Mauritius Forest Restoration Good Practice Guide - 2nd Consultative Workshop
•Descargar como PPTX, PDF•
1 recomendación•365 vistas
The PowerPoint presentation used to introduce the Consultative Workshop to obtain Practitioner Input into a Good Practice Guide to Native Forest Restoration in Mauritius
Recomendados
Más contenido relacionado
Destacado
Destacado (20)
Similar a Mauritius Forest Restoration Good Practice Guide - 2nd Consultative Workshop
Similar a Mauritius Forest Restoration Good Practice Guide - 2nd Consultative Workshop (20)
Más de John Mauremootoo
Más de John Mauremootoo (20)
Último
Último (20)
Mauritius Forest Restoration Good Practice Guide - 2nd Consultative Workshop
- 1. 8 September 2016 Pétrin Visitors Centre Black River Gorges National Park A UNDP/GEF PAN Project Activity 2ND CONSULTATIVE WORKSHOP TO OBTAIN PRACTITIONER INPUT INTO A GOOD PRACTICE GUIDE TO NATIVE FOREST RESTORATION IN MAURITIUS
- 2. Workshop Objective To consolidate the Good Practice Guide through stakeholder feedback on the structure of the guide and the information used, building upon the results of the stakeholder workshop held in September 2015
- 3. Ground Rules • Everybody’s input is equally valued • Respectfully listen & be patient – things may feel slow for some but challenging for others • Participate but don’t dominate • Talk one at a time in plenary • Avoid side-conversations • Mobile phones on silent • Feel free to ask questions during plenary but be aware of time constraints • The workshop is an information gathering exercise and not a decision-making forum.
- 4. Four quadrants of knowledge management Connect Collect PushPull Asking Telling Searching Publishing
- 5. Context: A long history of restoration
- 6. To expand and ensure effective management of the Mauritian protected area network to safeguard threatened biodiversity Context: PAN Project Objective
- 7. Context: PAN Project Objective. The Good Practice Guide can contribute to the PAN Project objective
- 8. Principal Users & Uses
- 13. Uses
- 14. Planning Uses
- 15. A stimulus to further improvement The Action Learning Cycle Uses
- 16. Boundaries: i.e. What won’t be addressed NoirattheGermanlanguageWikipedia
- 18. Species Recovery Crinum mauritianum Carissa xylopicron Gaertnera psychotrioides Kestrel photo ©Lance Woolaver, Plant photos ©Thomas Brendler
- 19. Institutional Frameworks "Statue Of 'Justice' Old Bailey" by Lonpicman - Own work. Licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0 via Commons
- 20. Finance and related issues
- 21. PR & Awareness
- 22. Good Practice Guide Timeline October 2016 – April 2017 Further consultation, writing and editing September 2016 Follow up discussions on the GPG April 2016 Production of guide (Version 01) September 2015 Stakeholder workshop to collect and consolidate information. June 2015 Stakeholder brainstorm to discuss topics for the good practice guide
- 24. Complexity Nerovivo on Flickr (CC BY SA)
- 25. OVERCONFIDENCE Complexity & the relationship between uncertainty and disagreement Adapted from Brenda Zimmermann Uncertainty Disagreement Forest restoration has simple, complicated and complex aspects.
- 26. WHAT CAN WE DO?
- 27. Planning Monitoring Evaluation COMPLEXIMETER Emphasise planning for the simple aspects of a project Adapted from Ricardo Wilson-Grau
- 28. Planning and project efficiency • Gantt charts with clear timelines, roles & responsibilities • Checklists • Standard Operating Procedures • Templates • i.e. USE RECIPES Emphasise planning for the simple aspects of a project
- 29. Emphasise planning for the simple aspects of a project
- 30. COMPLEXIMETER Monitoring Evaluation Planning Adapted from Ricardo Wilson-Grau Emphasise monitoring and evaluation for the complex aspects of a project
- 31. The Action Learning Cycle Manage adaptively using a systematic framework
- 32. Image from Nadya Zhexembayeva via LinkedIn
- 33. Complexity and the importance of monitoring Monitoring should cover all species concerned (flora and fauna) [We] should be well aware of the interactions between all the animals involved before undertaking weeding [There should be] constant on site visit and monitoring
- 34. Be careful what you wish for Thanks to Michael Quinn Patton
- 35. Lewis Carroll on Monitoring The Map is not the Territory
- 36. The Map is not the Territory What a useful thing a pocket-map is! Bruno
- 37. Mein Herr That's another thing we've learned from your Nation, map-making. But we've carried it much further than you. What do you consider the largest map that would be really useful? The Map is not the Territory
- 38. About six inches to the mile Bruno The Map is not the Territory
- 39. Mein Herr Only six inches! We very soon got to six yards to the mile. Then we tried a hundred yards to the mile. And then came the grandest idea of all! We actually made a map of the country, on the scale of a mile to the mile! The Map is not the Territory
- 40. Have you used it very much? Bruno The Map is not the Territory
- 41. Mein Herr It has never been spread out, yet. The farmers objected: they said it would cover the whole country, and shut out the sunlight! So we now use the country itself, as its own map, and I assure you it does nearly as well The Map is not the Territory
- 42. Less can be MORE
- 43. Our task today is to examine… The Shitty First Draft
- 44. Good Practice Guide: Main Topics Maintenance weeding Other possible ecosystem manipulations Cost of restoration Monitoring and evaluation. Choice of restoration site Techniques used for initial and maintenance weeding The process of initial weeding To plant or not to plant?
- 45. Review the text Add examples and other supporting information Add specific sources of information (in addition to the references listed) Critique the information provided Respond to specific queries. Edit the text Spellcheck Focus on grammar, punctuation, etc.
- 46. Facilitation Approach: World Café Adapted from: Germany champions 2014 FIFA World Cup" by Danilo Borges/Portal da Copa copa2014.gov.br Licensed under CC BY 3.0 via Commons
- 47. Topic 1 Topic 2 Topic 4 Topic 3
- 48. Topic 1 Topic 2 Topic 4 Topic 3
- 49. Topic 1 Topic 2 Topic 4 Topic 3
- 50. Topic 1 Topic 2 Topic 4 Topic 3
- 51. World Café Groups • Techniques used for initial and maintenance weeding • The process of initial weeding 1 • To plant or not to plant? • Maintenance weeding 2 • Choice of restoration site • Other possible ecosystem manipulations 3 • Cost of restoration • Monitoring and evaluation 4
Notas del editor
- Put emphasis on the final rule
- The Good Practice Guide as a contribution to the PAN Knowledge Management System Adapted from Barnes & Milton (2015): You must work in all four quadrants: Many organizations that fall into the trap of focusing exclusively on one quadrant. They buy a microblogging tool, for example, and expect it to deliver KM all on its own. Or they focus on wikis and blogs (both within the push quadrant) and find that lots of knowledge is published, but very little used. Or they invest in state-of-the-art search technology, but find that the key knowledge has never been captured in the first place.
- It is impossible to trace the exact time in which active forest restoration began in Mauritius but it dates from at least 1941 with the establishment of a 0.1 ha weeded forest plot by Reginald Vaughan and Octave Wiehe at Macchabee in the Black River Gorges National Park. Since then the extent of restoration work has gradually expanded with more and larger weeded “Conservation Management Areas”, restoration work on offshore islets such as Ile aux Aigrettes and Round Island and species recovery programmes established for rare animals and plants. Over the years a great deal of knowledge on restoration practices has developed. Some of this has been published in scientific journals, some in the grey literature and some remains on data sheets or in people’s heads. This good practice guide seeks to establish what is known by whom, how authoritative this information. This will help guide both new and experience practitioners alike and will help them to pinpoint knowledge and practice gaps and to establish procedures to collect the information needed to address these gaps.
- The production of the restoration good practice guide supports the PAN Project objective. It will contribute to all three project outcomes (1. Systemic framework for PA expansion improved; 2. PA institutional framework strengthened; 3. Operational know-how in place to contain threats) but specifically it will contribute to Project Outcome 3 by supporting the following outputs: Output 3.2: Cost-effective IAS control measures, and ecosystem restoration techniques, developed and tested. Output 3.4: Information management system for recording, exchanging and disseminating information in place.
- In this section some of the principle users and uses of the guide are outlined.
- Established practitioners will be able to use the GPG as a means of comparing their current practice against approaches used by other practitioners in other sites. It will also serve as a checklist of what should and should not be done as they go about their daily activities. It will serve as a guide for training of restoration staff and of monitoring of restoration activities (what is done) and results (what is achieved).
- The GPG will serve as a first port of call for new practitioners. It will help them identify what needs to be done and help them to locate experienced practitioners who can help them establish their restoration programmes.
- The GPG can prove to be a useful orientation document for the academic community who can contribute to the research work needed to address the gaps identified.
- The international conservation community can use the GPG to learn from what is happening in Mauritius and they can also use their expertise to help those in Mauritius address gaps.
- The document will serve as a source of information for all those interested in restoration in Mauritius
- The processes documented in the GPG will serve as an input into conservation management planning.
- The gaps identified, the monitoring and learning processes documented and the information content of the GPG will serve a stimulus to reflection, learning and planning and action for further improvement as part of the Action Learning Cycle. The fact that the information will be written down and accessible will enable knowledgeable individuals to point out gaps that can be addressed. The draft map of protected areas in Mauritius shown in this slide is an example of this phenomenon. Once it was produced it helped practitioners to identify existing protected areas that had not been included. These omissions can be addressed in another iteration.
- Boundaries must be imposed on all systems if they are to be addressed in a practical manner. If discussion is open and unbounded there is a tendency to drift and in the end fail to establish a clear way forward. Therefore, following the meeting in June, it was decided that certain areas, important though they are, would not be included in the GPG.
- Planting is a restoration technique so clearly plant propagation plays an important role in restoration. However, the GPG is focused on interventions at the site level so will focus on planting only but not the process of plant production which can be addressed in a separate forum.
- Species are a fundamental building block of any ecosystem so it is vitally important that rare species are saved from extinction, not only for their intrinsic value but so that the maximum number of “jigsaw pieces” is maintained for their contribution to our “ecosystem restoration jigsaw puzzle”. However, species recovery techniques are vast and highly specialised so will not be dealt with specifically in this guide.
- Optimising the institutional framework for protected area management in Mauritius is a key component of the PAN Project (Outcome 2: PA institutional framework strengthened) and a series of activities are planned and/or being implemented to contribute towards this outcome. The improved institutional framework is part of the enabling environment for improving restoration practices but the GPG will be focusing upon interventions at the field level and not the enabling environment.
- Finding and maintaining the funds for restoration is clearly a bottom line but activities such as budgeting, fundraising and producing business plans will not be addressed in this guide. However, a lot of the information summarised in the guide (e.g. time taken for weeding and cost of restoration practices under different circumstances) will help contribute to financial planning and related activities.
- The GPG can be used as an awareness raising product and will contain information which can be used to enhance awareness levels. It will not, however, address awareness-raising and PR per se. which is of course vital if restoration is to be mainstreamed into Mauritian society.
- The process began with a brainstorming meeting was held at Forestry HQ Curepipe involving practitioners from the Forestry Service, NPCS, the private sector and the PAN PMU to discuss the scope of the restoration workshop. The adaptive agenda has been based on the results of this meeting. However, the precise topics to be discussed are not ‘set in stone’ which allows room for the introduction of other issues if they are central to the workshop objective – hence the use of the term ‘adaptive agenda’. The next step was the first workshop to collect and consolidate information.. Following this workshop the information collected was be consolidated into a pre-first draft document which will be reviewed during this workshop. The next stage will be the production of the good practice guide. It will be the first version as the conception is that the guide will be periodically updated in the light of further knowledge, information and experience both from Mauritius and elsewhere. The final stage in this phase of production will be a meeting of stakeholders to launch the guide. This will serve as an opportunity to disseminate information to those who were not involved in the production of the guide but nonetheless have a stake in ecosystem restoration in Mauritius.
- A brainstorm was conducted on why we are aiming at a “good practice guide” and not a “best practice guide”. It essentially boils down to a fixed mindset versus a growth mindset. When we talk about “best practices” it implies that the process we are talking about has been perfected. This is a static concept, so if we simply replicate a “best practice” recipe we have no need to look for further improvement or expose our current practices to critical evaluation. The other implication of the term “best practice” is that there is a one-size fits all approach to the process that we are talking about. This “Macdonaldisation” approach rarely works for complex phenomenon such as ecosystem restoration in which every case is different. Acknowledging the complexity of a situation, however, does not mean that we cannot find common “restoration ingredients” which can help to optimise the exact “restoration recipe” chosen for any one site.
- There is also chaotic situations: those with a very high uncertainty and disagreement but I do not address these situations here.
- Vivi the dholl puri vendor in Quatre Bornes Market
- CAPTURE UNEXPECTED UNPLANNED OUTCOMES which can be positive and negative
- These are quotes from the group sessions of the first Good Practice Guide Workshop illustrating a common approach to monitoring in which people seek a huge amount of data without regard to how they plan to use it.
- One can think of the monitoring system as a map. Lewis Carol’s vignette illustrates the folly of pursuing ever more precise maps.
- 6inches to 1 mile: Ordnance Survey mapping is usually classified as either "large-scale" (in other words, more detailed) or "small-scale". The Survey's large-scale mapping comprises maps at six inches to the mile or more (1:10,560,[Notes 2] superseded by 1:10,000 in the 1950s) and was available as sheets until the 1980s, when it was digitised. Small-scale mapping comprises maps at less than six inches to the mile, such as the popular one inch to the mile "leisure" maps and their metric successors. These are still available in traditional sheet form.
- from Anne Lamott's Bird by Bird (NY: Pantheon, 1994) pp.21-26 Now, practically even better news than that of short assignments is the idea of shitty first drafts. All good writers write them. This is how they end up with good second drafts and terrific third, drafts. People tend to look at successful writers who are getting their books published and maybe even doing well financially, and think that they sit down at their desks every morning feeling like a million dollars, feeling great about who they are and how much talent they have and what a great story they have to tell; that they take in a few deep breaths, push back their sleeves, roll their necks a few times to get all the cricks out, and dive in, typing fully formed passages as fast as a court reporter. But this is just the fantasy of the uninitiated. I know some very great writers, writers you love who write beautifully and have made a great deal of money, and not one of them sits down routinely feeling wildly enthusiastic and confident. Not one of them writes elegant first drafts.
- As distilled from the results of the first GPG consultative workshop
- Some dos and don’ts
- The World Café facilitation approach is a way of ensuring that all participants can contribute their ideas to a group discussion or decision-making process. It is used in preference to a plenary discussion process which can be dominated by the most assertive, confident or powerful so exclude potentially useful ideas. There are a various ways of executing a World Café approach but essentially the process consists of dividing a big question into a number of topics, each of which is discussed by a small group at one table. At regular intervals the groups move to another table to discuss a different topic but one individual remains to introduce the findings of the discussion so far to the new group. In this way knowledge and insights are added to the previous discussions. Once all individuals have had the chance to discuss all topics an overall summary discussion is conducted in a plenary session.
- The following slides represent the World Café approach adopted at the this workshop. The groups are colour coded and those in black are the group facilitators/rapporteurs who will stay at the same table throughout. Focusing on the Yellow Group. During the first session the Yellow Group discusses Topic 1. After a certain amount of time has elapsed the all groups move to the next topic with the Yellow Group moving to Topic 2.
- After a certain amount of time has elapsed the all groups move to the next topic with the Yellow Group moving to Topic 3.
- After a certain amount of time has elapsed the all groups move to the next topic with the Yellow Group moving to Topic 4.
- After this round each group has discussed each topic. The next step is the plenary summary and discussion.