Evaluation of the Protected Areas Program: chapter 5


2.0 Background

2.1 Program Profile

2.1.1 Program Description

The Protected Areas Sub-sub Program 1.1.4.2 (hereinafter referred to as the PA program), delivered by the Canadian Wildlife Service (CWS) at EC, strives to protect nationally important wildlife habitats whose loss would have a direct impact on the Canadian populations of one or more wild species. The loss of species has a direct impact on the sustainability and health of ecosystems.Footnote2 By acquiring and designating protected areas, this program protects priority habitats from disturbances for the conservation of migratory birds, species at risk and other wildlife.

The PA program aims to identify, designate, and cooperatively manage a network of marine and terrestrial National Wildlife Areas (NWAs) and Migratory Bird Sanctuaries (MBSs). As such, the three fundamental areas of activity of the PA program are to:

  • plan the network of EC Protected Areas;
  • establish Protected Areas; and
  • manage Protected Areas.

Together, these groups of actions support the departmental strategic outcome: “Canada’s natural environment is conserved and restored for future generations” and are ultimately expected to contribute to the conservation of migratory birds and species at risk and the protection of rare and unique habitats, as well as to the maintenance or enhancement of attendant ecological goods and services.Footnote3 Details on these activities, their outputs and their expected contribution to direct, intermediate and final outcomes can be found in the logic model for the PA program (Annex 1).

The PA program operates under the authority of the Canada Wildlife Act and the Migratory Birds Convention Act, 1994 for the development and management of NWAs and MBSs, respectively. Despite differing in terms of their legal authorities, purposes, and prohibited activities, NWAs and MBSs are similar in that they are both specifically designated and managed to protect wildlife and their habitat, and so contribute to the national network of protected areas. NWAs protect significant habitats that support wildlife or ecosystems at risk, and represent rare or unusual wildlife habitats and bio-geographic regions for the purposes of conservation, research and interpretation. The MBSs aim to protect migratory birds--as populations and individuals--and their nests.

There are currently 146 Protected Areas managed by EC (or through delegation of authority to other government departments): 54 NWAs cover 1 million hectares of habitat (of which about half is marine habitat) and 92 MBSs cover approximately 11.5 million hectares of migratory bird habitat.  Many of these areas have been established for at least a decade: the first MBS was established in 1919, whereas the first NWAs were established after the Canada Wildlife Act was promulgated in 1973. Three NWAs, all within Nunavut, were created during the period under evaluation (2008-2009 to 2011-2012).

Inuit Impact and Benefits Agreement (IIBA)

The Nunavut Land Claims Agreement (NLCA) states that an IIBA must be negotiated every seven yearsFootnote4 between the Government of Canada and Inuit (unless otherwise agreed) before any new NWAs or MBSs are established in the Nunavut Settlement Area (NSA). A key overarching objective of the IIBA is to promote the economic self-reliance and cultural and social well-being of Inuit and as such, it aims to address all matters related to NWAs and MBSs within the NSA that could reasonably confer a benefit or have a detrimental impact on the Inuit To this end, the IIBA provides a mechanism for the co-management of NWAs and MBSs within the NSA by Inuit and CWS in accordance with the NLCA. The IIBA aims to specify procedures that ensure that decision-making for MBSs and NWAs is substantially informed and influenced by Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit (Inuit traditional knowledge), as well as by local Inuit involvement in the planning and management of NWAs and MBSs, while fulfilling the requirements of the Canada Wildlife Act and the Migratory Birds Convention Act. In accordance with the NLCA, an IIBA was concluded on August 22, 2008, between EC, Nunavut Tunngavik Incorporated (NTI) and four Designated Inuit Organizations / Regional Inuit Associations (DIO/RIA).

In administering the IIBA, EC is responsible for: establishing and administering nine Area Co-Management Committees (ACMCs) for its protected areas in the Nunavut Settlement Area; implementing protected area management plans; administering Inuit hiring programs that provide the Inuit with opportunities to gain experience in the field of wildlife conservation; and developing and implementing a National Wildlife Area Strategy for Nunavut. The NTI for its part is responsible under the IIBA for the establishment and administration of the Inuit Tourism Providers Fund, as well as other funds for the development of cultural resource inventories, such as Inuit oral history and archaeological projects, Wildlife Areas of Importance to Inuit, and Cultural Sites of Importance to Inuit.Footnote5

2.1.2 Partners and Stakeholders

Within EC, organizations that contribute to activities relating to this program include the Enforcement Branch, Science and Technology Branch, Strategic Priorities Branch, Corporate Services Branch (Real Property Management Division - Environmental Programs), and Regional Directors General.

The federal government actively pursues the protection of habitat through the activities of EC, Parks Canada, Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development Canada (for the IIBA), and Natural Resources Canada (NRCan). Other departments, such as the Department of National Defence (DND), Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada (AAFC) and Transport Canada, may manage sites designated by EC under a Delegation of Authority, as is the case with DND’s management of the Canadian Forces Base Suffield NWA.

The PA program involves the support of the public and requires close collaboration with Aboriginal groups, wildlife management agencies, natural resource agencies, non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and private property owners. Specifically, EC collaborates with several environmental NGOs and professional societiesFootnote6 to plan and implement protected areas.  The Canadian Council on Ecological Areas (CCEA)Footnote7 is also among EC CWS’ key partners.

In addition, PA program stakeholders also include industry, namely fishing, tourism and resource companies (e.g., oil and gas, forest products, mining), and Aboriginal and First Nations groups (e.g., Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami, First Nations Environmental Network, Centre for Indigenous Environmental Resources).

2.1.3 Program Outcomes and Logic Model

The logic model of the PA program was developed by the CWS and includes all components of sub-sub program 1.1.4.2. This logic model, attached at Annex 1, provides a visual depiction of the manner in which program activities and outputs are expected to lead to the achievement of intended direct, intermediate and long-term or final outcomes. Stakeholders and beneficiaries of these services and products are also included in the logic model.

As noted previously, the protection of natural areas in Canada is a shared responsibility among various stakeholder groups, including other federal department, provincial and territorial governments, environmental non-governmental organizations (ENGOs), and others. The focus of the current evaluation is on the relevance and performance of EC activities in contributing to the achievement of these shared outcomes. The three classes of direct, intermediate and final outcomes are summarized as follows:

  • Direct Outcomes are those that are most quickly observed and easily attributed to program activities. The PA program has 12 intended direct outcomes related to establishing networks of protected areas, engaging stakeholders, generating information for site management, and improving the health of wildlife and wild areas.
  • The program’s Intermediate Outcomes are longer-term results that are expected to stem from the achievement of direct outcomes, and include the development of a national network of protected areas which is complemented by continental and global networks, access and benefits sharing of biodiversity by Aboriginal peoples, public understanding and support for the role and importance of protected areas, and the maintenance of the ecological integrityFootnote8 of protected areas.
  • Long term outcomes of the program relate to the conservation of priority habitats for the conservation of migratory birds, species at risk and other wildlife, as well as maintenance and enhancement of attendant ecological goods and services, including ecological, economic, recreational, cultural/spiritual, and aesthetic benefits.

The inter-relations among program outputs, activities and outcomes are presented in greater detail in the program logic model, presented in annex 1.

2.2 Governance

Overall accountability for work completed under PA program rests with the Assistant Deputy Minister (ADM) of the Environmental Stewardship Branch (ESB), with the Director General (DG) of the CWS providing direct program oversight.  Two sub program co-leads (the Executive Director of Habitat and Ecosystem Conservation and the Director of Quebec Region, CWS) work on the DG’s behalf for the PA program.

For the IIBA, Area Co-Management Committees (ACMC) are established for each NWA, MBS or group within the NSA that is identified in the IIBA. The first ACMC was established in 2009, and five ACMCs have since been established for NWAs and MBSs.Footnote9 Three more ACMCs are currently in the process of being established, for a total of nine ACMCs, as per the Agreement. Each ACMC includes a CWS staff member and two Inuit members from the local community appointed by EC’s CWS on behalf of the Minister of the Environment and three Inuit members from the local community appointed by the relevant Regional Inuit Association.

2.3 Resources

Table 1 presents total expenditures for both the core PA program operations and the IIBA over the five year study period, excluding expenditures related to activities which fall outside the scope of the evaluation (i.e., HOTO, NWT-PAS, and CBRA). Relatively stable expenditures of between roughly $15 and $17 million annually are observed for the program overall, with the exception of 2008-2009.

Between 2008-2009 and 2012-2013, expenditures for the IIBA totalled $1,397,746 for EC and $3,638,850 for NTI,Footnote10 thus falling short of the total funding of $7.502Footnote11 million allocated to EC ($2.152 M) and the Nunavut Tunngavik Inc. (NTI) ($5.35M) over this time frame. Total IIBA expenditures of approximately $5 million over this period show substantial fluctuation, from a low of $226,000 in 2008-09 and increasing every year to a high of $1.6 million in 2011-12, followed by a decline to $1.15M in 2012-13.

Table 1: Expenditures in Support of the PA Program: 2008-09 to 2012-13 (including IIBA but excluding HOTO, NWT-PAS and CBRA)

Protected Areas Operations & Management - CWS
  2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013 Total
Salary 2,987,357 4,685,753 4,493,170 4,581,801 4,513,876 21,261,957
O&M 2,387,503 2,364,440 2,443,852 2,424,720 2,159,565 11,780,080
Capital 988,846 895,622 1,311,432 423,281 1,147,613 4,766,794
Contributions 735,043 1,162,000 1,212,309 1,694,500 1,604,390 6,408,242
VNR O&M 345,550 325,640 317,420 273,508 394,052 1,656,170
Total PA 7,444,299 9,433,455 9,778,183 9,397,810 9,819,496 45,873,243
Inuit Impact Benefit Agreement - CWS
  2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013 Total
O&M 30,637 175,603 318,925 315,998 556,583 1,397,746
G&C 195,610 525,000 950,000 1,368,986 599,254 3,638,850
Total IIBA 226,247 700,603 1,268,925 1,684,984 1,155,837 5,036,596
Total CWS 7,670,546 10,134,058 11,047,108 11,082,794 10,975,333 50,909,839
Other EC Expenditures
  2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013 Total
Other ESBFootnotea 3,219,037 3,205,524 4,136,396 5,004,108 3,327,776 18,892,841
S&T Branch 1,056,905 1,448,850 1,233,955 841,926 724,009 5,305,645
RDG Branch 57,222 0 223,303 63,830 9,430 353,785
Total Other EC 4,390,387 4,654,374 5,816,959 5,973,694 4,070,645 24,906,059
Grand Total 12,060,933 14,788,432 16,864,067 17,056,488 15,045,978 75,815,898

Notes:

  1. 2008-2009 to 2012-2013 data extracted from EC's financial reporting tool DISCOVERER, May 2013.
  2. For all years, expenditures related to the following were excluded: Canadian Biosphere Reserve Associate, HOTO, NWT PAS.

In addition to the PA program’s operations and management, Table 1 presents departmental expenditures not related to the core program’s delivery (e.g., regulatory support, scientific support) that the department incurs to support the work of the PA program. The PA program also receives support from the Enforcement Branch, however, enforcement-related expenditures are not tracked separately by program in departmental financial systems and so are not presented here.

As was observed for the IIBA, other departmental expenditures in support of the PA program show a moderate rise from about $4.4 M in 2008-09 to nearly $6M in 2011-12, but subsequently fall to a low of roughly $4M in 2012-13.

Page details

Date modified: