This presentation by Bartolomeu Soto was delivered at the 'Concessioning tourism opportunities in conservation areas and maximising rural development' workshop, held in Maputo between 19-22 March 2012 (Day 1, Session 3, Concessions processes)
Citation preview
1. Negotiating a Public Private Partnership
IntroductionInstitutional Arrangement to Restore the Gorongosa
National Park was one of the first protected Gorongosa National
Park areas declared in the country and became famous due to its
diverse and abundant wildlife; According to the legislation the
Park was Administered by Government until it was abandoned in
decade of 80s due to civil war. The Government returned to the Park
in 1993 after the 1992 peace agreement. Introduction The PPP
Attempts The paradigm shift was determined by the forestry and
wildlife law(1999) that created a provision that forest , In 1997
the Government launched a tender to wildlife and protected areas
can be delegated to an identify tourism concessionairs and received
administration of other sectors than public; a proposal which
comprised the following institutional arragement: Gorongosa Park
was subject to three attempts of negotiations for a Public Private
Partnerships namelly: The Mozambican company, the promoter Clivia
and Investimento lda. (Clivia+Investimento lda); African Park
Government; Bernardo Pedro Ferraz Local communities; Associao
Comercial da Beira Other Mozambican Investors Carr Foundation This
was the one that took shape The PPP Attempts The PPP Attempts
Unsolicited Proposal was received from African Park in 2003; The
Council of Ministers did not consider that At the same year
government received other two proposals from Bernardo Ferraz and
Associao Comercial Moambicana proposal due to the following: The
Government dicided to not engage AP due to following: The promoter
failed to prove that could mobilise the funds Interpretation of
legislation left a grey area on the need or not of a public tender
to to Gorongosa Park; identifiy a partner to co- manage Gorongosa
Park and direct negotiation were suspended; Did not have any track
record in working in Conservation This was exacerbated by the fact
that the Govenment was under pressure to attend areas; other
proposals Bernardo Ferraz and Associao Comercial Moambicana African
Park demanded that the funds that would invest in the Park should
be The roles and responsibilities of partners were not well
reimbursed to the mother compony by the revenue of the Park, which
was not spelled out; attractive to Government; There was no
Mozambican participation in African Park, although AP has agreed to
involve them;
2. What is Negotiation? Preparation of Negotiation Negotiation
is a process of interaction between parties directed at reaching
some form of agreement that will hold and which is based upon
common interests (Spoelstra & Pienner, 1999); When approaching
a negotiation situation it is important to consider the aim of
finding an outcome where both sides could gain, even if it means
giving something else in the process Preparation of Negotiation THE
PREPARATION FOR THE NEGOTIATIONS BETWEEN THE MITUR AND THE CARR
FOUNDATION The Preparation The Preparation Carr Foundation MITUR
Carr Foundation MITURObjectives Provide financial & tecnhical
Receive financial and Legal Ensured that it was negotiating Ensured
that the partner was support technical support for Implications
with the right partner and got ideal for partnership take
leadership in management of Gorongosa legal advice from Mozambican
management of Gorongosa take leadership in lawyer management of
resources. Tactics Experienced negotiators No experienced
negotiatorAnalysis of the Contatcs with Moz Embassy in MITUR got
information of Organised the Hotel Avenida Experienced in
protectedsituation USA and authorities in Moz moral and financial
as a Venue areas management provided good impression streghthens
from Embassy of Drafted the text of the Did not have venue and did
Moz in USA agreement not dicided for one Feed Back Strong feed back
in Feed back in performance wasIdentification of Provide support
for Ensure that the ownership of (Prepartion for performance being
done, but there wereissues reabilitation of the Park the process
remains with the the next phases) The performance was imroved
concerns that were coming up Ensure that the support will
Mozambique in following rounds most of time. (is there a be
sustainable Ensure that the process is comercial interest? Are we
legal securing the ownership?)
3. Phases of Negotiation Exploratory negotiatin wherein
preferences and bottom lines are discussed, information exchanged,
consensus reached as areas of conflitis and areas of consensus;
Accomodative negotiation wherein the process of the bridging of
differences and easy agreements are negotiated Confrontational
negotiation wherein hard bargaining is done on the core differences
between groups, where moment of crisis often arise and reciprocal
blackmail is quite common Compromise negotiation wherein solutions
are found through give and take, contracts obtained and general THE
PHASES OF NEGOTIATIONS BETWEEN consensus established (de Klerk,
1993) THE MITUR AND THE CARR FOUNDATION The Negotiations The
Negotiations The Exploratory Negotiation The Accomodative
Negotiation Government and Carr Foundation established a MoU for 6
months to allow joint activities while the parties finilise a long
term agreement; The negotiating team from Government made initial
Policy or legal statements about partnerships in PAs were attempts
to convince Government to accept the institutional scattered and
not well understood; arrangement proposed by Carr; The parties
agreed to draft principles of the relationship; Government did not
agree and was concerned about onwership and soverenigty issue;
There was no good information on each other Party. A conflict
emerged on the Institutional arrangement for the Carr oferred to
not interfere with legislation and establishing partnership; a
Warden who would deal with ecology and antipoaching; Government
wanted to keep the arrangement, maintaing a Carr wanted to keep the
planning and management under Government Park warden; his
representative; Carr wanted to establish horizontal Departments
with more power to one Head of Department appointed by Carr
Foundation The Negotiations The Negotiations The Confrontational
Negotiation The Compromise Negotiation Carr indicated that key
premises to continue to sign any agreement: There were found the
following solutions: Carr Foundation would keep the key position of
planning and Needed to be responsible of planning and management;
government would appoint a warden who is dedicated to the 30 years
implementation to give time to ensure sustainability; antipoaching
but represents the Park with other agents; Inclusion of fora major;
Steering committe composed by Greg Carr and a senior officer
Governnment commit to pay part of the cost of management of the
appointed by the Minister take decisions that are for the Park
warden Park; in Mozambique legislation; Revenues from the Park be
retained directly by the Park There are 6 Departments and each
Party appointed 3 Heads of the Carr demanded that once negotiations
are not completed by 31 Departments December 2007 it would consider
it terminated The period of agreement is 20 years and an evaluation
would determine a need or not of additional 10 years; Government
indicated key premises such as: Government committed to pay part of
the costs of the management of Not ready to give up the role in
planning and management; the Park; Wanted a short period of
agreement 5-10 years; Revenues from the Park are send to Ministry
of Finance and returned Wanted the revenues to be channelled to
FUTUR according to Moz to the Park instead of going through FUTUR
legislation and then to Gorongosa Park
4. Conclusions Thank You While government was talking about
participative management, clear guidance on how to establish it
were absent; The Government had no experince in negotiating
partnership agreements. Previous failures were blamed to the other
Party for whom the government created suspicious about possible
hiden agenda; Government did not have enough preparation for the
negotiation; the text of the agreement was drafted by Carr and the
venue provided by Carr The negotiations took 2 years while both
parties were antecipating 6 months, this indicates that both were
over optimistic;