The unstable political situation that has prevailed in Côte d'Ivoire since the end of 1999 has caused significant difficulties in the management and monitoring of the country's parks and reserves. Thus, the current assessment was supposed to focus on the 13 main current protected areas, but three parks and reserves could not be addressed due to the lack of recent information concerning them.

Globally, protected areas in Côte d'Ivoire are under strong pressure, likely to call into question their future. The main pressures identified are poaching, agricultural exploitation, forestry, logging, fishing, harvesting of non-wood and secondary wood products, and uncontrolled bush fires. Moreover, with the exception of the Ehotilé Islands and the Banco Park, protected areas are currently not supported by local communities. Park managers identify the same challenges: the high value of park resources (lumber for example) and the high demand that exists for these resources, as well as the easy access to parks. In addition, the crisis situation explains a number of problems: political instability, corruption, weak law enforcement, and the development of illegal activities. In some parks, managers recognize that they are under significant pressure to exploit resources.

Except for Tai, which has good performances, management in all the parks seems rather weak to average. To date, only five parks have land use and management plans (MAPs). These plans often lack measures aimed at peripheral populations.

To reverse this trend, managers should be empowered and equipped with appropriate resources, competent staff, effective management methods and a clear road map with measurable and monitored performance indicators. There is also a need for a strong and explicit political commitment by the State for protected areas. Advocacy should be made at the highest political level for the effective consideration of these conservation issues at all decision-making levels of the State.

Infrastructure has suffered enormously as a result of the crisis: there are almost no vehicles, equipment for field trips and means of communication. Funding has been very low in recent years. The OIPR is nevertheless optimistic about the future because the Global Environment Facility (GEF) could reactivate funding planned before the crisis. If this is confirmed, each park will be eligible for funding from the Foundation created for this purpose, provided that it has developed and validated a management plan and a business plan. Many parks are missing these two documents, so it is important to finalize them.

In the short term, it seems urgent to:

• Reactivate the regular meetings of the OIPR Management Board to validate important decisions in a consensual manner;

• Optimize the surveillance system, according to the resources available, in order to reduce the pressure of poaching in all parks (for example by mobile brigades, if they are relevant, but other solutions exist);

• Find a solution to the specific problems of Marahoué;

• Resume the process of delineating all protected areas in order to materialize their boundaries on the ground, and to reduce illegal encroachments and occupations wherever possible;

• Establish zoning for each park, as provided for by law, to make management decisions more effective;

• Clarify by a legal act the status of the N'Zo reserve and its attachment to the Taï Park;

• Pay particular attention to the state of conservation of the 3 World Heritage (PM) sites, Taï, Comoé and Mount Nimba, taking into account the recommendations of the PM Committee;

• Ensure that management plans address the issue of peripheral communities and make local management committees operational;

• Reflect on the status of renewable resources in reserves, and reinforce their protection when reasonable sustainable use is not possible;

• Launch mediation on the Ehotilé Islands and encourage the extension of the park to the marine area;

• Make the OIPR Scientific Council operational and ensure that its recommendations are taken into account in management decisions;

• Make the Wildlife Monitoring Unit operational within the General Directorate by recruiting a head of the unit;

• Establish a database of research activities in the parks. A documentalist could be assigned to the OIPR and take care of archiving, capitalization and even coordinate the research strategy.

In the medium term, the challenge will be to:

• Rebuild tourist infrastructures to allow a resumption of activity when the country's situation is normalized, in partnership with professionals in this sector;

• Conduct discussions with local populations in order to evolve park management methods in order to integrate the legitimate aspirations of these actors without calling into question the status, objectives or integrity of parks;

• Raise awareness among magistrates about the functions of protected areas and their role in conservation, but also for improving the incomes of local populations;

• Define a long-term park research strategy;

• Question the real representativeness of the network and reflect on its necessary extension to restore ecosystem connectivity.