Below is a Plan Evaluation which I had to do for one of my classes. I chose to evaluate Canada's Oceans Action Plan:
Canada’s Oceans Action Plan
1. Introduction
In the management world, plans are necessary to help develop new ideas and to enact change. They allow us to look at current situations, try to assess the challenges that managers face and what is needed to resolve current issues, as well as to determine what is working within a system. For this project we have been asked to review and evaluate a management plan to try to determine what is and is not working the chosen plan. I have chosen to look at Canada’s Oceans Action Plan (OAP), which focuses on coordinating and implementing ocean activities, including related legislation and policy. The OAP also acts as the framework to sustainably develop and manage Canada’s oceans. Within this report I plan on determining what aspects of the plan work in its favour as well as uncover any issues that may present themselves. I will also assess whether these issues may hinder the performance of the plan or if they could be resolved to allow managers to use the plan successfully.
2. The Oceans Action Plan
The OAP was developed in 2005 in response to the challenges that current managers were facing under the Oceans Act. The Oceans Act was passed in 1996 and the Oceans Strategy was passed in 2002. The Oceans Act deals with issues of conservation and development and is founded on three principles: 1) Sustainable Development 2) Integrated Management, and 3) Precautionary Approach (DFO, 2005). However, even after the implementation of the Oceans Act, we continued to see poor governance of Canadian oceans; for example declining fish stocks (the continued misinterpretation of the cod stock after the collapse), ocean user conflicts (the dispute over the ‘Grey Zone’ lobster fishery between Canada and the U.S.) and a weakening oceans industry sector (the government had to provide a $65 million investment to the Atlantic lobster fishery in 2009). With all of these negative issues surrounding the management of the oceans, the Government realized that action needed to be taken and so the OAP was developed. The Plan is applied to all three oceans that border the Canadian coastline (Pacific, Atlantic, and Arctic), which measures approximately 244,000km. Canada’s total ocean estate covers approximately 7.1 million square kilometers, which is equivalent to approximately 70% of Canada’s landmass (DFO, 2010). In the first section of the Oceans Action Plan, there is a brief overview of Canada’s oceans and their important role to the country, as well as some of the legislation that is directly involved with the governance of the oceans. The plan states that it has committed to managing our oceans wisely, as they play such an important role in the environmental, social, cultural, and economic aspects of Canadian’s lives. The plan will be implemented in phases, with the first phase taking 24 months to build the foundation for future success, beginning with integrated management under the Oceans Act, as well as focusing on ecosystem science to improve marine environment management. The second section of the OAP talks about how it is based on four pillars: 1) International Leadership, Sovereignty and Security; 2) Integrated Oceans Management for Sustainable Development; 3) Health of Oceans and; 4) Ocean Science and Technology, all of which are discussed in detail in terms of how they are applied to each of Canada’s three oceans. The third section of the plan talks about the four pillars discussed in the second phase and the 18 initiatives that are being implemented under the pillars during Phase I of the Oceans Action Plan.
3. Evaluation
3.1 Vision and general goals of ocean management
The goal of the OAP is to develop and implement an integrated management system that can be applied to all Canadian oceans. By using an integrated management system based on both ecosystem and precautionary approaches, the government wants to achieve a healthy, productive ocean system for the future, and to continue developing the ocean economy. This plan is a step in the right direction for Canada in terms of taking action and trying to develop a management plan that will help us to sustain and protect one of our most integral resources, our oceans. However, this plan is too broad and all encompassing. There are too many departments, communities and individuals involved in the implementation of the plan; I feel as though any data that will come out of the plan will become lost in a sea of information. The plan is too large and requires such a large sum of money that to fund Phase II (which requested hundreds of millions of dollars) seems like a long shot. It would have been more realistic to develop individual plans for each maritime region, or each initiative to ensure smaller amounts of funding required for each individual section instead of one large sum.
3.2 Description of ocean management under OAP and current state of knowledge
The ecosystems that are being managed under the OAP are Canada’s oceans (Atlantic, Pacific, and Arctic). The Oceans Act was passed in 1996 and the Oceans Strategy in 2002. Even with these policies in place, Canada has fallen far behind other developed nations when it comes to meeting its ocean strategy commitments. Throughout the plan it is stated that “Canada will continue to play a leadership role in international oceans management”(p. 11); however, when it comes to issues such as Marine Protected Areas (MAPs), Canada lacks initiative. Canada has legally protected less than 1% of its marine environment, while Australia and the U.S. federally designated MPAs are 32 and 16 times larger than Canada’s, respectively (Living Oceans Society, 2008). The Canadian government is required under national and international law to establish a network of MAPs by 2012 (CPAWS, 2008), and even with the OAP in place, that goal is looking unattainable. This is only one example of how the Canadian government has not played a leadership role in ocean conservation and management, as it claims it does.
3.3 Details of and commitment to monitoring, evaluation and research activities
Under the OAP there are 18 interrelated initiatives under four pillars. Each of these 18 initiatives focuses on a specific area or issue in Canadian oceans and was allocated a portion of the $28.4 million that was used to fund the project. Each initiative will be monitored for 24 months and the collected data will be used to assess current management practices, as well as to help work towards the long-term objectives of the Oceans Act. Seven governmental departments and agencies were involved with the funding and monitoring of the initiatives. There is no discussion in the plan of how the monitoring and data collection was going to be standardized across the seven departments and 18 initiatives. There was also no mention of the inclusion of some sort of progress report from each initiative, which would have been helpful to determine whether the initiatives were on track over the course of the 24 months. The plan also fails to mention whether during the research if it included Aboriginal Traditional Knowledge (ATK), or local fishermen knowledge, which is an important issue in terms of the collection of important applicable knowledge as well as the inclusion of the local community in the project.
4. Conclusion
Overall the Oceans Action Plan shows that the Canadian government realizes the importance and the necessity of developing a successful management plan that will accomplish the goals set out in the Oceans Act. The government has taken the initiative to try to develop a plan that takes each of the three oceans into account, as well as some of the important and sensitive areas in those oceans (the 18 initiatives). Phase I of the plan was completed in just over the 24 months; however, Phase II has not received the funding to continue on with the project. With the completion of Phase I, some critical data were collected and important lessons learned, yet no solidified management plan for the oceans was developed. In the end I believe that the Oceans Action Plan has greatly helped Canadian ocean research, and that a lot of the studies that were made possible due to the funding from the OAC would have never taken place under any other circumstances. However, I believe that it would have been easier to determine a successful management approach if the $28.4 million had been allocated to individual plans developed by regions, and that those plans would have had a better chance at receiving funding for ‘Phase II’. If the plans had been developed in this manner, there could have been a possibility of using the information and data collected to develop a final plan to determine the proper management approach for Canadian oceans.
References
Department of Fisheries and Oceans. (2005). Canada’s Ocean Action Plan. Retrieved from http://www.omrnrrgo.ca/docs/main/Oceans%20Action%20Plan% 20for%20Present%20&%20Future%20Generations%20-%20English.pdf
CPAWS. (2008). Challenges and opportunities in progress towards Canada’s commitment to a national network of MPAs by 2012. Retrieved from http://www.cpaws.org/files/report_mythandmadness.PDF
Department of Fisheries and Oceans. (2010). Canada’s ocean estate
a description of Canada’s maritime zones. Retrieved from http://www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/oceans/canadasoceans-oceansducanada/marinezones-zonesmarines-eng.htm
Department of Fisheries and Oceans. (2010). Formative evaluation of the oceans action plan – Phase 1. Retrieved from http://www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/ae-ve/evaluations/07-08/6B048-eng.htm
Department of Fisheries and Oceans. (2010). St. John’s 2005 conference – another step in stopping global overfishing. Retrieved from http://www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/fgc-cgp/index_e.htm
Living Oceans Society. (2008). New marine protected areas report card gives Canada a failing grade. Retrieved from http://www.livingocea ns.org/media/news06060801.aspx
Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat. (2010). RPP 2006-2007
fisheries and oceans Canada. Retrieved from http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/rpp/2006-2007/fo-po/fo-po01-eng.asp
0 comments:
Post a Comment