5.2 Land use 0 -- Institutions resist change; Regulations and procedures are only slowly management updated and are not accommodating the 1 -- Institutions do change but only very slowly; institutions are dynamics of variables that drive land uses 2 -- Institutions tend to adapt in response to change but not always very highly adaptive, effectively or with some delay; 1 responding 3 -- Institutions are highly adaptive, responding effectively and effectively and immediately to change immediately to change 5.3 Land use 0 -- There are no mechanisms for monitoring, evaluation, reporting or There are no explicit mechanisms for management learning; monitoring, evaluation, reporting and institutions have learning in the field of land-use planning. 1 -- There are some mechanisms for monitoring, evaluation, reporting and effective internal The only obvious monitor is the fact that learning but they are limited and weak; mechanisms for plans are made public and their quality can 1 2 -- Reasonable mechanisms for monitoring, evaluation, reporting and monitoring, be judged. learning are in place but are not as strong or comprehensive as they could evaluation, be; reporting and 3 -- Institutions have effective internal mechanisms for monitoring, learning evaluation, reporting and learning 5.4 Individuals 0 -- There is no measurement of performance or adaptive feedback; There is no known assessment of capacity or working in land know-how in response to changing 1 -- Performance is irregularly and poorly measured and there is little use use management government policies or changing of feedback; 1 institutions are circumstances. However, a core of good 2 -- There is significant measurement of performance and some feedback adaptive and planners does exist. but this is not as thorough or comprehensive as it might be; continue to learn 3 -- Performance is effectively measured and adaptive feedback utilized
5.2 Land use management institutions are highly adaptive, responding effectively and immediately to change 0 -- Institutions resist change; 1 -- Institutions do change but only very slowly; 2 -- Institutions tend to adapt in response to change but not always very effectively or with some delay; 3 -- Institutions are highly adaptive, responding effectively and immediately to change 1 Regulations and procedures are only slowly updated and are not accommodating the dynamics of variables that drive land uses 5.3 Land use management institutions have effective internal mechanisms for monitoring, evaluation, reporting and learning 0 -- There are no mechanisms for monitoring, evaluation, reporting or learning; 1 -- There are some mechanisms for monitoring, evaluation, reporting and learning but they are limited and weak; 2 -- Reasonable mechanisms for monitoring, evaluation, reporting and learning are in place but are not as strong or comprehensive as they could be; 3 -- Institutions have effective internal mechanisms for monitoring, evaluation, reporting and learning 1 There are no explicit mechanisms for monitoring, evaluation, reporting and learning in the field of land-use planning. The only obvious monitor is the fact that plans are made public and their quality can be judged. 5.4 Individuals working in land use management institutions are adaptive and continue to learn 0 -- There is no measurement of performance or adaptive feedback; 1 -- Performance is irregularly and poorly measured and there is little use of feedback; 2 -- There is significant measurement of performance and some feedback but this is not as thorough or comprehensive as it might be; 3 -- Performance is effectively measured and adaptive feedback utilized 1 There is no known assessment of capacity or know-how in response to changing government policies or changing circumstances. However, a core of good planners does exist.
PIMS%204587%20Jordan%20Tourism%20Mainstreaming%20Prodoc%20final%201%205%202013%20revised%20funds%20summary%2011%207%202013.docx