-
1- Project background
(click here)
-
Lebanon has
been designating protected areas and sites since the 1930's.
Responsibility for such designation and conservation
originally fell under the jurisdiction of what was then the
Ministry of National Economy. This mandate has since been
reallocated among several agencies including the Ministries of
Environment, Agriculture, and Water and Energy, as well as the
Directorate General of Antiquities under the Ministry of
Culture. The state of the existing classification system for
Protected Areas in Lebanon reveals an overall lack of a
structured and national categorization of protected areas. It
identifies no legally formal PA categories in Lebanon
subdivided into five groups of protected sites designated by
different national authorities with no clear rationale or
criteria for such grouping (table 1). Moreover, Arabic
terminology did not follow pace with international
nomenclature.
Table 1 The
different categories for Protected areas in Lebanon
GROUP
I
Protected sites established pursuant to decree no. 434
(28/03/42) modified by decree no. 836 (09/01/50) |
|
GROUP
II
Nature Reserves (Mihmiyat) established by laws since
1992 |
|
GROUP
III
Protected sites established by MoE decisions on the base
of the law of protection of natural sites (08/07/1939) |
|
|
GROUP
IV
Protected sites established by MoA decision before 1996
and based on the Forest Code (Law 85 from 1991) |
|
GROUP
V
Based
on the Forest Code (Law 558, dated 24/07/1996) and MoA
ministerial decisions |
|
Since 1996,
the Service of Protection of Urban Environment in the Ministry
of Environment has been focusing on the management of Nature
Reserves in Lebanon, which are continuously increasing, from 3
in 1996 to 10 in 2006, with regular requests submitted to the
Ministry of Environment (MoE) for the declaration of new
sites.
Stakeholders involved in protected areas management include
the Ministry of Finance, the Ministry of Water Resources, the
Ministry of Municipalities and Rural Affairs, municipalities,
non-governmental organizations, scientific institutions as
well as the local communities. This large set of stakeholders
and complexity in governance of PA is lengthening the
procedures and slowing reaction time. To date, and despite
several efforts, all protected areas still depend largely on
public funds to support both their conservation costs as well
as the infrastructure for visitors.
In addition, to date, all available information indicates that
conservation has been very successful at the most basic level
of protecting the biodiversity and habitats of the reserves
from well-known human pressures. Still, no functional
monitoring systems for biodiversity assessment nor an overall
conservation strategy defining conservation priorities have
been developed.
Despite significant progress on the development of capacities
to management of PAs, capacity development has been far below
what it could have been. Furthermore, the laws creating and
governing the reserves neither authorize the collection of
entrance fees, nor do they grant the legal status for the
reserve committees, which generated a number of problems
related to social security status, eligibility to access
international funding and donors, contracting management teams
and ensuring a job security, property and ownership etc…
-
2- Overall
objective
(click here)
-
SISPAM project was built on the previous experiences and
projects and has taken forward the sustainable management of
protected areas in Lebanon. It aims at reviewing the current
management structures in such a way as to identify and create
a stable and efficient structure overlooking site-specific
issues to concentrate on the national identity of Protected
Areas. This structure will ensure the development,
implementation and monitoring of management structures,
national plans.
-
3-
Operational Objectives
(click here)
-
1.
Agreement on the appropriate institutional structures for
integrated protected areas management in Lebanon:
The current Protected Area Project has piloted the use of
particular institutional mechanisms involving the MOE,
Government-appointed Committees, NGOs and management teams.
Positive as well as negative results have been observed, and
there is a need to review the implementation and compare this
with the best practice experience from other countries.
2.
A detailed implementation plan (the Protected Areas Action
Plan, indicating actions, time-frames and responsibilities,
and a means for monitoring and evaluating progress):
An agreed action plan with clear mandate to deliver is a
powerful mechanism to drive progress forward, and ensure
co-ordination and accountability of diverse institutional
actors.
3.
Appraisal of resource and capacity requirements to
successfully implement the Protected Areas Action Plan:
Incapacity is often the result of an uncoordinated approach
with wasteful overlaps and unresolved gaps. This component
will align existing capacity to key elements of the programme
and identify key capacity deficits as well as means to develop
lacking capacities.
4.
Agreement on the sustainable funding structures for the
implementation of the Protected Areas Action Plan:
There are diverse sources of funding including funding from
government, donors and revenue generation, but no adequate
agreement or means to ensure that the funding envelope is
strategically managed to secure an operational strategy.
5.
Effective implementation of pilot components of the Protected
Areas Action Plan;
including key outputs for capacity-building, financing,
protected area planning, protected area development and
protected area management;
6.
Effective management, administration and reporting structures
to the EC and MoE;
7. Focused
distribution of information to key stakeholders.
-
4-
Achieved Results
(click here)
-
Answering a number of expressed needs in Protected Areas (PAs) Management in Lebanon, SISPAM project (2004-2006) has exerted efforts and presented legally sound solutions for several concerns related to proper and sustainable PA management especially : absence of clear rational and defined criteria for PA designation, absence of overall national vision for Pas, irregular disbursement of supporting funds as well as
dependency of governmental financial support, unplanified and non oriented trainings, lack of job security for Management teams and subsequent instability in PA management, rigid bipolar management structure, private landowners excluded from PA network, plight situation
related to reporting and information sharing etc.....
Task 1: Stable Management structure for Protected Areas
The
National category system for Protected Areas in Lebanon, emanating from
a participatory approach (consultative meetings, round table, national
workshop) resulted in suggesting for Lebanon four categories of Protected
Areas with clear guidelines for designation and defined management bodies
(table 2). Legal endorsement of those suggested categories will require
approval of the draft decree defining criteria for PAs designation in
Lebanon prepared by SISPAM in collaboration with ECODIT Liban.
Improvement of the pre-existing management structure resulted
from a down up participatory approach extended on more than 3
years. It required reorganization of the work load and
administrative tasks between the different directly involved
parties: Ministry of Environment as tutelage body, Appointed
Protected Areas Committee as supervision body, and Management
Team as implementing/executive body; as well as redefining
proper management policies and procedures. Concerning Nature
Reserves (category A) and National parks (category B), those
amendments, described in the
management tool
kit for Protected Areas Management (Policies and procedures,
Job description)
were introduced as amendments to the draft
General Framework
Law for Protected Areas,
as well as in the
draft decree for
job description for PA staff
suggested by Ministry of Environment to be accepted by the
Council of Ministers and voted in the Parliament (for the
draft law). This latter also settles clear criteria for APAC
designation as well as it ensures proper job security to
Management teams by enabling them to be registered in the
National Social Security. The draft law has been prepared and
shall be submitted to the Parliament for voting.
Task 2: National Action Plan for Protected Areas
As a result from several one to one consultation meetings, the round table and the National Workshop, SISPAM, in collaboration with ECODIT prepared a
National Action Plan for Protected Areas. In order to properly endorse the action plan and ensure financial support by Lebanese Government (Ministry of Finance) for its implementation, a draft law program detailing required budget for each task as well as implementation schedule shall be submitted to parliament for voting. A set of
Monitoring and evaluating indicators were developed in order to monitor management effectiveness at site level as well as implementation success of the NAPPA.
Task 3: Appraisal of resource and capacity requirements to successfully implement the Protected Areas Action Plan
Resulting from survey on available national resources in terms
of integrated Protected Areas Management, a
National
Capacity Building strategy
for Protected Areas management was designed. Aiming at
improving its implantation over 5 years, a training unit
within the Ministry of Environment should endorse this
responsibility in order to assess training needs on yearly
basis and ensure that adequate training sessions are duly
followed up by concerned parties.
Task 4: Sustainable financing strategy for Protected Areas
In addition to a consolidated
database
highlighting international funding opportunities related to
Environmental issues and specifically to Protected Areas, SISPAM project in collaboration with Khattar Torbey
(legal and financial expert), developed a set of sustainable
mechanism offering alternative financing options for the
Protected Areas Sector in Lebanon. Those mechanisms are
summarized in the
Sustainable financing strategy for Protected Areas
and detailed reports can be claimed directly at the Service of
Protection of Urban Environment at the Ministry of
Environment.
Task 5: Pilot implementation of key elements and adaptively
management of implementation of Protected Areas Action Plan
In reference to the National Action Plan for Protected Areas (NAPPA), SISPAM project developed a log frame for timely realization of key elements, detailing activities that were executed in the framework of the project as well as an implementation schedule for forecasted activities.
Task 6: Effective management and reporting to EC
All progress reports, and the Interim report are available at
the Service of Protection of Urban Environment/ Ministry of
Environment, and the
Final
report
and the
Laymen’s
report
are available for download.
Task 7: Dissemination of key outputs of the project
A set of key outputs, available as printed version, can be
downloadable from SISPAM website as pdf versions, they enclose:
-
National Action Plan for Protected Areas Management (english pdf version)
-
National Capacity Building Strategy (English/ Arabic)
-
Sustainable strategy for financing Protected Areas (English/ Arabic)
-
Category system for Protected Areas in Lebanon (English/ Arabic)
-
Conservation need in Mediterranean Wetlands (English pdf version)
-
Management tool kit for Protected Areas including
-
-
Monitoring and evaluation indicators for PA management
(English pdf version)
-
- Job description for proper PA management (English pdf
version)
-
-
Policies and procedures for improved management (English pdf
version)
-
Management of Protected Areas in Lebanon (laymen’s report)
(English/ Arabic)
Acknowledgments
Success is not something you achieve overnight, but something you become through collaborative endeavors and overcoming unexpected obstacles. The only road to achievement is that paved with perseverance, determination, and support. Even when merit is usually attributed to a single party, accomplishments can only be realized through the involvement of many hidden arms that provide the material and mental encouragements necessary for success.
We acknowledge the devoted participation of the Service of Protection of Urban Environment at the Ministry of Environment in realizing SISPAM's objectives. We value the significant contributions provided by the UNDP team and EC Life who played an essential role in the endorsement of this project. We also direct our sincere appreciation to the APAC members, the management team, and all the project's staff and colleagues whose mutual cooperation facilitated the achievement of the project.
Finally, we would like to thank all individuals and organizations who have contributed in any minor or major way to the project's success.