HighARCS Project Outputs

The HighARCS project produced a range of Outputs that can be categorized in different ways in terms of their relationship to the integrated action planning process and their potential usefulness to prospective users of the WRAP toolkit.

Outputs, such as workshop proceedings and project reports, can be regarded as Evidence of project activity and proof of process concept; these have been linked in the HighARCS Project Outputs matrix to relevant process and tools contained in the WRAP toolkit.

Selected Outputs also constitute new knowledge and Results in terms of scientific findings and these have been framed in the HighARCS Project Outputs matrix against the HighARCS Research Questions presented here:

Overarching question:How can highland aquatic resources be sustainably managed and conserved while accommodating for the livelihoods of poor and food insecure communities?

1. Conservation:
   
   1. What is the existing aquatic biodiversity in the selected field sites?
   2. How can these aquatic ecosystems be managed to secure the sustainable provision of ecosystem services to ensure water quality and the conservation of biodiversity?
2. Livelihoods:
   
   1. What are the dynamics of the multiple livelihood strategies according to gender and age in the selected field sites and how do these strategies utilise resources derived from aquatic ecosystems?
   2. How can resource dependent livelihoods be ecologically sustainable and at the same time permit equitable local development opportunities?
3. Policies and Institutions:
   
   1. In each selected field site, what are the existing institutions and legislations which mediate access to aquatic resources at multiple scales and levels of government? How do conflicts evolve and relate to decision-making processes?
   2. What policies and institutional frameworks are needed to resolve conflicts between multiple stakeholders and ensure sustainable resource management whilst maximising local income generating activities?
4. Planning:
   
   3. What is the best approach to facilitating interactive participation in assessment, decision-making and planning with respect to aquatic biodiversity conservation and wise-use? Is this the best approach? What lessons can be learnt about the research process of HighARCS?
   4. Can social, economic and biological indicators be identified that are appropriate for local communities to assess change? What are the limitations and advantages to such an approach?
   5. How can monitoring of aquatic ecosystems, livelihoods, institutions be established and sustained locally? Who should be responsible? What to do if something changes? Is HighARCS sustainable in the long-term and what does it depend on?

Outputs that convey the Impacts arising from Integrated Action Plan development and implementation, for example, changes occurring on the ground in terms of biodiversity, ecosystems and livelihoods were also produced.

Finally Outputs that demonstrate higher level Outcomes regarding planning and management practice and policy-making and bridging the science-policy interface as a result of combined Integrated Action Planning, associated learning, knowledge sharing, communication and dissemination are highlighted in the HighARCS Project Outputs matrix.

Guandong Province, China

Nainital, Uttarakhand, India

Buxa, West Bengal, India

Son La Province, Vietnam

Quang Tri Province, Vietnam

Group Photos, in Project Meetings and Workshops