Business Planning for Protected Areas Building capacity for the by zim17557


									Business Planning for Protected Areas
Building capacity for the implementation of the CBD
Programme of Work on Protected Areas


South Eastern European Workshop
Organized by the German Federal Agency for Nature Conservation,
WWF International, The Nature Conservancy in cooperation with the
CBD Secretariat

held at

Isle of Vilm, 3-7 December 2008

financed by the Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature
Conservation and Nuclear Safety of Germany
South Eastern European Workshop on Business Planning for Protected Areas      Vilm, 3-7 Dec 2008


Workshop background, purpose, objectives, and organization                               3
Acronyms and Abbreviations                                                               4
Business-Oriented Financial Planning for Protected Areas                                 6
Experiences and Lessons from SINAC’s Financial Strategy                                  7
The Financial Analysis: Activity Based Cost Accounting                                   8
Assessing institutional and legal barriers for improving financial planning              9
Applying ABC for realistic financial needs and gap analysis                             10
Innovative Financing Model – Sečovlje Salina Nature Park (SSNP)                         11
DINARIC ARC ECOREGION – Protected Areas for a Living Planet                             12

Financial mechanisms classification and options: Revenue Mechanisms                     13
Sources of revenue and environmental fiscal reform                                      16
Screening of Financial Mechanisms exercise                                              17
Environmental Fiscal Reform                                                             18
Outline of an environmental fiscal reform                                               20
Forever Costa Rica                                                                      20
Results of RAPPAM in Slovenia and recommendations                                       22
WWF Danube-Carpathian Programme                                                         23

Formulation of the Financial and Business Plans                                         24
Outlining of a system-level financial plan and business plan                            26
Economic Impact of PAs                                                                  26
German NP Campaign: Wadden Sea NP                                                       27

Supportive actions at the national level                                                28
Supportive actions at the regional level                                                30
Concrete steps and milestones in development Business /Financial plans                  31
Preparation of National Action Plans / National Road Maps                               32
Financial Planning Survey Results                                                       32

Conclusions                                                                             34

 1 Programme of the workshop
 2 List of participants
 3 Exercise sheet “Applying ABC for realistic financial needs and gap analysis”
 4 Information on the DINARIC ARC ECOREGION – Protected Areas for a Living Planet
 5 RAPPAM goals of Slovenia
 6 Financial plan for a PA in Albania
 7 Financial plans for PAs in the other countries of the workshop
 8 National Action Plans/ Road maps of the countries of the workshop

Presentations               Group works

South Eastern European Workshop on Business Planning for Protected Areas        Vilm, 3-7 Dec 2008

Background of the workshop:

-   CBD Programme of Work on Protected Areas was adopted in 2004
-   State parties were asked for support for the implementation
-   2006-2007: series of regional workshops on the review of implementation and building
    capacity; 2 workshops held on Vilm in 2007
-   Follow up through regional programmes, training workshops on specific issues identified in
    the region, and other means
-   Financing of protected areas, and in particular business planning, was identified as an
    important area for capacity building and improvement in South Eastern Europe

The workshop was organized by the Federal Agency for Nature Conservation, WWF International
and The Nature Conservancy (TNC) and mainly financed by the Federal Ministry of the
Environment, Germany.
It was held in December 2008 at the International Academy for Nature Conservation on the Isle of
Vilm, in Germany.

Workshop purpose:
This workshop was intended to provide an overview for countries in South Eastern Europe of the
fundamentals of Financial Analysis, fundamentals of selecting financial mechanisms and
formulating a financial plan.

Objectives of the workshop:

-   Understand key elements of sustainable finance and PA business planning
-   Know where you are in the process
-   Develop a road map for moving forward
-   Create a model business plan for at least one PA in your country
-   Establish a learning network of practitioners

Organization of the workshop:
The general structure of the workshop was as follows, and the detailed final agenda is attached
as Annex 1.

-   Day 0: Welcome, participant introductions, general overview of the workshop
-   Day 1: Fundamental of Financial Analysis
-   Day 2: Fundamentals of selecting financial mechanisms and formulating the Financial Plan
-   Day 3: Formulating the Financial Plan, national presentations of the Plans
-   Day 4: Wrap up, discussing workshop survey results, workshop evaluation

Marlon Flores and Guillermo Chan, two top sustainable finance practitioners from The Nature
Conservancy took the lead, and expert input was provided by Jamie Ervin (TNC), Stella Satalic
(WWF European Policy Programme – Dinaric Arc Ecoregion), David Strobel (WWF International,
Danube-Carpathian Programme) and Andrej Sovinc (Secovlje Salina Nature Park – Slovenia).
Twenty-three participants came from 9 countries: Albania, Bulgaria, Croatia, Hungary,
Montenegro, Romania, Serbia, Slovak Republic and Slovenia.
The full list of participants with their contact details is given in Annex 2.

South Eastern European Workshop on Business Planning for Protected Areas         Vilm, 3-7 Dec 2008

Acronyms and Abbreviations

ABC               Activity Based Cost Accounting
ASP               Natural Protected Area
BfN               German Federal Agency for Nature Conservation
BiH               Bosnia and Herzegovina
BP                Business Plan
BRESCE            Regional Bureau for Science and Culture in Europe
CBD               Convention on Biological Diversity
CCC               Cable Car Company
CERI              Carpathian EcoRegion Initiative
CI                Conservation International
CIF               Cost, Insurance, Freight
CNPA              Carpathian Network of Protected Areas
CPAMEMT           Carpathian Protected Areas Mmanagement Effectiveness Measurement Too
CZ                Czech Republic
DAE               Department of Agricultural Economics
DAE               Dinaric Arc Ecoregion
DJN               Dajti National Park
DPA               Directory of Protected Area
EAG               Early Action Grant
EC                European Commission
EFR               Environmental Fiscal Reform
EU                European Union
FAO               The Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
FF                Forestry Fund
FN                National Fund
FP                Financial Plan
FPN               National Parks Fund
FSC               Forest Stewardship Council
FTA               Forestry Agenda
FVS               Wilderness Life Fund
G/S               Goods and Services
GEF               Global Environmental Facility
GIS               Geographic Information System
GOCR              Gobierno de Costa Rica (Costa Rica's Government)
GRUAS             The name of a process for Costa Rica's National Level Ecological GAP Analysis
HCVF              High Conservation Value Forests
HD                Habitats Directive
HNVF              Healthy Neighborhoods Venture Fund
IUCN              The Union for the Conservation of Nature
LAC               Latin American Countries
LDGC              Lower Danube Green Corridor
MA                Ministry of Agriculture
MOE               Ministry of Environment
MoEFWA            Ministry of Environment Forestry and Water Administration
MOEW              Ministry of Environment and Water (Bulgaria)

South Eastern European Workshop on Business Planning for Protected Areas       Vilm, 3-7 Dec 2008

MP                Management Plan
MPA               Marine Protected Areas
NFA               National Forest Administration (Romania)
NGO               Non-governmental Organization
NISP              National Implementation Support Programme for the CBD PoWPA
NNRR              Natural Reserves
NP                National Park
NR                Natural Resources
OECD              Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development
PA                Protected area
PA4LP             Protected Areas for a Living Planet programme
PES               Payment for Environmental Services
PNE               Patrimonio Natural del Estado (State Natural Equity)
PoWPA             Programme of Work on Protected Areas
RAPPAM            Rapid Assessment and Prioritization of Protected Area Management
SEA               Strategic Environmental Assessment
SFA               State Forestry Agency
SINAC             Sistema Nacional de Areas de Conservacion – Costa Rica
SINANPE           System of Protected Areas in Costa Rica
SK                Slovak Republic
SNV               Netherlands Development Organization
SSNP              Sečovlje Salina Nature Park
SW                South West
TEN-T             Trans European Network for Transport
TNC               The Nature Conservancy
ToR               Terms of Reference
UN                United Nations
UNDP              United Nations Development Programme
UNEP              United Nations Environmental Programme
UNESCO            United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
USAID             United States Agency for International Development
USD               United States Dollar
VC                Visitor
VN                Visitor Number
WWF               World Wide Fund for Nature

South Eastern European Workshop on Business Planning for Protected Areas          Vilm, 3-7 Dec 2008

                                                   Day 1

Business-Oriented Financial Planning for Protected Areas: A Tool for Financial Success
Marlon Flores
Senior Advisor, TNC – Conservation Finance and Fiscal Policy – Global Protected Area Team

Number of PA and PA coverage is constantly increasing worldwide – it is good, but problems
appear: existing financial sources are not enough and it is hard for PAs to find new funds and
donors. Financial gaps are getting bigger and bigger.

Traditional Approach to PA Financing:
   - Limited government funding
   - Site-level approach and international project-based (USAID / GEF / TNC /WWF / CI)
   - Trust Fund: Endowment, Sinking, Revolving
   - Capacity aspects are usually not addressed.

PAs need to broaden their range of vision and see the opportunities not only in the traditional
funding (central funding, international projects, Trust Fund), but also in business models (use
business principles, market analysis, business plans, dedicated staff and strategic partnership,
long term financial planning, promote fiscal reform).

PAs have to realize that they need to use at least the following basic business principles:
   - Realism
   - Supply/Demand connection
   - Pro-investment environment
   - Efficiency
   - Diversification
   - Innovation
   - Transparency
   - Accountability

PAs all over the world need financial sustainability:
   - The ability of a country to meet all costs associated with the management of a protected
        area system (central unit and PAs)
   - Implies “supply” (additional funding) and “demand” (managing financial needs). Financial
        sustainability needs to be addressed from both sides of the financial equation.

Sustainable financial planning (financial analysis, cost reduction strategies, assessment of
revenue mechanisms, reform of the legal and institutional framework, and implementation of the
financial plan) is a key element for reaching financial sustainability.

South Eastern European Workshop on Business Planning for Protected Areas          Vilm, 3-7 Dec 2008

Working at a system level is more efficient, because:
   - Activities required at a national level can affect all PAs (fiscal reform, funds management)
   - Activities require coordinated effort and support from central governmental institutions
   - Sites often require similar activities → cost-effective to provide these centrally (training,
   - Fundraising can be more effective if coordinated centrally
   - System level planning allows cross-subsidization between sites.

Financial Planning road map:
    1. Financial Analysis (needs/gaps) / Financial System Assessment
    2. Screening and selection of revenue mechanisms
    3. Formulation of financial and business plans

Unfortunately there are always barriers to sustainable finance:
   - Financial: Government budget allocations are below needs. Poor diversification of
        revenue sources.
   - Structural – Institutional: Legal, political and institutional constraints to innovation,
        change and cost-effective operations.
   - Leadership: PA managers are ill equipped and poorly motivated to promote
        diversification of revenue and cost effectiveness.
   - Technical capacity: Limited technical knowledge on financial planning, implementation
        of financial mechanisms and market opportunities.

Experiences and Lessons from SINAC’s Financial Strategy
Guillermo Chan
The Nature Conservancy – TNC

Integrating the Planning process:
SINAC’s Financial Strategy    →
Capacity Strengthening        →               SINAC → NISP/EAG ← TNC
Monitoring and Management     →
GAP assessment                →

PNE: GRAUS, SINAC’s Effectiveness and monitoring, ASP Management
Human Capacity building (training), Institutional Framework (structure), Information system
FN Assessment, Incomes, GAP, Annual workplan, Long-term financial plans

Income Identification and Quantification Process:
Financing Sources: Ordinary budget, Special Funds (FPN, FF, FVS), Other sources (NGOs, CI,

South Eastern European Workshop on Business Planning for Protected Areas       Vilm, 3-7 Dec 2008

Example of financial needs plan:

Type of Expense                               Average

Personnel                                     47.9%
Training                                       3.9%
Operational Expenses                          13.3%
Equipment                                     13.7%
Infrastructure                                14.2%
Maintenance                                    7.1%
TOTAL                                        100.0%

Example of an income composition:

Income Composition                            Average

Ordinary Budget                               45.2%
Park Fund                                     34.4%
Forest Fund                                    2.2%
Wildlife Fund                                  0.1%
Private resources                             18.1%
TOTAL                                          100%

Financial Strategy General Conclusions:
    - It is necessary to up-date and complete the strategic planning process
    - First financial exercise at the system level that used standardized information
    - Level of detail that allows making projections and scenarios easily
    - Lack of homogeneous working methods and procedures
    - Lack of controls in income collection
    - There is a need for integrated accounting information
    - It is necessary to strengthen the human team throughout the system, both financially and
       administratively (training)
    - It is urgent to up-date rates and fees (income, need, gap).

The Financial Analysis: Activity Based Cost Accounting
Marlon Flores

Financial Analysis:
1. Assesses income, costs, needs, expenses
2. Defines “basic” and “optimal” needs
3. Uses metrics to link conservation objectives, programs and costs
4. Defines financial gaps (for basic and/or optimal levels)
5. Identifies investment priorities
6. Identifies cost reduction opportunities
7. Fundamental for developing reliable financial and business plans.

South Eastern European Workshop on Business Planning for Protected Areas              Vilm, 3-7 Dec 2008

In the case of PAs usually there is a disconnection between conservation goals and costs. With
the help of ABC Accounting it is possible to link PA Objectives & Goals with Costs.

Activity–Based Cost Accounting (12-step process)
Key aspects:
    - Separate all activities into program areas
    - List the key metrics for mission critical and optimal states
    - Allocate expenditures and investments by program area
    - Calculate the resources required to meet mission critical and optimal states
    - Calculate the gap between currently available resources and required staff, non-staff and
        investment resources
    - Complete the summary financial statement.

ABC Accounting helps to find out how big the financial gap (difference between existing funding
and needs) is.

It is also important to reduce costs so that the financial gap can be minimized:
• Reduce personnel, equipment, program costs
• Employ strategic alliances / volunteers
• Improve financial systems (Funds management)
• Co-manage PAs.

Small groups work:
Assessing institutional and legal barriers for improving financial planning

1. What are the major barriers to an enabling legal and institutional framework for
sustainable finance in your country?

-   Protected Areas’ budget is set by governments
-   Allocations that go from the central government to the PAs are not enough
-   There are also other sources of money – for example from Information centres, but money
    first goes to the national level (government’s budget) – it will be distributed centrally – usually
    not in the way it should be
-   The worst happens when money doesn’t go back to protected areas at all (for example in
    Bulgaria) – “Black box”
-   Lack of well trained staff and managers, they need knowledge and good management plans
    for protected areas
-   National parks do not have the right to use concessions, but the Parks have to pay a fee to
    companies for example for using water (Croatia)
-   Nature parks don’t adapt management plans – there is no base to do ABC accounting
-   In Romania the main problem is that the Protected Areas are part of the National Forest
    Administration. Being part of NFA means that the National Parks are equal to companies, so
    it is even harder to receive money in this way. The Ministry of Environment doesn’t give
    money to NFA even though they apply through projects.
-   No legal framework for environmental services (Albania)

South Eastern European Workshop on Business Planning for Protected Areas            Vilm, 3-7 Dec 2008

-   In Montenegro there is no system of Protected Areas, the national parks exist separately as
    private enterprises – here conflict appears between protecting wildlife or generating money
-   Lack of governmental vision, political will and good political leadership – agriculture, health,
    etc. are much more important and supported than nature conservation – No recognition of the
    importance of nature tourism (Hungary)
-   In Germany it is not possible to make revenue by national parks, entrance fees are not
    accepted by the public – a good solution could be: donations from the Ministry of Education
    to the parks instead of charging the students
-   Common conclusion: there are too many priorities in the Protected Area Management Plan
    what to do → Conflicts appear: what to prefer amongst nature protection, improvement of
    tourism services, project development?

2. How would you design the process for assessing the legal and institutional framework
for sustainable finance in your country?

-   Cross-sector coordination (environment and water, agriculture, forestry) is needed
-   Vision for PAs!! – There is a need for proper political leadership
-   Clear objectives of PAs – identify what PA is for – based on that, implement management
-   Once a PA has a management plan it is important to know how the legal institutions work.

Small group work:
Applying ABC for realistic financial needs and gap analysis

Actual exercise is attached as Annex 3
Participants find this exercise:
    - Hard, since it is difficult to quantify budget numbers
    - Easy for those who have a management plan, since you just copy the available
    - Helpful
    - Others thought one example is OK, but to prepare an ABC Accounting system for the
        whole PA would be really hard and time consuming.

Participants thought they would need the following things to begin and/or institutionalize this
process in their agency or country:
    - Management plan
    - Proper political leadership
    - Make the agency/country be interested in this process
    - Clarify what the benefits are
    - Secure the allocation of the budget
    - Skilled staff

South Eastern European Workshop on Business Planning for Protected Areas            Vilm, 3-7 Dec 2008

Innovative Financing Model – Sečovlje Salina Nature Park (SSNP)
Andrej Sovinc
Secovlje Salina Nature Park – Slovenia

Park’s Identity:
- Area: 650 ha (Lera, Fontanigge)
- Ownership: 97% state owned
- N° of villages: 0, N° of inhabitants: 0
- Important species: 288 bird sp., 45 plant sp., invertebrates, amphibians, fish, reptiles…
- Important habitats: estuary, mudflats, halophytes, salt meadows…
- Traditional salt-works; supportive to wildlife and habitats.

Protected area – legal background:
- Nature Park (designated by the Government of the Republic of Slovenia in 2001)
- Cultural Heritage Monument (2001)
- Ramsar site (1993)
- Natura 2000 site (2004).

Situation in the Salina before 2002:
- Traditional salt-production is a pre-condition for a diversity of habitats and wildlife, dependent
    of water regime managed by man
- Due to high production costs of salt and invasion of much cheaper salt from N Africa to
    European market, the former managers of the area almost ceased with salt production and
    have not maintained water management infrastructure for decades
- The dykes and the salt basins were therefore deteriorated, there was no control over water
    regime – disturbances for wildlife and habitats, the area was a “paper-park” without
    management and there was a chaos caused by uncontrolled visitation.

Year 2002 – the mobile telecommunications operator MOBITEL acquires the company SOLINE
Salt Production Ltd. – in order to ensure restoration, preservation and development.
The responsibility for the management of the PA was given to the private company Mobitel/Soline
Salt-production Ltd. by concession contract – 20 years. Mobiltel has to pay a minimal annual fee
and has to manage the park according to the approved management plan. It has the right to
share the profit from tourism and salt production and to use the images from the area for

Reasons why Mobitel decided to invested in Sečovlje Salina Nature Park:
- Growth of income from salt sale (promotion of a “green product”)
- Growth of visitor numbers and income
- New tourist infrastructure in the surroundings of the Park area (spa resort)
- Better corporate reputation
- Preservation of natural and cultural heritage – good promotion tool for the company

Currently, 62% of the park’s budget comes from Mobitel, the rest is government contribution,
projects, donations, water management, and park income. The plan is to make the park more
self-sufficient - though they are unsure when this can happen.

South Eastern European Workshop on Business Planning for Protected Areas               Vilm, 3-7 Dec 2008

What has changed since the year of 2002:
- 36 km of dykes restored, 12 buildings reconstructed, 18 salt-pans renovated: increase in salt
  sale, 20 direct new jobs created
- conditions have improved for habitats and wildlife
- trade mark programmes and new park activities were developed – 5 times more visitors
  within 5 years
- 2008 was the first year when the nature park didn’t close with negative budget numbers.

Even though the park benefits greatly from the company’s experience in financial management,
economic growth and market approach, the park staff should not forget the pure conservation
goals, the “non-profitable” activities, and the nature itself.

                                                   Day 2

DINARIC ARC ECOREGION – Protected Areas for a Living Planet
Stella Satalic
WWF European Policy Programme – Dinaric Arc Ecoregion

Project duration: 2007-2011, implementing agency: WWF Mediterranean Programme Office

Programme goal: Create enabling conditions for the implementation of the CBD PoWPA
(representative, effectively managed and sustainably financed PA network).

3 pillars of work: Biodiversity info, Capacity building, PA financing/business plans –
securing/improving sustainable finance of PAs.
Memorandum of Understanding is signed.

 CBD Programme of Work on          Contribution      of    Habitats        References     to additional
 Protected Areas (PoWPA)           Directive (HD)/ Natura 2000,            actions needed at EU or
                                   EC 2006 Action Plan or other            national level/PoWPA goals
                                   EU Instruments                          and activities
 Programme Element 3: Enabling activities
 Goal 3.4: To ensure financial HD Art 8 possibility for EU co‐             3.4.1 by 2005, conduct a
 sustainability of protected areas financing for Natura 2000               national level study of existing
 and national and regional                                                 funds, financial needs and
 systems of protected areas                                                options for meeting those

Objective 1: PA gap analysis-GIS Corine, Emerald, Biodiversity targets, website
Objective 2: Scorecards, Maps of responsibilities, Capacity Building Questionnaires, RAPPAM
country plans
Objective 3: Big Win action plans, Big Win mapping of donors, Training on PA financing (Vilm,
Dec 08),

South Eastern European Workshop on Business Planning for Protected Areas                  Vilm, 3-7 Dec 2008

Big Win for Dinaric Arc: Joint statement signed on 29th May 2008 in Bonn
National Commitments:
- Establishment of new PAs (13)
- Enlargement of existing PAs
- Improvement of PA management
- Transboundary cooperation

More detailed information on Joint Statement 1 and 2 and on Succeeded Activities: see Annex 4.

Financial mechanisms classification and options: Revenue Mechanisms
Marlon Flores

Screening and Selection of Revenue Mechanisms

Protected Area revenue mechanisms:
1. Entry fee reform
2. Water user’s fee
3. Voluntary contributions in restaurant and hotel bills
4. PA trust (3 forms: 1. Endowment: Capital that is put aside generates interest, which is solely
    used 2. Sinking: money is used up over time, 3. Revolving: Money is spent, fund is
    replenished again)
5. Collection of spare currency
6. Co-management with Amigos of The Park Foundation
7. Gift & merchandise shop
8. PA volunteer program.

Based on how complex it is to implement these above mentioned revenue mechanisms and how
big or low their impact is, each of these mechanisms can be classified using the following table:

                                                       Implementation complexity
                                                    Low                      High

      Relative impact       High             Act immediately                   Start action
                                                                            (long-term view)

                            Low           Act opportunistically            Low priority / Drop

A. Identification of goods and services (G/S) of PA
B. Search for potential customers (investors) for the identified goods and services
C. Determination of the financial mechanism to tie investors to the identified goods and services
(fees, concessions, grants)

South Eastern European Workshop on Business Planning for Protected Areas            Vilm, 3-7 Dec 2008

Feasibility Analysis of Financial Mechanisms
(It is recommended to hire a consultant to prepare the Feasibility Analysis, 10-20 pages)
Focus should be on identifying two or more operative models to implement a financial mechanism.
Based on this analysis, the best operational model can be selected.

    -    Description of different options
    -    Advantages and disadvantages
    -    Market analysis: customers, demand, competition, market, costs, suppliers, location,
         resources, staff
    -    Political viability and fiscal reform (legal/ regulatory)
    -    Social viability
    -    Financial analysis (investment/ return)
    -    Risk analysis
    -    Comparative analysis
    -    Recommendations.

Commonly-cited reasons for not carrying out a Feasibility Analysis:
   - Because other parks are already using it
   - Another feasibility study already exists
   - They are just ways for consultants to make money
   - It has already been carried out by the company that will be in charge of implementing the
     financial mechanism
   - The feasibility study (and business plan) can be conducted by park staff
   - Better carry out a survey, increasing park entrance fees, and allocating resources for
     urgent needs.

Reasons for carrying out a Feasibility Analysis:
   - Define the scope of the project
   - Identify the best business operating model
   - Identify reasons not to proceed
   - Increase the possibility of success (identifies risk and risk mitigating factors)
   - Provides accurate information for better decision making
   - Expand possibilities for investment in protected areas
   - Help to secure financing from investors or donors.

Innovative Financial Mechanisms in Latin-America:
1. Peru, FTA (free trade agreement), #18.3.4. Forestry Agenda. Increase of approximately
USD 15 million to strengthen patrolling and control of illegal logging through a free trade
2. Increased governments allocations to the park system: Mexico 40% and Colombia 100%
3. Debt-for-Nature swap in Guatemala: USD 1.5 million (next 15 years) and in Costa Rica: USD
26 million (USD 1.6 M per year)
5. Water Fees in Ecuador: 1% of water fees earmarked to protect national parks. Revenue goes
to an endowment fund for 9 Pas (USD 0.5 M per year);
6. Municipal funding for watershed protection in Bogotá, Colombia (Water fund, USD 15 million).

South Eastern European Workshop on Business Planning for Protected Areas          Vilm, 3-7 Dec 2008

Revenue sources for Protected Areas:

I. Non-market based options:
    - Government’s budget allocations
    - Private capital donations
    - Corporate long-term contributions
    - Debt-for-nature swaps
    - Trust funds (Problem with trust funds: only donors put money into them, not governments.
        Reason why trust funds were created: governmental contributions weren’t sufficient. But
        the problem is still not solved in this way, since creating a trust fund doesn’t encourage
        governments to find solutions for the financial problems.
        Trust funds are also facing critical financial problems in today’s critical financial

II. Market based options:
1. “User-pays principle” options: fees and taxes which are directly based on renewable use of
natural resources in and outside of PAs:
     Tourism based fees and taxes:
     - Park entry fees
     - Recreational activity fees
     - Concession fees
     - Hotel taxes.
     Payments for environmental services:
     - Watershed protections
     - Carbon sequestration.
2. “Polluter pays principle” options: compensation fees, based on natural resources use
     - Fines and damages awards, pollution charges, fuel taxes
     - Environmental compensations
     - Natural resource extraction fees.

Embarked revenues which are not related to the environment:
   - “Sin taxes” (for example on cigarettes, alcohol, gambling)
   - Sales taxes
   - Social licensed plates and postage stamps.

Options based on activities outside PAs could be earmarked for conservation: Land use taxes,
forestry taxes, greasing fees, minding fees, oil concessions, lease payments and royalties, sand
and gravel excavation charges:
    - Real estate charges
    - Water supply, sewage charges
    - Pesticide and fertilizers taxes
    - Fines
    - Environmental compensations
    - Carbon taxes
    - Biodiversity offsets
    - Profit from green venture capital funds and eco-enterprises.

South Eastern European Workshop on Business Planning for Protected Areas          Vilm, 3-7 Dec 2008

Even though there are so many financial mechanisms available still there is a huge financial gap
for PAs. The reason behind it is that they don’t implement the financial mechanisms, because
they don’t know how to do financial reform.

Revenue diversification is very important:
• Risk management principle of investment policy
• Reduce dependency on international and government funding
• Promotes income generation / retention, and formulation of fiscal law
• Address government’s capacity issues.

Sources of revenue and environmental fiscal reform – Financial illustrations
Guillermo Chan

Reviewing existing environment and tourism laws for financing opportunities – then a cost-benefit
analysis – and based on that, bring the system up-to-date.

New Water fee law in Costa Rica:
   - Introduces the culture of “everybody pays for the use of water”
   - Started to be collected a year ago from individuals, companies and agricultural industry
   - Is a 7-year incremental process from the actual tariff scheme
   - At the 7th year the annual revenue will be approx. USD 25 M
   - The new law also provides a procedure for best practices and fiscal incentives
   - Most impacted sectors: agricultural and hydroelectric.

USD 25 million at the seventh year:
   - 50% of it would go to: Management and improvement of current hydrological network.
      Investment and development
   - 25% of it would go to: PES in private lands with strategic watershed allocation
   - 25% would go to: Strengthening of PAs with importance for the water system.

Update of Forestry Law (1):
   - This law was created in 1998, since then it hasn’t been revised or updated
   - The Forestry law includes aspects such as:
       • Issue of timber permits (licenses and fees)
       • Permitted species and quantities
       • Tax for wood products importation (3% CIF value).

Update of Forestry Law (2):
Currently taxed goods:
    - Gross wood importation, wood leafs, wood for floor insert, wood for handcrafted goods…
    - NEW taxed goods: Tools with wood parts, fiber wood boards, boxes or related for storage
        purposes, wood boards for doors or furniture, kitchen/cooking items, any other
        handcrafted or decorative items…

Its financial impact: + 150% increase in tax revenue / +USD 200,000 per year

South Eastern European Workshop on Business Planning for Protected Areas           Vilm, 3-7 Dec 2008

Screening of Financial Mechanisms exercise (participants were asked to select financial
mechanisms and classify them based on how complex their implementation and how high or low
their impact would be)

Consider the impacts:
            - Social
            - Environmental
            - Financial

              -   7 financial mechanisms were selected
              -   Concession fee
              -   Public-private partnership is important
              -   They found the exercise very useful – they have never done this before.

              -   Selected 10 financial mechanisms
              -   Good idea could be: Profit from the sale of organic products
              -   Entry fee, additional taxes – could greatly increase the revenue
              -   Another possibility: companies pay for mobile phone antennas
              -   They realized: In many cases updates to the laws would be needed for

              -   Water fee – it exists there, but it goes to the water company, it shall be
                  channeled towards the PAs
              -   New charge for hydropower, water fee – high complexity – requires law changes.

              -   PAs’ most important and biggest revenue source is the governmental allocation
              -   Agricultural, tourism income is also an important source
              -   EU funds are accessible
              -   Three is only a small contribution from corporations – they should donate more,
                  for specific projects – it could be good visibility, PR for them
              -   Rental fee
              -   Debt-for-nature swaps – could be an option, but implementation would be very
                  complex, Trust fund
              -   Conclusion: most of the financial mechanisms fall into the high complexity and
                  high impact category.
              -   Recreational activities
              -   Conclusion: most of the financial mechanisms fall into the high and medium
                  complexity category.

              -   PAs can generate money in different ways, but all the money has to come from
                  the state budget

South Eastern European Workshop on Business Planning for Protected Areas             Vilm, 3-7 Dec 2008

              -   There is no motivation to generate money by PAs, since they cannot make
                  independent decisions
              -   Political will (they have no green party) is important, political reform is needed.

Final Conclusion: Whatever we do, it comes with combined environmental and fiscal reform.

Environmental Fiscal Reform (EFR)
Marlon Flores

EFR refers to a range of taxation or pricing instruments that can raise revenue, while
simultaneously furthering environmental and social goals.

The context of EFR:
• Economic crisis, despite broad benefits
• Conservation challenges are beyond the competency of environmental ministries alone
• International development agenda focuses on poverty reduction, climate change, food security
• Used in OECD and middle income countries and limited use in low-income countries
• Need to understand the reform process.

Benefits of EFR:
• Move from “control-and-command” policy to economic instruments
• Multi-objective, high potential to solve conservation problems
    1. Social benefits:
         • Poverty reduction (MDG)
         • Environmental Problems > poverty
         • Access to infrastructure
         • Pro-poor investment
    2. Environmental benefits:
         • Improved Natural Resources management
         • Decrease of pollution
         • Funding for environment
    3. Fiscal benefits:
         • Fund generation
         • less distortions
         • less demand on central funding.

During negotiation with the Ministry of Finance about an EFR not only the environmental, but the
social, fiscal benefits have to be also emphasized, because these are all connected to each other.

Opportunities to carry out an EFR:
• Inefficient exploitation of publicly owned or controlled NNRR
• Undertaking polluting activities to a socially undesirable level
• Taxes on natural resources extraction (or import)
• User charges or fees (payments for environmental services – PES)
• Subsidy reform, environmentally related taxes
• Conventional taxes (sales taxes).

South Eastern European Workshop on Business Planning for Protected Areas            Vilm, 3-7 Dec 2008

Barriers to achieve EFR:
• Policy experts who say what to do but not how to do it
• Conservation policy experts who place too much emphasis on “command and control” policies
• Lack of political will
• Lack of institutional capacity
• Limited public awareness of conservation problems.

Key stakeholders:
• Poor and vulnerable groups (disaggregated by gender, location, ethnicity etc.)
• Non-poor households
• The private sector
• Civil society (NGOs, media, academic institutions)
• Politicians / decision-makers (Ministries, Parliamentarians, political parties)
• Bureaucrats (all levels)
• Development agencies and international actors.

Example of designing EFR:
A government has earmarked one percent of the income from gasoline sales’ tax that will be
allocated to the national protected area system.
Fiscal benefit: National Parks will have extra revenue.
Environmental benefit: Some of this extra revenue can go to support patrolling and enforcement
programs in the national parks.
Social benefits: communities in and around the protected areas will also benefit from this decision.

The process of fiscal reform:
1. Identify the key stakeholders and define the agenda
2. Discuss the need of fiscal policy reform and options
3. Implementation
4. Monitoring and evaluation.

Examples of EFR:
   - Water tariffs in Colombia: Water tariff was very low. The government decided to increase
      the water fee – Public protest started – Increase had to be eliminated – Problem: there
      was no support from the civil society.
   - Sustainable water tariffs in Latin American countries: Find out how much it costs to
      maintain and clean the water – ABC accounting – Find out the cost of running the PA –
      Calculate how much can be contributed to the PA’s cost from the water tariff. They are
      just about to start a study on the new policy.
   - Gasoline tax in Mexico: Idea: use a certain % of the sales tax on gasoline to finance PA
      system. Proposal went to Congress – Congress thought with this action low and mid-
      income families would be harmed too much – It didn’t go through.

South Eastern European Workshop on Business Planning for Protected Areas          Vilm, 3-7 Dec 2008

Group work
Outline of an environmental fiscal reform

1. Romania:
Idea: Establish a system for natural resource extraction fees – certain % of the extraction fees
would go directly to the PAs.
National Forest Administration and private owners already pay 3% of the wood exploitation, but
this goes to the Environmental Fund, not to the PAs.
(In case of water, mineral resources, electricity – no idea about extra contribution)
From the Environmental Fund a very small part goes back through projects to the PAs. This
should be changed.
In Romania there is no trust in NGOs, because they don’t return the funds to the PAs (except

Make sure there is political support during the whole process. Public awareness is also a very
important factor.
Ministry of Environment, politicians have to be involved in the decision making process, since
they approve the new law.

Unfortunately the implementation of this plan would only be realistic on paper in Romania.

2. Slovakia
Implement a Park entry fee system.
PAs, municipalities, local communities have to be involved.
The reasons for entry fees, and where money will go have to be clearly defined – Memorandum
of understanding will include this.
Political will at local level is a very important factor.
The implementation of this plan is realistic, since they have had entry fees in parks for 5 years.

Forever Costa Rica
Guillermo Chan

188 governments adopted the goal of having “at least 10 percent of the world’s eco-regions
effectively conserved.”
UN CBD goal: by 2012, nations would “establish a global network of comprehensive, effectively
managed and ecologically representative national and regional systems of protected areas”.

The Conservation Goal:
Establish an ecologically representative, effectively managed system of terrestrial and marine
protected areas, with a stable source of funding, thus enabling Costa Rica to be the first
developing country to meet the goals under the UN CBD Program of Work on PAs.

Terrestrial & Freshwater Protected Areas: Strict protected areas will receive ongoing funding
under Forever Costa Rica (26.5 % of continental territory in PA system).

South Eastern European Workshop on Business Planning for Protected Areas          Vilm, 3-7 Dec 2008

Protected Area Management Improvements:
   1. Financial commitments
   2. Improved procurement process
   3. Decentralization process
   4. Clear institutional structure
   5. Improved information technology
   6. Improved benefit sharing
   7. Improved capacity at regional level
   8. Improved role of regional councils
   9. Developed management plans
   10. Build institutions and legal framework for marine protected areas & sustainable fisheries.

Sources and uses of funds:
Sources of funds: Total USD 440 M (present value):
                     - Existing Government of Costa Rica: USD 360 M
                     - Existing external: USD 10 M
                     - New Government of Costa Rica: USD 20 M
                     - New external: USD 50 M
Uses of funds: Total USD 440 M (present value):
                     - Terrestrial and freshwater: USD 368 M
                     - Marine: USD 72 M
External funds flow only if and when all closing conditions are met:
– Government actions
– Government commitment to maintain or increase protected area funding in perpetuity
– Total external funds raised.

Multilaterals and bilaterals:
Government taking the lead, Minister of Foreign Relations confident can raise USD 17M+:
Early indications: GEF USD 2.15M, Germany/LifeWeb USD 2-3M
(Costa Rica well positioned), Spain, Korea, others expressions of interest

Capitalizing the trust fund - USD 50M:
USD 50M new external funding (capital)
- USD 17M Multilaterals & bilaterals: Government of Costa Rica
- USD 34M Foundations & individuals: Moore, Linden, TNC.

Why is this project important?
  - Double MPAs in Costa Rica
  - Conserve 30% & 32% respectively of Eastern Tropical Pacific and SW Caribbean
  - Provide global example
  - Possible to complete CBD goals
  - Strengthens credibility of the treaty itself and TNC’s global PA work
  - Replicable sustainable finance model as approach to achieve CBD goals.

All of the parks have to have a management plan – they have to show the results to the

South Eastern European Workshop on Business Planning for Protected Areas       Vilm, 3-7 Dec 2008

Results of RAPPAM in Slovenia and recommendations
Andrej Sovinc

Rapid assessment and prioritization of PA management in Slovenia:
           - 9 national parks cover 80 % of the total protected area
           - Changes in land use, tourism and recreation are threats in most of the parks
           - Intervention – water – is very common in the parks
           - Waste disposal in the parks is mostly negligible
           - Invasive species appear as a common problem
           - Having a trained staff: variable
           - The PAs have a high socio-economic impact in the country
           - Ministry of Environment had a huge financial support towards the PAs from the
              state institution which manages the state land
           - Only two of the PAs have an approved management plan
           - Research and monitoring level: variable, in some PAs good, in others poor.

Evaluation of the PA system in Slovenia:
            - Planning in the parks overall is not so good
            - Policy level is not high
            - Political support towards the park is at a middle level.

To ensure sustainable financing of PAs:
           - More staff training would be needed to be able to get international funds through
           - There is no support from the Ministry to find new financial sources.

Recommendations were prepared based upon the results of the RAPPAM analyses in Slovenia,
which involved 9 PAs with management authorities in place.

Results are presented in the following form:
• Recommendation/ Task
• Addressed to/ Responsible
• Deadline.

   1)    Strengthening the management effectiveness of PAs
   2)    Capacity strengthening at the institutional level
   3)    Management of habitats and species in PAs
   4)    To ensure sustainable financing of PAs
   5)    Strengthening of the importance and public appreciation of Pas.

For more detailed goals please see Annex 5.

South Eastern European Workshop on Business Planning for Protected Areas        Vilm, 3-7 Dec 2008

                                                   Day 3

WWF Danube-Carpathian Programme
David Strobel
Protected Areas for a Living Planet (PA4LP) Programme

The “Protected Areas for a Living Planet Programme (PA4LP)” of WWF aims at supporting
the PoWPA implementation in the region and is part of WWF’s programme on “Forests
and PAs”.

Core activities of PA4LP Programme:
   - Formation of a Carpathian Network of Protected Areas (CNPA)
   - Development of tools that facilitate & improve PA mgmt (CPAMEMT, CHM)
   - Training and capacity building (practioners & trainers)
   - Valuation of PA goods & services / development of a PES scheme
   - Development of pilot projects on participative management.

Project financing: MAVA foundation (2007-2011)

Main project approach:
Bottom-up: development of concepts that help PAs in improving their management and in
becoming increasingly engaged in networking
→ governments have committed to fulfilling CBD (and CC) goals, but in practice do not have the
capacities to steer or implement the required activities.

Status RAPPAM in Carpathian countries:
    • Ukraine (2008) – all Carpathian PAs (report to be produced in Dec 2008)
    • Romania (2006) – most of the Carpathian PAs
    • Slovakia (2004) – 9 PAs
    • Czech Republic (2004) - 2 PAs
    • Serbia (2009) (steered by WWF Dinaric Arc Programme)
    • Hungary, Poland: pending.

Carpathian Protected Areas Management Effectiveness Monitoring Tool (CPAMEMT)

Valuation of goods & services / development of a PES scheme:
 (1) Assessment of the value generated in 3 Carpathian model PAs – Slovakian, Romanian,
        Polish through a series of 3 workshops with stakeholders (Feb – Sep 2009)
 (2) Feasibility study and development of a PES scheme for one of the 3 model areas, incl.
        assessment of legislative/ fiscal requirements (Nov 2009 – June 2010)
 (3) Development of guidelines which facilitate this process in other PAs in the Carpathians or
        other regions (2nd half 2010)
 (4) implementation (2010, 2011,…)

South Eastern European Workshop on Business Planning for Protected Areas         Vilm, 3-7 Dec 2008

Financing situation in most of the Carpathian countries:
    - Predominantly strong reliance on the state (e.g. through national PA or forest agencies)
    - Trend to reduced financial means for PA administrations (e.g. CZ, SK)
    - Less staff has to cope with an increasing workload.

Key challenges for PA financial sustainability:
   - Becoming more independent from state funding/ strengthening engagement in EU and
       private funding schemes
   - Development of PES schemes that are adapted to the individual PA conditions, as 2nd/
       3rd pillar of financing
   - Continuous capacity building and training of PA staff to ensure the efficient use of
       available/ potential financing schemes.

CNPA (Carpathian Network of PAs) – formulation is in process in cooperation with UNEP – all 7
countries (Poland, Ukraine, Slovakia, Hungary, Romania, Moldova, Serbia) are in. It would help to
access EU funds much easier. Requirement: PA has to be larger then 100 ha.
Carpathian Opportunity – just started – focus is on food, agricultural, tourism sector.

Formulation of the Financial and Business Plans
Marlon Flores

What is a PA Financial Plan?
  - Management tool used to guide the financial operation of the PA system
  - Indicates what are the cash needs and guides on how to raise the cash, such as entry
       fees, PES, concessions, donations, etc.
  - Refers to the means by which cash will be acquired to cover future expenses, for
       instance through earning, appropriations, and international grants.
  - Summarizes protected area income, needs and financial gaps
  - Includes supportive business plans for diverse market-based financial mechanisms
  - May include the different strategies to address legal and institutional reform and capacity
       to enable the implementation of the plan.

What is a Business plan?
  - A business plan is a formal statement of a set of business goals, the reasons why they
       are believed attainable, and the plan for reaching those goals. It may also contain
       background information about the organization or team attempting to reach those goals.
  - The business goals being attempted may be for-profit or non-profit.
  - For-profit business plans typically focus on financial goals.
  - Non-profit and government agency business plans tend to focus on service goals,
       although non-profits may also focus on maximizing profit.

What is a Business Plan and how is it different from the Financial Plan?
  - Management tool that is connected to the financial plan
  - Uses market-analyses: demand-supply, competition, risk, etc.
  - Used to achieve the full financial potential of a revenue mechanism

South Eastern European Workshop on Business Planning for Protected Areas          Vilm, 3-7 Dec 2008

    -    Includes all aspects of the implementation of a financial mechanism, commonly focuses
         on a single revenue mechanism and its operating model.

Components of a Financial Plan of the Protected Area System:

System-level Financial Plan:
    - PA background: 2-3 pages,
    - Objective: About where to go and how to get there
    - Financial background: What kind of changes to make
    - Summary of financial needs and gaps: No text, tables, data instead
    - Investment priorities: What is the money needed for? Mentioning areas where the money
        is going. How to get the investment priorities? Here donors should see what the benefits
        are for them.
    - Financial goals and gap reduction: How the money is going to help to solve problems.
        Companies create an environmental unit in order to stay in business.
    - Summary of financial mechanisms
                        i. mechanisms
                       ii. feasibility analyses
                      iii. financial goals
                     iv. business plan                      Business Plan:
    - Economic impact                                    - Description of the mechanisms
    - Implementation program (action plan)               - Value added
                                                         - Operations
                                                         - Investment and return
                                                         - Financial goals
                                                         - Marketing
                                                         - Administration
The business plan(s) can either be part of the document’s main text, annexed or a separate
For a nature conservation organization a business plan is usually about conservation goals, but
not about finance – this should be changed!
To prepare a business plan, a consultant should be hired who is specialized in Strategic planning.
The Plan should be about 10 pages. It includes: Problem – Solution – Advantages: how the PA
contributes to the (local) economy’s development.
The public, government decision-makers, donors and the private sector will see PA managers as
business professionals with a clear idea of where they are, where they are going and how they
are going to get there!
- Starting with the existing template, develop a detailed outline for a financial plan for a
    protected area site (add/ edit details)
- Based on this outline, develop an operational work plan and process for completing the
    financial plan:
        • What are the steps towards completing the financial plan?
        • Who will do each step?
        • By when will each step be completed?

South Eastern European Workshop on Business Planning for Protected Areas                  Vilm, 3-7 Dec 2008

Small groups work:
Outlining of a system-level financial plan and business plan

Based on this outline, develop an operational work plan and process for completing the
financial plan.
Please see Annex 6 and Annex 7 for the countries’ financial plan.

Economic Impact of PAs
Marlon Flores

Making the Case for PA using the multiple economic valuation of ecosystems methods:
Protected Areas have to be communicated as investments, not as costs.
Approaches for this:

          Approaches                         Objective                           How we do it
 1. Determining the total value       To understand the            Identify all mutually-compatible
 of the current flow of benefits      economic contribution        services provided; measure the
 from an Ecosystem                    that ecosystems              quantity of each service provided;
                                      make to society              multiply by the value of each service
 2. Determining the net               To assess whether            Measure how the quantity of each
 benefits of an intervention          the intervention is          service would change as a result of the
 that alters ecosystem                economically                 intervention, as compared to their
 conditions – economist is            worthwhile                   quantity without the intervention;
 needed to do this                                                 multiply by the marginal value of each
 3. Examining how the costs           To identify winners          Identify relevant stakeholder groups;
 and benefits of an ecosystem         and losers, for equity       determine which specific services they
 (or an intervention) are             and practical reasons        use and the value of those services to
 distributed – it is about                                         that group (or changes in values
 winners and losers                                                resulting from an intervention)
 4. Identifying potential             To help make                 Identify groups that receive large
 financing sources for                conservation                 benefit flows, from which funds could
 conservation                         financially sustainable      be extracted using various financing

Identifying benefits of protected areas:
- By sector:

South Eastern European Workshop on Business Planning for Protected Areas       Vilm, 3-7 Dec 2008

- By benefit:
        Drinking water
        Cultural and spiritual
        Climate change
        Disaster mitigation
        Medicinal plants

Examples of PA benefits:
 - Tourism in Peru has given the government an increase in employment and tax revenue and
   has decreased poverty. In concrete numbers it generates USD 1.7 million for entrance fee for
   SINANPE, with a multiplier effect in the economy of USD 127.6 million.
 - Water: At least 16 PAs provide environmental services for water production for 1,759,527
   people. People consume approximately 254.9 million m3 annually (a value of USD 81 million).
   6 PAs provide 65.34% of hydroelectric power generation (11.1 million of MWh annually, or
   USD 335.2 million).
 - Erosion protection: Filtering of sediments for erosion in Poechos Dam (North of Peru) has an
   annually cost of USD 14.1 million. The PAs that protect the high basins allowed Peru to save
   about USD 1.2 million in the last 10 years in terms of avoided costs.
 - Carbon storage: Approximately 16 million ha of lands in PA are tropical forests. Considering
   the rate of CO2 storage, there is a stock of 3,901 million tons of CO2 in PAs.

Designing a communications campaign:
 - Show the PA’s contribution, additional investment to the economy
 - Clear objectives of the campaign (based on financial need and gaps and the specific
   environmental fiscal reform strategy needed)
 - Identify target audience of campaign
 - Develop compelling message
 - Identify communications channels
 - Identify and engage key spokespeople – who is popular in your country?

German NP Campaign: Wadden Sea NP
Gisela Stolpe
BfN – International Academy for Nature Conservation

Background of Wadden Sea NP:
- Important for birds
- Very rural/ remote area
- Tourism is important
- Nursery grounds for fish, mussels, shrimps
- Conflicts around new NP.

South Eastern European Workshop on Business Planning for Protected Areas        Vilm, 3-7 Dec 2008

Objective of the campaign:
To create a positive attitude among
            - The people living in the NP region
            - Other people of the federal state of Schleswig-Holstein
            - Decision makers.

Approach used:
Testimonials of 4 VIPs (Famous writer, mobile phone boss, young actors, erotic shop business
            - Different target groups
            - Provocative
            - Conveying different values.

What was done during the campaign:
          - On 4 consecutive Saturdays adverts in major newspapers
          - 4 x 1000 posters
          - 4 x 60.000 stickers used by all state agencies
          - 4 x 500 free postcards – given to NP info centers.

              -   30.000 EUR
              -   Partly paid by sponsoring
              -   No fees to VIPs.

                                                   Day 4

Participants were asked to identify:
             - supportive actions at the national level
             - supportive actions at the regional level
             - concrete steps, milestones in development financial, business plan.

Supportive actions at the national level

Provide human and financial resources for process:
   - Identify money for start
   - Develop task force
   - Identify focal point per country.

Mobilize public awareness:
   - Mobilize all stakeholders to support the idea of FP / BP
   - Get support from different stakeholders to start making and implementing FP
   - Make the public understand that PAs don’t have enough money

South Eastern European Workshop on Business Planning for Protected Areas         Vilm, 3-7 Dec 2008

    -    Share this information with Ministry of Environment and PAs
    -    Present BP to the government
    -    Commitments towards FP & BP

Identify financial mechanism:
    - Promote case study examples on “alternative” revenue sources for PAs
    - Develop brand mark for products
    - Establish a multi-sector body to explore the process of PES & taxes’ development.

Prepare a BP for a concrete PA:
   - Prepare a Financial Plan & a Management Plan for each PA in the country
   - All plans must be unique
   - Prepare a case study – financial plan for a PA site

Political negotiations:
    - Approve all PA Management Plans by the government
    - Lobby politicians and administration
    - Try to explain the importance of PA management to the ministry
    - Methodology for FP must be approved by the ministry
    - Ministry request to apply FP
    - Inform the ministry on the importance of having & formulating the financial plan
    - Lobby for Environmental Fiscal Reform
    - Materials and documents for business planning on webpage of state nature conservancy.

Training on FP/BP:
    - National actions: round tables, workshops, seminars
    - National seminars for sharing experience with existing “alternative” financing in different
    - National seminars for financial & business planning for protected areas
    - Convene a training process on sustainable financial & business planning at national level
    - Meeting with all the PAs (NFA + MOE in Romania)
    - Meetings and presentations to show the importance of FP
    - Workshop on financial planning for PAs at system and site level
    - Create a network of PAs at national level
    - Workshops for all PA managers in the country

South Eastern European Workshop on Business Planning for Protected Areas         Vilm, 3-7 Dec 2008

Supportive actions at the regional level

Building support:
    - Consultations with local stakeholders
    - Recruit celebrities for campaign
    - Disseminate the results of the workshop to wider audience in the region
    - Have open discussions on FP importance
    - Involve actors (main NGO, local org., public)
    - Meetings and discussions with regional PAs
    - WWF: Inform the ministries about the BP concept
    - WWF: Discuss the concept at the NPC meeting 15 –17 Dec. 2008

Learning / exchange:
   - Workshop for all partners in region
   - Next workshop should take place in Bosnia/ Serbia/ Albania
   - Follow-up workshop (on particular issues / components) with in the Dinaric Arc initiative
   - Workshop to see progress (- compare system, - choose best practice examples)
   - Meetings to show results
   - Regular meetings for capacity improvement and experience exchange
   - Improve information exchange through workshops and seminars.

Identify responsibilities:
    - Ministry appoints the focal point responsible for BP development

Information management beyond workshops:
    - Constant coordination between countries
    - Create a website for implementation for PA in region
    - Website or mailing list for info and experience exchange
    - Share information on progress between countries.

Identify concrete steps / management:
    - WWF: define the roadmap
    - WWF: define the TOR (consultants, park staff, focal point)
    - Help WWF? For identifying a project for CNPA BP
    - Have a regional fund for BP projects
    - Possibilities to create an international network of PAs

Regional guidance on instruments:
   - International seminars for sharing experiences with various finance sources in PAs /
   - Identify financial mechanisms
   - Analyse each country’s system→ create a model that uses best part from each.

Initiate post graduate studies on PA economics → NPCs to identify the existing curriculum

South Eastern European Workshop on Business Planning for Protected Areas         Vilm, 3-7 Dec 2008

Concrete steps and milestones in development Business /Financial plans

Create political will and commitment:
   - Try to show the importance of having and implementing a financial plan to park
   - Ministry request to apply FP
   - Present ideas and actions to stakeholders
   - Get commitment from the Ministry by January 2009
   - Find the money sources for preparing the BP.

Capacity building:
   - Workshop for management planning linked to business planning
   - Workshop on financial planning for PA economists
   - Educate people in PAs (staff, employees)
   - Educate park and ministry staff in financial issues
   - Management trainings.

   - Identify system vs. site level
   - Prepare the guidelines on business planning for park managers, try to make plan simple
   - Economic valuation and feasibility studies – find appropriate experts (difficult?)
   - Identify the consultants who are able to do good economic studies
   - Standardise the program and activities at national level
   - Realistic Management Plan for PA.

Individual steps:
    - Create a taskforce: 1. Define PA cost structure, 2. Define programs / function
    - Create a team for business plan preparation
    - Identify the main activities and goals for the BP
    - Analyse goals, costs, methods and needs
    - Activity-based cost accounting
    - Assessment of financial needs + gaps for all PAs
    - Map current – revenues, - types of incomes / mechanisms, - flows (step by step)
    - Include all parks in certain steps of creating a BP for one park, transfer the knowledge to
        their own PAs.

Work on legal and institutional framework:
   - Negotiations on political level for a fiscal reform January 2009 –2013
   - Environmental Fiscal reform
   - Lobby to ME for increase and use of Trust Funds directly by PAs
   - Create few NGOs for preparing application to Trust Funds
   - Analyse legal / institutional framework
   - Centralized system of information + costs

South Eastern European Workshop on Business Planning for Protected Areas            Vilm, 3-7 Dec 2008

Preparation of National Action Plans / National Road Maps

Please see Annex 8.

Financial Planning Survey Results
presented by Guillermo Chan

Q1. Please indicate the country that you represent:
Bulgaria: 3 participants
Romania: 2 participants

Q2. In which of the following aspects of PA financial planning are you involved?
Implementation: 56%
Formulation of the financial or business plan: 44%

Q3. Is there a management plan for the protected area (PA) system of your country?
Few protected areas have MP: 56%
MP are available for all or most of PA‘s: 33%

Q4. Is there a centrally managed PA system in your country?
There are sub systems of PA‘s managed at different level: 56%
There is a single centrally managed PA system: 44%

Q5. Have the financial needs and financial gaps of the PA system or individual protected areas in
your country been assessed?
The financial needs and financial gaps have not been assessed: 67%
There is a recent assessment of the financial needs and gaps: 22%

Q6. Are the PA management plans (at system or individual level) organized by conservation
goals, objectives, functional areas, programs and subprograms?
The management plans of the PA‘s have defined goals, objectives, programs: 89%
The goals, objectives, programs or sub programs are not clear/ others: 11%

Q7. Is there a financial plan and/or business plan for the PA system or individual PAs?
There is a financial plan for the PA system level and financial plan or BP for individual
PAs: 44%
There are no financial plans: 44%

South Eastern European Workshop on Business Planning for Protected Areas         Vilm, 3-7 Dec 2008

Q8. Are the conservation goals in the management plans of your PA system or individual PAs
linked to costs for basic or optimal conservation results?
No, resources are allocated according to availability of central funding and there are no links:
Conservation goals are linked to costs for basic and optional levels of conservation results: 22%
Conservation goals are linked to costs for basic conservation results: 22%

Q9. Indicate the four most important revenue sources of your PA system or individual PA?
Central government allocation: 78%, Park entry fees: 44%,
GEF/others international: 44%, Other re-creative activities: 33%
Tourism concessions: 33%, PES/Environmental compensation: 0%

Q10. Does the legal and regulatory framework for PAs in your country allows the PAs to generate
and retain self-generated revenue?
Self-generation and retention of revenue is possible: 57%
Is not possible, funds are transferred to government‘s central budget: 22%

Q11. How will you consider the financial management capacity, both individuals and institutions,
at the PA system or individual PAs? (Capacity to carry out financial analyses, assess and
implement revenue mechanisms, formulate financial and business plans, and develop a
supportive regulatory framework)
Basic: 56%
Medium: 22%
Advanced: 11%

Q12. Does the current legal and regulatory framework governing PAs in your country support the
formulation and implementation of a financial plan for the PA system or individual PAs?
Yes: 78%
No: 22%

South Eastern European Workshop on Business Planning for Protected Areas        Vilm, 3-7 Dec 2008


Participants agreed that even though most of them had small economic backgrounds, the
training/workshop helped them a lot to understand financial and business planning, mechanisms,
and analysis much better. They can also see much clearer, how important it is for the PAs to
combine the conservation goals with the business principles to reach financial sustainability.

Participants realized they have no time to waste any more, they have to start making steps
toward developing and implementing financial and business plans for their own countries’
protected areas.

Most of the participants agreed though that unfortunately this is not going to happen easily and
quickly, since it will require a lot of serious changes, such as inter alia:
    - Political lobbying
    - Changes in the law/ legislations
    - National fiscal reform.

But – especially after seeing the good examples from Costa Rica – participants have better hopes
and it seems more realistic now, that they can implement similar good practices in their own
countries and sooner or later the South Eastern European protected areas will also reach
financial sustainability.

The WWF Dinaric Arc project is committed to assist the countries in the region in the
development of Business Plans for at least one PA in each country in the next two years. A
second training workshop for experts from Bosnia-Herzegovina who could not attend this
workshop due to visa problems will take place in January 2009 in Sarajevo with technical support
from Andrej Sovinc and Stella Satalic and with financial support from the German Federal Agency
for Nature Conservation.

South Eastern European Workshop on Business Planning for Protected Areas   Vilm, 3-7 Dec 2008

Annex 1
Programme of the workshop
                                                              Wednesday, 3rd December, 2008

                                                              18:20   Registration and dinner

                                                              19:30   Welcome, Introduction of participants
                                                                      Introduction to the venue & into the course

                                                              Thursday, 4th December, 2008

     South Eastern European                                   FUNDAMENTALS OF FINANCIAL ANALYSIS

Workshop on Business Planning                                 08:30   Opening, introduction, objectives

                                                              09:00   Financial Planning; elements and definitions
          for Protected Areas
                                                              09:30   Institutional and legal framework of financial planning and assessment

                                                              10:00   Coffee / tea break

                                                              10:15   The nuts and bolts of activity-based cost accounting
             December 3rd – 7th, 2008
                                                              11:30   Financial Planning Survey: results and discussion

                                                              12:30   Lunch
                          at the
                                                              14:00   Small groups work 1:
     International Academy for Nature Conservation                    Assessing institutional and legal barriers for improving financial planning
                          Isle of Vilm                                (using SINAC assessment tool)

                                                              15:30   Coffee / tea break
                       organised by
                                                              16:00   Small groups work 2:
 The German Federal Agency for Nature Conservation (BfN)
                                                                      Applying ABC for realistic financial needs and gap analyses
in cooperation with The Nature Conservancy, CBD-Secretariat           (framing questions will be provided)
                  and WWF International
                                                              17:30   Open discussion and wrap-up of day (review lessons)

                                                              18:30   Dinner

                                                              20:00   Case study presentation:
                                                                      Andrej Sovinc presents business plan
Friday, 5th December, 2008                                                            09:30   Formulating a business plan: definition, elements, when do you need a
                                                                                              BP, and how to go about formulating it, and its connections to the
FUNDAMENTALS OF SELECTING FINANCIAL MECHANIMS AND                                             financial plan
                                                                                      10:00   Economic Impact: assessing the contribution of protected area’s
09:00   Identifying and selecting financial mechanisms, and cost reduction                    ecosystems to economic growth and equity (making the case for PAs)

09:30   Financial mechanisms classification and options                               10:30   Coffee / tea break

10:00   Diversification of financial mechanisms                                       10:45   Small groups work 5:
                                                                                              Outlining of a system level financial plan and business plan (s)
10:30   Coffee / tea break
                                                                                      12:30   Lunch
10:45   Small group work 3:
        Country-based screening of financial mechanisms exercise                      14:00   Small groups work 6:
        (using complexity/impact matrix)                                                      Outlining the strategy to make the case for the system of protected
                                                                                              areas: combining financial and economic valuation results.
12:30   Lunch
                                                                                      15:30   Coffee / tea break
13:30   Guided tour of Vilm nature reserve
                                                                                      16:00   Measuring progress: The UNDP Financial Sustainability Scorecard for
15:00   Coffee / tea break                                                                    National Systems of Protected Areas

15:15   The nuts and bolts of environmental fiscal reform                             16:45   Open discussion and wrap up of day (review lessons)

15:45   Small groups work 4:                                                          18:30   Dinner
        Outline of an environmental fiscal reform action plan including:
        identification, setting the agenda, discussion of options, decision-making,   20:00   Farewell party (to be organised by the participants)
        implementation and monitoring

16:45   Coffee / tea break                                                            Sunday, 7th December, 2008

17:00   Introduction to business principles in PA financial planning and discussion   09:00   Plenary discussion of small group discussions
17:45   Open discussion and wrap-up of day (review lessons)                           10:30   Coffee / tea break
18:30   Dinner                                                                        10:45   Brainstorm next steps in large group discussion

                                                                                      11:00   Discussion of next steps in small group work
Saturday, 6     December, 2008
                                                                                      11:45   Presentation of next steps in large group, workshop wrap up
                                                                                      12:30   Lunch
09:00   Formulating the financial plan for protected area systems: definitions and
                                                                                      13:35   Departure from Vilm
        elements and bringing all the pieces together
                                                                                      14:05   Train departure from Lauterbach Mole
                                                                                              (arrival in Berlin central train station at 18:15 h)
South Eastern European Workshop on Business Planning for Protected Areas   Vilm, 3-7 Dec 2008

Annex 2

List of participants
                                 South Eastern European Workshop on Business Planning for Protected Areas

                                                       3 to 7 December 2008, INA Vilm, Germany

                                                                    List of participants

No.           Name                           Institution                               Address                 Country                Phone/Fax/e-mail
1.    Bartusova, Zuzana    Administration Office of National Park Poloniny,   Mierova Street np. 193       Slovak Republic    Tel.1: +421 577/685615
                           Stakčin, Slovakia                                  06761 Stakcin                                   Tel.2: +421 907/502609
                           State Nature Conservancy of Slovakia                                                               e-mail1:
2.    Birda, Alin          Maramuresului Mountains Nature Park                22 Decembrie Street, no  Romania                Tel.1: +40 727/227224
                                                                              20                                              Fax: +40 026/2211794
                                                                               Viseu de Sus, Maramures                        e-mail1:
3.    Chan, Guillermo      TNC                                                4245 North Fairfax Drive     Costa Rica         Tel.1: 506/8849-0186
      Speaker                                                                 22203 Arlington, Virginia,                      e-mail1:
                                                                              San Jose
4.    Diku, Abdulla        Ministry of Environment, Forest and Water          RR. Durresit nr. 27          Albania            Tel.1: +355 42/270623
                           Administration                                     Tirana                                          Tel.2: +355 68/4023424
                                                                                                                              Fax: +335 42/231437
5.    Dountchev,           Vitosha Nature Patk Directorate                    Antim I str. 17              Bulgaria           Tel.1: +359 885/511022
      Alexandar Dimitrov                                                      1303 Sofia                                      Fax: +359 2/9895377

6.    Ervin, Jamison       The Nature Conservancy                             1061 Mountainview            United States of   Tel.1: +1 802/244-5875
      Speaker                                                                 VT 05676 Duxbury             America            Fax: +1 802/244-6257

No.          Name                              Institution                              Address                 Country                Phone/Fax/e-mail
7.    Felciuc, Mihaela      Protected Areas Unit                                Magheru Street 31           Romania            Tel.1: +40 731/880146
                            National Forest Administration                      Bucharest                                      Fax: +40 213/169848

8.    Flores, Marlon        The Nature Conservancy (TNC)                        4245 North Fairfax Drive    United States of   Tel.1: +703 841/2072
      Speaker                                                                   22203 Arlington, Virginia   America            Fax: +703 276/3241

9.    Glavicic, Irena       Sjeverni Velebit National Park Public Institition   Krasno 96                   Croatia            Tel.1: +385 53/665-380
                                                                                53274 Krasno                                   Fax: +385 53/665-390
                                                                                                                               e-mail1: promidzba@np-sjeverni-
10.   Grabrijan, Boris      Krajinski park Kolpa                                Adlesici 15                 Slovenia           Tel.1: +386 41/366501
                                                                                8341 Adlesici                                  Tel.2: +386 735/65240
                                                                                                                               Fax: +386 735/65241
11.   Groznik Zeiler,       Ministry of the Environment and Spatial Planning Dunajska cesta 48              Slovenia           Tel.1: +386 1/309-4554
      Katarina                                                               1000 Ljubljana                                    Fax: +386 1/309-4593

12.   Hoxha, Ylli           Environment and Forest Agency                       Rruga "Halit Bega" Nr. 23   Albania            Tel.1: +355 042/237-1237
                                                                                Tirana                                         Fax: +355 042/237-1242
13.   Jabs, Judith          Federal Agency for Nature Conservation                                          Germany            Tel.1: +49 38301/86-115
      Organisation          International Academy for Nature Conservation       18581 Putbus                                   Fax: +49 38301/86-117
14.   Kamburov, Ivan        Strandja Nature Park Directorate                    29 kan Asparuh str          Bulgaria           Tel.1: +359 886398488/
                                                                                 Tzarevo                                       Fax: +359 59522963/
15.   Leskovjansky, Marek   State Nature Conservancy of Slovak republic         Stefanikovo namestie c 9    Slovak Republic    Tel.1: +421 53/44220-10
                            Administration of NP Slovensky raj                  05201 Spisska Nova Ves                         Fax: +421 53/44220-26

No.          Name                             Institution                           Address                Country                Phone/Fax/e-mail
16.   Losonci, Ildiko      The Nature Conservancy - Boston                 205 Portland St., Suite 400 United States of   Tel.1: +1 603/2751522
      Organisation                                                         MA 02114 Boston             America            e-mail1:

17.   Luburic, Veselin     The Public Enterprise for National Parks of     Put Radomira Ivanovica 2    Republic of        Tel.1: +382 69/358-094
                           Montenegro                                      20000 Podgorica             Montenegro         Fax: +382 20/658-071
                                                                                                                          e-mail1: jpnpcg@cg.yu

18.   Mara, Avni           Forestry Department of Pogradec                 Laja Nr. 1                  Albania            Tel.1: +355 68/2096809
                                                                            Rruga e Drilonit,                             Fax: +355 83/222510
                                                                           Pogradec                                       e-mail1:

19.   Marinova Tsankova,   Bulgarka Nature Park Directorate                Str. Minzuhar 1             Bulgaria           Tel.1: +359 885999161
      Milena                                                               5300 Gabrovo                                   Fax: +359 66808857
20.   Matic, Goran         JP "Nacionalni park Fruska gora"                Zmajev Trg 1           Serbia                  Tel.1: +381 21/463824
                                                                           21208 Sremska Kamenica                         Fax: +381 21/462662
21.   Medenica, Nikola     Institute for the Protection of Nature of       Trg Vojvode Becir-bega      Republic of        Tel.1: +382 69/035-640
                           Montenegro                                      Osmanagica 16               Montenegro         Fax: +382 81/620-848
                                                                           Podgorica                                      e-mail1:

22.   Piscevic, Nevena     Ministry of Environmental Protection and Spatial Omladinskih brigada 1      Serbia             Tel.1: +381 11/3131569
                           Planning                                         11000 Belgrade                                Fax: +381 11/3132574

23.   Rajkovic, Zeljka     Ministry of Culture                             Runjaninova 2               Croatia            Tel.1: +385 92/2044-100
                           Nature Protection Directorate                   10000 Zagreb                                   Fax: +385 1/4866-100

No.           Name                             Institution                               Address               Country               Phone/Fax/e-mail
24.   Satalic, Stella       WWF European Policy Programme - Dinaric Arc Kestercanekova 1                   Croatia           Tel.1: +385 1/2361-653
      Organisation          Ecoregion-2012 Protected Area Prog.         10000 Zagreb                                         Tel.3: +385-99-2101679
                                                                                                                             Fax: +385 1/2361-620
25.   Silic, Tea            Sjeverni Velebit National Park Public Institution   Krasno 96                  Croatia           Tel.1: +385 53/665-380
                                                                                53274 Krasno                                 Fax: +385 53/665-390
26.   Sovinc, Andrej        Secovlje Salina Nature Park                         Seca 115                   Slovenia          Tel.1: +386/5-6721330
                                                                                6320 Portoroz                                Fax: +386/5-6721331

27.   Stolpe, Gisela        Federal Agency for Nature Conservation              Isle of Vilm               Germany           Tel.1: +49 (0)38301/86-113
      Organisation          Academy for Nature Conservation Isle of Vilm        18581 Putbus                                 Fax: +49 (0)38301/86-117
28.   Strobel, David        WWF International, Danube-Carpathian                Mariahilfer Str. 88a/3/9   Austria           Tel.1: +43 1/524 5470-16
                            Programme                                           1070 Vienna                                  Fax: +43 1/524 5470-16
29.   Szentirmai, Istvan    Örseg National Park Directorate                     Siskaszer 26/A             Hungary           Tel.1: +36 94/548101
                                                                                9941 Öriszentpeter                           Fax: +36 94/428791

30.   Tashev, Kiril Dimitrov State Forestry Agency                              55 Hr. Botev blvd.         Bulgaria          Tel.1: +359 987/9792
                                                                                1040 Sofia                                   Fax: +359 981/3736
31.   Velojic, Miljan       Public Enterprise "Vojvodinasume"                   Preradoviceva 2            Serbia            Tel.1: +381 21/6432-488
                                                                                21131 Petrovaradin                           Fax: +381 21/6433-921
32.   Vongrej, Viliam       State Nature Conservancy                            Sturova 115                Slovak Republic   Tel.1: +421 33/6474002
                            Male Karpaty Protected Landscape Area               90001 Modra                                  Fax: +421 33/6474002

South Eastern European Workshop on Business Planning for Protected Areas       Vilm, 3-7 Dec 2008

Annex 3

Exercise sheet “Applying ABC for realistic financial needs and gap analysis”
Financial Plan Detailed Sheet
Date started:
Date completed
Detailed sheet owner:
Program Name:

Program goals





                                                Mission critical
Program metrics                 Current level                      Optimal level




The mission critical state
 describes the
minimum level required to
operate the program while
meeting basic program

The optimal state
describes the ideal state of
the program if all
necessary funds, personnel
and other resources were
available to achieve that

The program metrics are specific, measurable,
achievable, and realistic
and where necessary also have a time frame
South Eastern European Workshop on Business Planning for Protected Areas   Vilm, 3-7 Dec 2008

Annex 4

Information on the DINARIC ARC ECOREGION – Protected Areas for a Living Planet
DINARIC ARC ECOREGION – Protected Areas for a Living Planet –Stella Satalic from WWF

Project duration: 2007-2011, implementing agency: WWF Mediterranean Programme

Joint Statement (1)
    -    Recognize the specific natural and cultural values of the Dinaric Arc ecoregion and
         acknowledge the CBD PoWPA to be a valuable framework for conserving biological
         diversity and generating benefits to local and national economies.
    -    Aim to further continue our activities towards implementation of national priorities leading
         to delivering on the objectives of the CBD PoWPA.
    -    Support increased understanding of the relationship between the CBD PoWPA and
         the EU legislation on nature conservation.
    -    Encourage mutual cooperation and exchange of experiences in protected areas
         management on the regional level.
    -    Recognize the importance of regional cooperation to achieve transboundary sustainable
         management of the South-Eastern European region.

Joint statement (2)
    -    Recognize and support the need for sustainable use of water resources and protection of
         groundwater-dependent ecosystems by introducing sustainable integrated management
         principles in the Dinaric karst system.
    -    Encourage the preservation of the cultural heritage of the Dinaric Arc through support for
         traditional activities in protected areas which contribute to biodiversity conservation and
         local livelihoods.
    -    Call upon the Dinaric Arc Initiative partners (WWF, UNESCO BRESCE, IUCN, UNDP,
         Council of Europe, FAO, SNV, UNEP, Euronatur) and other interested parties to
         strengthen their cooperation with the Dinaric Arc countries and facilitate necessary
         support in the delivery of the national priorities.
    -    Support evaluation of the contribution of protected areas to each country’s
         economy and for the region as a whole.
         Albania: 8. Strengthening institutions at national and regional levels, through assessing
         protected areas management effectiveness (RAPPAM)
         Bosnia and Hercegovina: 13. Strengthening institutional protected area management
         capacity at the entity and the state levels
         Croatia: 5. Strengthening institutions at national and regional levels, through assessing
         protected areas management effectiveness (RAPPAM)
       Montenegro: 7. Development of an institutional base for implementation of the CBD and
       capacity building
       Serbia: 6. Strengthening the institutions at national and regional levels, through
       assessing protected areas management effectiveness (RAPPAM)
       Slovenia: 8. Carrying out further awareness raising campaigns to demonstrate benefits
       of protected areas for local inhabitants and increasing public support for nature

Successes (1)
   -   New projects based on DAE
   -   GEF Early Action Grant: BiH - Activity 1.1.5 Ecological gap analysis (USD 109.200) -
   -   GEF Early Action Grant: Albania - Activity 1.1.5 (Comprehensive protected areas gap
       assessment, and planning of interim measures to protected highly threatened or value
       areas), and Activity 3.1.1 (Legal and institutional gaps addressed) (USD 150.000) –

Successes (2)
New projects based on DAE:
   -   Finnish Government: Programme on transboundary PAs in South-East Europe (support
       to Big Win) - submitted
   -   GEF/MAVA: Marine PAs in Adriatic - approved
   -   Norwegian Government: Natura 2000 in BiH - approved
   -   Italian Government: Contribution of NP Sutjeska to regional economy - approved
   -   Norwegian government; Natura 2000 in Serbia and
   -   Montenegro (submitted)
South Eastern European Workshop on Business Planning for Protected Areas   Vilm, 3-7 Dec 2008

Annex 5

RAPPAM goals of Slovenia
RAPPAM in Slovenia – Goals

  • To adapt guidelines for the preparation of management plans (MPs) to fit best national
      situation and system of PAs in Slovenia; MOE; 2009/III
  • To prepare and implement training on management planning for PA; MOE; 2009/IV
  • To prepare and implement training for park managers and staff on data management and
      use; MOE; 2009/III
  • Each PA to prepare analyses of pressures and threats; results to be included in the MPs;
      Park management authorities; Included in preparation of the MPs
  • To prepare a sustainable tourism vision for PA which should be consulted and agreed
      with local communities; Park mgmt auth/local communities; included in preparation of the
  • To speed up process of adoption of the MPs (for state designated parks); Park mgmt
      auth/MOE; 2010/IV
  • To prepare lists of missing ecological and socio‐economic surveys for PAs and involve
      research and other institutions in their implementation; Park management authorities;
  • To prepare list of those PAs that urgently need a management authority or interventions;
      MOE/Inst.for Nature Protection; 2009/IV
  • To update legal documents on establishment of certain PAs; MOE/Park management
      authorities; 2010/IV

  • To prepare an overview of the implementation of the »first choice« in PAs by the
      Government and include land acquisition as priority in the yearly MPs and increase the
      funding for this purpose in the state budget allocation; MOE/Agency for Environment/
      Park mgmt auth; 2010/II;
  • To establish a central unit for PAs within the MOE which should provide necessary
      advisory services and technical support (legal, economical, taxes, project design,
      accounting…); MOE; 2010/II
  • Central unit for PAs will be responsible for management of those PAs for which public or
      other managerial institution has not been established yet and should encourage other
      institutions to be involved in the management of PAs; MOE; deadline after the completion
      of the previous item
  • MOE to strengthen cooperation with other sectors of public policy in the implementation
      of PA policies and foresee the establishment of intersectional working group on PAs;
      MOE/government; 2010/I
  • Park authorities to review the cooperation with NGOs and explore the possibilities for
      effective cooperation; Park mgmt auth; 2010/I
  • To ensure coordinated approach of MOE and Park mgmt auth in defending nature
      conservation policies; MOE/ Park mgmt auth; ongoing task
  • To establish an effective communication between Park mgmt auth and Institutes for
      Nature Protection to enable involvement of Park mgmt auth in the process of
      conservation guidelines for PAs; Park mgmt auth /Institute for Nature Protection; 2009/II
    •   To establish mechanisms and ways of involvement of Park mgmt auth in the processes
        of issuing conservation agreements for interventions within the PAs and ensure on‐time
        and effective information exchange of information on future and planned interventions in
        PAs; MOE/Agency for Environment/ Park mgmt auth; 2009/IV
    •   To ensure enforcement of inspection services; MOE; 2009/III

  • To create a mechanism which will enable Park mgmt auth to be involved in the decisions
      on land‐use practices for the areas that are state owned; MOE/ Park mgmt auth; 2009/II
    •   To ensure dissemination of data and results of monitoring activities that are carried out by
        the state institutions to the Park mgmt auth; MOE/Institute for Nature Protection/ Park
        mgmt auth; 2009/II
    •   To outline particular interventions and activities to manage invasive species in PAs in the
        National strategy on invasive species; MOE; 2010/I
    •   Involvement of the agricultural service and technical agencies in provision of advisory
        services on nature conservation measures that are part of Agro‐environmental Measures;
        MOE/Ministry for Agriculture/ Park mgmt auth /Institute for Nature Protection; ongoing
    •   To create a variety of additional conservation measures to complement
        agro‐environmental measures, which are based on conservation programmes;
        MOE/Ministry for Agriculture; ongoing task

  • To enlarge the budget allocation for PAs and to ensure unified approach for the
      preparation of the yearly management plans, reporting on PA management and ensure
      effective monitoring on the expenditures in PAs; MOE/ Park mgmt auth; ongoing task
  • MOE to ensure support to Park mgmt auth in the process of applications of the projects
      for the international funding. MOP; ongoing task
  • To ensure »intermediate money« to overcoming delays in the payments from approved
      projects; MOE/Ministry of Finances; 2009/II
  • To prepare and implement training on the application and preparation of projects for
      international funding for PAs; MOE; 2009/IV

  • To design and implement communication projects to improve public appreciation of PAs
      and demonstration of benefits that are derived from PAs; Park mgmt auth /MOE; ongoing
  • Park mgmt auth to take care for effective promotion of sustainable forms of tourism that
      are applicable in PAs and put eforts in the inclusion of their inclusion in the national/local
      tourism strategies. Park mgmt auth; deadline to be decided.
South Eastern European Workshop on Business Planning for Protected Areas   Vilm, 3-7 Dec 2008

Annex 6

Financial plan for a PA in Albania
• VC = Visitor
• CCC = Cable Car Company
• VN = Visitor Number
• MoEFWA = Ministry of Environment
  Forestry and Water Administration
• DPA = Directory of Protected Area
South Eastern European Workshop on Business Planning for Protected Areas   Vilm, 3-7 Dec 2008

Annex 7

Financial plans for PAs in the other countries of the workshop

                 Financial plan for Kolpa National Park – 2009-2018


PA Background:
   - Founded in 2006. IUCN category V. 4300 ha
   - Kolpa river
   - Traditional agriculture
   - Potentials: tourism, sustainable agriculture instead of traditional, handcrafts

Objective of Financial Plan:
Sufficient resources for:
   - National resources preservation
   - Enabling successful sustainable development of local communities

Financial needs and gaps:
   - Staff and material costs
   - Infrastructure: information center, mechanization, water infrastructure
   - Projects
   - Land purchase

Investment priorities:
   1. Information center
   2. Developing a model of sustainable land use
   3. Design of park brand products
   4. improvement of water regime → Favorable ecological status: habitat, species

Summary of financial mechanisms:

  1. Government budget allocation
         o From Ministry of Environment for the Protected Area
         New sources could be for example for Water Fund:
         o Ministry of Agriculture
         o Ministry of Tourism
  2. Fees: Park fees and services
  3. Projects: local communities, cross border
  4. Donations

Feasibility analysis for:
   1. Water fund
   2. Tourism
   3. Revenue from state owned agricultural land
Financial goals and gap reduction:
Financial gap: 2.750.000 EUR for 10 years

Business plans for:
   1. Design and marketing of park services and products
   2. Information center
   3. Water fund

Economic impact

Action plan:

       What                        Who                               When

Management plan             Park authority, Ministry of Env.         2009

Information center          Park authority, MOE, Min. of Tourism     2012

Development of services     Park authority, local community, NGO     2012
and products

Improvement of water        Park authority, MOE                      2015

Development of sustainable Park authority, MOE, Min. of Agr., NGO,   2018
use model: land use and    Universities, Local communities
large carnivores

           Financial Plan for National Parks of Montenegro – 2009-2012

PA Background:
   - 4 National Parks
   - Potentials: develop tourism services, develop food production

Better controls of income (improve information system and train staff)
Develop a brand (organic, non-organic food, other products from locals)
Raise revenue for service development
Raise revenue from private sector

Financial background:
   1. Government allocation (biggest portion: 32%)
   2. Entry fees
   3. Services
   4. Concessions
   5. Recreation activity
   6. Products

   1. Salary
   2. Equipment
   3. Program protection
   4. Infrastructure
   5. Services

Needs and gaps:

                           Current (EUR)           Optimal (EUR)          Gap (EUR)
Staff                                1.100.000            1.430.000
Equipments                             200.000              200.000
Program protection                     350.000              700.000
Services                               100.000              120.000
Marketing                               50.000              100.000
HR                                      50.000              100.000
Total                                1.800.000            2.650.000         850.000 =
Investment priorities:
   1. Information system
   2. Building creative and education capacity
   3. Investment in local communities: Financial-feasibility analysis, work with local
      people, develop local brand

Economic impact:
   - Raise the standard of employment
   - Increase in number of staff
   - Better life for local people

                        Financial plan for Orseg National Park

Management Plan

PA Background
Main activities:
           - Protection and ranger service
           - Conservation
           - Environmental education

Problem: Ranger service → 50.000 ha out of total 100.000 ha PA is unguarded!
          - illegal logging
          - poaching
          - illegal waste deposit
          - pouching grassland

Objectives: improvement of the ranger service!

      Program metrics       Cost at current     Cost at basic level Cost at optimal
                            level – staff # 10  – staff # 17        level – staff # 25
                            (USD)               (USD)               (USD)
1.    Staff                            200.000             340.000              500.000
2.    Equipment                           5.000               8.500               12.500
3.    Vehicle                            25.000              42.500               62.500
4.    Operation                        240.000             408.000              600.000
5.    Gap-total                                            329.000              705.000

Investment priorities:
Guarding NATURA 2000 Sites outside of national Pas
   1. Staff and operation
   2. Vehicle
   3. Equipment

Financial mechanisms:
   1. Staff → Governmental allocation
          - EU directives
          - Public security
   2. Vehicle→ Car dealerships
      Marketing: ad surface, car popularity increase
   3. Equipment→ Producers of outdoor clothing, binoculars, etc.
   4. Operation→ National gasoline company (MOL) – going green
Increasing government allocation for staff:
           - civil pressure (NGOs)
           - political parties, etc.

Economic impact:

           -   Reduced illegal logging and waste deposit
           -   Increase in number of tourists
           -   More cost efficient operation of ranger service (less km/each ranger)
           -   Improving employment – directly = 7 – 15 new jobs, indirectly = tourism


       2009 – Preparation and negotiations
       2010 – Employ half of the rangers + related operational elements
       2011 – Monitoring and presenting results
       2012 – Second half of program implementation
       2013 – Final evaluation

                           Financial Plan for the PA system

PA system:
   - There are 27 Protected Areas in Romania, 22 of them are managed by the
       National Forest Administration (NFA), 1 by a University, 2 by Local Authorities,
       2 by the Ministry of Environment
   - 7% of the Romanian territory is covered by these PAs
   - II. + V. IUCN

       ↕ Custody
Ministry of Environment−──Trust Fund→Some part of it is available for PA: NGO –
10%, NFA – 60%
Land restoration: 2004 increased, 2008 decreased
(MA means: Ministry of Agriculture)

All of the PAs have management plan where actions are listed.

Achieve long term financial sustainability for PA system

Financial background:
   - NFA: 70%
   - Tourism fee: 25%
   - Private donors: 4%
   - Self generated revenue: 1%

Summery of the financial needs and gaps:
  1. Total income in:
     2004: 2 million USD
     2005: 2,9 million USD
     2006: 6,1 million USD
     2007: 6,4 million USD

   2. Current situation in 2007:
         o Basic level: 6,4 million USD
         o Optimal level: 18 million USD
         o Gap: 11,6 million USD

Investment priorities:
   - Key program priority analysis is already done (all PAs have Management plan
      submitted for approval
   -   Deep financial analysis is not possible due to lack of relations in accounting
       between costs and activities

   Measures TbD:
   - Standardize programs for all PAs
   - Implement into accounting system
   - Build also the optimal scenario
   - Consider programs to strengthen the National Agency of the Protected Areas (at
     this moment is being created) and NGOs

An accurate analysis of the investment priorities

Financial mechanisms:
   1. National Forest Administration funding
   2. Ministry of Environment trust funds (they might need a fiscal reform)
   3. EU funding
   4. Water fees and hydropower (Business Plan)
   5. Tourism (Business Plan)
   6. International funds/programs (WWF, TNC, etc)
   7. Bilateral (GTZ, USAID, GEF, etc)
   8. Mining sector (Business Plan)
                  Financial Plan for Sjeverni Velebit National Park

PA Background:
Prepare proper management plan
Adjust for target

   - Increase sources of revenue
   - Decrease financial gap

Financial background:
   - Government budget: 60 %
   - Own revenue: 30 %
   - Donations: 10 %

Needs and gaps:
   - Current revenue: 3 million kuna (Croatian currency)
   - Optimal revenue: 5 million kuna
   - Gap: 2 million kuna

   - Improve services (for example there are only 2 mountain huts)
   - Establish organized transport (bus would take people to the part after they park
       their car→ reduce pollution)
   - Improve patrolling
   - Scientific research

Financial mechanisms:
   - Redistribution of tourist fee
   - Pollution tax (redistribution)
   - Stamps→ Post office issues NP stamps→ income goes to the park
   - Online shops
   - Gift shops – expanding their offers→ develop a local brand, workshops with

Implementation of the plan:
  1. Identify stakeholders
  2. Raise public awareness
  3. Joint initiative with other Pas
  4. Meet with Ministries
  5. Academic study
  6. Political lobby
  7. Negotiations between ministers
  8. Change legislation
  9. Collect money!

                    Financial Plan for Slovensky raj National Park

   - National Park was established in 1988
   - 700.000 – 1.000.000 visitors/year
   - Second most visited park in Slovakia
   - NATURA 2000 site
   - Administration of NP is not an independent unit
   - More than 50% of the NP budget comes from state budget
   - 0 ha land in NP is owned by National Park/State Nature Conservancy
   - Current Management Plan – not approved, it doesn’t contain financial plan
   - 21 employees
   - NP budget is divided into 3 categories: Salaries, Overheads, Investments
   - Park entry fee exist, but it is not part of NP budget
   - Taxes (land use, parking fee, recreation) → Municipalities’ budget

General objective:
Achieve a long term financial sustainability for NP by implementing diverse financial

Specific objective:
Objective 1: Find opportunities to establish a self generated financial system, capacity

Objective 2: Legislative reform to achieve land ownership for NP in strict reserves (18%
of total area of NP).

Objective 3: Provide feasibility study for NP

Objective 4: Establish economic unit to implement feasibility plan and business plan

Objective 5: Raise awareness in local communities to understand benefits of PA for them

Objective 6: Memorandum of understanding for all stakeholders

Investment priorities:
   1. Objective 1
   2. Objective 3
   3. Objective 4
   4. Objective 5
   5. Objective 2
   6. Objective 6
Present problems:
   1. “Black box” problems
   2. Land ownership. Current situation: if the park wants to get entry fee they have to
      own the land
   3. No feasibility study
   4. No skilled staff
   5. No self-generated sources
   6. Local communities don’t understand the benefits of PA
   7. Conflict of interest with other stakeholders
                     Financial plan for Natural Park Strandja
PA background:
   - There is PA network developed and according to the PA Low Bulgaria has 6
   - The main responsible institutions for PA management are MOEW and SFA
   - The biggest National Park in Bulgaria
   - The park is situated in south-east part of Bulgaria

   - Conservation of old growth forests in Strandja PA
   - Zone of high conservation value forest according to the management plant of the
Financial background:
           Year     Cost (Euro)            Income (Euro)            Financial gap
           2005       10 000                   2 000                    8 000
           2006       10 000                   4 000                    6 000
           2007       10 000                   6 000                    4 000
      - Patrolling and guarding the territory of the PA
      - Raise public awareness
      - Fire prevention control
      - Uniforms

       - Private donations
       - Funds
       - Compensation for logging in old-growth forests (from the central budget)
       - Entry taxes
       - Tourism

   Financial gaps:
      - Central budget subsidies
      - Tourism taxes (visitor center, photo shooting, etc.)
      - Taxes of water distribution companies
      - Carbon sequestration taxes
      - Donations

   Investment priorities (profit):
      FSC Certification, Photo hunting, Build new information center (selling materials,
      tourism services)

   Economic impact:
      ‐ Developing alternative tourism in local communities
      ‐ Protection of water sources
      ‐ Conservation and protection of old growth forests


National park system background

Fruška Gora is proclaimed a National Park in 1960 in order to provide its permanent
protection and to improve its natural resources and beauty. The area of active protection
is 25.525 square kilometers. Fruška Gora is an isolated, narrow, island mountain in
Pannonia plain. It is intended by river courses extending to the south and north, with
some side ranges with steep slopes, spreading from the main narrow range.

Its location, specific geological history and different microclimatic conditions make it
very interesting and important to science. Thanks to unique and very rich deposits of
fossil fauna and flora, Fruška Gora is called the 'mirror of geological past.

The main characteristic of this region is the existence of numerous protected, rare and
endangered species. Fruška Gora's valleys are covered with pastures and fertile fields,
numerous vineyards and orchards which decorate its lower slopes while higher ground,
above 300 meters, is covered with dense deciduous forests.

Fruška Gora hides 16 orthodox monasteries famous for their specific architecture,
treasuries, libraries and frescoes and numerous archeological sites from prehistoric and
historic times as well.

Due to its outstanding natural resources, wonderful landscapes, exceptional charm and
beauty, that will bring you closer to nature, Fruška Gora is ideal place for rest and

The Fruška gora is a natural entirety with specific geology, relief, hydrographic and
varied edaphic conditions. All this, as well as specific climatic conditions, has given rise
to the development of a specific flora and fauna that has attracted numerous researchers.

The oldest records on the nature in the Fruška gora were made by botanists in the middle
of the 18th century, followed by numerous studies of geological, paleonthological and
geomorphologic forms and phenomena, flora and vegetation, fauna and the other fields of
natural and social sciences.

On the basis of numerous investigations, "The Fruška gora Monography" has been
published. A great number of papers, essays, expert opinions, and proposals on the
Fruška gora have been published as well. In the 19th and the first half of the 20th
centuries, data were collected that clearly showed that the Fruška gora is endowed with
exceptional nature values. In the papers of the scholars from that period, there is a
suggestion of the need to preserve this wealth.
After the Second World War nature protection activities began. In 1948, the Fruška gora
was proclaimed a National picnicking place and placed under the general protection as a
unique mountain area with well preserved forest vegetation, flora and fauna. In 1960, a
law proclaiming the Fruška gora a National Park was passed.

The borders of the National Park encompass the most typical part of a broader region
under the forests. These borders have largely remained the same till today and mark a
territory of 25,525 hectares. Due to a major scientific importance in the monitoring of
processes and trends of a spontaneous development of natural ecosystems or because of
cultural and educational importance, certain parts of the Fruska gora, as the best
preserved remains of autochthonous communities in this region, have been placed under
special protection. There are 39 protected areas and another 26 are planned to be
Since 1990, according to the new legislative regulation, the National Park, being
protected area of exceptional importance for the Republic, has been classified in I
category. In accordance with a legal requirement that adequate protection regimes have to
be defined, during the last two years recognition of the nature values in the National Park
has been taken.

Financial background

  No.                                      INCOME                                             (EUR)
   1                                           2                                                 3

1.   Self generated income (forestry, fishery, hunting, sale of souvenirs, eco-tourism,…)   2.850.000,00
1.1. Return of investing in forestry                                                         400.000,00
2.   Government’s budget allocation, Regional budget allocation, Fund for Environmental      150.000,00
3.   Taxes (natural resource extraction for minerals, recreation activity)                   400.000,00
4.   Concession fees                                                                              -
5.   PA volunteer program (civil army)                                                            -
TOTAL                                                                                       3.400.000,00
 No                     EXPENDITURES                           (EUR)
  1                              2                                3

 1    Management of PA                                         23.450.000
 2    Protection of natural and culture resources               6.700.000
 3    Protection and use of natural resources                 254.600.000
 4    Project and activities on protection and development     46.900.000
 5    Organization of area                                      3.350.000
TOTAL                                                        3.350.000,00

 No                      INVESTMENTS                           (EUR)
  1                              2                                3

 1    Feasibility study for road taxes                                15.000
 2    Training for rangers and staff                                   5.000
 3    Building’s adaptation                                            7.000
 4    Reconstruction of visitor center                                16.000
TOTAL                                                                 43.000

             GOALS                                   STRATEGY                                MEASURES

1.   Establishing basic activities for 1.1.    Optimal organization of public 1.1.1. Changes of organization and
     protection and development of            enterprise                             systematization in corporation
     PA                                                                              with Ministry
                                                                              1.1.2. Workshops for staff and
                                                                                     employees     (IUCN,    WWF

             GOALS                                   STRATEGY                                MEASURES

2.   Enhancement control on PA         2.1.   Equipping       and    developing 2.1.1. Education of rangers and
                                              control service                          voluntaries
                                                                                2.1.2. Reorganization control service

             GOALS                                    STRATEGY                              MEASURS
3.   Development          alternative 3.1.    Equipment of visitors centre and 3.1.1.   Guidelines programs for
     activities (tourism, education,          education of staff for eco-tourism        tourist     and     students,
     promotion, …)                            activities                                promotion      environmental
                                                                                        results    in    newspapers,
                                                                                        cooperation with tourist
                                                                                        organization,    promotional
                GOALS                                     STRATEGY                                    MEASURES

4.      Education for stakeholders on 4.1.        Implementation        of     CBD, 4.1.1. Workshops
        principles   of    sustainable            RAPPAM

Summary of financial needs and gaps

Needs – New knowledge and cooperations with relevant environmental institutions (consultant agency)

Gaps – Eco taxes for traffic across PA (Building payment system)

Investment priorities

Ecotourism and taxes
South Eastern European Workshop on Business Planning for Protected Areas   Vilm, 3-7 Dec 2008

Annex 8

National Action Plans/ Road maps of the countries of the workshop
National Action Plans / National Road Maps


January                                   Secure national commitment
February              Select one PA with Management Plan for elaboration of Business and
                                                Financial Plan
March                 Select one PA with Management Plan for elaboration of Business and
                                                Financial Plan
April                                    Team: preparation of F.P./B.P.
June                                          Open discussions
July                                           Starting FP/BP
June                                    Finish generalisation of FP/BP

January                                 PA analysis
February                      Lobby and promote FP/BP idea
March                        1st consultation with stakeholders
April                                National workshop
May                                 Bulgaria guidelines
June                                  Working group
July          ABC accounting, gap analysis, screening of financial mechanisms
August                            Travelling to Costa Rica
September                                Draft plans
October                              Consultants TNC
November              Consultations with local/national stakeholders
December                Political government, lobby, consultations

January       Inform ministry, suggest making Fin. Plan for Velebit cluster of parks
February                               Create a task force
March                       TORs for consultant and find consultant
April                        Work with consultant and prepare data
May                          Work with consultant and prepare data
June                                     ABC analysis
July                                     ABC analysis
August                                   ABC analysis
September                                ABC analysis
October                                  ABC analysis
November                     Pre-selection of financial mechanisms
December                     Pre-selection of financial mechanisms
January                   Consultant analysis of finance mechanisms
February                          Formulating Financial Plan
March                             Formulating Financial Plan
April                             Formulating Financial Plan
May                        Send financial plan for review to the park
June                       Send financial plan for review to the park
July                                Incorporate comments
August                   Formulate business plan for each mechanism
September                Formulate business plan for each mechanism
October                  Formulate business plan for each mechanism
November                 Formulate business plan for each mechanism
December                              Final visibility event

January       Discussion with PA mgmt
February      Discussion with PA mgmt
March           Negotiation with MoE
April            Prepare Mgmt Plan
May              Prepare Mgmt Plan
June             Prepare Mgmt Plan
July             Prepare Mgmt Plan
August           Prepare Mgmt Plan
September        Prepare Mgmt Plan
October          Prepare Mgmt Plan
November         Prepare Mgmt Plan
December         Prepare Mgmt Plan
January         Searching for funds
February          Apply for funds
March             Apply for funds
April             Hire consultant
May                Prepare FP
June               Prepare FP
July               Prepare FP
August             Prepare FP
September          Prepare FP
October            Prepare FP
November           Prepare FP
December           Prepare FP

January                          Creating a task force
February      Financial analysis, legal framework analysis, goal analysis
May                           Looking for consultants
June                         Preparing a Business Plan
September                   Presenting the Business Plan
November                        Training for managers
January                            Implementation

January        Share information with MoE and PAs
February                   Task force
March              Workshop for MoE and PAs
June                  Training of PA economists
July          Identify money, 1 year of data collection
June               Hire a consultant to do BP
July             Meeting with consultant and PAs
December                     BP of PAs
January           Make our plan simple
February          Make our plan simple
March             Make our plan simple
April         Definition of activities for B.P.
May           Definition of activities for B.P.
June          Definition of activities for B.P.
July          Looking for consulting agency
August        Looking for consulting agency
September     Looking for consulting agency
October                Preparing BP
November               Preparing BP
December               Preparing BP
January       Implementation and monitoring
February      Implementation and monitoring
March         Implementation and monitoring
April         Implementation and monitoring
May           Implementation and monitoring
June          Implementation and monitoring
July          Implementation and monitoring

January                     Meeting with director of SNC and economic unit
March         Meeting of PA directors, address their needs and proposals to SNC director
April                                           and MoE
May                Feasibility study and financial gap analysis for SNC (consultant);
June                                  workshop for PA economists
July            Change of internal economic documents/laws to retain self-generating
August                                  sources to PA budgets
October          Directors of PAs – dialogue with stakeholders creating 1 employment
November                          capacity for economist in each PA
January        Start dialogue with ministry of agriculture about ownership of PAs in strict
February                                         reserves

January                         Results of this workshop on a website
February      Presentation of the concept of sustainable financing planning to MoE and
                        parks: develop and agree on a road map for Slovenia
March                      Establish task force (Ministry, DAE, parks, ….)
April                   Training for PA staff on sustainable finance planning
May             Elaboration of the framework for guidelines on sustainable financing
                                           planning for PAs
August                      Elaboration of a pilot finance plan for one PA
September           Task force to lead on the process of sustainable finance plan
January                Approval management plans for all PAs in the country
May                      Study on evaluation of PA needs/gaps for all PAs
September                       Study on economic benefits of PAs

To top