Citation
Institutional factors affecting natural resources management in the Dominican Republic

Material Information

Title:
Institutional factors affecting natural resources management in the Dominican Republic
Creator:
Antonini, Gustavo A.
Place of Publication:
Gainesville, Fla.
Publisher:
Center for Latin American Studies, University of Florida
Language:
English

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords:
Caribbean ( LCSH )
Farming ( LCSH )
University of Florida. ( LCSH )
Agriculture ( LCSH )
Farm life ( LCSH )
Spatial Coverage:
Caribbean
North America -- United States of America -- Florida

Notes

Funding:
Electronic resources created as part of a prototype UF Institutional Repository and Faculty Papers project by the University of Florida.

Record Information

Source Institution:
University of Florida
Holding Location:
University of Florida
Rights Management:
The University of Florida George A. Smathers Libraries respect the intellectual property rights of others and do not claim any copyright interest in this item. This item may be protected by copyright but is made available here under a claim of fair use (17 U.S.C. §107) for non-profit research and educational purposes. Users of this work have responsibility for determining copyright status prior to reusing, publishing or reproducing this item for purposes other than what is allowed by fair use or other copyright exemptions. Any reuse of this item in excess of fair use or other copyright exemptions requires permission of the copyright holder. The Smathers Libraries would like to learn more about this item and invite individuals or organizations to contact Digital Services (UFDC@uflib.ufl.edu) with any additional information they can provide.

Full Text
INSTITUTIONAL FACTORS AFFECTING NATURAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT
IN THE DOMINICAN REPUBLIC
By
Dr. Gustavo A. Antonini Center for Latin American Studies University of Florida
For
USAID Washington, Office of Development Resources,
Bureau of Latin America/Caribbean Through
JRB Associates, Inc., McLean, Virginia
(IQC:AID/SOD/PDC-C-0247)
Gainesville, Florida October 24, 1980




INSTITUTIONAL FACTORS AFFECTING NATURAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT
IN THE DOMINICAN REPUBLIC
By
Dr. Gustavo A. Antonini Center for Latin American Studies University of Florida
For
USAID Washington, Office of Development Resources,
Bureau of Latin America/Caribbean Through
JRB Associates, Inc., McLean, Virginia (TQC:AID/SOD/PDC-C-0247)
Gainesville, Florida October 24, 1980




TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION PAGE
List of Tables iv
I. Introduction 1
Acknowledgements 1
Plan of Presentation 2
II. National Development Policies and Natural Resources
Management 3
Background 3
Current Policies 5
Future Prospects 6
III. Management Issues 8
Land 8
Water 9
Fisheries 10
Forests 11
Pollution 11
IV. Institutions 13
Secretari'a de Estado de Agricultura 13
Secretariado T6cnico de la Presidencia 17
Direcci6n General de Catastro 17
Direcei6n General Forestal 18
Instituto Agrario Dominicano 19
Plan Sierra 20
Instituto Tecnol6gico de Desarrollo 20
Instituto Nacional de Recursos Hidraulicos 20
Instituto Nacional de Aguas Potables y Alcantarillado 21
Corporaci6n de Acueducto y Alcantarillado de Santo
Domingo 21
Instituto de Desarrollo y Credito Cooperativo 22
Centro de Investigaciones de Biologla Marina 22
Corporaci6n Dominicana de Electricidad 22
Direcci6n Nacional de Parques 23
Jardin Botanico Nacional "Dr. Rafael M. Moscoso" 24
Parque Zoologico Nacional 25
Corporaciones de Presas 25
ii




V. Inter-Institutional Linkages 26
Public Sector 26
Public-Private Sectors 29
Public Sector-International Agencies 29
VI. Human Resources 31
Training 31
Present Labor Force 33
Projected Manpower Needs 38
VII. Budgeting and Financing 44
Sources of Funds 44
Use of Funds 47
VIII. Conclusions and Recommendations 56
IX. Bibliography 61
X. List of Abbreviations 63
XI. List of Persons Interviewed 65




LIST OF TABLES
TABLE PAGE
1. Summary listing of current levels and proyected increases
in professional-technical staffing by field of
specialization. .. ........................34
2. Levels of professional and technical staffing by workrelated activities in Dominican institutions. .. .........37
3. Current members of professionals/technicians and proposed
staffing additions over the next five years by fields of
specialization within each department of SURENA .. ........39
4. Current members of professionals/technicians and proposed
staffing additions over the next five years by fields of
specialization and within each institution. .. .........40
5. Proposed funding for SEA in 1980. ... .............45
6. Comparison of expenditures by programs in SEA for the 1978-80
period .. .................. ..........46
7. Percentage increases from 1978 to 1980 in SURENA budget 48
8. Comparison of expenditures by program in SURENA for the
1978-80 period .. ................... ....
9. Expenditures for soils mapping and analysis within the SEA
rural development program for the 1978-80 period .. ........50
10. Expenditures for the forest protection and control program of the Armed Forces during the 1978-80 period .. .........51
11. Use of funds by SURENA during the 1978-80 period .. ........52
12. Analysis of percentage in the SURENA budget from 1978-to 1980 by expenditure category .. .. .. .... . . . 54
13. Analysis of percentage in the Armed Forces budget from 1978 to 1980 for the forest protection and control program
by expenditure category. ............ ..........55
iv




I
INTRODUCTION
This Report on the "Institutional Factors Affecting Natural Resources Management in the Dominican Republic" was prepared for USAID Washington, Office of Development Resources, Bureau of Latin America/Caribbean through JRB Associates, Inc., McLean, Virginia (IQC: AID/SOD/PDC C 0247). It is part of a larger "Country Environmental Profile for the Dominican Republic" prepared by a multi-disciplinary team of specialists, Dr. Gary Hartshorn, Team Leader. While the Report attempts to cover the broad spectrum of natural resources management in the country, its principal objective is to focus more especially on environmental problems and trends as they relate to the small farm sector (USAID, 1980).
Many persons assisted in making this study possible. These individuals, whose collaboration and support proved invaluable, are acknowledged below. A brief outline follows describing the sequence in which the study findings are presented.
Acknowledgements
Several persons directly collaborated in the preparation of this Report. Orlando Amargoz and Fausto Grisanti worked as counterparts in Santo Domingo and assisted in invaluable ways. The Human Resources Survey was carried out by a team including the following eight individuals under the supervision of B6igica Nufez: Aurelina de Ruiz, Hector Tejeda, Eusebio Castro, Belarinemo Guzman, Juan Bautista Castillo, Jose Marieta, and Alfredo Marillo. Agapito Perez Luna, IICA, ably assisted in the design of the questionnaire.




2
Portions of the text were prepared at the University of Florida,
Gainesville, with the direct collaboration of Jose Enrique Lois (Institutions) and Ernesto de Jesus Nuhez (Budgeting and Financing). Messrs. Lois and Nuftez also provided a general evaluation of the overall content;. Without their direct participation in such a constructive manner, the Report presented herein not have been possible.
Plan of Presentation
The substantive portion of this Report is presented in the following manner. A brief historical background of present national development policies and the future prospects for natural resources management are discussed in Section II. There follows in Section III, a review of management issues concerning land, water, fisheries, forests, and pollution.
A detailed discussion of the objectives and scope of activities of
the sixteen principal institutions concerned with natural resources management in the republic is found in Section IV. Problems of inter-institutional coordination in the public sector and between public private agencies, as well as international technical assistance efforts are describe d in Section
The Human Resource Profile in Section VI discusses training, present
labor force and projected manpower needs. Funding and the use of budgetary allotments are found in Section VII, while conclusions and recommendations are presented in Section VIII. There is appended a bibliography and lists of abbreviations and persons interviewed.




3
NATIONAL DEVELOPMENT POLICIES AND) NATURAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT Background
The Dominican Republic has neither an explicit short nor long-term policy of environmental and natural resources management (Hip6lito Mej3-a, personal communication). Specific short-term actions are taken as the need arises by any one of several public policy formulating and implementing agencies. This manner of handling environmental matters reflects both the recent awakening of public sentiment and scientific concern as well as interinstitutional rivalries that have tended to keep apart rather than foster closer cooperation (Ml. de Jesus Viftas Caceres, personal communication).
Though Chardon (1937) demonstrated public awareness of the deforestation and soil erosion problems based on scientific observations as far back as 1937, very little action could be taken during the years of the Trujillo regime (1930-61) that was not in the dictator's interest. Rights to land, forest, and water were controlled outright by Trujillo or through the guise of quasiindependent companies. After his overthrow in 19,61, a wide range of political, economic and social restrictions were removed. Movements of people, goods and services became the rule rather than the exception; staged migrations from rural hamlet to town and city took place.
In the forested mountainous interior of the republic, the demise of the dictator precipitated mass invasions of lumber company lands that many considered were owned in part by Trujillo. Standing timber was indiscriminately cut by peasants intent upon establishing their land claims by introducing slash-and-burn farms. Some planners and policy makers have suggested that




4
this indiscriminate cutting of the forests in the early 1960s represented a true peasant revolt against the dictator's inhumane policies. In 1967, the OAS estimated that only a fraction of the republic could be classified as forested. As a result of this indiscriminate cutting, President.Balaguer decreed a complete cessation of lumbering activities; he placed the matters of legal enforcement as well as reforestation in the hands of the Armed Forces (PNUNA, 1977).
The Dominican Republic in the late 1960s and early 1970s was a country
trying to make up for years of social decay and economic stagnation. Relatively rich in natural resources and labor but poor in capital, the country sought to utilize its base to bolster primary agricultural production. The overriding concern was to improve the standard of living of the people. The method used to achieve this improvement was through fuller integration of the Dominican economy with foreign markets. Given the country's comparative advantage in selling agricultural commodities such as sugar and coffee, it was assumed that export earnings derived from these products could finance development of the other sectors of the economy.
Unfortunately, a number of serious obstacles surfaced that impeded
development. These obstacles included: (a) inherent weakness of Lthe republic's single crop export sector; (b) weakness of the country's export-dependent industrialization process; (c) externally caused price fluctuations; (d) rigidity and fragility of the demand *function; and (e) excessive increases in the country's import bill due to the spiraling cost of fossil fuels. Collapse of the price of sugar along with dramatic increases in the cost of imported petroleum in 1976 called for immediate actions to diversify the economy and improve the rational use of the country's natural resources. Over the past two years, the government has reoriented economic policy by




5
placing major emphasis on the agricultural and mining sectors. Current Policies
The present national development policy not only reasserts the previous administration's goal to improve the social and economic well-being of the population, but in addition it places emphasis on providing opportunities for improving the conditions of the poorest segments of society. To achieve these goals, the medium-range Agricultural Development Plan (ADP) for the 1980-82 period contemplates activities with the following objectives: (a) improve the nutritional level of the population, especially the two lowest income levels;
(b) increase food production; (c) improve income distribution in the rural areas; (d) reduce agricultural imports; (e) increase the exports of farm products as a means for alleviating the negative effects caused by price increases of petroleum products; (f) settle new families on agrarian reform projects and consolidate settlements; and (g) create new sources of salaried work in the rural areas (SEA, 1979c).
The ADP program of activities combines direct government action to increase productivity and improve the standard of living of small-holder agriculturalists with indirect incentives to stimulate greater private sector involvement in the development process. This Plan is being carried out at the present time, though with some variations in the ranking of priorities due to the damage caused by Hurricanes David and Frederick in 1979.
The Plan's basic objective is to eliminate the condition of malnutrition in low income population groups. The strategy pursued is to increase food crop production to benefit both small-holders and salaried farm workers, since both groups suffer from limited availability of land and low salary levels, situations which, have given rise to the high rate of under-employment in the rural sector.
The objectives to increase both food production and food supply go handSin-hand with the need simultaneously to increase available farm income. The




6
Plan does not exclude the role that large farmers should play to more fully employ and better remunerate on-farm labor. Stated in another way, the Dominican Republic's principal rural development policy is to provide a more equitable distribution of the factors of production so that increases in agricultural and livestock yields will benefit all income groups, but most especially the underprivileged small-holders, tenants and salaried farmworkers. Already, a number of important steps have been taken to stimulate this change process: applied research, in-service training, institutional reorganization, credit and other extension services, construction of roads and irrigation works. Future Prospects
The implications of such developmental impacts on the environment are
unmistakable. Population pressures, the search for universally greater economic well-being, land restrictions imposed by the country's relatively small size and absence of any frontier areas awaiting colonization, are factors that urgently call for the development of short and medium-term strategies that can harmonize rural development schemes with future natural resources management policies. The ADP recognizes this need and calls for the formulation of a natural resources development policy that addresses community or living space concerns as well as considers factors of production directly related to physical landscape characteristics such as slopes, land cover, agricultural soils and water.
The Plan underscores the need to formulate and propose a natural resources management policy. Obviously, such a clearly established policy does not exist at the present time. Nonetheless, there is an awareness both in government circles and in the mind of the general public that the socioeconomic development goals of the country's growing population must be set within the context of a
I
finite resource base, that use of such resources should be determined in a




7
manner that does not imperil their use by future generations, and that natural resources management is a dynamic, constantly changing process whose problems and solutions must be considered within a holistic framework of relationships between people and .the land (Ramon Perez Minaya and Juan Nufez, personal communication).




8
MANAGEMENT ISSUES
Land
Land use problems in agricultural areas of the Dominican Republic are related to three basic factors: (a) rapid increases since 1961 in the total land area in farm production; (b) shorter fallow periods resulting from farm area expansion; and (c) increases in pasture land which have occurred at the expense of forested areas.
According to Sector Analysis (USAID, 1979), sma*11 farms (less than
5 hectares) show a more intensive land-use' with 68 percent of their area in cyclical and permanent crops. This percentage diminishes to 18 percent for large farms (30 hectares and above in size). In contrast, natural and improved pastures account for solely 19 percent of small farms but reach 60 percent of the area of large farms.
With adequate rainfall, it is not uncommon to obtain more than one
harvest a year in short cycle crops; production is by intercalation and the crops include maiz, beans, manioc, plantains and sweet potatoes. Small farms have 23 percent of their area in intercalated crops while the large farms have only 2 percent. Expressed in another way, far with an average size of 60 hectares devote less than 1 hectare to intercalated crops. Use of irrigation prompts a shift in agricultural practices since small farms have reduced areas of intercalated crops where irrigation is practiced.
Cultural practices by small-holder agriculturalists in the cultivation of food crops reflect a tendency towards intensive use of more fertile lands (Antonini, 1968). Permanent crop production of sugar cane, fruit crops,




9
coffee and cacao manifests a more extensive land use. While adequate rainfall can be relied upon in certain regions of the republic, in many other areas, limited precipitation or a scarcity of irrigation water seriously restricts the extension of agricultural land use. Care must be exercised, therefore, in advocating an intensification of agricultural use.
The increase in pasture and farm lands at the expense of forested areas
and the ecological ramifications of such changes in the Dominican Republic have been well documented (Antonini, Ewel and Tupper, 1975). Land use changes directly affect, through removal of plant cover, concomitant changes in the hydrology of the soil zone. The amount and kinds of vegetation covering the soil will determine in large measure the potential for surface water runoff and soil erosion. Paulet (1977) estimates the prevailing erosion potential in the mountainous regions at 600 to 1400 tons of soil loss per hectare per year. The soil erosi on problem is acquiring increasing relevance as new hydroelectric and irrigation works begin to be placed into operation. Some of the existEing infrastructure already has been gravely endangered by sedimentation. Water
The republic's hydrography is divided into seven irrigation districts and
108 independent drainage nets that cover a surface area of approximately 160,000 hectares. This water resources system has grown notably in recent years with the construction of numerous dams and irrigation canals.
While there still remains an urgent need to increase the country's harnessing capacity, the overriding concern is to improve the existing system of providing water for agricultural use. Fundamental problems are found in administering irrigation water. According to the ADP, these problems include: (a) persistence.of laws and regulations that make difficult adoption and implementation of policies that can improve water management in the irrigation districts; (b)




10
inadequate land use zoning; (c) under-staffing that inhibits upgrading technical services; (d) lack of better decentralization in administrative and operational services; and(e) absence of measurement and water control systems and continued dependence on an archaic rate for water use (SEA, 197,9c).
The present rate structure for water use is obsolete and does not permit self-financing irrigation services. Cognizant of this problem, INDRHI (1980) has under review a new tariff structure for water use as well as corresponding enabling legislation. This action, which assumes establishing a mechanism for better water control and more efficient irrigation use, as well as proposals for incorporating users directly into the administration and management of the irrigation districts, should strengthen water resources administration in the republic.
Fisheries
Traditionally, fisheries has been given little attention. Recently, however, a number of public and private sector institutions have intensified research programs and outreach activities which focus on increasing productivity and the catch.
The Dominican Republic is favorably endowed with extensive and diverse
coastal.habitats that offer a variety of fauna and flora of ecologic and economic value. There persist too "native habitats" with valued indigenous fauna, such as the Cocodillia spp. and iguanas in Lake Enriquillo.
In recent years, the annual volume of fish caught totaled nine tons of which 80 percent is marine. The volume of marine fish caught is low and it reflects the primitive fishing methods used. Results of an INDOTEC study will be available in the near future which should provide the baseline of information needed to increase production.
The inland waters for all practical purposes have not been exploited. There




is an extensive stream network and some 2,000 kin2 of watershed with numerous water bodies and temporary lagoons that offer favorable conditions for fresh water fisheries (SEA, 1979b). In pursuing such development, however, care must be taken to exercise stricter control of exotic or endangered'fish catches, such as the turtle and carey (Law 5194, 1969, Decree 600, 1975). Seasonal sportsfishing and hunting, too, should be more strictly regulated. Forests
The OAS in 1967 estimated that the total forested area of the country was
557,000 hectares (OAS, 1967). Irrational use by sawmills in the 1940s and 1950s and the wholesale clear-cutting by subsistence farmers in the early 1960s prompted the government to institute strict control radically halting all such forest activities. The Armed Forces was made responsible for safeguarding these areas and for reforestation (Law 206, 1967,, Resolution 104 of FORESTA, Decrees 1998, 1968, and 3777, 1969).
PNUbiA (1977) reported 200,000 hectares with conifers and 130,000 hectares of mixed forests. Both forested zones are located in the Central Cordillera and are of major economic importance. These forests, however, have been reduced in area to one-half their coverage of several decades ago, through the act of shifting cultivation and the lack of control of forest fires.
The termination of commercial logging has permitted adequate regrowth in
some areas; in others, however, shifting cultivation and forest fire damage are still persistent problems. Recent damage sustained from Hurricane David, especially on the southern slopes of the Central Cordillera, requires immediate attention through the region will take years to recooperate. Pollution
Accelerated socioeconomic development in the Dominican Republic manifests itself in large-scale rural to urban migration with attending dramatic shifts




12
in population and settlement patterns. In 1960, 65 percent of the population was rural; today, 55 percent is urban. The absence of urban planning and the failure to provide for adequate water supply and waste disposal have led to serious pollution problems and environmental degradation (Antonini, 1976).
Pefta Franjul (1978) states that in most cities and rural communities of
the republic, it is very risky to drink water since in most instances the water sources are affected by chemical and bacteriological contamination. Treatment-of these sources is meager and it is generally recommended to boil water for drinking purposes. Indeed, poor water quality gives rise to high indices of infant mortality and morbidity (Miranda, 1974).
Air pollution is another environmental problem that requires urgent attention. The mining operations as well as the construction and light industries are the principal sources of air contamination. Some are high polluters and indiscriminately discharge industrial waste into the air and rivers; others have adopted preventive measures (Pefia Franjul, 1978).




13
IV
INSTITUTIONS
There are approximately twenty-six institutions involved with
environmental and natural resources-related matters in the Dominican Republic. Of these, eighteen are public sector agencies. Some agencies, such as PARQUES, ZOOLOGICO, BOTANICO, and the dam corporations, were created and function as special entities directly under the President's Office; another agency type, such as PLAN SIERRA, is a mixed unit with public as well as private sector participation.
Institutions in the private sector that have some relationship with
natural resources and the environment are the following: UCM3 UNPHU; UCE; the vocational agricultural schools, LOYOLA, SALESIANA, and DAJABON; the Dominican Ornithological Society; the Dominican Conservation Society; andthe Caribbean Ecological Society.
Of the nine private institutions, six are educational and some carry out research; three are small conservation organizations devoted to preserving the flora and fauna of the country. The universities and technological schools are treated in Section VI-Training of this chapter, while the conservation associations are discussed in other chapters under relevant headings. Secretar'a de Estado de Agricultura
SEA is governed by Law 8 dated September 8, 1965 and Statute 1142 dated April 28, 1966. Though this legislation remains in force, SEA's internal structure has varied significantly and is very different from its originally conceived form. Indeed, Congress is considering new legislation that would modify substantially the Secretariat's legal base.
SEA contains six undersecretariats, thirty-six departments and eight




14
regional offices. SURENA is the unit within SEA that deals with natural resources; SEICA has some activities in this field, mostly through the Soil Testing Laboratory in San Crist6bal. The regional offices are operational units charged with carrying out programs and projects.
SEA's responsibilities are: (a) to formulate and direct the republic's agricultural policies in accordance with national development goals and in coordination with other public agencies in the sector; (b) to study and monitor the socioeconomic aspects of agricultural production, distribution and consumption; (c) to manage the use of renewable natural resources; (d) to rationalize present with potential land use by promoting improvements in agricultural technology and upgrading the training of farmers and technicians; (e) to promote agricultural production and protect such production from pests and diseases; Mf to review and approve annual budgets of institutions in the agricultural sector; and (g) to monitor, participate in and regulate all matters related to the nation's agricultural development (Jose Enrique Lois, personal communication).
SURENA is responsible for managing renewable natural resource use in the Dominican Republic. The laws and statutes in force that assign to it such a mandate are: Law 8 (September 8, 1965) management and conservation Of land resources and the environment; Law 85 (February 4, 1931) hunting; Law 5914 (May 22, 1962) fishing; and Law 8 (September 8, 1965) weather forecasting. The key functions of each department in1SURENA are listed below.
The Meteorological Service has the following responsibilities: (a) to
maintain climatological stations throughout the country, analyz e station data and periodically report short as well as long-term trends in weather and climate;
(b) provide synoptic daily weather forecasts for marine and air navigation; (c) offer training in the field of meteorology; (d) conduct studies of the atmosphere; and (e) establish guidelines and control mechanisms to detect any




15
activities that may induce air pollution (SURENA, 1979). The Department recently acquired new equipment to improve its service. The importance of the Meteorological Service was highlighted in 1979 by increased public awareness after Hurricane David (Angel Fdlix.Deh6, personal communication)Fisheries Resources is responsible for: (a) monitoring compliance with statutes that regulate fisheries exploitation in the country; (b) promoting rational resource use in marine and fresh water areas; (c) obtaining baseline information that will permit such rational use; (d) sponsoring oceanographic research to guarantee the optimum use of the habitats; (e) maintaining and improving water quality as a living environment in order to guarantee its productivity; (f) acting as the sector's principal administrative-implementing agency charged with coordinating inter-institutional activities related to fisheries resources (SURENA, 1979). Though this Department has existed for sometime, it has functioned effectively only in the last two years. The Department supervises a number of action programs, one of the most important is the PIDAGRO III Aquaculture Project financed by IABD; it also undertakes research to increase fresh water fish catch.
The Department of Inventory and Evaluation is a research unit responsible for conducting studies on the potentialities of natural resource use in the republic. It was recently created and is an outgrowth of the GODR-USDA-Michigan State University Comprehensive Resource Inventory and.EvaliMation System (CRIES). The Department has two key functions, the first of which is to carry out, update and maintain an inventory of renewable natural resources of the country. The objective of such an inventory is to provide precise information concerning the quantity and quality of each natural resource factor input. This inventory is being.carried out in coordination with other SURENA departments as well as other public and private institutions that generate primary information concerning all




16
natural resources factors. The Department has a specialized remote sensing unit. The other important function is to establish and maintain an archive of published documents concerning the topic (Gustavo Tirado, personal communication).
The principal functions of the Wildlife Department are: (a) to promote
the conservation of wild terrestrial and marine animal species for reproductive, scientific, educational and recreational purposes; (b) to carry out an inventory of fauna for guiding more optimal use of wildlife areas; (c) to promote the conservation and reproduction of endangered species; (d) to control the introduction of new wildlife species and to establish a system for regulating wildlife resources. This Department only began to function two years ago. Presently, it carries out a number of programs in the areas of wildlife preservation and food production (Marcos Pe~ia Franjul, personal communication).
The Department of Water and Land has four key functions which are: (a)
to set policy guidelines for water and land management and to provide channels through which corrective measures considered in the laws and statutes can be enforced; (b) to assist in the preparation of watershed management plans and to rank by priority such plans and projects that attempt to resolve the problems attending resource conservation; (c) to review projects concerned with resource development in urban-suburban areas as well, in terms of their technical validity and compatibility with other prospective plans and policies, in as much as they may affect present and future natural resource use; (d) to offer technical assistance to farmers in preparing and carrying out more efficiently plans for the management and conservation of land and water resources (Italo Russo, personal communication). The Department is presently carrying out a land and water conservation project under the auspices of PPA II (SEA, 1977).
In addition to these five principal departments, SURENA has an Office of




17
Technical Coordination and an Environmental Education Unit (SURENA, 1979). The Office is responsible for the overall elaboration of policies, development of inter-institutional collaborative efforts at the local and international levels; it also is in charge of program development and provides technical backstopping to the Undersecretary of Natural Resources. The Environmental Education Unit is responsible for promoting a public awareness for natural resources management. It attempts to achieve this goal by developing short courses for teachers, technicians and farmers. The Unit also is charged with providing supportive materials for diffusion purposes (Italo Russo, personal communication). Secretariado T6cnico de la Presidencia
The Department of Environment and Natural Resources (MEDIO AMBIENTE) of the President's Technical Secretariat was created in 1977 to monitor national policies as well as to develop normative plans in the area. Though handicapped by limited staff and resources,the Department has actively pursued the introduction of natural resources management elements into national development planning (Gretel Castellanos, personal communication).
The Department is an executive unit within the Office of the Technical
Undersecretary; as such, it is outside the formal national planning framework, though its personnel actively collaborate with ONAPLAN on a need basis.
MEDIO AMBIENTE has been most active in working on the establishment of an
inter-institutional coordinating Council forNatural Resources Management (CONARENA) in the republic (Pedro J. Bona Prandy, personal communication). It has also collaborated with ONAPLAN in preparing multi-sector regionalization plans for the Southwest and Eastern Cibao; and it has been involved in preparing reports on the environmental impact of various development schemes. Direcci6n General de Catastro
CATASTRO is a unit of the State Secretariat of Finances. It carries out




18
the important function of servicing the rural cadastral needs of the country. Already half of all farms have been surveyed under a program sponsored by PIDAGRO I. The remaining farms will be surveyed under provisions called for by PIDAGRO III. CATASTRO can provide important baseline information that will be helpful in orienting future environmental policy (SEA, 1979a). Direcci6n General Forestal
FORESTA was created by Decree 8086 on May 5, 1962 as a unit of SEA.
Law 5856 dated April 2, 1962 states as its principal objective the establishment of norms for conserving, restoring, and using the country's forest resources. This law substitutes L w 1688 (1948) concerning the conservation of forests and fruit trees. Law 426 (1966) broadens the powers of FORESTA in conservationrelated matters.
The grave ecological consequences brought about by indiscriminate forest cutting in 1966 and 1967 propelled the government through Law 206 (1967) to charge the Armed Forces with monitoring, conserving, and upgrading yields from forested areas. Thus, in 1967, FORESTA was transferred to and became a dependency of the State Secretariat of the Armed Forces.
Resolution 104 (1967) declared as an important national interest an active
and permanent reforestation program; Decree 1998 (1968) created an inter-municipal level commission charged with protecting the national forest; and Decree 3777 (1969) promulgated that only in exceptional cases could permission be authorized for cutting trees and then only with the prior approval of the President.
The general functions of FORESTA are: (a) to carry out a forest inventory as well as studies of forest exploitation, reforestation and management; (b) to establish norms for the proper use of forest resources on State and private lands; (c) to plan forest-related projects according to availability of resources and needs of specific regions; (d) to regulate by law timber cutting concessions




19
in the country; (e) to monitor compliance with statutes governing conservation and reforestation; (f) to promote campaigns for reforestation and forest conservation and monitor their development; (g) to carry out studies to determine indigenous forest species, exotic species with rapid growth characteristics adaptable to the ecological conditions of the country, as well as possible new future uses of wood products (Ramon Rodriguez, personal communication).
A law calling for the reintegration of agencies in the public agricultural sector is being discussed by Congress (SEA, 1980). This proposed legislation calls for shifting. FORESTA over to SEA. Should this occur, it would maintain decentralized operations although it would be legally and administratively integrated within SEA.
Instituto Agrario Dominicano
Law 5859 (April 27, 1962) created IAD. By law, the Institute answers to SEA and is controlled by a Directive Council presided over by the Secretary of Agriculture. According to Law 496 dated October 1969, the President of the Republic designates all top management personnel including the Director, Subdirector and Secretary (ONAP, 1980). This statute remains in force and undoubtedly has affected IAD's administrative efficiency and operational capacity.
The principal objective of IAD is to transform the latifundio-minifundio structures of land tenure into a more egalatarian system. Its most important functions are: (a) to distribute parcels of State land with the facilities needed to establish settlements of underprivileged farm farmilies, and to establish a permanent and effective agrarian reform; and (b) to sponsor education and technical training programs for farm workers and their families (Ernesto de Jesus Nuftez, personal communication). At one time, IAD had a Soil Classification Division that duplicated functions of the Soils Departmentin SEA. Recently, however, this Division has been dissolved and its functions assumed by SEA.




20
Plan Sierra
PLAN SIERRA is an integrated rural development scheme that was initiated in 1979. It is directed by an executive council with members drawn from the public and private.sectors; nonetheless, it is dependent on SEA for its appropriations (Blas Santos, personal communication). The Plan's objectives include the conservation and rational use of natural resources in the Sierra region of the Central Cordillera. In addition to efforts in the natural resources management field,the Plan includes projects in crop and animal production, public health, education and rural organization (SEA, 1979e).
PLAN SIERRA is a unique and important institutional experiment: it is
a mixed private-public venture; it is decentralized in that the Plan administers its own resources assigned through SEA; and it is headquartered in the town of San Jose de las Matas which is located in the impact region (Antonini and York, 1979).
Instituto Dominicano de Tecnologsa
INDOTEC is the research agency of the Central Bank of the Dominican Republic. Its principal objective is to contribute to the industrial development of the country through research, analytical services, training, as well as the provision of technical, marketing information.
INDOTEC recently carried out studies of fisheries resources. One of these studies deals with problems related to fisheries exploitation in the country. Another contains proposals to increase marine and fresh water fish production (Jose Enrique Lois, personal communication). Instituto Nacional de Recursos Hidraulicos
INDRHI was created as an autonomous agency under Law 6 dated September 8, 1965. This agency is responsible for water resources use in the republic. Its principal functions are: (a) to plan, construct, and operate water works for irrigation




21
purposes (b) to conserve water resources and develop systems for water management; and (c) to determine the future needs of infrastructural works for energy use.
INDRHI historically has had difficulty in cQordinating its activities with other governmental agencies in related fields. For example, it maintains both meteorological as well as fluviometric stations in its project areas. A case could be made for placing all weather stations under the Meteorological Service. Similarly, its Agrological Division carries out reconnaissance studies of watershed areas, such as the Hatillo dam site, and executes reforestation programs but without coordination with the CDE, FORESTA or the Department of Water and Land of SEA. On the positive side, however, the Agrological Division carries out soil conservation in the Sabana Yegua dam area in coordination with the Department of Water and Land (Fausto Grisanti, personal communication).
The lack of coordination between INDRHI and SEA is extended also to the area of water use. Hence, there is a poor use of irrigation water. Though INDRHI is responsible by law for the management of surface and underground water, there is no national policy and subsequently no specific normative actions in this area.
Instituto Nacional de Aguas Potables y Alcantarillado and the Corporaci6n de Acueducto y Alcantarillado de Santo Domingo
INAPA was created as an autonomous agency by Law 5994 dated July 30, 1962. It is part of the health sector and has the basic functions of planning, designing, constructing, administering and operating all water supply and waste disposal systems for urban and rural sectors of the country. CAASD was created by Law 498 on April 11, 1973. It is also an autonomous agency whose functions are the same as INAPA's but are restricted to Santo Domingo City. Both agencies are under the President's Office.




22
Instituto de Desarrollo y Credito Cooperativo
IDECOOP is an autonomous agency created by Law 31, dated December 25, 1963. Its principal objective is to promotecooperative organizations in the country through education, technical assistance and financial sponsorship. At the present time, IDECOOP is carrying out a fisheries project with external financing. Begun in 1977, the objective of this project is to improve local methods of the catch; its overall objective is to increase the availability of fish as a food and thus reduce the protein deficiency of the population (Jose Enrique Lois, personal communication).
Centro de Investigaciones de Biologra Marina
CIBIMA is a unit of the Autonomous University of Santo Domingo. Its objectives are: (a) to better use marine resources for the socioeconomic benefit of the country; and (b) to achieve scientific advances for the university in the field of marine sciences.
CIBIMA operates within the Department of Biology in the Faculty of
Science. It regularly offers courses in the marine sciences and biology; it possesses facilities for organizing seminars, short courses and exchanges with foreign visiting professors (CIBIMA, 1980).
The Center functions under agreements with SEA, INDRHI and the Dominican Academy of Science. The SEA agreement was signed in 1976 and extended in 1977; these agreements have channelled external financing to the Center under PPA I and PPA II (CIBIMA SEA, 1977). In 1979, Hurricane David destroyed CIBIMA's installations with a valued loss of $200,000. Corporaci6n Dominicana de Electricidad
CDE was created by Law 4115 dated April 21, 1955 and Decree 555 of January 16, 1955. Its functions are the production, transmission and distribution of electric energy in the country. CDE has an Agroforestry Department charged with:




23
(a) reforesting high watershed areas; (b) planting fruits and other trees in the areas directly adjacent to the dams and reservoirs; and (c) felling and planting pines for use by CDE in the production of light posts (ONAP, 1980).
This Department coordinated activities with.SEA, FORESTA and INDRHI. In early 1978, it was dissolved and the first and second functions were passed to SEA. The former CDE staff in Augast 1979 assisted SEA in efforts directed to rechannel streams and rivers around Constanza affected by Hurricanes David, Frederick and Allen. CDE still discharges the felling and planting of pine trees for light posts.
CDE administers the large hydroelectric projects, a fact that has led to a weakening of INDRHI and to an even greater independency of action by CDE. There are conflicts between these two agencies with respect to the management of dams since INDRHI's interest lies in the use of water for irrigation purposes while CDE's interest is in producing electric energy. Recently, an interinstitutional agreement was signed creating norms for regulating both functions and setting the stage for establishing mutually compatible guidelines for regulating water use in the hydroelectric projects (J.R. Leandro Guzman Rodriguez, personal communication).
Direcci6n Nacional de Parques
PARQUES was created by Law 67 (November 1974) as a unit of the President's
Office. Its principal objective is the conservation and study of the environment in areas termed "national parks" located in rural, urban and recreational areas as well as at historic sites. ZOOLOGICO and BOTANICO were also included in this category; Law 67 (1974) declared the area around the Zoo a conservation zone.
The national parks of greatest importance in the republic are the J. Armando Bermuoez and Jose Carmen Ramirez with 77,972 and 76,976 hectares, respectively. Both are located in the very wet montane and low montane forested uplands. These




24
are the source areas of the country's principal rivers and the parks existence as conservation zones are amply justified. The smaller, remaining parks are the following: Puerto Plata and Cape Francis on the north coast; Cabritos Island; Del Este, with 43,000 hectares in the southeast and including the largest island in the republic; the southern littoral in the National District; and the northcentral area, termed the Haitises, with 20,578 hectares All of these sites have been declared national parks by law (PNUMA, 1977).
The most important functions of PARQUES are: (a) to guarantee the public right to recreational land and to enjoy contact with nature in its pristine state; (b) to provide study areas where management techniques can be tested and directed to achieve stability in natural ecosystems; (c) to set aside areas where the populace can participate in direct observations of nature and complement such observations with environmental education courses and lectures, both actions directed to make people conscious of their relation with the environment and their responsibilities towards it.
Though PARQUES concentrates its actions in specific areas, it maintains adequate contacts with SURENA and actively collaborates with FORESTA (Marcos Pefia Franjul, personal communication). Given the parallelism between both SEA and PARQUES, however, the law proposing integration of the agricultural sector contemplates shifting National Parks to SEA. Jardin Botanico Nacional "Dr. Rafael M. Moscoso"
BOTANICO was created by Law 456 (October 12, 1976) with modifications in its legal base enacted under Law 921 (August 14, 1978). Normative direction is by a Technical Consultant and Administrator, both of whom are appointed for indefinite periods by the President. The principal functions of BOTANICO are:
(a) to strengthen education and culture in what concerns botany and the biological sciences; (b) to carry out studies of Dominican flora and preserve




25
ecological zones that have suffered damage; and (c) to undertake studies in botany and ecology in coordination with PARQUES (ONAP, 1980). Parque Zoologico Nacional
ZOOLOGICO was created on January 3, 1975 by.Law 114. Decree 451 (December 24, 1974) declared protected all of the flora and fauna that surrounds the Park. ZOOLOGICO is a unit of the Presidency. Its principal functions are: (a) to study the ecology of indigenous species of vertebrates in the different habitats of the island; (b) to develop biological studies and promote development of a popular awareness concerning indigenous species; (c) to maintain adequate numbers of indigenous and exotic species in captivity; (d) to contribute to the ecological reserves through studies and publication (ONAP, 1980).
Both BOTANICO and ZOOLOGICO have newly constructed, modern facilities which permit them to develop program activities without hindrance. Furthermore, both agencies count with adequate economic resources and the support of the local universities.
Corporaciones de Presas
Five autonomous corporations have been created by Presidential Decree and made responsible for the construction of hydropower facilities. These agencies were established because of the inherent weakness in existing governmental institutions and because of the greater ease with which political control and fiscal restraints could be exercised.
The following corporations have been established and the costs of the
corresponding works are as follows: Hatillo ($85 million); Valdesia ($52 million); Rincon ($26 million); Sabaneta ($45 million); and Sabana Yegua ($82 million). In reality, the administration of these corporations is delegated by the President to a small group of trusted, responsible individuals. The agencies function with minuscule staff and cease to exist with the completion of the project. The works are then turned over to INDRHI or CDE (L. Guzman, personal communication).




26
V
INTER-INSTITUTIONAL LINKAGES
Public Sector
There exist an ample range of public institutions that carry out activities related to environmental and natural resources management. These institutions have an incredibly complex and heterogeneous character since each is charged with specific and at times, unique missions.
That there are problems of division of interest and institutional conflicts is due as much to the diverse responsibilities assigned each of the different public agencies, as it is to the absence of a natural resources policy. The ADP calls for passage of enabling legislation to define specific policies for soil, water and forest resources. The Plan also recognizes the importance of strengthening SURENA as the principal normative-operational unit in the natural resources sector. Another specific recommendation in the Plan is the call for creating a Council for Natural Resources Management (CONARENA) as the instrument needed to harmonize and coordinate policy formulation and implementation amongst the various public and private institutions (SEA, 1979d).
Land Resources. Though positive steps very recently have been taken by
integrating IAD's Soils Department and the Agroforestry Division of CDE into SEA, there still persist some problems with INDRHI's Agrological Division and the parallel functions that this Division possesses with SURENA. Greater coordination needs to be achieved between CATASTRO and SEA since their functions are closely related.
Water Resources. This problem is more complex since there are a larger
number of institutions involved. There are conflicts between INDRHI and SEA with




27
regard to a water resources management policy as well as in the activities that each carries out; steps are being taken at the field level to mollify these problems.
The management of dams and reservoirs poses a classic confrontation
between CDE's interest to devote such infrastructure to intensive energy use and INDRHI's efforts to use water downstream for irrigation purposes. Both institutions have very different priorities and these conflicts will continue to arise if no overall national policy is adopted. Recently, the executives of both institutions signed an inter-institutional agreement to form a technical commission to study the problem and present viable solutions.
The creation of corporations to construct dams and reservoirs is an
obvious parallelism with functions that were mandated under law to INDRHI. It has been argued that these corporations were created out of a lack of faith in INDRHI's ability, as much by the government as by international lending agencies, to carry out these very costly projects. However, had an opportunity been given to INDRHI in the first place, and if resources provided to the corporations had been directed to the Institute to upgrade personnel, equipment and materials, it is possible that this institution today probably would be much more efficient technically and administratively.
INAPA and CAASD have very specific functions and it is recommended that
they coordinate closely, especially in the rural areas with respect to the treatment of potable water. Such coordination can be established at the normative level between SEA, SESPAS and INDRIHI.
Wildlife Resources. The responsibilities related to wildlife are concentrated in SEA's Wildlife Department. Other SEA departments that relate to this activity are Plant BrE.Cding, Livestock and Coffee and Cacao. There is adequate coordination since they are dependencies of the same institution. There is no




28
formal coordination between ZOOLOGICO, BOTANICO and SEA;the first two agencies are considered very independent.
Forest Resources. FORESTA is the agency responsible for setting and
carrying out forest-related policies and programs in the republic. 'Notwithstanding, its internal structure is weak and it does not have sufficient technically qualified personnel to carry out its work. There is little coordination with SEA and PARQUES.
In 1978, the President ordered by Decree 301 that both FORESTA and PARQUES coordinate their activities with SEA through SURENA. A Coordinating Commission was created and the Commission was charged with avoiding the duplication of functions and efforts amongst these three agencies. This Commission is presided by the Secretary of Agriculture and includes the Technical Secretary of the Presidency, the Director of FORESTA and the Director of PARQUES.
The law being considered by Congress to integrate the public agricultural
sector calls for moving both agencies to SEA in order to assure that the policies established in the natural resources management area are concordant with national development policies and in particular with agricultural development policies.
Fisheries Resources. The Department of Fisheries Resources within SURENA is charged with a bread array of functions and responsibilities. It has been strengthened in the last two years and it carries out a number of important projects. Examples are: IDECOOP,-which since 1977 is carrying out a program to expand marine fisheries production; INDOTEC, which is just now completing a study to determine marine fisheries potential; and CIBIMA, which for its part, orients its activities towards research.
SEA and CIBMA have signed inter-institutional agreements that have
significantly stimulated research. With respect to IDECOOP, though ties have been broadened, one cannot say that adequate coordination exists. In general,




29
the existent institutional. structure is weak and too dispersed to stimulate a brcad program. cf fisheries exploitation. Public-Private Sector Links.
The coordination between the public and private sectors is relatively
recent and generally informal. With the exception of agreements that SEA has signed with the universities and some of the vocational schools, through the Professional Training Project (PPA II) to train technical personnel in different disciplines related to agriculture, the participation of the private sector in the public arena and the mechanism of existing coordination are really limited. It is important to take into consideration this problem and that the public sector must not only make an effort to intensify this coordination but also to stimulate other private organizations to fight for environmental concerns. CONARENA can be an important means for amplifying the coordination between both sectors. Public Sector International Agencies
The relationship between the public sector and international lending agencies or technical assistance missions of foreign governments is concentrated in the following areas.
The Inter-American Institute of Agricultural Sciences (IICA) in collaboration with SEA has carried out research principally in the areas of soil and water resources. This collaboration was initiated in 1973 under PIDAGRO I and through SEICA (Agapito Perez Luna, personal communication).
The Organization of American States has collaborated with SEA and FORESTA. The most important collaborative effort was the natural resources inventory of the Dominican Republic published in 1967 and considered the classic baseline environmental work of the country.
-The Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations has offered
technical assistance in the areas of forest, soils and water use for several years.




30
The Nationalist Republic of China through its Mission to the Dominican Republic is offering technical assistance in both rice cultivation and fisheries. Israel is another country that has an agreement with SEA to stimulate fisheries; it also collaborates in the rice research programs. The government of the Federal Republic of Germany is initiating a broad technical assistance program that includes conservation of natural resources (Jose Enrique Lois, personal communication).
USAID has offered technical assistance and loans for development of natural resources. It has sponsored numerous studies in the areas of forest, soils and water resources. Through its loan program, PPA I and PPA II, it has aided in implementing various projects in the natural resources area, principally in land and water (Sergio Grullon, personal communication).
USDA has sponsored research in forest and soils areas. It was instrumental in helping to carry out the CRIES Project.
IADB has financed hydroelectric projects, and under the auspices of PIDAGRO I, II, III, various projects in soils, fisheries and forestry. The World Bank has concentrated its efforts in the construction of hydroelectric works, especially dams and irrigation canals.




31
VI
HUMAN RESOURCES
Surveys were undertaken of twenty-six public, semi-autonomous and private agencies involved in training, research, planning and program implementation in the natural resources and environmental management fields. The purposes of the surveys were to determine the levels and disciplinary orientation of training currently available in the Dominican Republic, to identify present manpower levels, to relate fields of training with current areas of work, and based on the proposed program of activities for each institution, to identify institutional needs for additional numbers of professionals and technicians over the next five years. The agencies surveyed include: Training UASD, UNPHU, UCMM, ISA, LOYOLA, SALESIANA, and DAJABON; Research BOTANICO, ZOOLOGICO, CIBIMA, INDOTEC, CENDA, and CIAZA; Planning MEDIO AMBIENTE, and OSISA; and Project Implementation SURENA, FORESTA, PARQUES, IDECOOP, CAASD, INAPA, IAD, INDRHI, PLAN SIERRA, PRYN, and INDESUR. Training
The centers of higher education in the Dominican Republic are UASD, UNPHU, UCMM, UCE, and INTEC. They provide Licenciate (Lic.) and Engineer (Eng.) level professional training with the exception of INTEC which offers, in addition, a one-year advanced course of study in Agricultural Economics. Aside from the above exception, post-baccalaureate training is not available in the Dominican Republic in any of the fields related to natural resources management.
It should be recognized that over 80 percent of the present professional staff in the nineteen agencies concerned with planning, project implementation




32
and research solely have a Lic. or Eng. degree. This type of training at a Dominican university is pursued through an Engineering degree program with a major concentration in Agriculture or Civil Engineering. Programs leading to an Agricultural Engineering degree are offered by ISA-UCMM, UNPHU, UASD and UCE. Civil Engineering studies are pursued through UASD and UNPHU. Recently, UASD instituted a program with a minor concentration in Soils while ISA-UCMM now offers one with a minor in Forest Management and Administration (Rafael Martinez Richiez, personal communication).
In most cases, while foundation courses in Soils, Hydrology, Forestry
and Botany may be taken, emphasis is placed on agronomic or engineering-design aspects and little advanced training is possible in these subject fields. Exceptions to the rule are studies in Marine Biology through the cooperative CIBIMA-UASD program and in Geology at the UCMM. The latter program, however, is heavily oriented towards mining and engineering applications and less toward Geomorphology. The recently established Department of Natural Resources in UNPHU's School of Agronomy should offer very important service courses in Ecology and related subjects in the coming years and thus help provide Agronomists with a greater awareness for environmental and natural resources issues.
Due to the current absence of more advanced studies in natural resources at Dominican universities, the increased demand for such specialized training has led many individuals to obtain "skills-instruction" by attending short intensive courses abroad. The two most oftentimes cited examples are: airphoto interpretation skills through the Inter-American Center of Photo Interpretation under the Ministry of Public Works in Medellin, Colombia; and cartographic training at the Pan American School operated by the InterAmerican Geodetic Service in the Panama Canal Zone. In addition, attendance




33
at conferences and workshops abroad in the respective fields of interest is often used as a "refresher" mechanism.
While social scientists represent only 4 percent of the current work force in natural resources management fields, it is important to note that a more diversified training base is available in this area in the republic. There is Lic. training in Economics at UASD, UNPHU, UCMM, UCE and INTEC. Sociologists are trained at UASD and UNPHU; while UCMM offers a Lic. in Social Work. The UASD recently established a Lic. program in Geography and UCMM offers a minor concentration in this field.
Public Administration also represents 4 percent of the present labor force in the natural resources sector. Lic. training was made available through the UASD in the mid-1960s, but due to low enrollments, it was suspended for several years. Recently, this program was re-established but enrollments remain low and the program's future is somewhat in doubt.
Technical level training in the field of Agronomy is available through the following vocational schools: ISA (Santiago); LOYOLA (San Crist6bal); SALESIANA (La Vega); and the Agricultural School (Dajabon). These schools draw their student population from farm families; their geographical location at different points in the republic helps to build a cadre of agronomists that reflects the country's varied ecological and social contions. FORESTA operates a technical vocational school at Jarabacoa, but todate only in-service, short courses have been offered in matters related to forest conservation.
Present Labor Force
Table 1 presents a summary listing of current staff levels as well as projected increases. There are 448 individuals who work as professionals and technicians in natural resources and environmental management programs




TABLE 1
SUMMARY LISTING OF CURRENT LEVELS AND PROJECTED INCREASES IN PROFESSIONAL-TECHNICAL STAFFING BY FIELD. OF SPECIALIZATION
T R A I N I N G L E V E I
FIELDS OF SPECIALIZATION PH.D. I MA-MS LIC-ENG TECH SUBTOTAL
Agronomy 43 6 13 0 56 16
Botany 1 2 3 3 1 5 5
Biological Sciences 2 1 4 9 33 4 7 46 14
Chemistry 3 2 14 1 20
Computer & Information Sciences 1 3 12 3 27 10 40 16
Ecology 1 4 20 23 2 6 33 23
Education 5 7 3 1 5 8 13
Engineering Sciences 1 33 6 9 43 6
Forestry 4 8 5 13 25 30 34 51
Geology 1 2 2 1 4
Hydrology 1 12 8 22 25 35 33
Meteorology-Climatology 5 7 8 20 15 25
Pisciculture 4 2 4 8 22 16 24
Planning & Project
Administration 2 2 3 8 1 5 17 4
Social Sciences 1 15 3 1 17 3
Soils Science 4 7 4 13 12 4 28 16
Professionals, Unspecified 1 5 1 10 21 23 15
Technicians, Unspecified 5 11 75 11 80
Present Staff 14 44 263 127 448
Future Additions 9 82 85 172 348
Total Future 796




35
in the nineteen surveyed planning, research and program implementing agencies. Of this total, 414 have been trained in the following areas: Agronomy; Botany; Biological Sciences (including General Biology, Marine Biology, and Microbiology); Chemistry and Biochemistry; Computer and Information Sciences (including Computer Science and Data Processing, Cartography and Photo Interpretation); Ecology (including General Ecology, Natural Resources Management, Range and Forest Management, and Wildlife Management); Education; Engineering Sciences (including Agricultural, Chemical, Civil, Electro-Mechanical, Fisheries, Industrial and Sanitary); Forestry; Geology; Hydrology; Meteorology and Climatology; Pisciculture; Planning and Project Administration; Social Sciences (including Sociology and Economics); and Soils Science. There are 23 professionals and 11 technicians whose training falls outside of the above fields, but who nonetheless work in the-area of natural resources management.
Three hundred and twenty-one individuals are considered professionals with training at the Ph.D., MA-MS, and Lic.-Eng. levels; 127 are technicians with secondary or equivalent technical school training. Eighty-two percent (263) of all professionals are at the Lic.Eng. level. Their fields of specialization in ranked order (numbers of persons) are: Agronomy (43); Biological (33) and Engineering (33) Sciences; Ecology (23); and Hydrology
(22). Fourteen percent (44) have MA-MS degrees: the largest percentage (12 individuals) are trained Hydrologists; 7 are Soil Scientists; and there are
4 persons each with graduate training in the Biological Sciences, Ecology, Forestry and Pisciculture. Four percent (14) of all professionals have received Ph.D. training. By far, the largest proportion (4) are Soil Scientists: there are 3 Chemists; 2 in Biological Sciences and PlanningProject Administration; and 1 each in Botany, Hydrology and other fields. Fina lly-, 28 percent (127) of the entire staff is at the technical level.




36
The greatest numbers of technicians have received training in Computer and Information Sciences (26 out of 27 in Cartography and Photo Interpretation), Forestry (25) and Agronomy (13).
Table 2 presents the levels of professional and technical staffing by work-related activities in the nineteen Dominican institutions. Because of the importance of SURENA in the scope of activities under review, this institution's personnel has been disaggregated and staffing is examined by each respective department. The four major activities pursued by these agencies are Planning, combined Planning and Projects Implementation, solely Project Implementation, and Research. Each institution is categorized by its prevailing scope of activities and the sum of professional and technical staff in each work-related sphere indicates both strengths and weaknesses in the sector's capacity to carry out natural resources and environmental management programs.
The work areas of Planning combined with Project Implementation (246 individuals) and Project Implementation (52) account for 67 percent of the work force. One hundred and forty individuals make up the research staff and solely 10 persons are engaged in Planning.
The principal implementing institutions, based on numbers of professionaltechnical staff, are FORESTA (53), INDRHI (47), Water and Land (34), Fisheries
(30), and the Meteorological Service (21). Over half of the personnel in this work-related activity are at the Lic.-Eng. level; close to 40 percent are technicians.
The research institution with the largest professional-technical staff is INDOTEC (47); this is followed by CENDA (39), Inventory and Evaluation
(14), BOTANICO (12) and ZOOLOGICO (12). Close to three-quarters of these agencies' staff are at the Lic.-Eng. level; another 10 percent each can be




TABLE 2
LEVELS OF PROFESSIONAL AND TECHNICAL STAFFING BY WORK-RELATED ACTIVITIES IN DOMINICAN INSTITUTIONS
PLANNING AND
PLANNING PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION RESEARCH
AGENCIES PH.D. MA/MS LIC-ENG TECH PH.D. MA/MS LIC-ENG TECH PH.D. MA/MS LIC-ENG TECH PH.D. MA/MS LIC-ENG TECH
SURENA a. Technical Coordination 1 1 (1)
b. Wildlife 3 6 3(12)
c. Fisheries Resources 6 13 11(30)
d. Water and Land 5 17 12(34)
e. Meteorological Service 1 11 9(21)
f. Inventory & Evaluation 1 12 1(14)
g. Environmental Education 1 2 1 (4)
FORESTA 13 40(53)
PARQUES 1 9 3(13)
BOTANICO 1 2 7 2(12)
ZOOLOGICO 2 2 8 -(12)
CIBIMA 2 2 5 1(10)
IDECOOP 3(3)
INDOTEC 5 1 39 2(47)
CAASD 2 14 -(16)
INAPA 1 10 8(19)
INDRHI 1 9 34 3(47)
lAD 4 12(16)
MEDIO AMBIENTE 1 5 -(6)
PLAN SIERRA 1 6 4 (11)
CENDA 2 27 10(39)
PRYN 1 11 1 (13)
CIAZA 2 4 (6)
OSISA 1 1 1(3)
INDESUR 6 (6)
CESDA*
TOTALS 1 3 5 1(10, 1 27 126 92(246) 4 30 18(52) 12 10 102 16(140)
*Centro Sur de Desarrollo Agropecuario was not surveyed.




38
found at the Ph.D. and technician levels; the MA-MS category accounts for the least number of individuals.
Only three units are concerned with Planning on a full-time basis. These are MEDIO AMBIENTE, Technical Coordination and OSISA. They reflect only 7 percent (10 individuals) of all current staffing. Though the Lic.-Eng. level continues as the principal staff component, the MA-MS makes up a significant third.
Projected Manpower Needs
Tables 3 and 4 present information on current numbers of professionalstechnicians and proposed staffing additions (over the next five years) by fields of specializaiton. This information is provided both for each department of SURENA as well as for the other institutions. Projections are based on information obtained through interviews with agency heads; in some cases, the proposed staff additions have been adjusted either in level or number of individuals requested, to reflect more accurately both project program development and the ability of a unit to absorb additional staff.
Personnel projections should reflect both anticipated staffing needs at the executive-administrative, professional and technical levels, as well as the institution's respective function either as a planning, project implementing or research unit. As a general rule, Ph.D. staff should be reserved for the research institutions. The nine proposed Ph.D. additions fulfill this requirement with the possible exception of one Marine Biologist designated for Fisheries Resources. This Department does have prospective research goals and it is assumed that the fulfillment of such goals, in addition to the need to work more closely with CIBIMA, would be enhanced with a resident Marine Biologist.
The greatest proposed proportional increase is at the MA-MS level. It is
here that the greatest present as well as future professional and administrative




CURRENT NUMBERS OF PROFESSIONALS/TECHNICIANS AND PROPOSED TAfING DDT IU UV Tki D, LTE ~IHE Lvr It.JKx DI
,FIELDS OF SPECIALIZATION WITHIN EACH DEPARTMENT OF SURENA
TECHNICAL COORDINATION WILDLIFE
FIELDS OF SPECIALIZATION PH.D. MA-MS LIC-ENG TECH SUBTOTAL PH.D. MA-MS LIC-ENG TECH SUBTOTAL
Agronomy 1 10 1 10
Botany 3- 3
Biological Sciences 6 2 8
Chemistry Computer & Information Sciences a
Ecology 5 1 9 9
Education Engineering Sciences
Forestry 1 1
Geology
Hydrology
Meteorology-Climatology
Pisiculture
Planning & Project Administration Social Sciences
Soils Science 1 1
Other Professionals 1 1
Technicians, Unspecified
Present Staff 1 1 3 6 3 12
Future 5-Year Additional Demand 5 5 13 10 23
Total Future Staff-5 Years i 3
al General Ecologist and b8 Wildlife Ecologists and 1 in
4 in Natural Resources Management Natural Resources Management
(




CURRENT NUMBERS OF PROFESSIONALS/TECHNiGiANS AND VKUFUt'U)W biAr'iimN PV1i1U.Nb Uvr., JIn LNA r.I vz I v._,o DI
FIELDS OF SPECIALIZATION WITHIN EACH DEPARTMENT OF SURENA
FISHERIES RESOURCES WATER AND LAND
FIELDS OF SPECIALIZATION PH.D. MA-MS LIC-ENG TECH SUBTOTAL PHD. MA-MS LIC-ENG TECH SUBTOTAI
Agronomy
Botany c d f
Biological Sciences 1 3 7 11 4 2 161
Chemistry 2 2
Computer & Information Sciences 1 2 7 8
Ecology 1 1 11 4 16
Education 2 2
Engineering Sciences 2 1 1
Forestry 2
Geology 2 2 3 5 5
Hydrology
Meteorology-Climatology
Pisiculture 3 6 22 9 .22
Planning & Project Administration 1 h 1
Social Sciences 2 2 2
Soils Science 11 5 1
Other Professionals
Technicians, Unspecified 3 3 20
Present Staff 6 13 L1 30 5 17 12 34
Future 5-Year Additional Demand 1 7 6 22 36 5 18 20 43
Total Future Staff-5 Years 66 1 77
CMarine Biologist gNatural Resources Management
d4 Pisciculturalists & 3 Marine hEconomists
Biologists iCartographers
e2 Fisheries Engineers
fMarine Biologist




CURRENT NUMBERS OF PROFESSIONALS/TECHNICIANS AND PROPOSED STAFFING ADDITIONS OVER THE NEXT FIVE YEARS BY
FIELDS OF SPECIALIZATION WITHIN EACH DEPARTMENT OF SURENA
METEOROLOGICAL SERVICE INVENTORY & EVALUATION
FIELDS OF SPECIALIZATION PH D. MA-MS LIC-ENG TECH SUBTOTAL PH D. MA-MS LIC-ENG TECH SUBTOTAL
Agronomy 1 1 7 7
Botany
Biological Sciences
Chemistry Computer & Information Sciences 1 1 3k 1 1 1 2 4
Ecology 2
Education 1 1 2 2
Engineering Sciences
Forestry
Geology
Hydrology 1 1
Meteorology-Climatology 5 7 8 20 15 25
Pisiculture Planning & Project Administration 2 2 m 1 1
Social Sciences 1 2 1 2
Soils Science
Other Professionals 1 1
Technicians, Unspecified 15 15
Present Staff 1 11 9 21 1 12 1 14
Future 5-Year Additional Demand 5 20 25 1 7 1 15 24
Total Future Staff-5 Years -46 38
JSystems Ecologist
kRange & Forest Management
1
Cartographer & 2 Specialists in Computer Scienc mAgricultural Economists
ncartographer




CURRENT NUMBERS OF PROFESSIONALS/TECHNICIANS AND PROPOSED STAFFING ADDITIONS OVER THE NEXT FIVE YEARS BY
FIELDS OF SPECIALIZATION WITHIN EACH DEPARTMENT OF SURENA
ENVIRONMENTAL EUCATION SURENA TOTALS
FIELDS OF SPECIALIZATION PHD. MA-MS LIC-ENG TEQH SUBTOTAL PH.D. A-MS ILIC-ENG TECH SUBTOTAL
Agronomy 8 1 10 9 10
Botany 3 3
Biological Sciences 1 1 1 3 7 17 4 5 25 12
Chemistry 2 2
Computer & Information Sciences 3 2 3 9 11 6
Ecology 3 0 1 1 3 16 11 4 18 17
Education 23 5 2 3 5 3 5 5 11
Engineering Sciences 2 2
Forestry 1 2 1 2 2
Geology 2 2
Hydrology 3 2 3 5 6 7
Meteorology-Climatology 5 7 8 20 15 25
Pisiculture 3 6 22 9 22
Planning & Project Administration 1 3 1 3
Social Sciences 5 2 5 2
Soils Science 3 3 5 3 8
Other Professionals 1 1 2
Technicians, Unspecified 3 35 3 35
I,,,
Present Staff 1 2 1 4 18 61 37 116
Future 5-Year Additional Demand 3 3 5 11 2 45 28 92 167
Total Future Staff-5 Years 15 283
0Environmental Education PSenior level staff appears under Marine
Biology & Fisheries Engineering




CURRENT NUMBERS OF PROFESSIONALS/TECHNICIANS AND FRUUbED STAFFING ADDIilUNbUVhK Tiv t LNAl Julve ImaKo D
FIELDS OF SPECIALIZATION AND WITHIN EACH INSTITUTION
FORESTRY PAROUES
FIELDS OF SPECIALIZATION PH.D. MA-MS LIC-ENG TECH SUBTOTAL PH,D; MA-MS LIC-ENG TECH SUBTOTAL
Agronomy 7 7
Botany b
Biological Sciences 2 2
Chemistry 1 1
Computer & Information Sciences 6 6a
Ecology 2c 1 1 2
Education 2 1 1 2
Engineering Sciences 7 7 3 1 4
Forestry 8 1 10 20 30 21 4E 1 1 2 4
Geology
Hydrology
Meteorology-Climatology
Pisiculture
Planning & Project Administration
Social Sciences 2 2
Soils Science
Other Professionals 2 2 3 3
Technicians, Unspecified 7 7 8 8 C
Present Staff 13 40 53 1 9 3 13
Future 5-Year Additional Demand 8 10 30 4E 6 8 14
Total Future Staff-5 Years 01 -27
al Ecologist; 1 Parks Management Specialist
b
Marine Biologists
CEnvironmental Education




FIELDS OF SPECIALIZATION AM WITHIN EACH INSTITUTION
BOTANIC ZOOLOGICO
FIELDS OF SPECIALIZATION PHD. MA-MS LIC-ENG TECH SUBTOTAL PH.D. MA-MS LIC-ENG1 TECH SUBTOTAL
Agronomy
Botany 1 2 1 2 2 3 3
Biological Sciences 1 1
Chemistry 1 1
Computer & Information Sciences
Ecology 1 i 1
Education
Engineering Sciences 2 2
Forestry
Geology
Hydrology
Meteorology-Climatology 2 2 3 3
Pisiculture 2 2
Planning & Project Administration
Social Sciences
Soils Science 2 2
Other Professionals 5 5
Technicians, Unspecified 1
Present Staff 1 2 2 12 2 2 8 12
Future 5-Year Additional Demand 2 3 5 d
Total Future Staff-5 Years 17 12
dNo funds projected for additional staff




FIELDS OF SPECIALIZATION AND WITHIN EACH INSTITUTION
CIBIMA IDECOOP
FIELDS OF SPECIALIZATION P .D. MA-MS LIC-ENG TECH SUBTOTAL PH .D. MA-MS LIC-ENG TECH SUBTOTAL
Agronomy
Botany
Biological Sciences 1 1 4 1 7 1 1
Chemistry
Computer & Information Sciences Ecology
Education
Engineering Sciences Forestry
Geology
Hydrology 1 1
Meteorology-Climatology Pisiculture 1 1 2 2 2
Planning & Project Administration Social Sciences Soils Science
Other Professionals 5 10 1
Technicians, Unspecified
Present Staff 2 2 5 1 10 3 3
Future 5-Year Additional Demand 5 10 1E
Total Future Staff-5 Years 25 3




CURRENT NUMBERS OF PROFESSIONALS/TECHNICIANS AND PROPOSED STAFFING ADDITIONS OVEK THE NAT 1vhiv XtAKb 1x
FIELDS OF SPECIALIZATION AND WITHIN EACH INSTITUTION
INDOTEC CAASD
FIELDS OF SPECIALIZATION PH.D. MA-MS LIC-ENG TECH SUBTOTAL PH.D. MA-MS LIC-ENG TECH SUBTOTAL
Agronomy
Botany
Biological Sciences 1 10 11
Chemistry 3 1 11 1 16
Computer & Information Sciences
Ecology 1 1
Education
Engineering Sciences 8 8 4 2e 4 2
Forestry
Geology 1 1 i
Hydrology Meteorology-Climatology
Pisiculture
Planning & Project Administration 1 7 8
Social Sciences 1 1 2 2 2
Soils Science
Other Professionals 1 9 10
Technicians, Unspecified 5 5
Present Staff 5 1 39 2 47 2 14 16
Future 5-Year Additional Demand 2 7 9
Total Future Staff-5 Years 47 25
sanitary Engineers




C;UKRLN1 INU~ULKZDO VX L)LiuiLi) xlKI2a -11~,Lii~ _~ --
FIELDS OF SPECIALIZATION AND WITHIN EACH INSTITUTION
INAPA INDRHI
FIELDS OF SPECIALIZATION Pil,D. MA-MS ILIC-ENG TECH SUBTOTAL PH.D. M-MS LIC-ENG TECH SUBTOTAL
Agronomy
Botany
Biological Sciences
Chemistry
Computer & Information Sciences 9 10
Ecology
Education f
Engineering Sciences 1 10 2 8 19
Forestry
Geology 1 1
Hydrology 1 1 8 3 18 20 26 23
Meteorology-Climatology
Pisiculture
Planning & Project Administration Social Sciences
Soils Science 1 7 7 3 11 7
Other Professionals
Technicians, Unspecified 9 9 20 20
Present Staff 1 10 8 19 1 9 34 3 47
Future 5-Year Additional Demand 2 2 9 13 3 27 20 50
Total Future Staff-5 YearsI 32 97
fEnvironmenta Engineers
Environmental Enaineers




FIELDS OF SPECIALIZATION AND WITHIN EACH INSTITUTION
IAD MEDIO AMBIENTE
FIELDS OF SPECIALIZATION PH.D. MA-MS LIC-ENG TECH SUBTOTAL PH.D. MA-MS LIC-ENG TECH SUBTOTAL
Agronomy
Botany
Biological Sciences 1 1
Chemistry
Computer & Information Sciences 1 12 10 13 10
Ecology 1 1
Education
Engineering Sciences
Forestry 1 1 2
Geology
Hydrology
Meteorology-Climatology
Pisiculture
Planning & Project Administration 1 1
Social Sciences 3 3
Soils Science
Other Professionals 1 1
Technicians, Unspecified
Present Staff 4 12 16 1 5 6
Future 5-Year Additional Demand 10 1
Total Future Staff-5 Years 6 6




CURRENT NUMBERS OF FRUYESLUNALS/1Er1CHNiULAN5 ANU k'KUrubLJ Z3,1J1rLINeLl aiUjJJitu.oL1a Vvrr% mnz i'Irui n Cvr na Lr asLX.L
FIELDS OF SPECIALIZATION AND WITHIN EACH INSTITUTION
PLAN SIERRA CENDA
FIELDS OF SPECIALIZATION PH.D. MA-MS LIC-ENG TECH SUBTOTAL PHD_ MA-MSI LIC-ENG TECH SUBTOTAL
Agronomy 4 4 22 5 27
Botany
Biological Sciences
Chemistry
Computer & Information Sciences Ecology 1 2 1 1 3 2 11
Education
Engineering Sciences
Forestry 1 1 2 3 1
Geology
Hydrology
Meteorology-Climatology
Pisiculture
Planning & Project Administration 5 5
Social Sciences 2 2
Soils Science 1 1 2 3 5
Other Professionals
Technicians, Unspecified 3 3
Present Staff 1 6 4 11 2 27 10 39
Future 5-Year Additional Demand 1 2 3 6 1
Total Future Staff-5 Years 17 40
gNatural Resources Management




CURRENT NUMBERS OF FKUROFESSLUNALS/TECHNLUIAANS AND FKUk'VbU STALri aUv1aLUiv VAK 111 Ia&A rivz iztwa DI
FIELDS OF SPECIALIZATION AND WITHIN EACH INSTITUTION
PRYN CIASA
FIELDS OF SPECIALIZATION PH.D. MA-MS LIC-ENC TECH SUBTOTAL PH.D. MA-MS LIC-ENG TECH SUBTOTAL
Agronomy 9 9
Botany
Biological Sciences Chemistry
Computer & Information Sciences Ecology 3 3
Education 1 1 2
Engineering Sciences Forestry
Geology
Hydrology Meteorology-Climatology Pisiculture
Planning & Project Administration 1 1 2 2
Social Sciences
Soils Science
Other Professionals Technicians, Unspecified
Present Staff 1 11 1 13 2 4 6
Future 5-Year Additional Demand
Total Future Staff-5 Years 13 6




CURRENT NUMBERS OF PROFESSIONALS/TECHNICIANS AND PROPOSED STAFFING ADDITIONS OVER THE NEXT FIVE YEARS 51BY
FIELDS OF SPECIALIZATION AND WITHIN 1ACH INSTITUTION
OSIZA INDESUTR
FIELDS OF SPECIALIZATION PH.D. MA-MS LIC-ENG TECH SUBTOTAL PH.D. MA-MS LIC-ENG TECH SUBTOTAL
Agronomy 2 2 4 4
Botany
Biological Sciences Chemistry
Computer & Information Sciences Ecology 4 4
Education
Engineering Sciences Forestry
Geology
Hydrology
Meteorology-Climatology Pisiculture
Planning & Project Administration 1 1h
Social Sciences 1 1 2 12 1
Soils Science 1 1 1 1
Other Professionals Technicians, Unspecified
Present Staff 1 3 6 6
Total Future Staff-5 Years
hEconomist




CURRENT NUIIBERS OF FROFESSIUNALS/TECHNIGLANS AND k'KUYUUiW bTAEIILNUf L AULW IU' UV tZ Nl I aAI Xive IaMo e3
FIELDS OF SPECIALIZATION AnD WITHIN EACH INSTITUTION
SURENA
FIELDS OF SPECIALIZATION PH.D. MA-MS LIC-ENG TECI SUBTOTAL PH.D. MA-MS LIC-ENG TECH SUBTOTAL
Agronomy 8 1 10 9 10
Botauy 3 3
Biological Sciences 1 3 7 17 4 5 25 12
Chemistry 2 2
Computer & Information Sciences 3 2 3 9 11ii 6
Ecology 1 3 16 11 4 18 17
Education 3 5 3 5 5 11
Engineering Sciences 2 2
Forestry 1 2 1 2 2
Geology 2 2
Hydrology 3 2 3 5 6 7
Meteorology-Climatology 5 7 8 20 i5 25
Pisiculture 3 6 22 9 22
Planning & Project Administration 1 3 1 3
Social Sciences 5 2 5 2
Soils Science 3 3 5 3 8
Other Professionals 1 1 2
Technicians, Unspecified 3 35 3 35
Present Staff 18 61 37 116
Future 5-Year Additional Demand 2 45 28 92 167
Total Future Staff-5 Years 283
iSenior level staff appear under Marine Biology and Fisheries Engineering




41
demands in all agencies rest. Given that eleven out of the total nineteen institutions in the sector are program implementing agencies, there is an urgent need to introduce quickly professional skills and managerial techniques that will enhance the successful completion of program activities. The advanced skill level and the nature of the subject matter, juxtaposed with the relatively short period (21-24 months) required-for completion of MA-MS training, are all factors which prompt such a heavy investment at this level.
Table 1 summarizes the five-year demand projection by field for the
nineteen institutions surveyed. It will be noted that, for example, a total of 20 MA-MS in Ecology are proposed. A perusal of Tables 3 and 4 indicates that the 20 MA-MS are distributed by agency in the following manner: SURENA, a subtotal of 16 with Technical Coordination 1 General Systems Ecologist and 4 specialists in Natural Resources Management; Wildlife 8 Wildlife Ecologists and 1 specialist in Natural Resources Management; Water and Land
1 specialist in Natural Resources Management; Inventory and Evaluation 1 specialist in Range and Forest Management; PLAN SIERRA 1 Ecologist; BOTANICO
1 Ecologist; PARQUES 1 Ecologist and 1 Parks Management specialist. A similar procedure can be followed in determining personnel projections by specific fields within the work-related areas for each institution.
While the prospective 82 additional MA-MS professional should serve the demands within the nineteen service agencies, every effort should be made to incorporate some of them, at least on a part-time basis, into the academic programs of the local universities. This would appear to be the most feasible and economical manner of broadening instruction at the national level to include more substantive training in the fields of natural resources.
Of the total 85 proposed additional Lic.-Engs., by far the largest number will be Agricultural and Civil Engineers. This projection assumes




42
continued availability of the UASD program with minor in Soils, the ISA-UCNM program in Forest Management and Administration and the future establishment of a much needed concentration in Hydrology within Civil Engineering either at UASD or UNPHU. As a general rule, training at this level should be carried out in the country.
The five-year personnel projections show more than a doubling of the present number of technicians. The consensus of heads of departments and agencies is that the greatest bottleneck to program implementation currently rests at this operative level. Past experiences of Dominican professionals, who returned from MA-MS training abroad and did not find relatively-trained, supportive, technical staff to assist in program implementation, has been disheartening: in many instances, such highly skilled individuals quickly have become frustrated and after a short period of time, have left government service.
The greatest numbers of technicians are needed in SURENA by Fisheries Resources (22), Water and Land (20), Meteorological Service (20), Inventory Evaluation (25), as well as in other agencies such as FORESTA (30), and INDRHI
(20).
The short intensive course of two to three months duration, offered in the country and in Spanish, is a well-tested method of transmitting skills and job techniques. The SEA-UNPHU link through the School of Agronomy's Department of Natural Resources could provide the institutional base; requisite technical back-stopping from outside the republic could be provided on a need basis to offer a series of short courses on relevant themes or skills. One such course, of potential value to SURENA, would be oriented to improve techniques for inventoring, evaluating and managing natural resources; this course should include laboratory as well as field techniques in land use methods




43
and conservation practices, as well as work in thematic cartography and interpretation of air photo and remote sensed data.




44
VII
BUDGETING AND FINANCING
The financial analysis presented below is an initial attempt at
characterizing recent public expenditures in the natural resources management field. It has two basic shortcomings. First, a financial analysis ideally should be based on proposed as well as actual budgetary expenditures. This report only includes actual expenditures for 1978; it was not possible to obtain similar data for subsequent years. Second, though an active search was carried out in Santo Domingo City, it was not possible to obtain financial information for any of the autonomous government agencies nor the private sector. As a result, no global figures can be given at this time for the natural resources sector expenditures. This analysis, due to data limitations, is restricted to the programs of SEA and the Armed Forces based on information found in ONAPRES (1979).
Sources of Funds
Within the context of SEA's five basic program funding categories which totalled $63,188,215.00 for 1980, SURENA's natural resources development program was assigned $3,905,190.00 or 6 percent of the total (Table 5). In 1979, SURENA received 4 percent of the estimate $46,974,837.00 total budget; in 1978, it was 4 percent of the $12,450,444.00 executed budget (Table 6). Over the past three years, SURENA received the least amount of financing of any of SEA's programs. Notwithstanding the proportionally low funding level, one can observe a significant, comparative annual increase over the threeyear period: 1979-80, a 110 percent increase or $2,013,205.00; 1978-79, a 263 percent increase or $1,332,284.00 (Table 6).




45
TABLE 5
Proposed Funding for SEA in 1980 National External
Total Sources Sources
PROGRAMS
1. Administration 21,235,110 17,1926,285 3,308t825
2. Production, Credit,
and Marketing 20,778,365 20,441,590 336,775
3. Natural Resources 3,905,190 3,851,190. 54,000
4. Rural Development 10,444,430 8,316,$325 2,128,105
5. Livestock 6,825,1125 6,825,125-Institutional Financing 96,570,905 74,039,485 22,531,420
159,759,125 131,400,000 28,359,125




46
TABLE 6
Comparison of Expenditures by Programs in SEA for the 1978-80 Period F U N D S
Spent Estimated Proposed
1978 1979 1980
National Sources 22,030,510 95,810,276 131,400,000
PROGRAMS
1. Administration 5,822,234 9,374,359 17,926,285
2. Production, Credit & Marketing 2,718,784 22,469,078 20,441,590
3. National Resources 505,701 1,837,985 3,851,190
4. Rural Development 2,233,359 8,800,033 8,316,325
5. Livestock 1,170,366 4,493,382 6,825,125
6. Institutional Financing 9,580,066 48,835,439 74,039,485
External Sources 28,359,125
22,030,510 95,810,276 159,759,125




47
Only two activities, Meteorological Services and Fisheries Resources, existed in 1978; the Wildlife, Water and Land, as well as Inventory and Evaluation programs were created in 1979. The percentage increase from 1979 to 1980 in each activity is illustrated in Table 7. It should be noted that Fisheries has received most of the funding; in contrast;,Water and Land has received the least amount. The program of the Meteorological Services, Wildlife, Fisheries Resources, Water and Land, as well as Inventory and Evaluation, were accomplished with local funds during the 1978-79 period: in 1980, only $54,000 in external funding was assigned to Water and Land as part of the AID-517-T-029 (PPA) Loan (Table 8) (SEA, 1977).
A part of the Rural Development Program budget of SEICA is used for
soils mapping and laboratory analysis; hence, it could be subsumed under the Water and Land budget because of the similarity in tasks performed.
The annual increase in budgetary allocations for this task is 182 percent for the period 1978-79 ($206,363) and 80 percent in 1979-80 ($255,570). The soils mapping phase of the Rural Development Program has been locally funded except in 1980 when a $49,000 allocation was assigned from the AID 517-T-029 (PPA) Loan (Table 9) (SEA, 1977).
The Armed Forces Forest Protection and Control Program shows an annual
increase of 63 percent for 1978-79 $1,166,259.00 and 30 percent during 1979-80 ($894,135.00). This program is financed exclusively with local funds (Table 10) (ONAPRES, 1979).
Use of Funds
The SURENA program shows an annual increase in capital expenditures of 3876 percent during 1978-79 ($81,390.00) and a 248 percent increase ($1,250,894.00) in operating expenses during the same period (Table 11). For the period 1979-80, capital expenditures rose by 1341 percent




48
TABLE 7
Percentage Increase from 1978 to 1980 in SURENA Budget
Meteorological Land & Inventory &
ears Service Wildlife Fisheries Water Evaluation
978-79 $602,583 $324,484
158.98 -----251.44
979-80 $690,461 $264,100 $775,706 $116,653 $220,285
70.51 274.98 171.04 55.25 224.70




49
TABLE 8
Comparison of Expenditures by Program in SURENA for the 1978-80 Period FUNDS
Spent Estimated Proposed
1978 1979 1980
ACTIVITIES
1. Meteorological Services 376,651 979,234 1,669,695
2. Wildlife 96,045 360,145
3. Fisheries 129,050 453,534 1,229.240
4. Land and Water 211,137 327,790*
5. Inventory and Evaluation 98,035 318,320
TOTALS 505,701 1,837,985 3,905,190
*$54,000 external funds provided by AID-517-T-029 (PPA) loan.




50
TABLE 9
Expenditures for Soils Mapping and Analysis within the
SEA Rural Development Program for the 1978-80 Period F U N D S
Spent Estimated Proposed
1978 1979 1980
National Sources 113,347 319,710 526,280
Operating Expenses 432,280
Capital Expenditures 94,000
External Sources. 49,000*
.13,347 319,710 575,280
*AID 517-T-029 (PPA) loan.




51
TABLE 10
Expenditures for the Forest Protection & Control Program
of the Armed Forces during the 1978-80 Period FU N DS
Spent Estimated Proposed
1978 1979 1980
National Sources 1,830,079 2,770,895 3,544,720
Operating Expenses 1,830,079 2,770,895 3,544,720
Capital Expenditures 9,027 234,470 354,780
1,839,106 3,005,365 3,899,500




52
TABLE 11
Use of Funds by SURENA during the 1978-80 Period
FUND S
Spent Estimated Proposed
1978 1979 1980
National Sources 505,701 1,837,985 3,851,190
Operating Expenses 503,601 1,754,495 2,647,725
Capital Expenditures 2,100 83,490 1,203,465
External Sources 54,000
AID 517-T-029 Small
Farmer Development Program
505,701 1,837,985 3,905,190




53
($1,119,975.00) and operating expenses by 51 percent ($893,230.00). The capital expenditure increment is extremely high and may demonstrate equipment purchases, such as for machinery, buildings, installations and improvements. The operating expenses increase though high initially shows more rational growth during the second period. A final analysis *of the percentage
distribution by types of expenditure is provided in Table 12. The figures show a better distribution between capital expenditures and operating expens es.
Only 1980 budget figures were available for the soils mapping and
laboratory task within SEA's Rural Development Program. The breakdown is as follows for 1980: capital expenditures, 18 percent; and operating expenditures, 82 percent. Given the limited information, one can only state that the percentage relationship is low and an effort should be made in the future to better distribute financial resources.
The Forest Protection and Control Program of the Armed Forces for the
1978-79 period presents a.2497 percent increase ($225,443.00) in capital expenditures and a 51 percent increase ($940,816.00) for operating costs (Table 10). For 1979-80, capital expenditures showed a 51 percent rise ($120,310.00) and operating costs 28 percent ($773,825.00). Percentage increases show no marked tendency towards better distribution of capital expenditures and operating expenses (Table 13).
Finally, mention is made of two approved IADB projects for which local
counterpart funding was not included in the 1980 budget. The first is a two-year Acuaculture Project totalling $1,087,000.00, with first year disbursements at $829,750.00 and the second year at $257,250.00. The second is a four-year Soil and Water Conservation Project, totalling $654,000.00, of which the Dominican government is funding 49 percent and IADB 51 percent (ONAPRES, 1979).




54
TABLE 12
Analysis of Percentage in the SURENA Budget from 1978 to 1980 by Expenditure Category
Year Capital Expenditures Operating Expenditures
1978 0.42% 99.57%
1979 4.45% 95.46%
1980 31.25% 68.75%




55
TABLE 13
Analysis of Percentage in the Armed Forcas Budget from 1978 to 1980
for the Forest Protection and Control Program by Expenditure Category
Year Capital Expenditures operating Expenditures
1978 0.49% 99.51%.
1979 7.80 92.20
1980 9.10 90.90




56
VIII
CONCLUSIONS A1ND RECOMMENDATIONS
Conclusions
Environmental policy. Though a defined national policy exists for intermediate-term agricultural development planning in the Dominican Republic, at this time there is no explicit policy for natural resources management. Solutions are sought for environmental problems on an ex post facto basis.
Land Use. Over the last few years, population pressures have caused an increasing amount of agriculturally-marginal hill land and forests to shift over to cultivated use. Such a more intensive use has not taken into consideration minimal functional farm size or ecologically compatible technological requirements. As a result, agg ravated problems of deforestation, soil erosion and reservoir siltation are of common occurrence.
Water Use. There are serious water management problems related to
inadequate measurement, control and use. These problems cause difficulties in the administration and operation of the irrigation districts. Recent studies should permit redesigning a more adequate legislative framework.
Fisheries. The Dominican Republic possesses an extensiVe fluvial network and coastline in comparison with its limited geographical area, factors favorable to promoting fisheries exploitation. However, catch methods remain primitive and weaknesses persist in the institutional fabric.
Forests. After a period of irrational exploitation in the 1960s, the forest area in the republic has regenerated. There still remains, however, no adequate forest management policy. As a consequence, traditional problems persist.




57
Institutions. There are sixteen public institutions directly related to natural resources management in the Dominican Republic. Some of these agencies have distinct responsibilities and others have parallel functions. This situation has resulted in frequent conflicts and what is worse, an under utilization of human, institutional and financial resources. There is little coordination between public and private sectors. Informal arrangements are the rule rather than the exception.
Decision-makers have demonstrated genuine interest to resolve structural bottlenecks and organizational problems. In some cases, legislation has been proposed as a corrective mechanism; in others, simple informal working agreements are used. The law before Congress to integrate the agricultural sector is an example of the former, while the INDRHI-CDE memorandum of understanding is an example of the latter. In any case, a fundamental governmental objective since 1978 has been institutionalizing the management and the decision-making process in the public sector.
Budget. The basic problem is the lack of standardized procedures to
evaluate all agency budgets and sector expenditures. The situation in the private sector is even worse since very little budgetary information is made available.
Human Resources. Training in the natural resources management fields is not available in the Dominican Republic. Most professionals have an Engineer-. ing degree with a major concentration in Agriculture or Civil Engineering. Technical, vocational school training is available solely in Agronomy; FORESTA periodically offers short courses.
There are 448 individuals working in twenty-six public and private
agencies in natural resources management; 321 are considered professionals and 127 technicians. Five-year demand projections for nineteen institutions




58
estimate a need for an additional 348 individuals; 176 professionals and 172 technicians. Greatest demand is at the technical level; this followed by the baccalaureate (85), masters (82) and doctoral (9) levels. Recommendations
Environmental Policy. An urgent need exists to formulate a natural resources policy and relate such policy to the development goals of the country.
Planning. A Natural Resources Management Plan is needed, one that contemplates discrete actions and programs to be taken singly or in combination in the areas of water, soils, forest, wildlife, fisheries resources a nd environmental pollution. Such a Plan should provide the frame of reference for identifying, planning and executing field and laboratory-based programs over the short and long-term.
More rigorous planning is required in the agricultural areas to improve productivity and protect the ecosystem. This is especially true for marginal upland areas which have been placed under more intensive shifting cultivation. Many of these areas, such as the Sierra, coincide with catchment zones of the multi-purpose hydroelectric projects. Only adherence to such planning will maintain the viability and prolong the lifespan of these projects.
Institution. Mechanisms that bolster greater inter-institutional collaboration need to be established. An important mechanism in this regard will be the National Council of Natural Resources (CONARENA); it will be a step forward in irradicating traditional problems of diffusion of effort and duplication of function that in the past have led to inefficient use of personnel and financial resources.
SURENA must continue to be strengthened. It should develop more fully its mandate to plan, implement and supervise national policy in the natural resources management fields. It is necessary, furthermore, to strengthen




59
other key institutions, such as INDRHI, FORESTA, and PARQUES. Care must be taken to see that all coordinate more closely their activities with SURENA.
Budget. An effort should be made to begin to unify and standardize accounting procedures so that a more rigorous analysis of the expdditures in natural resources can be made in the future. Such normalized accounting procedures would greatly aid in improving the use of national and external funds.
Human Resources. There is an urgent need to establish instructional programs for natural resources management in the republic. It is important to provide support for the newly established Department of Natural Resources at UNPHU. This Department needs to build a teaching and research staff. Such a Department should offer formal professional training within the Lic.-Eng. curricula as well as topically-focused or skill-oriented "refresher courses" for technical, professional and administrative staff.
A professional training program should be initiated as soon as possible
and scholarships created to satisfy the projected middle management and intermediate professional staff needs. Care should be exercised in defining specific job requirements within each agency and using such job descriptions as the basis for screening scholarship applicants. The job descriptions should serve as points of reference in developing academic curricula.
Since many individuals will be called upon to exercise their professional skills as members of interdisciplinary problem-solving teams, it is important that they be given opportunities to develop these special team skills within the supportive environment of their university studies. Furthermore, all who pursue NA-MS and Ph.D. training abroad should be required to prepare theses or dissertations on relevant environmental problems in the Dominican Republic. It is important that research priorities be established a priori and related




60
as much as possible to on-going field projects in the sector so that the large number of projected academic studies have a definite impact on environmental problems of greatest concern.




61
IX
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Antonini, Gustavo A., 1968 Processes and Patterns of Landscape Change in the Linea Noroeste,
Dominican Republic. Ph.D. dissertation, Columbia University.
1979
Urban and Regional Planning in the Caribbean. Association of Caribbean
Universities and Research Institutes, Kingston, Jamaica.
Antonini, Gustavo, Ewel, Katherine, and Tupper, Howard 1975 Population and Energy: A Systems Analysis of Resource Utilization
in the Dominican Republic. The University Presses of Florida,
Gainesville.
Antonini, Gustavo and York, Mason, 1979 Integrated Rural Development and the Role of the University in the
Caribbean: The Case of Plan Sierra, Dominican Republic. Revista
Geografica, 90, julio-diciembre.
Chardon, Carlos, 1937
Reconocimiento de los recursos naturales de la Repdblica Dominicana.
Report to President Rafael Trujillo Molina, Ciudad Trujillo (Santo
Domingo).
Centro de Investigaciones de Biologia Marina, 1980
Contribuciones.
Centro de Investigaciones de Biologla Marina y Secretaria de Estado
de Agricultura, 1977.
Acuerdo entre la SEA y CIBIMA para desarrollar sus programas para la
evaluaci6n y producci6n de los recursos bi6ticos.
Instituto Nacional de Recursos Hidr5ulicos, 1980
Estudio sobre una nueva tarifa de agua (versi6n borrador).
Miranda, Carlos, 1974
Implicaci6n sanitarias econ6micas y legales del problema de la contaminaci6n del agua en Repiblica Dominicana (ponencia presentada en
Mejico).
Oficina Nacional de Administraci6n y Personal, 1980
Manuel de organizaci6n del gobierno Dominicano.
Oficina Nacional de Presupuesto, 1979
Presupucsto do ingresos y gastos pblicos para 1980




62
Organization of American States, 1967
Reconocimiento y evaluaci6n de los recursos naturals en la
Rep'blica Dominicana. 3 vols. Washington, D.C., Pan American Union,
Department of Economic Affairs.
Paulet, Manuel, 1977
Lineamiento para el establecimiento de un program de conservaci6n
de suelos y agua en RepGblica Dominicana, Iftstituto Interamericano, de
Ciencias Agricolas.
Pefia Franjul, Marcos, 1978
Repiablica Dominicana: Ensayos Ecol6gicos.
Program de las Naciones Unidas para el Medio Ambiente, 1977
Studio exploratorio de la situation ambiental en la Rep'blica
Dominicana.
Secretar'a de Estado de Agricultura, 1977
Program para el pequefio agriculture, II: Proyecto Tierras y Aguas.
1979a
Estrategia institutional para el manejo de los recursos naturals en
Rep6blica Dominicana.
1979b
Program Integrado de Desarrollo Agropecuario III: Proyecto de Acuacultura.
1979C
Plan de desarrollo agropecuario 1980-82.
, 1979d
Reorganizaci6n de la Subsecretarla de Recursos Naturales
1979e
Plan de desarrollo: La Sierra
1980
Anteproyecto de ley para la conservation de los recursos
SubsecretarTa de Estado de Recursos Naturales, 1979
Program de desarrollo y conservaci'n de los recursos naturals
renovables.
United States Agency for International Development, 1979
Sector Analysis (working draft).
'1980
Scope of Work for Country Environmental Profile for the
Dominican Republic (IQC:AID/SOD/PDC-C-0247).




63
x
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
ADP Plan de Desarrollo Agropecuario
BOTANICO Jard'n Botgnico Nacional "Dr. Rafael M. Moscoso"
CAASA Corporaci6n de Acueducto y Alcantarillado de Santo Domingo
CIAZA Centro de Investigacio'n Agr1cola en Zonas Aridas
CENDA Centro Norte de Desarrollo Agropecuario
CESDA Centro Sur de Desarrollo Agropecuario
CDE Corporacion Dominicana de Electricidad
CATASTRO Direcci6n General de Catastro
CIBIMA Centro de Investigacio'n de Biologla Marina
CONARENA Consejo Nacional de Recursos Naturales
CRIES Comprehensive Resource Inventory and Evaluation System
PARQUES Direcci6n Nacional de Parques
DAJABON Escuela AgrTcola de Daiabon
FORESTA Direcci'n General Forestal
GODR Government of the Dominican Republic
IAD Instituto Agrario Dominicano
IADB Inter-American Development Bank
IDECOOP Instituto de Desarrollo y Credito Cooperativo
IICA Inter-American Institute of Agricultural Sciences
INDRHI Instituto Nacional de Recursos Hidr5ulicos
INDESUR Instituto de Desarrollo del Suroeste
INDOTEC Instituto Dominicano de Tecnolog'a
INAPA Instituto Nacional de Aguas Potables y Alcantarillado




64
INTEC Instituto Tecnologico de Santo Domingo
ISA Instituto Superior de Agricultura
LOYOLA Instituto Politecnico Loyola
MEDIO Departamento del Medio Ambiente y Recursos Naturales
AMBIENTE
OAS Organization of American States
ONAP Oficina Nacional de Administracio'n y Personal
ONAPLAN Oficina Nacional de Planificaci6n
ONAPRES Oficina Nacional de Presupuesto
OSISA Oficina de Integraci6n Agropecuaria de Azua
PNUMA Programa de las Naciones Unidas para el Medic, Ambiente
PIDAGRO Programa Integrado de Desarrollo Agropecuario
PRYN, Proyecto Riego Yaque del Norte
PLAN SIERRA Plan de Desarrollo Integral "La Sierra" SEA Secretarla de Estado de Agricultura
SEAPLM' Subsecretaria de Planificaci6n Agropecuaria
SESPAS Secretaria de Estado de Salud Pu'blica y Previsi6n Social
STP Secretariado T&cnico de la Presidencia
SEICA Subsecretaria de Investigaci6n, Extensi6n e Investigacion
SURENA Subsecretaria de Estado de Recursos Naturales
SALESIANA Escuela Agricola Salesiana UASD Universidad Aut6noma de Santo Domingo
UCE Universidad Central del Este
UNPHU Universidad Nacional Pedro Henriquez Urefia
UCMM Universidad Cat6lica Madre y Maestra
USAID Agencia de los Estados Unidos para el Desarrollo Internacional
USDA United States Department of Agriculture
ZOOLOGICO Parque Zool6gico Nacional




65
X1
LIST OF PERSONS INTERVIEWED
Pedro J. Bona Prandy Subsecretario Te'cnico de la Presidencia
Gretel Castellanos Director
Department del Medio Ambiente y Recursos Naturales (STP)
Angel Felix Defi6 Subsecretario de Estado de Recursos Naturales SURENA
Fausto Grisanti Subdirector Department de Planes, Programas y Proyectos SEAPLANE
Sergio Grullon Director
Department de Recursos Externos SEA
J.R. Leandro Guzman Rodr-guez Ing. Asesor Corporaciones Sabana Yegua y Hatillo
Jose' Enrique Lois Ex-Subsecretario de Planificaci'n Agropecuario SEA
Rafael Martinez Richiez Director
Oficina de Coordinacio'n Universitaria SEA
Hipo'lito Mejla Secretario de Estado de Agricultura
Ernesto de Jes5s Nufiez Ex-Auditor General Institute Agrario Dominicano




66
Juan Antonio Nufiez Director Department de Planificacio-n Sectorial ONAPLAN
Marcos Pefia Franjul Director Department de Vida Silvestre SURENA
Agapito Pe'rez Luna Planificador Regional IICA
Ram'n Pgrez Minaya Director ONAPLAN
Ram6n Rodriguez Direcci6n General Forestal
Italo Russo Director Oficina de Coordinacio'n Te'cnica SURENA
Blas Santos Director PLAN SIERRA
Gustavo Tirado Director Department de Inventario)Evaluacio'n y Ordenamiento SURENA
Ml. de Jesus Vifias C5ceres Gerente General Gulf and Western Corp. (La Romana) Ex-Secretario de Estado de Agricultura