LOCAL and international conservation groups operating here need to work closely for better results, recommends the report on the Review and Analysis of Fiji's Conservation Sector.
Put together by academics Annette Lees and Suliana Siwatibau of the Austral Foundation, the report highlights the issue of conservation NGOs not working close enough.
"Getting the NGOs to work together is like herding cats," said the report.
"The NGOs are competing for funding. So they have to be secretive about what they do. "It's not harmonised. It's chaotic."
While acknowledging the good work of conservation NGOs, Ms Lees said if they were serious about conservation, there would be no question of their not being able to work together.
The report said outside of the Government, there were 23 organisations and at least half a dozen community groups working on conservation programs.
Twenty of these are NGOs and 18 have offices in Fiji.
Ms Lees said it is through these organisations that almost all biodiversity conservation work in Fiji is designed and implemented.
"Collectively, they provide nearly $12million annually and over 100 staff to conservation," she said.
"Fifteen of the organisations have predominantly biodiversity conservation objectives while the remainder have a stronger focus on sustainable livelihoods or a resource management approach.
"The objectives, assumptions, approaches and size of the organisations vary widely."
Ms Lees said conservation gains could be made if NGOs coordinate efforts, focus on working to local priorities, joint assessments and strategies, coordinate government engagement and consider sharing offices and resources.
"Far from this vision is the current situation with the conservation NGOs, described to the review team as one of intense and unhealthy competition between the NGOs for resources, ideas and even communities," she said.
As a result of this, there has been duplication of effort, inefficiencies, avoidance of difficult conservation problems and reduced transparency.
Ms Lees said Fiji was too small and the conservation problem too large for the intensely competitive environment to result in positive conservation impact.
