1. Overview
This organisational structure was developed to accommodate a large number of stakeholders. It was important to ensure that all groups had a say in the organisation while still being held accountable in way. (see table in 3. Description of accountability)
2. Diagram of Structure
3. Description of accountability
| Trustee Representation | Interest Groups | Members | Non/Voting |
| Staff (3 Trustees) | Field Station Staff (3 Trustees) | Research Station | Voting |
| Field Stations | Non voting | ||
| Visitors (3 Trustees) | Student and Research Organisations | University Research (International) | Voting |
| Scientific Institutions (International) | Voting | ||
| Local schools | Non voting | ||
| Nature Clubs | Non voting | ||
| Tourist Industry | Public Information Centres | Non voting | |
| Tourist Accommodation | Non voting | ||
| Tourism – Local Governments | Non voting | ||
| Land Management | Geopark | UN Organisation | Voting |
| (3 Trustees) | Forest Services | Voting | |
| ABC County | Government | Voting | |
| Farmers | 3 Counties | Non voting | |
| XYZ Enterprises | Sustainable Ecosystem Management | Enterprises | Voting |
| (3 Trustees) | And Resource Stewardship | EU organisation | Non voting |
| ABC Country organisation | Non voting | ||
| TRUSTEES TOTAL: 12 | |||
4. Impact on success of organisation
The expectation is that this organisational structure will encourage:
- Input from all groups which will ensure that all key information and learning is captured.
- Engagement and commitment from all groups which should increase resources available.
- Trust (transparency, mutual support and consistency) which will improve the decision making process.
5. Other notes
None at this time
Discussion (0)
There are no comments for this doc yet.
Comment posting has been disabled on this doc.