Implication of METT framework for assessing the performance of ecosystems and biodiversity in three protected areas of Balochistan being managed with different mechanism

Faiz Mohammad Kakar, Syed Ainuddin, Zahoor Ahmad Bazai and Saeed Ur Rehman Kakar 1. Pakistan Study Center, University of Balochistan, Quetta-Pakistan 2. Department of Disasters Management and Development Studies, University of Baluchistan-Pakistan 3. Botany Department, University of Balochistan, Quetta-Pakistan *Corresponding author’s email: faizkakar@yahoo.com Citation Faiz Mohammad Kakar, Syed Ainuddin, Zahoor Ahmad Bazai and Saeed Ur Rehman Kakar. Implication of METT framework for assessing the performance of ecosystems and biodiversity in three protected areas of Balochistan being managed with different mechanism. Pure and Applied Biology. Vol. 8, Issue 1, pp331-342. http://dx.doi.org/10.19045/bspab.2018.700155


Introduction
Protected areas (PAs) are the central part of any national biodiversity strategy and key components of environmental conservation, providing a number of invaluable advantages to humanity [1,2]. They are at the forefront of conservation efforts for having a number of ecosystems that maintain the crop diversity and species with economic value. Pas also have the capacity for water retention, erosion control, fuel wood, shelter, reduced flooding and unnatural wild fires. Most of the local and rural communities depend on the Pas for their food, health and livelihoods. In addition, local communities are also protected against adverse environmental risks of floods and droughts [3,4]. PAs contribute directly to global sustainable development and poverty reduction [2,5]. The ecosystems in PAs provide benefits of various natures at all levels [6]. It is estimated that nearly 1.1 billion people (one sixth of the world's population) depend on PAs for a significant percentage of their livelihoods (UN Millennium Project 2005). It is often hard to quantify the advantages of ecosystems in an accurate manner and to considerate the relation between ecosystems and livelihood. It was estimated that the global value of biodiversity to be roughly $38 trillion and the advantages of land conservation (and subsequent loss of ecosystem services) were always outweighed by the costs [1]. The management of ecosystem biodiversity in PAs is becoming very challenging in developing countries due to multiple factors such as increasing population, new ways of income, industries and development initiatives [7]. To assure the good governance for environmental protection at national level, Pakistan signed a number of international environmental conventions, treaties and laws regarding, climate change, biodiversity, endangered species, wetlands, desertification, hazardous wastes, environmental modification, ozone layer protection, sea law, marine dumping and ship pollution [8]. Pakistan  . These PAs are being managed either exclusively by government or co-managed by NGOs, local communities or private sect (Kothari, 1999). Pakistan is struggling to overcome the challenges being faced in managing the PAs. However, some of the issues involved are very complicated and require foreign support and assistance. One of the major challenges being faced is climate change. The uncontrolled extraction of resources from forest is not a factor responsible for the loss of biodiversity but the state government that grabs about 50% revenue from forest resources. Out of this revenue, 94% is generated from timber sale by Azad Jammu and Kashmir Logging and Sawmills Corporation (AKLASC) and 06% by non-timber forest products (NTFP). Undoubtedly, the situation emphasizes for a long term planning and stresses on shifting the dependency on the other resources [10]. With such a critical scenario across the country, Balochistan, the largest but less developed province of Pakistan, is suffering the same situation. Thus both the political and social authorities have to take serious steps for controlling the challenges being faced in the management of conserved ecosystems and biodiversity in PAs. The management of PAs demand for possible and solid recommendations based on detailed, reliable and authentic research which is the objective of present study. The study is aimed to assess the management effectiveness with the application of WB designed and recommended Management Effectiveness Tracking Tool (METT) for comparative analysis of three selected PAs of Balochistan being managed with three different types of mechanisms: (1) by Public Institution, (2) by Public Institution and Local community and (3) by private by local community.

Materials and methods
The methodology for this study is descriptive. The study is undertaken to highlight the better mechanisms for management of PAs by assessing the management effectiveness of the three PAs with the aim to influence the policy makers to implement a scientifically tested and proved mechanism for management of PAs in future.

Selection of protected areas
Three PAs were selected and assessed in the province of Balochistan based on the following criteria: 1. The PAs must be recognized at the provincial, national and international level and registered in World Database of Protected Areas (WDPA). 2. The selected PAs must have different management mechanisms for comparative analysis: a. PAs entirely managed by Government with no involvement of local community. b. PAs co-managed by Government with local community involvement c. PAs purely managed by local community Keeping in Consideration the above criteria, the three selected National PAs for our study in the province of Balochistan were (1) Chiltan National Park, (2) Ziarat Juniper MAB and (3) Torghar. The registration numbers of targeted PAs was searched in WDPA which are internationally registered with WDPA https://protectedplanet.net/country/PK#ref1 and being managed by Government, Government and local community and local community ( Figure 1). METT questionnaire and its categories METT with a guided questionnaire was used in present study for comparative analysis to assess and measure the management effectiveness of three targeted PAs in Balochistan. METT is standardized and globally applicable tool for all types of PAs. It is widely used by WWF/WB to evaluate the progress for improving management effectiveness of PAs. METT has some key characteristics such as harmonized record system, appropriate for reproduction, generating reliable data to allow progress tracking over time, relatively quick and easy to be filled by PA staff and score analysis. METT consist of 30 questions categorized in five sections such as (1) Context, (2) Inputs, (3) Planning, (4) Process and (5) Outputs/Outcomes. There are four scores categories (0 to 3) indicating the levels of management effectiveness at PAs where score "0" depicts poor management, score "1" depicts fair management, score "2" depicts good management and score "3" depicts excellent management.

Data collected
Data was collected as per the guidelines of WB booklet for METT utilization. METT questionnaires were filled out by interviewing the PA staff. PA staff comprised of District Forest Officers, Ranger Officers, Forest Officers, Conservators, Helpers and Security Guards. In community managed PAs, questionnaire were filled out by approaching office bearers, conservators, community members and tribal leaders involved in PA protection. Standard comparative analysis of study A well-known study [11] entitled "Tracking Progress in Managing PAs around the World" conducted by WWF and WB across the world in 55 countries investigating METT applications developed by WB and WWF in the management effectiveness of 331 PAs has been considered a baseline for comparative analysis of targeted PAs in our study. The Average data of all 30 indicators of METT has been considered as threshold.

Data analysis
Score of each questionnaire was entered in the excel spreadsheet and data was analyzed using statistical software SPSS version 20.
The averages and percentages of the categories of planning, process, inputs and outputs/outcomes were calculated for comparative analysis of PAs.

Results and discussion Comparison of overall results with WWF threshold standards
Comparison of overall results of indicators of all three PAs with [11] threshold data showed remarkably diverse results ( Figure 2). Most of the indicators were found better than the overall result of [11] report which is very encouraging. The indicators such as PA design, regulations, maintenance of equipment, staff number, laws enforcement, land and water usage planning, security of budget and involvement of local communities scored higher levels and significant differences were observed with the data of world PAs which indicates better management of PAs in Balochistan in our study. In addition, the indicators such as legal status, PA boundary demarcation, PA objectives, management of budget, condition of values and economic benefits slightly crossed the levels of [11] threshold data and indicated better effectiveness of PAs in Balochistan. However, indicators such as research, staff training, education and awareness programs and commercial tourism were found very weak in our study as compared to the [11] threshold data. The causes of weak indicators could be poor governance, security situation in the province and lack of the capacity of line departments and stakeholders. The causes were also highlighted in general discussion with local communities during data collection process. Overall, the management effectiveness of all three PAs (Chiltan National Park, Ziarat Juniper MAB and Torghar) was not only satisfactory but also as like management of PAs at global level.    indicator threshold standards. It was observed that input of Ziarat Juniper MAB less than threshold standards. Outcome of Chiltan National Park was far better than all

Conclusion
The present study revealed various significant factors concerning the assessment of management effectiveness of PAs in Balochistan. The very first factor is the overall management of PAs being managed by local communities was more effective as compared to PAs managed exclusively by Government and co-managed by Government and local communities. PA being managed jointly by government and local communities was still better than the PA managed exclusively by Government. The factors observed were good planning and comparatively better utilization resources at PAs being managed by local communities. The second factor observed is Low impact of PA context on their outputs and outcomes was observed and event with the same context of all three PAs was their Registration with WDPA. The outputs and the outcomes are not equal because the planning process and inputs affect management effectiveness of PAs. The third factor is dependence of independent variables that can influence the effectiveness of management of PAs. The fourth factor is control of land use and hunters in PA. Involvement of local communities attaining some economic benefits is more effective.
Local communities play vital role in controlling land, hunting and vegetative cover of PA. In concluded that effectiveness of PAs management depends on the level of involvement of local communities. Involvement of local communities is directly proportional to the effective management of PAs.