTED AREA SYSTEM OF
ETHIOPIA
(SDPASE)
A UNDP-GEF Government of Ethiopia Project – Implemented by GTZ-IS
Ethiopian Wildlife Conservation Authority
REPORT OF THE INCEPTION WORKSHOP
Addis Ababa, February 2009
Report Number One
February 2009
Contents:
Abbreviations and Acronyms
Preface
Introduction
Nik Sekhran, UNDP-GEF.
Ludwig Siege & Lakew Berhanu, PMU
The Workshop Programme
Welcome and Overview
Speech from Hon. State Minister
Workshop Moderators
Her Excellency Tadelech Dececho, presented
by Dr. Kifle Argaw, Director General, EWCA
Presentation on Biodiversity and Protected Areas Nik Sekhran, UNDP GEF
Presentation from Director General of EWCA
Dr Kifle Argaw
Presentation on SDPASE,
Ludwig Siege, Chief Technical Advisor
Results of the Working Groups:
1.
2.
3.
4.
The revised project outcomes
The revised logical framework of the SDPASE.
The results from the regions/states
The updating the new draft map of the protected areas of Ethiopia.
Closing Speech
The Director General, EWCA
Annexes
Annex 1
Details of assessments, position / policy papers, studies and reports
(recommended, not all compulsory)
Annex 2
List of participants
Annex 3
Workshop evaluation: analysis of responses from participants
(Note: The annex to the Project Document, pointing out the changes made on the inception
workshop, will follow, after approval from the Project Steering Committee.
2
Abbreviations and Acronyms
Acronym
AWP
CAWM
CEO
CTA
DG
EIA
EWCA
GEF
GIS
GoE
GTZ-IS
IUCN
KWS
M&E
MoARD
MoCT
MoFED
NPC
NP
PA (SP)
PES
PMU
SDPASE
SLM
UNDP
Meaning
Annual Work Plan
College for African Wildlife Management (Mweka)
Chief Executive Officer (of GEF)
Chief Technical Advisor
Director General
Environmental Impact Assessment
Ethiopian Wildlife Conservation Authority.
Global Environment Facility
Geographic Information System
Government of Ethiopia
German Technical Cooperation- International Services
International Union for the Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources
Kenya Wildlife Service
Monitoring and Evaluation
Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development
Ministry of Culture and Tourism
Ministry of Finance and Economic Development
National Project Coordinator
National Park
Protected Area (Protected Area System Plan)
Payment for Environmental Services
Project Management Unit
Sustainable Development of the Protected Area System of Ethiopia
Sustainable Land Management
United Nations Development Programme
3
Preface: Nik Sekhran, Senior Technical Advisor for Biodiversity, UNDP-GEF
May I say at the start how pleased I was to be invited to participate in this Project Inception Workshop for
SDPASE: The Sustainable Development of the Protected Area System for Ethiopia. As most people know,
this project has been a long time in the making, it is extremely gratifying to see the project actually start,
and our congratulations to all those involved in the preparation and approval process.
An Inception Workshop is a normal part of UNDP-GEF Project “Best Practice”. Most project Documents
these days prescribe for an Inception Workshop within three months of Project Start-Up. An inception
workshop allows all stakeholders to reconvene, with the Project Management Team, and to re-look at the
Objectives and Activities of the Project, to revisit the Principles behind the Project, and to strengthen the
partnership between project stakeholders. Partnerships include the co-financiers, between implementing
and executing agencies and the donor agencies; and between different layers of the project from Federal to
Regional Governments; and to Protected Areas and Civil Society on the Ground.
In this case, there is an even greater need to re-examine the Outputs and Activities of the Project
Document; as the details were written over two years ago and the project documentation was signed a
year ago. Much has changed in the Wildlife Sector since then, and it is important to bring the Project, via
the Project Document, up-to-date.
UNDP-GEF wishes to congratulate the Government of Ethiopia on its recent moves to strengthen the
Wildlife and Conservation Sector in Ethiopia; in particular the creation of the new Ethiopian Wildlife
Conservation Authority (EWCA), and the new Wildlife Policy and Regulations. UNDP-GEF would like to
reaffirm that the project philosophy is to support the Government in conservation, though capacity building
for the new institutions and to help implement policy elements on the ground.
The project still fits within the GEF (Global Environment Facility) Priorities for Biodiversity, in helping
countries develop sustainable Protected Area Systems. The scale of Ethiopia’s biodiversity resources need
an extensive and representative system of Protected areas, that maintain biological values as well as
ensuring a continued flow of ecosystem goods and services. This will need considerable capacity and
support to implement given the huge challenges facing conservation through growing population demand
for land and resources, and the newer threats of climate change and variability.
We cannot change the Objectives and Outcomes of the Project (without going back to the GEF); and it was
re-assuring to learn from all participants at the Inception Workshop that these Outcomes were still
relevant. We can however modify the activities to reach these outcomes. The Workshop gave considerable
clarity as to what needed to be changed and emphasised.
We look forward to the project delivering impact. Good Luck with your conservation efforts, in maintaining
this globally and nationally important resource.
4
Introduction (Lakew Berhanu, Ludwig Siege)
After a long and intensive planning process that took 11 years from project idea to project inception, the
SDPASE (Sustainable Development of the Protected Area System of Ethiopia) started work on the 1st of
October, 2008.
SDPASE is funded by the Global Environment Facility/UNDP. Other funding sources are the Government of
Ethiopia and co-funding institutions like NGOs, bilateral development projects etc.
SDPASE is embedded in the Ethiopian Wildlife Conservation Authority. The Authority, founded in 2007, is
still a fledgling institution. It is charged by the Government with the daunting task to bring the protected
area system of Ethiopia, including the National Parks, Wildlife Reserves, Wildlife Sanctuaries, Controlled
Hunting Areas, back on track after decades of political marginalisation and neglect.
Staff numbers will grow tremendously in the next months, reflecting the Government’s decision to refederalise nine National Parks, up to now under Regional administration and also the policy to achieve a
density of 1 scout per 10 skm in a National Park.
Critical to the success of revitalising the protected area system will be the mobilisation of additional
funding for wildlife conservation through partnerships. The limited GEF-contribution of 9 Million over 8
years is meant to serve as “seed” money to make the “political” and “business” case vis a vis Government
and potential partners.
It will be of particular importance to give the PA system its due role in the important national programmes,
namely the PASDEP (the poverty reduction strategy) and the Sustainable Land Management Programme
and watershed conservation of the country. Only when achieving this the PA system will be truly
“mainstreamed” in the political processes of Ethiopia and will attract its due share of donor funding.
But to convince partners to enter into partnerships we need “success stories”. There is a dearth of them:
actually right now there is no Park or Sanctuary that fulfils the legal requirement of being free of
settlements and livestock. SDPASE will monitor and support its pilot areas and help creating these success
stories, together with its partners.
EWCA has contracted GTZ-IS as implementing partner of EWCA for the first phase of the project. The role of
GTZ has been agreed upon as technical support and financial administration. The role of EWCA is that of
the Executing Authority.
The results of this workshop, in particular this workshop report, forms the basis for the revision of the
project document and the development of the Annual Work Plan of 2008/09. GTZ-IS is prefinancing the first
3 to 4 months of the implementation, until the AWP will have been developed and approved.
We feel that the workshop has produced valuable results to feed into the development of the Annual Work
Plan.
According to the evaluation of the workshop by the participants, via a questionnaire distributed at the end
of the sessions, the workshop has been a success. We have noted the critical points, like the provision of
better material and the allotment of more time, and will redress this in future workshops.
We thank all participants for their participation and their valuable contributions.
5
THE INCEPTION WORKSHOP PROGRAMME, SDPASE
Alan Rodgers & Lakew Berhanu, Moderators / Facilitators
1) What is an INCEPTION WORKSHOP?
It is a critical part of GEF Project Process and UNDP Process, accepted as best practice, and prescribed
for in the project documentation (prodoc). It is supposed to take place within three months of project
start-up.
The Inception Workshop allows
•
•
•
The opportunity for all STAKEHOLDERS to interact with the new incoming Project Management
Team (and vice versa).
The opportunity to create “Awareness and Partnership” around the project document (important
here as project preparation was quite some time ago.
The opportunity to discuss beneficial changes to the Project Document, in the light of current
reality. This again is especially important here, as the Prodoc was drafted over two years ago, and
was approved well over a year ago. MUCH has happened since then in the wildlife sector of
Ethiopia since then, and these changes need to be reflected in the project documentation. Indeed
approval from MoFED was based on the provision that the Prodoc be modified.
THERE ARE FOUR PARTS TO THE WORKSHOP PROGRAMME:
1
Presentations, from: The Ministry, EWCA – DG, GEF and the PMU
2
Discussions: In Working Groups (allows work, participation, interaction, understanding)
3
Evening Dinner: socialise and get to know each other
4
Conclusions and Way Forward
The workshop programme was relatively flexible, we had the ability to accommodate other inputs and
change the programme as time allowed.
6
We are conscious that Wildlife Conservation is about wildlife in the Protected Areas and outside.
Both aspects of wildlife are important, and important to this Project.
KeyNote Address.
HE Wro Tadelech Dalecho1, State Minister for Ministry of Culture and Tourism,
Delivered by Dr Kifle Argaw, Director General of EWCA,
Dear Guests, Ladies and Gentlemen
Ethiopia is endowed with plenty of natural resources. It comprises of highlands with a unique biodiversity,
deserts with active volcanoes, steppes where wild animals roam. Moreover the country is known for her
long and glorious history, which manifests itself in many cultural monuments. These cultural sites are a
great attraction for tourists.
I would like to mention here but a few: Lalibela, the churches of Gondar, the Axum obelisk. Some are
UNESCO World Heritage Sites because of their uniqueness. Tourists visit our country to see these cultural
sites, but also because of its ethnic variety. From the Danakil to the Omo valley the visitor can find very
special and interesting ethnic groups, not yet drowned in the great melting pot of globalisation.
Even though Ethiopia’s diversity of wildlife is unique even when compared to its famous neighbouring safari
destinations like Kenya, it is little known to foreigners. The country contains over 6,000 species of plants,
many still undescribed by science, more than 860 bird species (16 endemic species and two endemic
genera), and 279 species of mammals, of which 35 are endemic species.
1
The State Minister presented her apologies and was unable to attend.
7
Ethiopia still has important populations of elephants in all regions except in dry Afar, lions and other
charismatic endemic flagship species, most notably the world’s only grazing primate, the Gelada Baboon,
the Mountain Nyala, the Ethiopian Wolf, the Walia Ibex, the Swayne’s Hartebeest, and the Dibatag. It is
evident that the wildlife of Ethiopia has the potential to contribute significantly to national and local
development.
Income from wildlife and protected areas can benefit local populations, through tourism and consumptive
utilisation. Protected areas play a very important role in the sustainable land management approach of the
Government, because they prevent erosion, drought and desertification, improve microclimates, and buffer
the effects of the climate change.
Protected areas secure the country’s water supply by stabilising the river catchments. Protected areas also
help securing the country’s electricity supply by preventing erosion and the silting of the dams. Through
this mechanism Ethiopia’s PAs have a direct positive impact on economic growth and the industrialisation
of Ethiopia.
The Government has come to realise that in the past this potential has not been adequately tapped and
that wildlife and protected areas have not played their due role in the development debate of the country.
So far our National Parks lack tourism facilities, some existing are in disgrace like in Awash National Park.
They are not really marketed by our tourist operators, even though the wildlife can be spectacular.
But as in many other African countries people and wildlife in the country are competitors for scarce land
and as a result the biodiversity is under severe threat arising mainly from conversion of forest and wildlife
areas to agriculture, virtually open access of local communities to protected areas leading to degradation of
habitats.
There are more than 30 National Parks, Wildlife Reserves, and Sanctuaries in the country which harbour
wildlife. Outside these areas, large tracts of the country have been declared “Controlled Hunting Areas”,
where tourists hunt wildlife on a sustainable basis for hard currency. The “nominal” protected area system
of national parks, wildlife reserves and sanctuaries, the controlled hunting areas and the forest priority
areas, covers an impressive 14% of the country.
From a biodiversity point of view, some areas are incorrectly sited or too small to maintain the ecological
processes they were created for. Numerous ‘wildlife reserves’ and ‘controlled hunting areas’ provide little
to no protection. Some areas with important biodiversity are not yet represented in the country’s PA
system, like the South Western forests and the Eastern area in the Ogaden, known for its unique
biodiversity.
To address these issues, under the proclamation 541/2007, the Ethiopian Wildlife Conservation Authority
was created and put under the Ministry for Culture and Tourism. There is a new vision in the Government
to make conservation work and to give it its due role in the development of the country.
Biodiversity is a global challenge. Therefore potential national and international partners have been
contacted and invited to join in the effort. In collaboration with UNDP/GEF, we have developed a joint
project, the “Sustainable Development of the Protected Area System of Ethiopia” project” (SDPASE). The
UNDP Country Office Ethiopia is the Implementing Agency of GEF and as such the contract partner of the
Ethiopian Wildlife Conservation Authority. In agreement with UNDP/GEF, the Authority has charged GTZ-IS,
to provide financial, administrative and technical support.
The project document, which forms the basis for the implementation of the project, is old. Moreover it
should go in harmony with government policy and strategic plan. It therefore needs revision. To plan these
revisions we have come together here. We need to work hard together hand in hand. I would also like to
take this opportunity to request all our national and international partners to provide us with the necessary
support to achieve our goals. The door is wide open for partnership!
I wish you success with the re-planning process!
8
Presentation by Nik Sekhran, Senior Technical Advisor for Biodiversity. UNDP-GEF.
Nik Sekhran presented the GEF approach to Biodiversity management.
1. WHY IS BIODIVERSITY IMPORTANT?
Unprecedented loss of Natural Capital
 We depend on natural ecosystems to provide goods, such as food and medicine and services such as
pollination, carbon sequestration, nitrogen fixation and hydrological system regulation.
 The livelihood strategies and food security of the poor often depend directly on functioning ecosystems
for goods and services.
 The 2005 Millennium Ecosystem Assessment concluded that almost 60% (15 out of 24) of the
ecosystem services that support life on Earth are being undermined as a result of human activities. The
report found that two service groups, namely fisheries and freshwater provision, are now degraded
beyond levels that can sustain current demands
2. WHY IS BIODIVERSITY IN TROUBLE?
 In the 20th century, the human population grew from 1.65 to 6.5 billion people.
 Humanity is now living beyond the planet’s ecological means
 50% of the land surface has been transformed and some 40% of the primary productivity is captured by
humans
3. GEF’S GOAL IN BIODIVERSITY
The goal of GEF’s biodiversity program is the conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity, the
maintenance of the ecosystem goods and services that biodiversity provides to society, and the fair and
equitable sharing of the benefits arising out of the utilization of genetic resources.
GEF has 4 Strategic Objectives
 Sustainable Protected Area Systems
 Mainstreaming Biodiversity
 Safeguarding Biodiversity
 Access and Benefit Sharing
4. UNDP’S BIODIVERSITY PROGRAMME
Objective:
…….to assist developing countries and countries in transition to develop their own capacity to manage
biodiversity so as to sustain the delivery of the ecosystem goods and services on which human
development depends
5. PROTECTED AREAS
5.1. Mainstreaming biodiversity management objectives into economic sector activities, to ensure that
production practices maintain essential ecosystem functions
 Transforming Sector Governance
 Market Transformation (Supply Chains)
 Focus on Barrier Removal
In 40 Countries
5.2. Unleashing the economic potential of PAs, so that they can fulfil their management functions, are
sustainably financed, and contribute to sustainable development.
9
 Ecosystem Governance
 Accessing, Combining and Sequencing Funds
 Focus on Barrier Removal
In 70 Countries
6. MAINTAINING RELEVANCE TO THE NATIONAL ECONOMY
Recent studies have highlighted that in certain countries PAs contribute significantly to economic
development, in particular through the use values from tourism.
Challenge remains to uncover use values and to catalyse investment in PAs to optimise and sustain tangible
economic benefits
In Ethiopia this means:
Building a vibrant nature based tourism industry, based on Ethiopia’s biodiversity, culture and aesthetic
beauty.
Challenges Going Forward: Climate Change
Land use change remains the largest threat to biodiversity and to the provision of adequate ecosystem
services
Climate change will exacerbate biodiversity loss and increase overall management costs
7. MAINTAINING THE RELEVANCE OF PAS IN A WORLD FOCUSED ON CLIMATE CHANGE
- Nature Based Adaptation (safeguarding natural capital to reduce vulnerability)
Reducing losses of Carbon Reservoirs in Forests and Wetlands
Two approaches:
a. Mitigation: to avoid the unmanageable
b. Adaptation: to manage the unavoidable
8. ROLE OF PROTECTED AREAS IN CLIMATE CHANGE MITIGATION
 Terrestrial protected areas cover 12.2% of land area, but contain 15.2% of global carbon stock
 PAs contain proportionally more carbon than other land (but 85% of carbon is outside PAs)
 Strengthening PA network in areas of high deforestation pressure and high carbon could be one
strategy to reduce emissions.
9. ROLE OF PROTECTED AREAS IN CLIMATE CHANGE ADAPTATION
Adaption in PA-systems:
• Modelling of projected climate change
• Assessment of impacts on conservation targets
• Assessment of impacts on ecosystem services
• Revision of protected area system design
• Consolidation of protected areas
• Fire management strategies
Adaption in PA-corridors:
• Development of PA corridors to include ecological gradients
10
•
Use of all PA governance types, including state, private, indigenous and community conserved
areas
• social assessments to understand how neighbouring communities are affected by CC
Adaption in National Parks:
• Inclusion of PAs in Climate Change Action Plans
• Revision of land use plans
• Revision of coastal zone management plans
• Inclusion of biodiversity considerations in all sectoral plans
• Recognition of nature-based infrastructure as cost-effective adaptation measure
10. SHOWING RESULTS IN ETHIOPIA:
• SDPASE is a start--- intended to build an enabling environment for the PA system to contribute to
the economy; if successful, there is huge opportunity .
• Need to build credibility in the sector– recognizing that there is huge competition for investment in
PAs from other countries in Africa
Presentation by Director-General EWCA, Dr Kifle Argaw
Dr. Kifle presented the change in Ethiopian Wildlife Conservation.
1. The resource potential:
• 277 species of Mammals (31 endemic),
• 862 species of Birds (16 endemic),
• 201 species of Reptiles (9 endemic)
• 63 species of Amphibians (24 Endemic)
• 150 species of Fish (4 endemic)
2. List of Protected Areas
• 16 National Parks,
•
4 Wildlife Sanctuaries,
•
8 Wildlife Reserves,
• 18 Designated Controlled Hunting Areas.
3. Main wildlife areas in the country
 Southern part of the country; the Omo river basin and the Mago valley in the south are
noted for species
 West and south west lies the Gambela region, the Savannah and swamps of Gambela,
south west forests and Welega.
 Rift Valley, the Abijata and Shalla Lakes, Yangudi-Rassa and Afar lowlands Awash and
Senkele.
 East and south East Babile, Garale and Ogaden region , Yabello ,Hararge ,Bale and Arsi.
 North and North west Qafeta Sheraro and Semien Mountains, Alatish, Welo and Gojjam
high lands.
11
4. Why change was needed?
Existence of real “pain” about how work was done,
There was organisational strategy for change
Commitment of senior leadership to bring organisational change
Aim of the change: Analysing the current process and to design new efficient and effective wildlife
conservation.
Expected outcome:
 To design new wildlife conservation process
 To bring new institutional arrangement with clear vision, mission objective and plan
 To bring community based wildlife conservation
 To build committed and capable working force
 To deliver effective and efficient service delivery for the pubic.
5. Major problems identified:
 Absence of community participation in wildlife conservation
 Lack of coordination between federal and regional organisations and stake holders
 Inefficient service delivery
 Lack of attention for the sub sector as a development agenda
 Poaching and habitat destruction: farmland expansion and grazing land extension,
widespread poaching
In the process written and unwritten rules on which the process is based were identified. Old
assumptions were checked and replaced with new assumptions.
6. Stake holder analysis:
Stakeholders were identified and interviewed: tourists, communities living around PAs, private
investors, federal and regional institutions, international and national development partners and
donors.
The following major needs and expectations were identified:
Sustainably managed PAs with a large mega diversity, large species composition, intact
ecosystems, free from human and livestock pressure,
An efficient and effective wildlife conservation system supported by modern technology and
capable working force, full community participation and benefit sharing.
7. Institutional set up:
3 technical and 5 supportive departments were endorsed. The human resource-needs for head
office and NPs were proposed with regard to professional composition and numbers, support
process composition and numbers of scouts/rangers.
8. Laws and regulations:
 Wildlife Conservation Policy: endorsed
 Wildlife Conservation Proclamation: 2 endorsed (18 for the gazettement of Parks will be done
in future)
 Wildlife Conservation Regulations: one endorsed
 Wildlife Conservation Directives: prepared, awaiting the regulations
12
 Wildlife Conservation Technical manuals and Guidelines: four
9. Mission Statement:
To sustainably conserve and manage Ethiopian wildlife resources through active
participation of local communities, mainly for the benefit of Ethiopians and moreover the
global community, and pass to the next generation as a heritage.
10. Vision:
To be a leader in wildlife conservation and eco tourism
11. Value Statements:
 We conserve and manage Ethiopia’s wildlife scientifically and responsibly
 We will be evaluated by our customer’s satisfaction
 We will work for the benefit of Ethiopians
 We will work to maximise the benefit from the sector
 We shall be accountable for ethical rules
 We give priorities for gender and youths
 We ensure sustainable development by engaging ourselves in a dynamic and continuing
change.
In the planning process, three major Strategic Themes have been identified:
Theme 1: Wildlife Protection and Development
Theme 2: Improving National Parks and Wildlife Sanctuary management
Theme 3: Wildlife Utilisation
The main activities are:
Establish new Pas and transboundary NPs
Redemarcate and legalise existing PAs
Improve management of endangered and endemic wildlife species
Minimise and render solutions for human wildlife conflict
Control illegal trade in wildlife and its products
Conduct and coordinate research
Establish community conservation areas
Prepare Management Plans for PAs
Prevent and control wildlife diseases
Administer and manage federal NPs and Sanctuaries
Strengthen the federal wildlife protection system
Establish a national management system for NPs and Sanctuaries
Involve communities in wildlife protection
Strengthen wildlife education
Relocate communities that have encroached on PAs by creating alternative livelihoods
Maximise income from sustainable utilisation of wildlife
Promote the wildlife resource of the country
Encourage private investors and provide technical support to them:
13
Licensing for utilisation, sport hunting, trapping, taxidermy, export, CITES certificates,
hunting for locals, filming, research, tourist guiding
Long-Term (stretched) Objectives:
 All PAs will be designated and legalised by full participation of the communities
 If people still exist in newly gazetted NPs and wildlife sanctuaries, they will be relocated by
creating alternative livelihoods.
 The protection of a specified number of key mammals and bird species will be improved
 3 reserves will be upgraded to NPs, 3 trans-frontier-parks will be established
 3 NPs will be restocked with wild animals
 The local communities living around 18 wildlife conservation areas will benefit from
ecotourism by establishing their own conservation areas and by rendering services to
tourists
 The current annual revenue from wildlife (nine Million Birr) will be increased by 60 %
 Conservation education will be conducted for 20000 local communities around wildlife
areas
 Prevention and surveillance on 4 transmissible wild animal diseases
 15 NPs, 3 sanctuaries, 18 controlled hunting areas and the concerned regional and national
offices will be connected by radio
 Website will be established
 Infrastructure inside 15 NPs and 3 sanctuaries will be improved or established (offices,
roads, lodges, camps, residences etc)
 In one year the scout density will be improved from one scout/114 skm to one
scout/10skm
 Service delivery cycle time will be reduced by 50% in 1 year
Let us work together to save wildlife!!
Presentation by Dr Ludwig Siege, Chief Technical Advisor SDPASE. PMU in EWCA.
Ludwig Siege presented the need for replanning of the SDPASE:
1: The objectives of the workshop have been formulated as:
• To redesign and realign the project objectives and activities in order to enhance the
performance of the sector in line with its aims, vision, mission.
• Redesign and adapt the strategic plan based on the priorities of the sector.
But there are limits to the redesigning:
The outcomes cannot be changed without going back to GEF HQ, but the ways and means to
achieve the outcomes can be adapted according to the new developments and challenges.
14
2. Background:
The biodiversity and the ecosystems of Ethiopia are of great international significance.
They are also spectacular and often unique.
The majority of the country falls into one of two Biodiversity Hotspots. The Ethiopian Highlands
comprise over 50% of the Eastern Afromontane Hotspot. Over 40% of the Horn of Africa Hotspot
falls within Ethiopia.
What are the problems of this biodiversity?
The Prodoc names a few:
• Increasing demand for natural resources, and an over-dependence on natural
resources, few alternatives
• Poor agriculture planning, no inter-sectoral coordination, policy not harmonized,
little political will
• No incentives for conservation by stakeholders, and no stakeholder participation
• Wildlife damage crops, no rewards
The use of the biodiversity in Ethiopia is often unsustainable.
• Overgrazing, erosion,
• Food insecurity, hunger,
• Silting of dams, power cuts,
• Dwindling wildlife.
Just to illustrate the magnitude of the sustainability problem:
Ethiopia has now around 77 Million inhabitants.
With a growth rate of 3 percent/annum, the population will be double that in 2032.
That means that Ethiopia will have 154 Million inhabitants by then.
Thus, demand on natural resources will at least double.
This challenge has to be met. This will require a huge effort by people and Government of
Ethiopia.
But it can be met only when the use of the natural resources is sustainable.
3. Sustainability:
„A harvest/utilisation that does not compromise the harvest/utilisation of future generations“.
One usually defines 3 types of sustainability in the context of conservation:
Ecological, financial, social.
Sometimes „institutional“ is added.
There is a hierarchy in these types of sustainability:
Without financial sustainability (sustainable financing) ecological sustainability cannot be
achieved.
Acceptance of PAs and wildlife by local communities and political leaders is also a precondition for
the ecological sustainability of a PA-system.
15
4. Mainstreaming PAs:
There are many benefits derived from biodiversity, through tourism, consumptive utilisation and
ecosystem services
Ecosystem services include:
 Protected areas help preventing erosion and desertification, improve microclimates,
amelioration of the effects of the climate change
 PAs can secure the country’s water supply and agriculture by stabilising the river
catchments.
 PAs also help securing the country’s electricity supply by preventing erosion and the
silting of dams.
But: protected areas and wild animals go hand in hand with considerable opportunity costs, i.e.
income foregone by not using a protected area otherwise.
In the long run, PAs have to show that they represent a form of land use which is beneficial for the
people and the nation. In this the PA system is in competition with other forms of land use.
If wildlife conservation and protected areas do not contribute productively to poverty reduction
but on the contrary limit available resources which otherwise could be used to alleviate poverty,
this form of conservation has no political future.
PASDEP: In the present PASDEP protected areas and wildlife are only mentioned in the text with 9
lines (out of around 210 pages), and in the indicator matrix in 3 lines (out of 51 pages and several
hundreds of indicators)
6. The SDPASE:
GOAL: Ethiopia’s biodiversity, ecosystems and ecological processes are effectively safeguarded
from human-induced pressures and adequately represented in a sustainable Protected Area
System that is contributing significantly to economic development, both locally and nationally
PROJECT PURPOSE (stage One): Enabling frameworks and capacities for managing the system of
protected areas that have biodiversity, ecosystem and ecological process conservation as a major
objective will be emplaced
OUTCOME 1: Protected areas are mainstreamed in the development framework in Ethiopia and
receive greater political support.
OUTCOME 2: Appropriate policy, regulatory and governance frameworks in place, leading to
redefinition of protected area categories and reduced land-use conflict
OUTCOME 3: Institutional arrangements and capacity for protected area planning and
management emplaced, leading to improved PA management
OUTCOME 4: New protected area management options and partnerships trialled, and replicated
through partnerships catalyzed across protected area estate (Co-Finance)
OUTCOME 5: Financial sustainability plan developed and demonstrated (for implementation in
Phase II)
PROJECT PURPOSE (Stage Two): Working in an enabled environment, sustainable management of
the system of protected areas that have biodiversity, ecosystem and ecological process
conservation as a major objective is ensured
16
The task of the Workshop is to redesign the outputs so that they fit the present reality.
There are trigger indicators to move to stage 2:
1. The Ministry of Water Resources has amended its policy to include a protected area
component for watershed management and protection.
2. Strategies for implementation of Wildlife Policy and Proclamation in place.
3. The Sustainable Land Management Program and Blue Nile Development are funding
protected area establishment, development and management in relevant areas
4. A 16% increase in the METT scores for the four demonstration sites recorded by the end of
the first stage
5. Six further sites (including at least two new sites) will be benefiting from co-financing and
partnerships and will be being implemented using the produced and disseminated good
practice model
6. The guidelines for limited harvesting (sport hunting and timber) concessions are agreed, in
place and enacted in four concession areas which will act as demonstration sites for
replication in the second stage period.
7. Decision on components of Trust Fund in place
These triggers cannot be changed without going back to the GEF council, which is impractical.
17
WORKING GROUPS:
(Note that the slightly late start and the long presentations meant that the original programme was
shortened and the first two working groups were coalesced). There was one set of Groups on day one, and
a second set of Groups on day two.
Each session was around two and a quarter hours, with start-up- explanation (10 minutes), main discussion
(90 minutes) and Feedback Session (35 minutes). Within each session there were 5 separate working
groups (with 50 people – this was some 10 people per group – less on day two). The people in the groups
were mixed – so each group had wardens, experts, hunters, civil society, donors etc. (The moderators
helped to do that!)
WORKING SESSION ONE (the earlier One and Two) on Day One: There are 5 Outcomes in the Project. Each
Group addressed one Outcome. The groups read the detail of the Outcome and discussed the outputs
planned for the Outcome. In particular the groups discussed:

1
2
3
4
5
What has happened already in progress to that outcome in the last year?
Are the Outputs and activities that are planned still relevant?
Are there gaps which need to be added to the suggested outputs activities?
Does the sector have the capacity to deliver these outputs, what capacities are needed?
Who are key partners in delivering these outputs?
Are indicators / targets suggested for the Outcome still relevant, can they be strengthened?
WORKING SESSION TWO Day Two: There were five themes to discuss. Each Group discussed one of the
following themes:
1. Training needs for EWCA / partners (all levels, short skill courses and longer term training)
2. Sustainable finance in all aspects – including tourism, PES, carbon
3. Project Assessments, Analyses, Frameworks and Studies suggested in the project, are they still
relevant? Are their gaps? How do you prioritise?
4. Community Issues in Conservation in Ethiopia
5. The Hunting Industry in Ethiopia – How it Contributes to Conservation
NOTE that Groups 4 and 5 were included as a result of discussion on day one. Groups were largely open,
although hunters were in group 5, many NGOs in Group 4 and many Wardens EWCA staff in Group 1
Outputs were conclusions as to relevance, needs, gaps, priority setting, partnerships, ways forward.
RESULTS FROM THE WORKING GROUPS:
Main results of the group work were
1. The revised project outcomes
2. The revised logical framework of the SDPASE.
3. The results from the regions/states
4. The updating the new draft map of the protected areas of Ethiopia.
18
1. THE REVISED PROJECT OUTCOMES
UNDP GEF stated that we cannot change the Outcomes without going back to GEF Secretariat / Council for
approval. We can however “tweak” the wording to improve clarity.
That we have done – in three ways: increasing clarity, making the wording reflect an outcome and
emphasis to the key issue. The changes are shown in the table below:
1: The Project Goal and Project Purpose remain as they were. These are:
2: The five Outcomes for Stage One remain virtually the same, but are slightly reworded to reflect new
realities: the institution is created (and the key emphasis is now strengthening the institutions), and the
policy is in place (and the key emphasis is implementing the provisions of the policy).
No
1
2
3
4
5
Initial Wording of Outcome
(Sept 2006)
Comment
Wildlife Protected Areas are
mainstreamed into national
development frameworks
Policy, regulatory and governance
frameworks are in place and
functioning.
Protected Area Agency has
capacity for planning and
managing the PA system Plan for
Ethiopia
New Protected Area management
partnerships are piloted and
replicated
Not formulated as an
Outcome2
Financial sustainability plan
developed and demonstrated
Not formulated as an
outcome
Assumes the frameworks
were not in place (the 2006
situation),
Strengthened to include
focus on improved PAs, as
well as system, and stress
increased capacity
Not formulated as an
Outcome
Revised Wording of Outcome (Dec 2008)
Protected Areas and Wildlife Conservation are
mainstreamed into the Development Framework of
Ethiopia, with greater political support and funding
Policy, regulatory and governance frameworks are
supported, leading to redefinition and implementation of
PA categories, with reduced land-use conflict.
Increased institutional capacity for Protected Area
Planning and Management, leads to functional system
plan and improved Protected Area Management.
New Protected Area Management Options are piloted,
developing best practice to be replicated across the PA
system.
Mechanisms for financial sustainability for Ethiopia’s
Protected Area System are developed and demonstrated,
for scale-up in Stage 2.
Outcomes for Stage 2. These are left as they were, and will be readdressed as the project moves closer to
the achievement of indicators and targets within Stage one, and assesses progress to reaching triggers
necessary to reach Stage two
Outcome Targets and Indicators. These are reformulated, and have quantifiable targets, which could be
monitored beyond the life of the Project
Outputs: There was a lack of clarity in the wording of the Outputs in the voluminous Project
Documentation, with different level of emphasis between the Proposal, the text in Prodoc, the CEO
2
An Outcome is a “change in the status quo” due to impact from the project. Merely having wildlife mainstreamed is
not enough, that mainstreaming needs to lead to significant change in the system
19
template and the log-frame. This lack of clarity was stressed during the Stakeholder consultations in the
Inception Workshop.
Outputs are being reworded, using more conventional Output language (i.e. ensuring that an Output is a
level or stage that can be achieved, and can be assessed by targets and indicators). The Outputs are
attached to more conventional real time indicators, with quantitative targets. Outputs have been written
into the updated log frame.
20
2. THE NEW PROJECT PLANNING MATRIX:
LOGICAL FRAMEWORK FOR SDPASE (REVISED DECEMBER 2008)
GOAL: Ethiopia’s biodiversity, ecosystems and ecological processes are effectively safeguarded from human-induced pressures and adequately
represented in a sustainable Protected Area System that is contributing significantly to economic development, both locally and nationally
Indicators
Outcome and Output
PROJECT PURPOSE Stage One: Enabling frameworks and
capacities for managing the system of protected areas
that have biodiversity, ecosystem and ecological process
conservation as major objectives will be implemented



Protected Area System Plan approved and functional
Protected Area System plan shows >60% of PAs are legally gazette, with management plans and staff
capacity.
Protected Area system plan has increased representation for ecosystem coverage, goods and services
OUTCOME 1: Protected Areas are Mainstreamed in the
Development Framework in Ethiopia, with Greater
Political Support.

Second Generation PASDEP includes strengthened text and indicators and targets for Protected Areas.

Policy and Strategy papers in other sectors seek linkage with Protected Areas



Overall funding for Wildlife Sector increases from Government, Donor and Business sectors.
Modalities for enactment of policy and new legislation in place.
Policy and regulations are under implementation, through System Plans and PA GMPs.
OUTCOME 3: Institutional Capacity for Protected Area
Planning and Management Leads to Improved PA
Management



Institutional re-structuring, mandate definition and staffing complete in HQ, key regions and PAs.
Net improvement in management effectiveness of protected area estate
Adoption of good practice model for each category of protected area
OUTCOME 4: New Protected Area Management Options
and Partnerships are Trialled, and Replicated through
Partnerships Catalyzed Across the Protected Area Estate
(Mainly Co-Finance)

Good practise models (success stories) available, documented and used for dissemination
OUTCOME 5: Financial Sustainability for Wildlife
Conservation in Ethiopia is Developed and Demonstrated
(for Implementation in Phase II)
 Ethiopia has a functional Financial Sustainability Plan for PAs approved, with components on tourism, PES,
Carbon., and increased government / donor support
OUTCOME 2: Policy, Regulatory and Governance
Frameworks are Supported, leading to redefinition of
protected area categories and reduced land-use conflict
21

PROJECT PURPOSE (Stage Two): Working in an enabled
environment, sustainable management of the system of
protected areas that have biodiversity, ecosystem and
ecological process conservation as a major objective is
ensured
Indicators to be developed as Stage 2 approaches, validated by Mid Term Evaluation
OUTCOME 1: Systemic capacity for protected area
management consolidated. Indicators below:
OUTCOME 2: Sustainable financing mechanisms
contributing to protected area budgets. Indicators below:
OUTCOME 3: Replication of good practice model across
protected area estate catalyzed
OUTCOME 4: Protected areas mainstreamed across all
relevant sectors
DETAILED FRAMEWORK FOR STAGE ONE
Purpose/Outcome/Output
PROJECT PURPOSE (Stage One):
Enabling frameworks and capacities for
managing the system of protected areas that
have biodiversity, ecosystem and ecological
process conservation as a major objective
are emplaced
OUTCOME 1 Protected Areas and
Wildlife Conservation are
mainstreamed into the
Development Framework of
Ethiopia, with greater political
Indicators
Baseline
 Protected Area System approved
and functional
 Protected Area System Plan
shows >60% of NPs and Sanctuaries
are legally gazetted
 Protected Area System Plan has
increased representation for
ecosystem coverage, goods and
services

 Policy and strategy papers in
other sectors seek linkage with PAs
 Overall funding for wildlife sector
increases from Government, Donor
and business sectors
 No other sector with partnership
with wildlife
 Federal Government 6,8 Million
Birr/annum
No such plan in place
Target Internal Mid Term

Draft plan under discussion
 Only 2 out of the 20 NPs and
Sanctuaries are gazetted
 Over 25 % of PAs are legally
gazetted

 All major biomes and
ecosystems have some coverage,
especially the South-western
forests, the Ogaden.
No PA system plan
 One sector with approved
partnership with wildlife sector
 Federal Government 12
Million Birr/annum
Target End of Stage One
 Protected Area System Plan
approved and adopted
 Over 60 % of PAs are legally
gazetted, others with gazettement
plans.
 All NPs and sanctuaries are on
the WCPA-list with correct
boundaries
 Case for PAs for ecosystem
services is adopted, with first PAs
agreed
 2 sectors with approved
partnership with wildlife sector
 Federal Government direct 15
Million Birr/annum, plus indirect 5
Million
22
support and funding
1.1 Major indicators from this PA
plan have been adopted in the
second gen. PASDEP
1.2 Increased protected area in
major watersheds of the
sustainable land management
program
1.3 Linkage with and adoption by
tourism sector of protected areas as
one of the key marketing strategies
OUTCOME 2: Policy, regulatory and
governance frameworks are
supported, leading to redefinition
and implementation of PA
categories, with reduced land-use
conflict.
2.1 Policy frameworks for Wildlife
Conservation supported at Federal,
 Indicators and targets are
“populated”, and the wildlife sector
contribution to Ethiopia development
is documented and disseminated
 Second generation PASDEP
includes strengthened text, indicators
and targets for PAs and wildlife
 Number of SLM watershed
programmes seeking protected area
status within catchments including
forests
 Area and % of protected area
within target catchments including
forests
 National Tourism Master Plans
and Programmes with increased
emphasis on wildlife tourism
 Number of tourists in NPs
continues to increase, with increase
in revenues to govt.
 Number of local
community/private sector ecotourism
sites increases
 Increase in wildlife tourism
promotion products (film, brochures,
web-sites)
 Modalities for enactment of
policy and new legislation in place.
 Policy and regulations are under
implementation, through System
Plans and PA GMPs.
 Indicators and targets not
populated
 New wildlife policy & proclamation,
regulations approved; guidelines
pending
 No guidelines for GMPs, other
implementation guidelines
 Implementation guidelines
published
 Guidelines for business
planning, management planning
available.
 Draft GMPs follow regulations
 Guidelines are implemented
across PA system.
 GMPs for 6 PAs follow
regulations and are under active
implementation
 Key components of Policy and
Regulatory Frameworks with

 Strategy is in place and
approved
 GMPs and business plans for
the major areas incorporate
 PASDEP includes only 3 indicators, 9
lines text on wildlife
 None (although starting discussion
via IFAD’s SLM Programme)


 PASDEP of 2011-2016
recognises PAs and wildlife as
important elements of sustainable
development of the country
 The real economic impact of
wildlife and PAs satisfactorily
described in the PASDEP
 Two watersheds under formal
discussion as to PAs for watershed
and potential PES
 PASDEP of 2011-2016
recognises PAs and wildlife as
important elements of sustainable
development of the country.
 PASDEP continues to use
wildlife / PA indicator statistics
 10,000 ha of PA including
forests established, >5% of
watershed
 Two national and regional
tourism plans with detailed links
to wildlife sector
 Increase by 15% over 2007 in
revenue in Nechsar, Bale, Simien
Abiata Shala, Awash
 20,000 ha of PA including
forests established, >10% of
watershed
 All national and regional
tourism plans with detailed links to
wildlife sector
 Increase by 40% over baseline
in nos and revenue in the 5 PAs plus
Mago, Omo

Increase by 30%

Increase by 50%

Increase by 50%

Increase by 50%
 Four (including Region and
private sector and community
agreements)
Zero %
Emphasis is minor
 Baseline is 2007 (see EWCA
statistics)

Baseline is 2007 (>5)

Baseline is 2007 (>5 local products)
No such strategies
23
Regional and Local levels
2.2 Policy implementation
supported through development of
key strategies and position papers.
implementation strategies in place
 Policy strategy components are
written into PA management plans
and work plans
 X Strategies with action points
are under implementation, nationally
 Strategic components not yet in PA
plans
No such strategy papers
 Management Plan Guidelines
incorporate strategy concepts
 Two (e.g. tourism, hunting,
sustainable financing) are under
implementation.
strategic concepts.
 GMPs for 6 PAs follow
regulations and are under active
implementation
 Four strategies are under
implementation
2.3 Strategy implementation
piloted in priority Protected Areas
and Landscapes, developing
synergies to Outcomes 1, 3, 4 and 5.
 Strategies are implemented in
PAs, including border marking, antipoaching reduces illegal off-take &
illegal grazing and cultivation
stopped, AIG, EE inputs
No such formalised strategies in place.
At least two strategies in all
demonstration sites and at least
one strategy started in additional
4 sites.
 Strategies lead to lessons
learned analysis and tool kits.
 At least two strategies in place
in 8 sites.
2.4 Protected Area categorization
modified to suit Ethiopian situation
 No unfeasible mandates for PA
authorities

 Some mandates presently not
feasible: (e.g. NPs free of people)
 Mandates of selected PAs
reflect real situation on the ground
 Mandates of PAs reflect real
situation on the ground
OUTCOME 3 Increased institutional
capacity for Protected Area
Planning and Management, leads to
functional system plan and
improved Protected Area
Management
 Institutional re-structuring,
mandate definition and staffing
complete in HQ, key regions and PAs.
 Net improvement in
management effectiveness of
protected area estate
 Adoption of good practice model
for each category of protected area

Restructuring complete in HQ, 2
regions and 3 PAs
 Restructuring in 5 regions and
10 PAs
 METT scores of pilot areas
increased by 10 points on the
average
 Good practice models
described and propagated
3.1 New Institutions at Federal
Level with Clarity of Mandates,
Internal Structures, and regional
linkages in place.
 EWCA has internal structure
reviewed, with TOR and mandates
agreed.
 EWCA has developed working
modalities with Regions over
conservation management at regional
level.
 Gap analysis complete and used
for improving PA system
 Initial structures in place
 New staff being recruited (Dec
2008)
 Still uncertainty as to optimum
landscape working
 All sections of EWCA with clear
mandates, TOR with targets.
 Two landscapes have trial
cooperative arrangements with
Regional authorities.
 Only rudimentary understanding of
gaps in PA system
 Gap analysis report available
and integrated in economic study
 System METT score (calculated
by the average METT score across
the system using only the areas
included in the baseline score, and
readjusted once new areas are
assessed or are designated)
increased by 12 points on average.
 Sections producing clear annual
reports documenting conservation
success.
 At least three Landscapes have
cooperative governance
arrangements between Region and
Federal authorities.
 New PAs started in identified
Gaps (like Coffee forests etc)
3.2 National Protected Area System
Plan Developed Using Gap Analysis,
Approved and Under
Restructuring on its way
 All Protected Areas in Ethiopia have
a METT score < 40

No good practice models yet
24
Implementation.
 Individual protected areas use
business planning as a standard tool
for protected area management
planning and monitoring
 Staff with appropriate business
planning skills (Master’s level
business planners, socio-economists,
and environmental economists)
employed by protected area
organization
 Career development planning for
staff within protected areas
organization exists
 Staff skill level of EWCA meets
requirements of mandates
 No business planning at the
protected area site level
 No business planning at system level
 No staff with business planning skills
 2 business plans at PAs
enacted

Career planning does not occur
 Career plans available for
senior staff

Systematic training do not exist
3.5 Institutional Capacity for
Training in Wildlife is Built and
Functional
 Number and quality of graduates
from training institutions adequate
 Scout training facility does not exist
 Warden training not practical
enough
OUTCOME 4: New Protected Area
Management Options are piloted,
developing best practice to be
replicated across the PA system
 Good practise models (success
stories) available, documented and
used for dissemination
 No good practise models available,
demonstration/pilot sites have still low
METT scores
 Training started according to
staff development plan, at least 3
trainings
 Scout training facility
established
 Assessment of training
institutions complete, contracts
issued for warden level training.
 METT scores for
demonstration sites increased by 6
%
4.1 Lessons Learned on
Management Modalities available
from pilot sites
 Good practice models applied to
other sites
 Few lessons learnt available (African
Parks, FZS)
 2 good practise models
available

4.2 Landscape Level Management in
Place, with functional Joint
Management Committees at
 Management effectiveness of
limited harvesting areas
 Joint management committees in
place and functioning
 No joint management committee
exists
 No limited harvesting areas using
guidelines
 2 joint management
committees are functioning
 New utilisation guidelines
applied in 2 cases
 Joint management committees
established in 4 demonstration sites
 Four limited harvesting areas
using agreed regulations /
guidelines (Trigger for Stage 2)
3.3 Both Protected Area System and
Individual Protected Areas Use
Business Planning as a Tool for
Management and Monitoring
3.4 Wildlife Staff at HQ and Field
Level with Functional Capacity and
Skills
 System business case
propagated by study (“A primer on
the economic arguments….”)
 Staff with business planning
skills in place
 Business plans and monitoring
systems adopted in 4 demonstration
sites and their regional support
authorities
 >70 %of staff have career
development plans (including
training opportunities). 6 trainings,
+ 3 MScs)
 Individual M&E system and
incentive mechanisms in place
 In-country training institutional
capacity starts producing the
required personnel
 Scouts are trained and up to
their tasks
 METT scores for demonstration
sites increased by 16 %
4 good practice models
available and applied
25
Selected Sites
4.3 Piloted Interventions in Priority
Protected Areas, and Landscapes.
 Strategic interventions prioritised
within EWCA – SDPASE are planned
and implemented in pilot PAs
None at present
At least 2 different interventions
in two PAs
 At least two different
Interventions in 6 PAs
OUTCOME 5: Mechanisms for
financial sustainability for Ethiopia’s
Protected Area System are
developed and demonstrated, for
scale-up in Stage 2
 Ethiopia has a functional
Financial Sustainability Plan for PAs
approved, with components on
tourism, PES, Carbon., and increased
government / donor support
 Government provides bulk of
financing (<20% needs). 0% offset by
generated revenues. No retention
scheme
 Sustainable financing options
are available and discussed,
Government input increases.
 Sustainable Finance Plan is
approved. Decisions on possible
Trust Fund mechanisms are made.
PES and Tourism fund flows start.
5.1 Financial Sustainability Plan is
developed for Protected Area
System
 Financial sustainability plan is
developed, decided upon and being
implemented

 Sustainable financing options
modelled and tested
 Sustainable financing plan
adopted
5.2 Tourism contributes
significantly to recurrent costs for
demonstration sites
 Tourism income is retained in the
demonstration sites
 No lodges within demonstration
sites
 No retention

 Proposals for retention
schemes available
 Each demonstration site has
appropriate visitor accommodation
in place
 Retention schemes in place
5.3 Co-finance secured for a further
four further sites (Beyond Initial
Demonstration Sites)
 The sector has forged strong
partnerships with donors, NGOs for
these sites, based on success stories
(see Outcome 4)

 2 Co financing agreements
have been signed
 The further sites are partly
funded from new sources
No sustainable financing plan exists
No co-financing for these sites
Investors apply for sites
26
3. THE RESULTS FROM THE REGIONS
Six regions were present and gave a short overview over the state of affairs in their regions:
Not present were Afar and Beneshangul Gumuz.
Regions
Amhara
Important PAs
Has founded a successful Protected Area Authority. The
Authority has fulfilled 3 out of 4 demands of UNESCO to strike
Simien from the list of the world natural heritage sites. Task nr.
4 remains, the resettlement of the people living inside its
boundaries.
New park: Blue Nile, Denkoro Chaka-Forest.
New areas under scrutiny.
Simien, Alatish NPs.
New PA: the Blue
Nile below Bahir
Dar. Denkoro ChakaForest, Community
Conservation Area:
Menz
Agency has close to 200 staff. There is strong political support.
Gambella
PAs are under the Culture, Tourism, Parks and Hotels
Commission. Gambella is the only NP. Not much emphasis by
regional authorities on PAs and biodiversity. Only 1 warden and
2 scouts posted for the 5000 skm of the park. Border not known
or ignored by authorities. Consequently investments and
settlements widespread in park.
Gambella NP
Controlled hunting areas presently not allocated, despite an
abundance of wildlife in some areas: white-eared Kob, Mrs.
Gray’s Lechwe.
Oromia
PAs are under the Bureau of Agriculture. Bale NP is the most
important one. GNP for Bale approved by Regional
Government: Several Controlled Hunting Areas. All PAs,
especially Abiata Shalla NP, are under huge population
pressure.
Bale, Abiata Shalla,
Kuni Muktar, Yabello
SNNPR
PAs are under the Culture, Tourism, Parks and Hotels Agency.
The agency has created 2 new NPs: Maze and Chebera
Churchura. Between Mago and Omo a new community
conservation area is being established.
Omo, Nechsar,
Mago, Yabello,
Maze, Chebera
Churchura.
Poaching more a threat than in other regions. Quote: Hamer. “I
prefer to shoot government cattle (buffalos) than slaughter my
cattle”.
Community
Conservation Areas
promoted.
There is strong political support and a large number of staff.
Somali
PAs are under the Bureau of Agriculture and are heavily
understaffed. Abundance of wildlife and endemic species of
Gerale
27
plants and wildlife especially in the Ogaden area, but only one
new Park, Gerale, no hunting areas.
Tigray
PAs are under the Bureau f Agriculture. So far one National
Park, Kafta Shiraro, which shares its border with Eritrea and is
important for Elephants because it harbours the northernmost
population of Elephants in Africa. 5 new areas under scrutiny.
No hunting areas.
Kafta Shiraro
4. A NEW AND UPDATED MAP OF THE PROTECTED AREAS OF ETHIOPIA
The PMU of SDPASE gave out a few copies of a new draft GIS computerized map of the Protected
Areas of Ethiopia, super-imposed on a topographic map of Ethiopia. This map was prepared at the
Technical University College GEO3 by Prof. Meissner.
The PMU asked for comments on the map as to correctness and completeness. Are some PAs
missing? Should we include potential Protected Areas? Those who got copies were asked to
contact the PMU (lakew.berhanu@gmail.com) with comments.
Those who would like copies – please ask the PMU – the file size by email is around 2 MB. The map
is shown on the title page (but is best shown on A3 paper). The map is shown on the title page.
CONCLUSIONS: WHAT WERE THE REACTIONS FROM THE PARTICIPANTS?
A) IN GENERAL



THERE WAS GREAT INTEREST – Most people and all working groups expressed interest in
SDPASE, and saw value in SDPASE as a conservation Project in Ethiopia.
All Groups in their Feedback said that SDPASE was relevant, was necessary (and was very late
in starting).
All groups said that there was a need for updating content of project documentation
B) The PROJECT DOCUMENT


EVERYONE said: This is a very complex document (set of documents) to understand. There is a
need to make the core parts of the document (goal outcome outputs) much clearer, to
outsiders, to partners and to those charged with implementation or parts of implementation.
Everyone said that the project needs to prepare better sets of documents for working groups.
C) PATTERNS OF CHANGE (General)
•
•
The wildlife conservation sector has progressed since the Project Document was first drafted.
The sector has progressed in the last year since The Project Document was signed
28
•
•
Key issues were the Proclamation setting up the Ethiopian Wildlife Conservation AUTHORITY; and
The new approved policy and regulations
D) PATTERNS OF CHANGE (Specific)
•
•
•
Comments were that the first stage of reform was in place (i.e. policy, new institution), but
that now the policy needs to be enacted, and capacity of the new EWCA needs to be built.
There has been a huge increase, but most needing training and skills.
A recurring comment was the main progress was at HQ – Federal level – there now needs to
be attention at REGIONAL level.
E) The FIVE OUTCOMES
•
The five Outcomes were all relevant
a) Mainstreaming (making PAs relevant to the national development process)
b) Moving the policy process forwards; from preparing to implementing policy.
c) Institutional Support: Focus on Capacity and Training
d) Learning from On Ground Experiences
e) Sustainable Financing
BUT underneath these large level OUTCOMES, i.e. at output / activity level
•
•
•
•
There is much less clarity:
The Project should therefore develop a clearer logframe / results matrix to provide such
clarity.
This logframe would focus on Outputs and Activities
Once this is done, there is value in sharing this with Stakeholders to validate the process –
partners – priority.
F) NETWORKING


One obvious outcome of the workshop was the positive networking between participants.
This was obvious from listening and observing workshop process, and this was reinforced
by the results of the Evaluation Forms. All groups of people wanted more and continued
contact with each other. This was said by regional staff, by EWCA and by the NGOs, donors
and civil society. The project must learn from that and invest in networking, which is an
essential first step to experience sharing, best practice dissemination and overall
knowledge management. Inviting the wardens (the staff on the ground, the cutting edge!)
is essential.
The new structure of the wildlife sector, with what were National Parks managed by the
Regions, to National Parks which are managed by the Federal EWCA, but which remain
surrounded by buffer zones of forest and people / regional land, will need quite complex
networking and partnership strategies that focus on the landscape level.
29

Such landscape planning is an essential part of the developing Protected Area SYSTEM of
Ethiopia.
G) CONCLUSIONS
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Project feedback was largely general. Participants did not have clarity of documentation to
be more specific.
The Project needs to focus on “HOW TO” do things.
The Proclamation / Policy bullet points need fleshing out in strategy papers
A clear priority remains the linkage to Regions – in both broad institutional terms, and from
the Project viewpoint
Revising documentation for update and clarity is a priority.
Develop draft position papers on key issues
The presentation on sustainable finance was compelling. We should use the Project to
attract more resources, from government, from donors and from new emerging sources
via PES (tourism, water, carbon)
The project should maintain principles of capacity building, sustainability and partnership.
You have the beginnings of stakeholder consultation process. BUILD ON THAT. Have part
two of the workshop, when there has been updating, when there is greater clarity within
each outcome. Bring in main partners.
30
Annex 1: DETAILS OF ASSESSMENTS, POSITION / POLICY PAPERS, STUDIES AND REPORTS
These are arranged in five main categories:
1) Mainstreaming into national development processes
2) Economic analyses and financial support, business planning
3) Training, skill development
4) Protected Area System planning
5) Specific position papers
Please note that the following list is tentative. Priorities might change in view of developments in EWCA and the sector, and papers listed below
might be developped and supported by other agencies/donors. Not all studies/papers have the same priority, thus some might be dropped
reflecting changes in priorities.
DETAILS OF ASSESSMENT AND STUDIES ETC
No.1
MAINSTREAMING INTO NATIONAL DEVELOPMENT PROCESSES
1.1.
Integrating (and institutionalizing) M & E process about Protected Areas into PASDEP. This includes the indicators and targets agreed on at
PASDEP start-up in 2006. Study will develop protocols for such data collection and modalities to integrate.
1.2.
The integration of EIA process on wildlife areas into PASDEP, with specific reference on reducing conflict between conservation and “unplanned”
development. The consultant will produce Guidelines for future EIA process and use past case history to illustrate issues.
1.3
A study on Protected Area impact on SLM / Land Degradation, e.g. around Simien in Amhara Region (dry mountains) and new Ogaden in Somali
Region (arid) PAs. The aim is to contrast in and out PA situations, comparing resource status and livelihood implications.
1.4.
To compile learning, and best practices on Sustainable Land Management within documentation to feed into a larger workshop on PA – SLM
interactions in general at a later stage in project.
31
DETAILS OF ASSESSMENT AND STUDIES ETC
1.5.
A field study on Protected Area and Poverty issues, with reference to selected Ethiopian protected areas (and transfer skills in such studies).
Study will look at positive and negative impacts and opportunities for improvement. Note that this feeds into later studies on community support,
training curricula, tourism linkages etc. Outputs include:
1) Detailed documents (with statistics) on impacts of Protected Areas on Local Livelihoods (including lost opportunity costs).
2) An understanding of these impacts within wildlife sector at all levels.
3) Recommendations to reduce negative consequences and improve positive feedback.
2
2.1
ECONOMIC ANALYSES AND FINANCIAL SUPPORT, BUSINESS PLANNING
To develop the overall “Business Plan” for the Wildlife Sector, looking at long-term needs and contributions from Federal/Regional levels. Factor
in the growing linkages from tourism and PES process. Advise on planning at system and PA level. This leads to Stage 2 of Project. Key Outputs
are:
1) The optimum and essential costs scenarios for the Wildlife Sector, factoring in major new PAs / staffing are outlined
2) Funding strategies are outlined showing present and anticipated government allocations, compared with regional norms. To review the existing
financing / business plans models and enabling legislation for ALL the regional wildlife units in Ethiopia.
3) To analyze the scope for PES (Payment for Ecological Services) issues around PAs - looking at potential for watershed services to the PA
system. Strategies to meet gaps between requirements and probable funding are outlined (looking at PES, Tourism, Carbon, Hunting etc)
2.2
To prepare the detailed economic assessment of Ethiopia’s PA system. (“Making the Economic Case”). This incorporates tourism and PES
planning information as outlined in Outcome 1.
Part two of the study uses this information to show growing importance of PA system to macro-economic and local micro-economic systems in
country, and show how to use this information to advocate for funding flows.
Part three of this study links the PA Business Plan models to the economic arguments.
2.3
Agreement on PES structures within Federal and Regional Authorities.
2.4
To list the main elements of existing wildlife policy and legislation and institutional arrangements on federal and regional level and their linkages
with other sectors etc in other regions. The study will present federal and regional law and policy and institutional set ups and consequences for
action on field level. The study provides lessons on best practice at regional level.
32
DETAILS OF ASSESSMENT AND STUDIES ETC
2.5
Ensure all PAs are on IUCN WCMC list. This study will work with authorities to improve PA gazettement reporting process. Key outputs include:
1) Clarity on PA categories, linking international typology to national categories.
2) Agreement on the functions of the UN List of PAs, Updating Ethiopia’s database
3) Advice on PA categories of value in Ethiopian context
3.
TRAINING, SKILL DEVELOPMENT
3.1.
An updated Training Needs Assessment for “In-Service Training”, and develop the Training Programme for all staff cadres (work with Training
Officer).
3.2.
To develop a training framework for Wildlife Guards - (Training Needs Assessment, Curriculum and Methodology) working with new Dept Training
Officer and co-finance partners for Guard (Scout) cadres. Providing links to Kenya Ranger Training School and others.
3.3.
To develop a training framework for new Wildlife wardens (Training Needs Assessment, Curriculum and Methodology) working with new Dept
Training Officer and appropriate training institutions. Providing links to CAWM Mweka Tanzania and KWS School Kenya)
3.4.
To develop the overall Knowledge Management system for the sector, including databases, computerized and hard copy records. Advise on
learning, and planning KM at federal regional and at PA level. This leads to Stage 2 of Project. Key outputs are:
1) A “SWOT” assessment of existing formal and informal knowledge management systems in Ethiopia’s “wildlife sector”.
2) Recommendations for strengthening such knowledge and information management, from government, NGOs and Academia
3) Demonstrations of KM mechanisms including web sites, databases, library storage etc.
4.
PROTECTED AREA SYSTEM PLANNING
4.1.
GAP-analysis: To advise on PA system ecological coverage, looking at total gaps and inadequacies in terms of size and design. Set out a biogeographic planning framework, which fits into GIS planning structures. This leads to Stage 2. Key Outputs are:
1) Building on the PA System analysis from PDF B, assess the current bio-geographic analysis of Ethiopia
2) Assess the coverage of current PA network against the best of bio-geographic and ecological systems (real & potential PAs)
3 Make recommendations for further improvements to PA system (new PAS, upgrading, dispersal, corridors, fragmentation)
33
DETAILS OF ASSESSMENT AND STUDIES ETC
4.2.
To describe best practises of business and management planning in the sector, especially experiences from partner’s initiative. To develop
national guide lines.
4.3.
To develop plans for an overall cost-effective GIS system for the wildlife sector (learn from Forests). Select local technical partners to undertake
training and set up systems. Advise on needs at federal / regional level. Key outputs from this “planning consultancy” include:
1) Assessment of current GIS situation in Ethiopia (training, practitioners, skills) with special reference to past forest expertise
2) An agreed outline of GIS Options for wildlife sector (including costs and benefits)
3) An approved contract setting out the development of a GIS system.
4.4.
5.
To assist EWCA in carrying out species conservation plans, analyse the consequences of these plans for the PA system, demonstrate
coordination with broader Africa scale plans for e.g. Elephant, Lion conservation.
SPECIFIC POSITION PAPERS
5.1.
To examine best practice, opportunities and constraints within existing working partnerships (Region to Development Partner, PA to Development
Partner, PA and Region to varied donor groups and larger NGOs; and PAs with the Private Sector) with a view to determining best practices for
future partnership. .
5.2.
Service Contract to University of Addis Ababa to commission student small scale field studies in priority PAs, to build greater partnership between
biodiversity researchers and wildlife sectors. Contract covers 3 years, to be governed by joint committee to decide criteria, priorities and timing.
Amounts increase as University builds capacity. Key Outputs include:
1) A network of wildlife researchers established, with greater awareness in academia of wildlife problems.
2) A set of research outputs that address priority issues in PAs
3) Protected Area field staff participate in field research and resource surveys, with linkages to academia.
34
DETAILS OF ASSESSMENT AND STUDIES ETC
5.3.
Service contracts to two field based civil society groups to undertake awareness raising, leading to increased cooperation amongst communities
around conflict PAs. Details of PAs to be decided after Inception process, but key outputs include:
1) Greater factual knowledge of background to community – conservation conflicts which can inform management
2) Knowledge can feed into management Plan and Community planning frameworks
3) A greater capacity in country to address socio-economic issues within the wildlife sector
5.4.
A review of the hunting sector: lessons and best practices on quota setting, hunting management and reserve conservation, as a technical study
to EWCA, involving local and international hunting organisations. Key Outputs include:
1) A review of present hunting concessions (historical trends in quota use, revenues and beneficiaries)
2) Strengthening of the private sector association with linkages top PA management and resident communities.
3) Recommendations for improving conservation management in key hunting areas of Ethiopia.
35
ANNEX TWO: LIST OF PARTICIPANTS (and contacts)
No.
Name
Organization
Position
Tel
E-mail
1
Sanne Van Aarst
HOA-REC
Program Officer
0913 122900
sannevanaarst@gmail.com
2
Dr. Yirmed Demeke
Wild for Sustainable
Development
Coordinator
0911 643388
yirmed.demeke@yahoo.com
3
Didumo Adar
CTPAC
Communication Officer
0911 397714
4
Aklilu Kebede
EWCA
Expert
0911 050451
5
Kahsay G/Tensay
EWCA
Department Head
0911 742003
kahsaygt@hotmail.com
6
Dr. Zelealem Tefera
FZS
Representative
0911 406483
zelealemtefera@fzs.org
7
Dereje Dejene
UNDP
Team Leader
0911 374837
derejedejene@undp.org
8
Abiyot Hailu
Awash National Park
Warden
0911 835780
abiot.hailu@yahoo.com
9
Lakew Berhanu
SDPASE
NPC
0911644889
lakew.berhanu@yahoo.com
10
Fride G/Yesus
EPAA
Manager
0111 552140
11
Edward Dwumfour
World Bank
Env. specialist
0911 501199
edwumfour@worldbank.org
12
Berhanu Jilcha
Bale Mountain NP
Warden
0911 957530
berhanubmne@yahoo.com
13
Adane Tsegaye
Chebra Churchura
Park
Warden
0913 357056
adanetsg@yahoo.com
14
Alehgne Taye
Maze National Park
Warden
0468840411
mazenationalpark@yahoo.com
15
James Young
Born Free Foundation
Project Director
0913 119054
James@bornfree.org.uk
16
A.N Roussos
Eth Rift Valley Safari
General Manager
0911 200704
ervs@ethionet.et
36
17
Mesfin Anbesse
Senkelle Swayne's
Hartebeest Sanctuary
Warden
0911 397067
18
Berhanu Gebre
Amhara Parks and
Protection Authority
General Manager
0918 340139
19
Asmare Goshu
Alatish National Park
Warden
0918 731460
20
Maru Brudier
Simien Mountain NP
Warder
0918 731742
21
Kassa Abuhay
Blue Nile Safari
Manager
0911 418317
22
Degu Tadie
Wildcode
Manager
0911 157583
wildcode@ethionet.et
23
Fiona Flintan
SC-US
0911 202716
fionaflintan@yahoo.com
24
Rowan Mactagart
ESTA
0912 600409
rmactaggart@counterpart.org
25
Shimelis Fedadu
EPA
Head, Planning
0911 644523
26
Aynalem Meshesha
MOFED
Expert
0911 214956
aynalemmfantaye@yahoo.com
27
Ayele Kebede
FfE
Program Manager
0911 013886
axmacali@yahoo.com
28
Wondwosen Sisay
EWCA
Warden
0911 024569
29
Cheire Enawgaw
EWCA
Expert
0911 673737
cherieenawgaw@yaoo.com
30
Janny Poley
RNE-HOA
First Secretary Emb.
011 3711100
jc.poley@minbuza.hl
31
Omot Agw Okwoy
Gambella National
Park
Warden
0911 478984
omotagwa@yahoo.com
32
Alan Rodgers
GTZ-IS
Facilitator
33
Hailemariam
G/Micheal
Tigrai BoARD
Team Leader
berhanug2003@yahoo.com
alan.rodgers@undp.org
0914 706768
haigeb2002@yahoo.co.uk
37
34
Dr. Graham Hemson
EWCP
Coordinator
0911 864628
ewcp@200.ox.ac.uk
35
Almaz Beyero
TPHA
Head
0911 823695
almazb2003@yahoo.com
36
Alemayehu Matewos
Mago National Park
Warden
0916 856427
37
Baffa Balcha
Nech Sar National
Park
Warden
046 8840409
38
Genet Garedew
EWCA
Department Head
011 5154844
39
Hailu Ayarra
ASLNP
Warden
0911 865753
40
Woubishet Zenebe
ONP
Acting Warden
41
Dr. Ludwig Siege
SDPASE
Chief Technical Advisor
0913073700
ludwig.siege@gtz.de
42
Ato Esayas Abebe
GTZ-IS
Deputy Director
0116622260
esayas.abebe@gtz.de
43
Zina Benjelloun
GTZ-IS
Head of Strategy and PR
0116622260
zina.benjelloun@gtz.de
44
Dr. Leonhard Moll
Austrian Dev. Au
Head Coordinator
011 1533835
45
Getachew Tilahun
Libah Safari
Manager
011 5509364
libah_safar.com.et
46
Ahmed Ali
Livestock, Crop &
Natural Resource Dev.
Bureau
Team Leader
0911 013886
axmacali@yahoo.com
47
Fetene Hailu
EWCA
Coordinator
0911 930974
fetenehailu@yahoo.com
48
Sisay Shewamene
Shield & Spear
International Safari
General Manager
0911209105
ssis@ethionet.et
garedewg@yahoo.com
38
ANNEX THREE: THE EVALUATION OF THE WORKSHOP
Introduction:
The Workshop team distributed a simple one page “Workshop Evaluation Form”, and 32
participants returned completed forms. The form asked for a three part rating (Satisfactory, Partial
Satisfactory, Non-satisfactory) on two issues:
Did the Workshop raise awareness and understanding of the SDPASE Project?
Did the Workshop allow stakeholders to participate and comment on SDPASE objectives
and outcomes, and so suggest changes in the Project Documentation?
The Evaluation Form asked participants on good and bad things about Workshop Process, Content
and Organisation, and to suggest what organisers could do to improve workshops in the future.
Respondents were divided into Four Categories: those from EWCA, those from Regional Wildlife
Agencies / Parks, those from Civil Society, Academia and Donors, and Hunters.
Responses:
Category
EWCA Staff
Regional Staff
Civil Society
Hunters
Totals
%
Satis
6
8
8
4
26
78
Awareness Question
Part Sat Non-Sat Total
1
0
7
4
0
11
1
0
9
0
0
4
6
0
32
22
0
100
Satis
5
8
4
3
20
65
Participation Question
Part Sat Non-Sat Total
1
1
7
4
0
12
5
0
9
1
0
4
11
1
32
34
3
100
Specifics: 1) What Could be Improved for Future Workshops?
No
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Issue
More time needed for discussion
Better, clearer materials to be given out
More and complete set of stakeholders
Allow participants to choose groups
Broaden process to allow more presentations
Repeat process in regions (and in PAs)
Include more training
Include Amharic translator (as English not good)
More leadership from EWCA
Do it at weekends
Hunter
1
1
1
Civil Soc
7
4
4
2
1
3
Region
5
5
1
EWCA
2
4
2
4
2
2
1
1
1
1
Total
15
14
7
2
2
9
2
1
2
1
This mirrored comments on poor aspects: NOT enough time, people needed more/ better materials, and
some stakeholders were missing (eg EWNHS, Community leaders, Academia).
2) What was good about the workshop?
39
No
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Issue
Opportunity for networking
Ability to learn about the Project and Wildlife Conservation in Ethiopia
Opportunity to suggest how to update document
Information Sharing
Time available to discuss important issues
Broad range of stakeholders, especially regions
Opportunities to integrate different conservation activities / perspectives
Good Facilities (apart from Parking!)
The bringing in of Park Staff
Good Facilitation / Moderation *
Number
12
12
11
9
8
8
5
4
4
11
(*The moderator thanks them all, especially the person who said “the Moderator was nice and good-looking”, but
notes the lady did not leave her telephone number).
Some Quotes

Good to have so many stakeholders and actors in nature conservation and tourism development
brought together (a donor)

It is always good to network, and good for us in civil society projects to be involved in such conservation
project process; let us have more of it, and ask us fir assistance if you need it; let us see how to
integrate more (Civil Society).

It was a good mix of stakeholders, especially bringing in the Park Wardens (CS).

It was good to bring together so many stakeholders, to know their views and needs (EWCA)

Some of the stakeholders were irrelevant to the Workshop. (EWCA)

The workshop allowed participation from many actors (EWCA)

It was good to share experiences from so many stakeholders (EWCA)

I got a lot of information about other PAs in Ethiopia, which I did not know about (Region)

The Discussion Groups allowed greater understanding of issues (Region).

It was good to have a group focus on capacity building (Region)

This allowed free and open discussion, especially for Park Wardens (Region)

Meeting all the stakeholders in conservation, including donors, was useful (Region).
Conclusions
For a first workshop this was a GOOD result. YES, the organisers are aware of time issues;, and the need for
better materials. There is an obvious need for more meeting, participation and interaction in general. There
is an obvious need for opportunity to debate specific interest topics, giving informed materials and time for
presentations from different stakeholders. SDPASE has resources to provide such input, which is a key part
of capacity building.
SDPASE Addis Ababa, 16.2.09
40