1. ESI Indicators: overview of considerations within and beyond boundaries Ian Dutton idutton@tnc.org

2. Presentation Sequence  Reasons why ESI measures not as common  Review of purposes of measuring effectiveness –Feedback vs feedout  Use of ESI Measures in PA Management –Indicator selection  Use of ESI indicators Beyond the Boundaries –Case studies – water yield and fisheries  Some Unresolved Challenges  Promoting integration of ESI measures

3. Why are ESI measures less used?  Bias of PA management towards biological and physical values  General lack of attention to management effectiveness (M E)  Lack of integration between monitoring inside and outside PAs

4. Feedback and Feedout Functions of PA Monitoring

5. Continuum of M E Monitoring

6. ESI Indicators  Add often missing/persuasive “Human Dimension” to ME evaluation  Necessarily simplify complexity of systems they purport to describe  Comprise both established indicators and experimental techniques  Are a norm in development sectors (e.g. CPUE) and create a framework for comparison inside and outside Pas when comparison possible  Increasing focus for BIG PICTURE assessment of human wellbeing (e.g. Nat Economic + Social Accounting) and progress

7. Increasing Sophistication Then (if asked!) Then (if asked!)  Total cost per park  Management plan written  Number of visitors  Number of Staff Now Now  Cost per unit effort/ cost effectiveness  Management plan working + if not, why?  Quality of visitor experience  Staff competencies

8. Key Principles for ESI Indicator Selection  Changes can be benchmarked or related to broader trends  Solid theoretical framework – e.g. what level of change is significant?  Well understood meaning – enables consistency of measurement/ interpretation  Facilitate communication about status and trends – even when things are not going in “right direction”

9. The cost(s) of not looking beyond boundaries Lack of integration across boundary leads to: Lack of integration across boundary leads to:  Inefficient data collection/duplication  Loss of learning  Loss of opportunity to build constituency/promote benefits  “Blindness” + Institutional isolation  Lack of institutional willingness to work at scales commensurate with threats  etc.

10. Case 1: Lore Lindu NP Sulawesi

11. Measuring Benefits Across Boundaries @ 2 scales  Buffer Zone - village agreements (self monitored) promote improved village governance, stakeholder support and improved livelihoods  Downstream Cities - water valuation – ($9 million/year) built new constituency in local govt. and rural sectors

12. Case 2: Spillover Effects from Marine Protected Areas  Community marine sanctuary model imported to Blongko (N. Sulawesi) from Apo Island  Fish abundance increased 3x in first 2 years with resultant increase in catches beyond boundaries  20 sanctuaries now established in province and more on way!

13. Some Unresolved/Irresolvable Challenges  Scale  Cultural differences  Precision vs cost  Concordance

14. Recommendations  Employ ESI measures more effectively within PA management  Link ESI measures with broader State of Environment efforts to inform global efforts such as Millennium Goals CHALLENGE Involve social science more directly in performance management…