DIGITALNA ARHIVA ŠUMARSKOG LISTA
prilagođeno pretraživanje po punom tekstu



ŠUMARSKI LIST 11-12/2019 str. 50     <-- 50 -->        PDF

Table 3 shows the proposals of the solutions and activities for the improvement of the mechanisms of PA financing, while the text below presents the attitudes of the representatives of PA managers and the representatives of the public administration and service, as well as the PA management system organizations.
The representatives of the Nature Conservation Movement (NCM) think that the problem in establishing a specific financing mechanism is related to the misunderstanding of the state and decision-making policies, while the representatives of the Institute of Forestry (IF) and the Institute for Nature Conservation of Voivodina Province (PINC) believe that there is a political influence on the formation of such a fund and recall the example of the green tax, which was abolished shortly after the establishment (Ministry of Agriculture and Environmental Protection-MEP). The representatives of the Institute for Nature Conservation (INC) also think that the problem is related to the absence of a strategic proposal how to solve this issue. Furthermore, the representatives of the Serbian Orthodox Church (SOC) believe that large PA managers would receive more funds, while smaller PAs would be left without sufficient financial resources.
Regarding the establishment of a model of sustainable financing, representatives of all PA managers believe that the problem is that local governments are already poor enough and that they do not have additional fundings to finance PAs, while the representative of the Institute of Lowland Forestry and Environment (ILF) thinks that financing is already defined by the existing management programs. According to SOC, PEV and IUCN, this is not feasible, given the insufficient interest of local governments and other institutions. Additionally, there is a problem of internal and cross-sectoral disagreements (PINC).
Regarding the problems in the determination of the funds needed to finance the current system of PA management and establish new PAs, PA managers find the identification of potential funds a very ungrateful task since PAs are very complex systems (PES1), the representatives of the PINC and the MEP think that there is no political readiness, while the representative of the Faculty of Forestry (FF) stresses the absence of a clear methodology, validity and availability of data.
The proposal to improve the financing mechanisms of PAs by defining a list of possible mechanisms of financing at national and international levels was made by the PE “Palić-Ludaš” (PEPL) representative, who stressed the problem of the risks of an incomplete list. On the other hand, the representative of the IF thinks that it is necessary to conduct research on this issue and that nature protection must be recognized by the existing Green Fund (PEV). Furthermore, the representative of the World Wild Fund (WWF) states that the problem lies in the applicability of certain mechanisms in relation to the type of manager, while the representative of the IF states that the list itself does not guarantee a good-quality implementation.