Measuring and Reporting on Effectiveness – New Zealand Experiences Department of Conservation Te Papa Atawhai Hugh Logan Director General, Department of Conservation, New Zealand World Parks Congress, Durban, September 2003

Five Main Points 1.Context: New Zealand’s ecology is unusual and relatively well protected; 2.Primary focus of measurement is to improve management; 3.Secondary focus is information for reporting; 4.World Heritage Area reporting is based on information used only for reporting; 5.Learning about management effectiveness is a long and continuing process.

Here’s our place 1. Context: New Zealand’s ecology is unusual

Split from Gondwana - 65 million years isolated development Mammals not present Birds filled all major niches Ancient forests evolved slowly One of the 25 biodiversity hot spots Evolution in Isolation

New Zealand was the last major land mass settled by humans The impact on indigenous ecosystems has been a disaster NZ’s Introduced

Forest before Polynesian Settlement Forest at European Settlement Forest today Forest before European settlement AD % % animal species % Forest Loss of indigenous species & forest cover

8.3 million hectares 14 National Parks 15 Marine Reserves 68 Conservation Parks 3 World Heritage Areas one of which is both a cultural and natural heritage site Protected areas are about 30% of the land area but less than 1% of the marine Context: New Zealand’s ecology is unusual and relatively well protected

2. Primary focus of measurement is to improve management Major effort to improve measurement with the Department Traditional focus has been reporting on what we do (outputs) Now moving to measure what is being achieved (outcomes) – the changes in the health of ecosystems and species This is much harder

3. Secondary focus is information for reporting Information for reporting still tends to drive our processes – to Parliament, other government and international agencies There is a tension between meeting the reporting need and collecting information for management needs It is often said that this should not be so, but the needs of managers and external agencies are different

4. WHA reporting is based on information used only for reporting WHA reporting is too coarse-grained to contribute to our management information needs. We do it because we recognise the external reporting is of value, but it is an additional task

5. Learning about our management effectiveness is a long process We are making good progress on improving measurement We recognise that this takes time and investment in systems and capacity For example: We can now report on the extent to which different kinds of ecosystems are protected

As a surrogate for outcomes reporting we are also reporting on the efforts we are making and providing examples of site and species-specific condition to describe what is being achieved Over the next 3-5 years we will be able to report more comprehensively on the states of Environments and Species and how these states are changing We will follow a similar path in reporting on freshwater and marine ecosystems, albeit more slowly Becoming more comprehensive

In Summary: 5 Main Points New Zealand’s ecology is unusual and relatively well protected – main issue is the decline in ecosystem health; Primary focus of measurement is to improve management; Secondary focus is information for reporting; World Heritage Area reporting does not assist our management work; Learning about changing ecosystem condition and management effectiveness is a long and continuing process.