PUTTING IT ALL TOGETHER

 

How do the elements of a master plan fit together?

 

Developing a master plan involves first developing a vision for a comprehensive protected area system, and then laying out specific plans to achieve that vision.  The individual components of a master plan are clear, but the actual process of putting it all together is considerably less so -- each element is a distinct part of the plan, but there are multiple linkages and interactions between them.  Although there is no single best way to develop a master plan, the following are some guiding principles:

 

• The process of developing a master plan is not likely to be linear but rather an iterative process.  For example, a gap assessment might first include gaps in ecological representation, and then, following an assessment of protected area management effectiveness, might include management gaps, which will require additional analyses of protection gaps.

 

• Some elements must come in logical sequence – it will be difficult to conduct an ecological gap assessment without first identifying key biodiversity features, and it will be difficult to develop a sustainable finance plan for example.

 

• It is common to complete an assessment without taking the next step of developing concrete strategies.  This step is critical, and should not be left to the final stage, or left out entirely.

 

• Prioritization should be a key element of the master plan at all levels, particularly for strategies – for creating new protected areas, abating threats, improving management, developing policies – all should be prioritized based on urgency, feasibility and overall impact.

 

• One assessment can contribute to several other assessments and strategies.  For example, assessments of management effectiveness can contribute to capacity assessments and strategies, to gap assessments, to sustainable finance plans, and to monitoring.

 

• Sustainable finance should encompass all aspects of the protected area system master plan.  In doing so, it may be helpful to break down specific components for sustainable financing (e.g., costs to create new protected areas, to restore degraded areas, to improve management effectiveness).

 

• When developing strategies and costs, it may be helpful to develop multiple scenarios, ranging from optimistic to realistic.

 

• A long-term multi-institutional structure with secure funding for the master planning process will likely ensure better continuity and follow through with implementation.

 

• The overall success of the master planning process will be determined by political will and leadership – agencies and supporting institutions may have to invest in building political will as part of the master planning process.

 

• The different elements of master planning will require different timelines.  Modifying laws and policies and creating new protected areas, for example, are likely to be far more complex than improving management within existing areas.

 

• Monitoring should be built in to the three core aspects of the master plan: improving the protected area network, protected area managmeent, and the enabling environment.

 

• The results of monitoring should be incorporated into future planning and decision making.

References and resources on putting the elements of a master plan together