In 1994 and on the basis of the lessons already learned a second phase of the project was undertaken the object of which was, within the regional context, to consolidate and strengthen the social and political dimensions of the activities carried out. Certain projects viewed as priorities in light of their significant demonstration potential, were strengthened, with emphasis on the activities in Nicaragua, Guatemala, El Salvador and Costa Rica.

By that time we had already moved into policy formulation in the field and regarding wildlife. The program activities had permeated the decisonmaking levels and experience was being built up as to how the local dimension can transcend the national, regional and global political levels.

The more long-term objectives of the program were then summarized as follows:

1. Promote the sustainable use of wildlife resources to improve the quality of life for Central America's rural population.

2. Advise the Central American governments and NGOs on their wildlife resource management programs, in the subject matter, administrative, legal and cooperation areas.

3. Execution of demonstration projects.

We have learned major lessons from carrying out the activities needed for accomplishing these objectives. While not innovative from the conceptual standpoint, these lessons certainly have been so in the practical arena. At that time the process of systematization and exchange of experience (local-local, national-national and regional) was already a continuous process in the program activities. The information generated enables us to speak knowledgeably about sustainability indicators, policy generation, systematization processes, participatory systematization processes and the establishment of networks. This stage culminates in the preparation and distribution of publications and regional discussions which have enabled and will enable Central America to participate with concrete contributions to the world discussion on publications on biodiversity conservation and development.

At that time, the economic, social and political context of the region was substantially different from what it used to be for the implementation of activities and, at least in conceptual terms, it was sustainable use that was assessed in governmental and nongovernmental institutions rather than "community-based" use. We then had the program techniques, and a more integral and holistic view of how to approach the question of wildlife conversation, our desire being:

• To conserve nature and to raise the quality of life for the inhabitants of Central America as two facets of one single process.

• To accomplish community development and consolidate the grassroots organizations and to stimulate participation in decisionmaking as fundamental aspects of the process aimed at improving the quality of life for the people within the context of natural resource conversation.

• To approach environmental problems from a holistic standpoint, in which the social justice and poverty mitigation aspects are also priority aims of the actions carried out.

All of this is maybe summarized in the conceptual framework that was developed thanks to the team work and thinking done and the network built up of many persons in the region, as detailed in the annex.

Community-based and sustainable use of natural resources continues to be today, for the Central American region and for the countries of the "South" in general, one of the greatest challenges for meeting the basic principles of conversation policies at the global, regional and national levels, including equity, development, democracy, social justice and peace.

The activities of this regional program have produced results aimed at fostering more participatory processes in their formulation and drafting of legal instruments, for example:

• Community consultation regarding the cynegetic calendar in Uaxactún, Guatemala, which led to the preparation of a draft Hunting Law which takes into account the concerns and needs of the local communities.

• The process of preparing Panama's draft Wildlife Law, the first to expressly recognize and promote community-based wildlife use in the region.

• The search process for a legal framework for conservation of biodiversity which led to the de facto creation of the first National Biodiversity Commission (CONABI) in Nicaragua.

• The definition of a legal framework for biodiversity conservation based on equitable distribution of benefits, which led to the submission of the draft Biodiversity Law in Costa Rica, the first such draft covering all related topics starting from a specific philosophy.

• The design of a system of wildlife resource utilization which differentiates the community and commercial aspects, for the National Parks and Wildlife Service (PANAVIS) of El Salvador.

The global outcome of the Wildlife Program for Central America's activities has been the incorporation of the community elements into each country's wildlife policies, in some cases through reform of legal instruments, in others by means of reshaping of the institutional structure, while all the time seeking to maintain a profound respect for the needs of the local communities as expressed in the demonstration projects.

The concept of sustainable use acquires dimensions and specific features of its own in the different ecological and cultural contexts in which it is applied.

The uses concerned vary not only according to the type of resources but also depending on the geographic and climatic situation, the status of landholding, prevailing socioeconomic conditions, and legislation and regulations that promote or legitimize the use made of the resources.

Various efforts have been made to locate criteria or indicators in the economic, social, biological and legal plans that will provide pointers regarding the progress of wildlife conservation initiatives.

The indicators form one more instrument of a planning and evaluation process, giving us a parameter for checking out the progress of a project or how community development itself is progressing.

It will accordingly be apparent that a system of indicators for monitoring a community's use of wildlife will only be of value when applied within a context and in accordance with processes which are consistent with the prevailing national and local circumstances.

It is against this backdrop that we have been using the Wildlife Program for Central America to endeavor to define a system of indicators that will be unable for future evaluation and monitoring work. To date we have succeeded in identifying certain indicators or criteria of a qualitative nature and we hope next to be able to move into quantitative measurement.

All these criteria are based on concrete experience acquired in Central America and in communities which utilize wildlife resources (Annex 1).

In the course of our work we have also sought to develop activities aimed at providing inputs for the formulation of wildlife conservation policies in general.

From some of the most successful processes we have learned that:

• Policy formulation must be a process consistent with and based on concrete realities.

• The policies must serve to legitimate processes that do not take away rights from the peoples concerned or adversely impact their quality of life.

• A policy that enjoys support is one that has been reached through a process of negotiation, dialogue and consensus-building.

• These must be constant feedback on the policies through a two-way process.

• The policies are not static, but are an interesting combination of elements tied in with the present and looking toward the future.

Like the other Latin American countries, Central America has to cope with the globalization, the opening up of its markets, the widening social gap and the emergence of new values as the new century dawns. The possibility of a holistic approach that incorporates the social, economic, biological and legal dimensions into the new policies for the conversation and sustainable use of natural resources will enable accomplishment of development which is linked with improvement of the quality of life for our Latin American peoples.