|Symptoms for Concern
||Underlying Reasons and Causes
||Desired Changes in the Status of Biodiversity Conservation
||Associated Project Component
|Weak legal, regulatory and institutional basis for biodiversity conservation (BC):
||Lack of political commitment to BC:
||Legal and institutional basis for protected area (PA) planning and management in place; legal inconsistencies relating to BC identified:
||Strengthen National Framework for Biodiversity Conservation
|No provisions for PAs included in draft Land Law.
No specific law for PA establishment and management.
Other laws lack concern for, or may even be inconsistent with BC.
Weak legal basis for BC outside PAs.
||Lack of understanding and commitment at national political decision making level for BC.
Lack of public pressure for policy changes for BC.
Lack of intersectoral mechanism for review and revision of legislation for BC.
||Ministerial Order issued that legally confirms 3 model conservation areas (2 PAs and 1 forest park) and specifies the basic principles for their management.
Regulations for planning and operating conservation management model areas are developed and in place.
Specific law passed for establishing and managing all categories of PAs.
Land law amended to be consistent with PA law.
All new laws issued during project period are consistent with the international treaties and agreements that Romania has ratified regarding BC.
Other laws that may conflict with BC identified.
||Strengthen national laws and regulatory framework
|Danger that ecological integrity of Romanian ecosystem may be permanently lost.
||Lack of strategy for national network of PAs.
Lack of appreciation that the Carpathian ecosystem is an interrelated system rather than a collection of independent forest production units.
||A Central Authority that will develop PA policy and network strategy legally established.
A Central Authority to take responsibility to replicate relevant project experience elsewhere in Romania in place.
Mechanism to coordinate BC in the Carpathian chain is in place.
Strategy for biodiversity monitoring is developed.
||Strengthen Directorate for Nature and Biodiversity Conservation to plan biodiversity conservation policy.
Strengthen NFA to replicate PAs in Forest Areas.
|Legal basis for forest planning is based on "production unit" decision making rather than systemic view of Romania's ecosystem.
||Systemic issues of ecosystem protection not present when existing laws and forest management systems developed.
||Strategy to incorporate BC concerns into forest management planning is developed.
||Develop strategy to incorporate BC into forest management planning.
Gradual destruction of the Carpathian ecosystem:
Destructive uses of Carpathian resources:
||Effective models for BC ready for replication throughout Romanian Carpathian ecosystem:
Develop Models for Protected Area and Forest Park Management:
|Decreasing diversity and abundance of animals and plants: e.g., large carnivores, ungulates, chamois, fish in glacier lakes, endemic plants.
Tree line receding.
Increasing areas covered by invasive species.
Integrity of wildlife habitat fragmented.
Increasing soil erosion.
Increasing water pollution.
Construction along roads into parks and danger of other developments in adjacent areas that are incompatible with BC.
Danger that tree harvesting may be undertaken in officially declared PAs.
Trees and seedlings destroyed by increased populations of rodents.
||Lack of administrative structures for planning and managing biodiversity.
Expansion of human activity in wildlife corridors.
Lack of mechanism that incorporates BC into land use planning.
Pressures for financial income within National Forest Authority.
Unsustainable grazing by sheep and cattle.
Unsustainable hunting practices.
Declining populations of birds of prey resulting from unsustainable hunting practices.
Lack of understanding of incentives influencing resource-use.
Tourists who indiscriminately collect natural products, discard trash, disturb animal habitats and create secondary trails.
||Model PAs and a forest park plan that demonstrate how to manage biodiversity effectively.
Land use plans for areas adjacent to conservation sites reflect BC concerns and protect remaining animal corridors.
Model mechanisms established that eliminate destructive stakeholder behaviors.
Increasing numbers of tourists visit models areas with no negative impacts on biodiversity.
|Establish systems for planning and managing PAs and Forest Parks that reflect biodiversity conservation concerns
Develop shared resource management programs.
Develop strategy for eco-tourism.
|European bison-major "flagship" species for Romania- has been extinct since 1832.
||Habitat loss and unsustainable hunting practices in the 16th, 17th, 18th and 19th centuries.
||Establish breeding herd of European Bison at Neamt and develop strategy for subsequently reintroducing animals into the wild.
||Establish program to reintroduce European Bison.
|Declining genetic diversity in forests.
Loss of aquatic biodiversity-e.g., salamanders, fish, dragon flies, other invertebrates-in streams.
Reduction in open feeding areas for wildlife.
||Continuous use of the same seed sources for seedlings.
Log harvesting via water courses.
Focus on timber production in forest management.
||Models of forest management plans that integrate BC concerns developed for 2 forest districts.
Basis for demonstrating and disseminating the financial/economic benefits of Independently Certified Standards for Forest Management is in place.
||Develop models of forest management practices that reflect BC concerns.
|Weak political support for BC
||Low public understanding of biodiversity conservation
||Effective program for public awareness
||Build public support for Biodiversity Conservation
|Very low level of public awareness of potential dangers to Romania's biodiversity.
Political decisions necessary for BC are unlikely to be taken without strong public pressures.
||Lack of understanding of the economic -e.g., aesthetic, cultural, environmental-and financial values of Romanian biodiversity and the potential for its irreversible loss.
Lack of financial models that demonstrate the ecological functions of ecosystems.
Lack of assessment of the economic values to the Romanian people of their rich biodiversity heritage.
||National program that raises public awareness of Romania's needs and opportunities for BC in place.
Ecological education packages developed for use in primary and secondary schools.
||Prepare and implement a public awareness program.
Florin Trifoi (Counselor to the State Secretary, MWFEP),
Erika Stanciu (Forest Engineer),
Mircea Verghelet (Forest Engineer),
Oliviu Iorgu (Forest Engineer),
John F. Stewart (Team Leader),
Adriana Dinu (Biodiversity Conservation/PA Management Specialist),
Gordon Temple (Facilitator)
Project Rationale Workshop
Vata de Jos, Romania
Dec. 1-5, 1998