Field trips How well did we accomplish the following workshop objectives?

did not add much additional value to the outputs Filipino participants tend to be limited by “hang-ups” from experiences, and there was a tendency to micro-focus and forget main objectives Filipino participants should have exerted more effort to be understood by Indonesian participants, rather than spend time squabbling over some details

d. Small group discussions

Issues and challenges were discussed in detail People were less inhibited, thus there was more sharing There was sharing of insightsexperiences with other participants Smaller groups are better for sharing Can elicit wider participation Provided a more focused discussion Enabled the participants to learn more about the two countries’ CB-MS sites OK, overall, but could have been better if our Indonesian friends could have related better–factor here is not the interest, but more of some degree of technical language barrier or problem Best way to refine points on various topics Participants were able to share experiences, concerns about, and hopes for CB-MSs–more time would have allowed more fruitful and useful discussions Probably where most of the sharing and best outputs were generated Allowed interactions among Indonesians and Filipinos, and among people of different responsibilities and agency affiliations working on CB-MSs Gave a sense of responsibility to be more active Enhanced participation

e. Field trips

Philippines Management options were discussed In the beginning, I thought the field trips were useful. But in retrospect, it would have been more useful to have chosen, say the Apo Island MS, where university and NGO participation and cooperation would have been more evident. In other words, one successful and one unsuccessful site, maybe. Of course there were many considerations for site selection. Learned much from it successful or unsuccessful We should have done only one site per person because there was not enough time for two sites. Provided an opportunity for getting actual data on what we were discussing Useful not only for the needed break, but for learning first hand what is going on in an area Gave an opportunity to see what the LGU, CRMP, and others have done on CB-MS establishment I have not been to these sites. Added reality to the discussions and highlighted the difficulty of CB-MS management It allowed the participants to observe what was going on in the sites. Good overall; it was an opportunity to see a living example to back up discussions. To see and learn by direct observation and discussion with the local community For comparison with other sites M a r i n e S a n c t u a r i e s W o r k s h o p 102 Learned by observing and getting information, a tool for improvement For learning about successful CB-MS experiences in the Philippines Indonesia Learned much from it validated the reports on MPA, POs, culture, tradition, etc. Only really good way to gauge something is to see it for yourself Provided an opportunity for getting actual data on what we were discussing Not only for the needed break, but for learning first hand what is going on in an area Provided some basis for comparison and areas for improving future implementation Showed reality and newness in Indonesia Provided a good comparison with Philippine experience. Provided affirmation that what works in Indonesia is on the right track For both trips, seeing the actual sites and talking to people involved in CB-MSs drove home the lessons effectively more than the discussions did. For comparison of sites in the Philippines and in Indonesia For development of CB-MSs and improvement of knowledge Provided an opportunity for sharing of experiences on the management of CB-MSs. 3. The participants rated the food, lodging, and workshop rooms in the two workshop venues as follows: Rating Philippines Food Poor-Fair Lodging Fair-Good Workshop rooms Good Indonesia Food Good Lodging Good-Excellent Workshop rooms Good-Excellent Philippine workshop Communicationinformation before the workshop Good-Excellent Communicationinformation during the workshop Good-Excellent Secretariat support Good-Excellent Indonesia workshop Communicationinformation before the workshop Good-Excellent Communicationinformation during the workshop Good-Excellent Secretariat support Good-Excellent 4. Do you have recommendations on how we could improve the conduct of this activity?