Get documents about "Evaluation Report Sample Outline
Document Sample
i
MADAGASCAR
MINISTRY OF ENVIRONMENT, OF WATERS AND FORESTS
TERMINAL EVALUATION
UNDP/GEF UNDP/TRAC COMPONENTS
MADAGASCAR SECOND ENVIRONMENTAL PROGRAM
MAG/96/G31 & MAG/97/003 PROJECTS
Antananarivo, July – August 2003
ii
LIST OF ACRONYMS
AGERAS Appui à la Gestion Régionale et à l'Approche Spatiale
AGEX Agence d'Exécution
AGIR Appui à la Gestion de l'Environnement à travers des Instruments Régionalisés
ANAE Association Nationale d‟Actions Environnementales
ANGAP Association Nationale pour la Gestion des Aires Protégées
CAPE Composante d‟Appui aux Aires Protégées
CFE Comité de Fonds pour l'Environnement
CFSIGE Centre de Formation aux Sciences de l'Information Géographique et de l'Environnement
CIME Comité Interministériel sur l'Environnement
CGP Coordination Générale des Projets
CI Conservation International
COS Comité d‟Orientation et de Suivi
CNE Comité Natonal pour l'Environnement
CNRE Centre National de la Recherche sur l'Environnement
CTD Comité Territorial Décentralisé
CRADES Comité Régional d'Appui au Développement Economique et Social de la région DIANA
DAP1,2,3 Document d'Appui au Programme 1,2,3
DGE Direction Générale de l'Environnement
DGEF Direction Générale des Eaux et Forêts
DGEP Direction Générale de l'Elevage et de la Pêche
DIREEF Direction Interrégionale de l'Environnement , des Eaux et Forêts
DSRP Document de Stratégie pour la Réduction de la Pauvreté
EAP Environnemental Action Plan
EIS Environnemental Impact Study
EMC Environnement Marin et Côtier
ENP Environmental National Policy
EP I, II, III Environmental Program, phases 1, 2, and 3
FID Fonds d'Intervention pour le Développement
FIDA Fonds International pour le Développement Agricole
FOFIFA Foibe Fikarohana momban'ny Fampandrosoana
FORAGE Fonds Régional d'Appui à la Gestion de l'Environnement
FTM National Geographic Institute
GEF Global Environment Facility
GELOSE Gestion Locale Sécurisée des Ressources Naturelles Renouvelables
GIS Geographic Information System
GIZC Gestion Intégré des Zones Côtières
GTDR Groupe de Travail pour le développement Rural
IFAD International Fund for Agricultural Development
ITF Interimary Trust Funds
IUCN The World Conservation Union
JIRAMA Jiro sy Rano Malagasy ( Electricité et Eaux de Madagascar )
KFW Kreditanstalt Fur Wiederaufbau
MDS Multi-Donor Secretariat
MECIE Mise En Compatibilité des Investissements avec l'Environnement
MGHC
MINENVEF Ministère de l'Environnement, des Eaux et Forêts
MIRAY Name of USAID funded project implemented by a Consortium of Pact, CI and WWF
ME Monitory and Evaluation
NEAP National Environmental Action Plan
NEX National Exécution
NGO Non-Governmental Organisation
ONE Office National pour l‟Environnement
OP Operational Program
OSF Observatoire du Secteur Forestier
PA Protected Area
PAGE Programme d‟Appui à la Gestion de l‟Environnement
PAGS Plan d'Aménagement et de Gestion Simplifiée
PAIR
PCD Plan Communal de Développement
iii
PIIGE Politique, Instrument, Information pour la Gestion de l'Environnement
POLFOR/GTZ Projet "Appui à la mise en oeuvre de la Politique Forestière " financé par la Coopération Allemande
PSDR Programme de Soutien au Développement Rural
PTA Plan de Travail Annuel
REF Biodiversité Recherche Environnementale Finalisée sur la Biodiversité
SAGE Services d‟Appui à la Gestion de l‟Environnement
SILK
SNRM Sustainable Natural Resource Management
TVA Taxe sur les Valeurs Ajoutées
TELMA Telecom Malagasy
UNDP United Nations Development Program
UNOX United Nations
USAID U.S. Agency for International Development
UTR Unité Technique Régionale
VOI Local Base Communities
WCS Wildlife Conservation Society
WWF World Wide Fund for Nature / World Wildlife Fund (US)
WB The World Bank
iv
Table of contents
Executive summary ............................................................................................................. vi
1 Introduction ..................................................................................................................... 1
1.1 Purpose and scope of the evaluation ................................................................................. 2
1.2 Methodology of the evaluation ......................................................................................... 2
2 The program and its development context ...................................................................... 3
2.1 Program start and duration ................................................................................................ 3
2.2 Problems that the second phase of the Environment Program seeks to address ............... 3
2.3 Immediate and development objectives ............................................................................ 4
2.4 Major stakeholders ............................................................................................................ 4
2.5 Beneficiaries ..................................................................................................................... 5
2.6 Expected and Observed Results ........................................................................................ 5
3 Findings and Conclusions ............................................................................................... 7
3.1 Project Formulation........................................................................................................... 7
3.1.1 Country ownership/Driveness .................................................................................. 7
Consistency with national environmental and development agenda, and with
national/sectoral development plans .................................................................. 7
Outcomes incorporation into national and sector development plans .................................. 8
Involvement of country representatives in project identification/planning/implementation 8
Government commitment to the program............................................................................. 8
3.1.2 Implementation approach ......................................................................................... 9
Logical framework ............................................................................................................... 9
Project adaptation to changing conditions .......................................................................... 10
Partnerships in implementation arrangement ..................................................................... 10
Changes in project design ................................................................................................... 10
Overall project management ............................................................................................... 11
Adequacy of the intervention strategy ................................................................................ 12
3.1.3 Stakeholder participation / Public involvement ...................................................... 12
Information dissemination .................................................................................................. 12
Consultation and stakeholder participation in the design, implementation and evaluation of
program activities ............................................................................................. 13
Stakeholder participation .................................................................................................... 13
Partnership development between various program stakeholders ...................................... 13
Compliance with commitments towards local stakeholders and involvement of
stakeholders...................................................................................................... 13
Consulting and seeking for experience, NGOs, community groups, public and private
sectors knowledge and skills, and the academic institutions for conception,
implementation and assessment of the project activities ................................. 14
3.1.4 Potential for replication .......................................................................................... 14
Knowledge transfer............................................................................................................. 14
Expansion of demonstration project ................................................................................... 14
Capacity building................................................................................................................ 15
3.1.5 Cost effectiveness ................................................................................................... 16
Compliance with the incremental cost criteria ................................................................... 16
3.1.6 Linkages between project and other interventions within the sector ...................... 16
Partnership strategy ............................................................................................................ 16
3.2 Implementation ............................................................................................................... 18
3.2.1 Financial Planning .................................................................................................. 18
v
Actual cost by activity ........................................................................................................ 18
Financial management ........................................................................................................ 19
Quality of financial controls, including reporting, and planning ........................................ 20
GEF grant and co-financing ............................................................................................... 20
3.2.2 Monitoring and evaluation...................................................................................... 21
Quality of initial M&E plan................................................................................................ 21
Effectiveness of implementation ........................................................................................ 22
Quality and use of relevant impact indicators .................................................................... 22
Lessons learned for the design and implementation of other similar M&E systems .......... 22
3.3 Results ............................................................................................................................. 23
3.3.1 Attainment of objectives ......................................................................................... 23
Development objectives ..................................................................................................... 23
Immediate objectives .......................................................................................................... 24
3.3.2 Sustainability .......................................................................................................... 25
Establishment of financial and economic instruments and mechanisms to maintain benefits
beyond GEF assistance .................................................................................... 25
Development of policy and regulatory frameworks that further the project objectives ..... 25
Incorporation of environmental and ecological factors affecting future flow of benefits .. 26
Development of appropriate institutional capacities .......................................................... 26
3.3.3 Raising awareness amongst stakeholders for biodiversity and environment
sustainable management ......................................................................................... 27
Achieving social sustainability by mainstreaming project activities into the economy or
community production activities ...................................................................... 27
Achieving stakeholders consensus regarding courses of actions on project activities ....... 27
3.3.4 Contribution to upgrading skills of the national staff ............................................. 27
4 Recommendations ......................................................................................................... 28
4.1 Corrective actions for the design, implementation, monitoring and evaluation of the
project............................................................................................................................ 28
5 Lessons learned ............................................................................................................. 30
vi
Executive summary
1. Introduction
An independent evaluation of the UNDP supported components of the second phase of the
Madagascar environmental program (EP II) was conducted by an independent team composed of
an international consultant and a national counterpart, commissioned by the UNDP Country
Office in Madagascar. The present document presents the key findings of their evaluation.
The Environmental Program was elaborated to implement the national Environmental Action
Plan in three phases over a period of 15 years. The EP II, executed from 1997 to 2003, had
adopted a program approach and was multi-donor funded. The total budget envelope for EP II
was 150 000 000 USD. UNDP contributed to EP II with its own resources (TRAC:
1 626 448 USD) and with GEF funds (8 000 000 USD).
The development objectives of the EP II, according to the Staff Appraisal Report – Madagascar
Second Environment Program (World Bank, 1996) which applies for EP II, as a whole are: i)
reverse current environmental degradation trends and promote sustainable use of natural
resources, including soil, water, forest cover, and biodiversity, ii) create conditions for
environmental considerations to become an integral part of macroeconomic and sectoral
management in Madagascar.
The immediate objectives of the UNDP supported components were initially formulated as:
1. Sustainable development and management of the marine and coastal areas.
2. Regional planning and local management of natural resources
3. Environmental Research / Biodiversity inventory and market-oriented biodiversity sustainable
exploitation
4. Elaboration and communication of environmental policies, strategies and instruments.
In February 2002, UNDP support was restructured. The first development objective of EP II was
recrafted, referring to “reducing” instead of “reversing” current environmental degradation trends.
Immediate objectives were reformulated as follows:
1. Integrated approaches for sustainable development are adopted by the population through the
integration of the environmental concerns in the design of regional, inter-communal and
communal development plans.
2. Marine and coastal ecosystems potentialities are managed in a sustainable manner.
3. Policies, instruments, and information for an integrated environmental management are
elaborated and implemented.
UNDP/GEF initially provided support to three operational EP II components: Support to regional
management and spatial approaches (AGERAS); Environmental applied research / Market-
oriented sustainable utilisation of biodiversity (REF/Biodiversité); Marine and coastal
environment (EMC). UNDP (TRAC funds) provided support to the reinforcement of the
institutional and legal framework for the marine and coastal environment, and therefore in
support of the operational EMC component. After the reorganization of EP II in 2002,
GEF/UNDP support was programmed into institutional and operational components, including
the operational activities of the three previous components and of another one, called GELOSE
(transfer of resource management rights to local communities). The institutional component refers
to “Environmental Policy, Instruments, and Information” and remained under the execution of
ONE (National Environment Office).
vii
The mandate of the AGERAS component was to provide support to the development of a
decentralized, multi-level participatory planning process (regional or inter-communal, communal,
and local base communities) integrating environmental concerns into planning and using
geographic/spatial planning tools. The mandate of the Biodiversity component included
environmental research and biodiversity inventories, the development of policy and legal
instruments for biodiversity and the commercial/market development of biodiversity products.
The EMC component was created to develop methods for the management of coastal zone
resources, for supporting participatory planning for marine and coastal pilot areas and for
reinforcing national policies and strategies for coastal zone management. The GELOSE
component related to the implementation of a new law enabling transfers of natural renewable
resource management rights to local communities.
2. Ouputs
Elaboration of a national policy and strategies:
Finalisation of the national biodiversity strategy
National strategy for integrated management of coastal and marine resources
National policy for the sustainable development of the coastal zone and
implementation of legal texts
Framework and strategy for sustainable development and management of the coastal
zone
Small island management strategy
Strategy for the creation of marine and coastal protected areas
Elaboration of legal texts:
Intellectual property rights for biodiversity prospecting law (submitted)
Application decree of the Environmental Charter relating to the National policy for
the sustainable development of the coastal zone
Elaboration of management plans for specific resources or issues:
Three pilot models of coastal zone development and management plans
Pilot model of no-take zones for reef fisheries (3 voluntary marine reserves)
Local management plans for: Mangroves, Tourism, Pollution reduction and
prevention
Models for the management of pastures, fishery resources, and forest resources
Participatory process for environmental management:
Transfer of renewable natural resources management rights to local communities (
Creation, development of capacities and/or support to multi-level participatory
planning structures (18 regional or inter-communal, communal, and local base
communities) integrating environmental issues with economic and social
development
Elaboration of PCDs (77 Communal development plans)
Elaboration of inter-communal or regional priority programs to address territorial
environmental questions (15 completed plans)
Development of tools and guides for:
the transfer of natural resources management rights,
the elaboration of PCD and “green” PCD;
the elaboration of simplified planning and management plans.
Pilot approaches to market-oriented sustainable utilisation of biological resources outside
protected areas:
Production of native silk based on the conservation of an endemic forest species, tapia
(Uapacea bojeri) and the re-introduction of an endemic silkworm (Bombyx
madagascariensis);
viii
Management of raffia (Raphia ruffa) palm stands based on sustainable harvest
techniques and respect for market quality standards;
Sustainable use and marketing of traditional herbal medicines.
Information system:
Development of a biodiversity database on commercially useful species (250
species);
Biodiversity inventories for the western dry forest (Mikea forest), two eastern
rainforest corridors, raffia palms
3. Development of the national institutional capacity in the field of participatory
environmental management
Initially, the National Environment Office (ONE) was the executing agency of EP II. The creation
in January 2002 of the NGO SAGE (Service d’Appui à la Gestion de l’Environnement) resulted
from the fusion of the operational elements of four (4) components that were previously under the
management of ONE. The fusion of the components into SAGE stimulated the process of
transferring natural resource management rights to local communities and increased its visibility
through its integration with marine and coastal management systems and sustainable biodiversity
market development activities, based on participatory planning. This institution functions as a
decentralised structure with one central unit and six regional technical units, allowing a better
interaction with field operations.
The team is competent, dynamic and highly motivated to move forward. It gathers professionals
from diverse horizons covering a range of management disciplines. In a very short time, SAGE
has reached a high level of maturity which is demonstrated by their recent initiative to undertake
an in-depth business planning process to assure the future of the organization within and beyond
the time frame of the environmental program.
The development of national institutional capacities such as SAGE‟s promotes the appropriation
by the country of its own development, the development of Malagasy institutional memory and
increases the benefits from projects experiences. However, SAGE was initially created without a
clear vision of its role on the national scene in the environment field and without a clear
indication of the timeframe to reach its financial and operational autonomy. Until now, SAGE
was fully supported by EPII funds; there is a need to diversify the funding base, and assure the
continuation of current operations relying on SAGE expertise. Before the end of EP II support,
SAGE must complete a detailed business plan clearly clarifying its long term intervention niche
based on its specific strengths and expertise, in order to assure its long term institutional
sustainability.
4. Evaluation of objectives achievement
4.1 Development objectives
i) Reverse current environmental degradation trends and promote sustainable use
of natural resources, including soil, water, forest cover, and biodiversity (rating:
satisfactory)
The EP II has succeeded in slowing down ecosystem degradation trends and biodiversity loss
therefore contributing significantly to the achievement of this development objective. This is
clearly illustrated by four studies1 comparing the rates of change of forest cover inside and
1
Hawkins and Horning, 2001. Forest cover change in USAID and control areas – A preliminary evaluation and report to USAID and
partners. PAGE/USGS. 21 p.; FTM. 2001. Rapport sur l‟évolution de la couverture végétale et l‟incidence du tavy. Programme
Environnemental Phase 2. 74 p. ; ONE. 2001. Incidence du tavy dans les zones cibles. Rapport de synthèse. Évaluation du PE2
de la cellule de coordination ONE. 17 p. ; ANGAP. 2001. Incidence du tavy sur les aires protégées.
ix
outside EP II intervention zones, or inside and outside protected areas, using Landsat images
between 1993 (or 1994) and 2000. The results of these studies are coherent and indicate that the
annual rate of forest loss outside protected areas or outside EP II intervention areas is twice, or
more, the rate of forest loss within EP II intervention areas. This is a strong evidence that EP II
has globally contributed to the reduction of threats to biodiversity, although a more focused
approach would have increased the visibility of the results and made them more tangible.
One of the most powerful effects of the EPII lies with the contractual transfer of renewable
natural resources management rights to local communities throughout the country. These
transfers of management rights are initiated on demand from local populations. Where carefully
structured, and with accompanying capacity building support, the transfers have resulted in the
removal of the heaviest pressures on ecosystems (deforestation, tavy fires, bush fires, destructive
fishing practices, etc) and in the rehabilitation of degraded sites (reforestation), as agreed with
local communities in their contract. Such positive effects have been observed in most sites visited
by the Evaluation Team, slowing environmental degradation trends. They result from the local
communities‟ good will to take the responsibility to preserve the natural resources within their
territory, based on their understanding of their dependence upon these resources or of the services
they provide. This behaviour and attitudinal change is also a prime result of EPII as well as the
inversion of the environmental management approach from repression to enticement. In various
sites, transfers of management rights have been accompanied by market-oriented biodiversity
utilisation support, which has reinforced the population‟s motivation for resource conservation.
However, the sustainability of these results may be jeopardized in some cases or by certain
weaknesses that should be addressed in the next phase of the Environment Program:
when transfers are not linked to a process allowing the generation of revenues for the local
communities;
when the planning of transfers of management rights does not adequately take into account
local populations needs, subsistence requirements and especially, their motivations to
preserve their resource endowment;
by insufficient integration of basic information on biological parameters that determine the
sustainable productive capacity of a resource and, in turn, the sustainable level of revenue
based on the exploitation or use of that resource;
by limited capacity at the local level for the enforcement of regulations and dina (local rules)
relative to restricted or forbidden collection over large or distant territories (ex. large forests
or mangroves);
by limited capacity for the determination of sustainable exploitation levels or carrying
capacity, including knowledge base on the biology and state of resources.
EP II has raised much awareness amongst local communities on the opportunities and benefits
provided by the sustainable use of natural resources, especially through the process of transferring
management rights. According to interviewed local populations, the relative long-term presence
of the environmental mediators involved in the GELOSE process (transfers of natural resources
management rights) and trained by SAGE, has been a critical factor in raising awareness and
building their trust in the process.
ii) Create conditions for environmental considerations to become an integral part
of macroeconomics and sectoral management in Madagascar (rating:
satisfactory)
EP II has contributed to the creation of favourable framework conditions for the integration of
environmental issues with economic and social development, through the elaboration of
participatory planning tools and structures, guidelines for the elaboration of “green” communal
development plans, and legal tools (application decrees for the GELOSE law (No 96/025) for the
management rights transfer to local communities have been developed. Laws on intellectual
x
property rights and on access to natural resources and equitable benefit sharing have been
drafted). The positive effect of reducing threats to biodiversity has been enabled by the
development of an institutional and legal framework, a great contribution towards sustainable
environmental management.
4.2 Immediate objectives
Objective 1. Approaches for sustainable development integrating environmental concerns in the
design of regional, inter-communal and communal development plans are adopted by the
population. (rating: satisfactory)
The development of participatory planning structures ranging from local to regional levels is
contributing to the promotion of good governance in environmental management in Madagascar.
It had the strong result of creating a new dynamic enabling the integration of individual
environmental initiatives and motivated people into global environmental action plans. These
structures allow the emergence of synergies amongst various stakeholders to increase the impact
of their actions, and to find consensual solutions to resource use conflicts. Their impact is
particularly important, as they are serving as structures to hold government civil servants
accountable for their actions, since poor governance is one of the greatest threats to biodiversity
conservation. The program contributed to the capacity building of 338 local base communities
(EMC and AGERAS combined) and enabled the creation of 117 participatory planning
structures, which were involved in the design of 18 priority regional or inter-communal
development plans designed to bring solutions to major environmental problems.
Still, the representative quality of some of these structures is somewhat lowered by the
insufficient participation of women, and non-systematic and inadequate representation of the
local populations directly concerned by the sustainable use of the resources, in a few higher level
structures.
Objective 2. Marine and coastal ecosystems potentialities are managed in a sustainable manner.
(rating: satisfactory)
The attribution of the rating reflects the successful achievements of this component and the
pertinence of the approach that was adopted for the elaboration of the policy and strategies, rather
than the effective achievement of the objective. As stated, the objective implies that a legal tool
such as the “National Policy for the sustainable development of the coastal zone” should not only
be validated by stakeholders, but that it should be ratified by governmental authorities and
implemented through the Coastal Zone Management Plan. The attainment of this objective does
not rely solely on the program performance but requires lobbying efforts and political will to
ensure the document is properly supported for its adoption, which requires the integrated efforts
of different sectors including the ministries in charge of fisheries, environment, tourism, and
transportation.
This component has successfully elaborated strategies, a national policy, and instruments, using a
broad, field-based participatory approach, and through national and regional workshops.
However, the implementation of these tools in the field could not be fully realized due to a lack of
synergy between the ministries in charge of the environment and of fisheries, in the context of the
EP II. In particular, the National policy for the sustainable development of the coastal zone could
not be put into action as the policy has not yet been adopted. This policy did not seem to be a
priority for the responsible ministry, as it did not provide the level of effort required to ensure that
the file is submitted to the Government and adopted by the Parliament. This likely caused the
delay rather than a low performance of the EMC component. This situation illustrates the need for
a dynamic awareness raising campaign aimed specifically towards governmental authorities.
xi
The mini-projects were successful as a demonstration of what could be achieved through
participatory planning and working together, therefore raising awareness and acting as incentives
to foster the involvement of base communities in participatory planning and to promote
management rights transfers.
Marine and coastal resources have been the object of management rights transfers to local
communities. This has the potential to reduce overexploitation and use of destructive fishing
practices.
The attainment of this objective has been slowed down by some factors, other than the ones
referred to previously, that the EMC team had to overcome. Since the marine and coastal zone
component was not part of the EP1, the team had to develop and establish its bases with the
communities. Also, the marine and coastal inventories were not completed due to the poor
performance and break of the contract of the international consultant that had been selected for
this activity. Therefore, the database that should have served as a basis for the design of the other
activities and the identification of priority sites was never developed. However, this problem was
by-passed as the team used data collected in the context of a previous project and organized
national workshops with all the stakeholders to determine the marine and coastal eco-regions and
their biodiversity, pressures, potentialities, and trends. The identification of sensitive sites was
based on empirical knowledge of the pressures on the marine and coastal ecosystems, but
remained non-documented.
Objective 3. Policies, instruments, and information for an integrated environmental management
are elaborated and implemented. (rating: satisfactory)
National strategies and policy, instruments, and information for integrated environmental
management have been developed as stated above, for the marine and coastal environment
component, participatory planning, and management rights transfers to local communities. Legal
tools such as management rights transfer contracts, are accessible (in terms of readability) and
clear in terms of communities‟ rights and responsibilities which favour their adoption by local
populations. The delay in the implementation of the legal framework developed by the EMC
component is due to a lack of consensus amongst technicians over a few particular issues, added
to the 6 month suspension of activities caused by the political crisis in 2002, and is not imputable
to EP II performance.
5. Issues to be addressed for the next phase
Further integration of the biodiversity component (presence of endemic, rare, or threatened
species and of critical or unique ecosystems) into the elaboration of documents relative to
natural resources management, i.e. sous-programmes, “green” communal development plans,
contracts for the transfer of management rights, and local communities cahiers de charges.
The creation of a new institution should include a strategic vision of its development, through
its integration into national structures at the end of the program support, or through the
elaboration of a strategy to develop its autonomy. A specific component of the program
should concern capacity development of SAGE, to ensure that the organization is able to
fulfill its role or mandate, and is autonomous in pursuing its operations at the end of the
program. Therefore, SAGE should get a specific support to complete a strategic planning
exercise before the end of EPII, and elaborate a strategy to reach its operational and financial
autonomy in the course of EPIII.
Starting, as early as possible, the National Capacity Self-Assessment for global environmental
management, in order to take into account these results coupled to SAGE‟s strategic planning
xii
exercise results, to optimise capacity building/development efforts and use of existing ones
for EPIII.
Carrying out socio-economic studies in the villages requesting management transfers in order
to know precisely the communities‟ motivations to preserve and manage their natural
endowment; based on the results of these studies and according to the objectives pursued in
the transfer of management rights to communities, identify the most appropriate management
approaches, i.e. spatial planning or resource management or a combination of both; support
the development of capacities needed to elaborate and implement resource management
measures, in particular where resources are subjected to intensive use or commercial
exploitation.
Consolidation and reinforcement of the knowledge base on biodiversity, including data
underlying the elaboration of measures for the sustainable management of renewable natural
resources, i.e. knowledge of the biological characteristics of used or exploited species; habitat
requirements; status, size, and distribution of the population in the management area in
relation to the national species distribution, calculation of maximum sustainable yield or
exploitation levels. In this view, initiatives aiming to repatriate databases on Madagascar
biodiversity to Madagascar should be supported.
Management rights transfers of some resources, fisheries for instance, are conditioned by the
obligation to collect simple data on production and effort, which will eventually provide the
necessary information base to elaborate sustainable management models for these fisheries.
Local populations that benefit from natural resources management rights transfers should be
involved in the collection of simple statistics and data on the used or exploited resources, in
order to gather the required information to develop recommendations for their utilisation to
ensure a constant, sustainable provision of resources to the local populations.
Association of national research institutions and universities as service providers for the
provision of scientific support with:
a. Monitoring the dynamics of the ecosystems concerned by the transfer of management
rights to communities and for which the reduction of pressures could involve
significant modifications to the ecological equilibrium (Arivonimamo tapia forest
example: vegetation regeneration, double flowering cycle, increase of vulnerability to
parasites and disease following cessation of fires, predator (bird) population increase
following the reintroduction of silkworms, …)
b. Acquiring the biological data required for the elaboration of sustainable management
measures based on the determination of sustainable exploitation levels for the natural
resources underlying the development of market-oriented biodiversity exploitations
linked to management right transfers to populations. These sustainable exploitation
thresholds must serve as a basis for economic feasibility studies of such
exploitations.
c. Searching for solutions in response to emerging problems that could put at risk the
sustainability of the resources supporting the market-oriented exploitation (ex.: A
disease is affecting silkworms, inhibiting the growth before the reach of the chrysalis
stage, thus preventing the mechanical separation of the silk cocoon).
Improve and increase monitoring efforts in order to:
a. in terms of project management, measure effectively the level of advancement of the
project towards the attainment of RESULTS (outcomes and impacts), not only on the
realization of activities based on target levels;
b. follow the evolution of the socio-economic situation for the communities involved in
the management rights transfers;
xiii
c. monitor the implementation of the management measures planned in the management
rights transfer contracts;
d. measure the level of integration of the various trainings with beneficiaries and the
level of awareness developed by target audience (local communities, participatory
communal and regional structures, and government authorities);
e. follow the dynamics of the ecosystems where intense pressures have been removed,
especially where a dependence link has been promoted through management rights
transfers to local communities coupled to market-oriented biodiversity exploitation;
f. monitor natural resources status, especially for the resources that are the object of
management rights transfers and vulnerable biodiversity;
g. assess the effectiveness of natural resources management as implemented by local
communities, in the context of the management rights transfers, in order to adapt it as
the situation is evolving.
Performance analysis – 2 to 3 years after the end of EPII - of the participatory planning
structures created under EPII, including the ones participating in EPIII.
1 INTRODUCTION
An independent evaluation of the UNDP supported components of the second phase of the
Madagascar environmental program (EP II) was conducted by an independent team composed of
an international consultant and a national counterpart, commissioned by the UNDP Country
Office in Madagascar. The present document presents their evaluation.
The Environmental Program was elaborated to implement the National Environmental Action
Plan in three phases over a period of 15 years. The EP II, executed from 1997 to 2003, adopted a
program approach and was multi-donor funded. Originally, the EP II budget had been estimated
at 150 000 000 USD. UNDP contributed to EP II with its own resources (TRAC: 1 626 448 USD)
and with GEF funds (8 000 000 USD).
The development objectives of the EP II, according to the Staff Appraisal Report – Madagascar
Second Environment Program (World Bank, 1996) which applies for the entire EP II program,
are:
i) reverse current environmental degradation trends and promote sustainable use of natural
resources, including soil, water, forest cover, and biodiversity,
ii) create conditions for environmental considerations to become an integral part of
macroeconomics and sectoral management in Madagascar.
The immediate objectives of the UNDP supported components were initially formulated as:
1. Sustainable development and management of the marine and coastal areas.
2. Regional planning and local management of natural resources
3. Environmental Research / Biodiversity inventory and market-oriented biodiversity
sustainable exploitation
4. Elaboration and communication of environmental policies, strategies and instruments.
In February 2002, UNDP support was restructured, and the immediate objectives reformulated as
follows:
1. Integrated approaches for sustainable development are adopted by the population
through the integration of the environmental concerns in the design of regional, inter-
communal and communal development plans.
2. Marine and coastal ecosystems potentialities are managed in a sustainable manner.
3. Policies, instruments, and information for an integrated environmental management are
elaborated and implemented.
UNDP/GEF initially provided support to three operational EP II components: Support to regional
management and spatial approaches (AGERAS); Environmental applied research / Market-
oriented sustainable utilisation of biodiversity (REF/Biodiversité); Marine and coastal
environment (EMC). UNDP (TRAC funds) provided support to the reinforcement of the
institutional and legal framework for the marine and coastal environment, in support to the
operational EMC component. After the reorganization of EP II in 2002, GEF/UNDP support was
programmed into institutional and operational components, including the operational activities of
the three previous components and of another one, called GELOSE. The institutional component
refers to “Environmental Policy, Instruments, and Information”, called PIIGE, and remained
under the execution of ONE.
2
1.1 Purpose and scope of the evaluation
Purpose
The purpose of the terminal evaluation is to evaluate the effects of the UNDP supported
operations through GEF and UNDP funds, in order to draw lessons for the development of other
programs and projects, in Madagascar and elsewhere, and to shape the design of the third phase
of the Environment Program.
Scope
The scope of the evaluation covers both UNDP and GEF requirements for a terminal evaluation,
as well as particular questions specified in the terms of reference for the evaluation. The
evaluation applies to the results of the UNDP supported components of the program, and
comprises the following issues or fields of analysis:
1. Level of attainment of results (global environmental objectives, immediate objectives) and
progress made towards their achievement. Pertinence of results and products (project
outputs/activities).
2. Underlying factors, beyond UNDP competence, and influencing the realization of the effect
3. Strategic role and contribution of UNDP
4. Partnership strategy
5. Evaluation according to GEF Project Review Criteria: Country ownership / Driveness,
Implementation approach, , Stakeholder participation / Public involvement, Sustainability,
Replication approach, Financial planning, Cost-effectiveness, Monitoring and evaluation
The actual evaluation concerns UNDP/GEF funded initiatives of the second phase of the
Environmental Program. However, the effects observed with beneficiaries result obviously from
past and current actions taken in their locality, within EP II or any other project operating in their
locality. During the interviews, an effort was made to attempt to distinguish the UNDP-GEF/EP
II specific contribution. The evaluation complements but supercedes the internal evaluation of the
project undertaken by UNDP in September 2002.
1.2 Methodology of the evaluation
The evaluation team was formed by an international consultant, Dr Dominique Roby, natural
resources management specialist, and a national counterpart, Ms Voahangy Raolisoahanmanga,
economist, appointed by the Ministry of Environment, Water and Forest. The team meets the
independence and objectivity criteria established for independent evaluations of UNDP/ UNDP-
GEF projects as it was not involved in the design or the realization of the program components
under evaluation. The duration of the evaluation was 6 weeks.
The methodology used by the evaluation team included:
Review of program design documents (GEF and UNDP): The review was conducted against
two basic design documents. The Staff Appraisal Report – Madagascar, dated September
1996, is the basic design document for the entire EP II. The second design document is the
UNDP project document for the UNDP/GEF-funded components, referred to as DAP3. A
revised version of the DAP3 was produced to justify the 13th budgetary revision of DAP3
presenting the new context for EP II, i.e. simplification of the program and restructuring
ONE, and introducing the new institutions SAGE and PIIGE.
Review of evaluations carried out in the course of the program implementation.
Review of documents and tools produced in the context of the program.
Interviews with primary beneficiaries guided by the use of a questionnaire: base communities
and participatory planning structures – visited places are indicated in the tables summarizing
the results of these interviews, presented in Annex E.
3
Interviews with partners (Technical Directions, other executing agencies).
Meetings on the evolution of the evaluation with the UNDP program officer in charge of
environment.
Preparation of the report addressing GEF and UNDP criteria for a terminal evaluation
Presentation of the key findings of the evaluation (UNDP)
2 THE PROGRAM AND ITS DEVELOPMENT CONTEXT
2.1 Program start and duration
UNDP and GEF support to the implementation of EP II is financed through the programs
MAG/97/003 funded by UNDP (1,5 M US$) and MAG/96/G31 funded by the GEF (8 M US$).
The program document « UNDP/GEF support for EP II implementation » was signed in August
1997 and activities effectively started early 1998. The duration of the project was planned from
September 1997 to June 2002. The closing date was later postponed till December 2003 for
UNDP supported components.
2.2 Problems that the second phase of the Environment Program seeks to
address
Poverty and the low level of agriculture technology (slash-and-burn agriculture or tavy) are the
main causes of natural resources degradation, underpinning the chain of deforestation, vegetation
fires, soil erosion and loss of fertility. The very close bond between rural communities and the
resources leads to an impact all the more direct of the changes on either part. A traditional land
tenure system prevails in the rural areas and, in spite of its legitimacy, does not give populations
formal usage rights, which results in an open access situation. The process of ecosystem
degradation is further accelerated by the absence of spatial and resource management systems and
capacities.
Madagascar designed a National Environmental Action Plan (EAP) in 1988 with the support of a
group of donors in order to address this situation. The Environmental Charter elaborated in 1990
presents the objectives and the strategy of this EAP. The EP is designed to implement the EAP, in
three phases over 15 years. The plan is based on the basic principle of participation and fosters an
integrated approach to the resolution of environmental problems. At its inception, the country did
not have the necessary institutional framework to deal with environmental issues and programs,
and conservation initiatives were mostly led by international NGOs, with little active Government
involvement. The formal management framework, codified in policies and legislation, where they
existed (and often inherited from the colonial powers) was highly centralized, but with little
capacity for enforcement. As a result, the EP I was developed with a large external input. The
first phase had two objectives: establishing a proper policy, regulatory and institutional
framework to implement the Environment Action Plan, and carry out actions of an urgent nature
focused on halting critical environmental degradation in priority sites. The GEF did not contribute
funding to EP I.
To fully elaborate the conservation lessons learned in EP I, the GEF financed a participatory
process for the design of the Second Environment Support Program (EP II). A scientific priority-
setting workshop was convened to this end involving a number of Madagascar conservation
specialists. They identified priority areas for 8 species groups, historical patterns of habitat loss
and current human pressures, and in the process reconfirmed the urgent need to take and sustain
action to preserve Madagascar‟s biodiversity. The key findings were then presented to the
stakeholders to evaluate possible solutions, institutional needs and conservation approaches.
4
These consultations revealed the need to work with communities to manage forests and develop a
decentralized approach to solve environmental problems.
2.3 Immediate and development objectives
The Development objective of the EPII according to the Staff Appraisal Report was to: i) reverse
current environmental degradation trends and promote sustainable use of natural resources
including soil, water, forest cover, and biodiversity, ii) create conditions for environmental
considerations to become an integral part of macroeconomic and sectoral management in
Madagascar
The Development objective of the EPII according to Madagascar Support Program DAP3 is
formulated as follows: Natural resources and environmental sustainable management, based on a
decentralized, community participatory approach.
Immediate Objectives of the Program
The immediate objectives of the UNDP supported components were initially formulated as:
1. Sustainable development and management of the marine and coastal areas.
2. Regional planning and local management of natural resources
3. Environmental Research / Biodiversity inventory and market-oriented biodiversity
sustainable exploitation
4. Elaboration and communication of environmental policies, strategies and instruments.
In March 2001, UNDP support was restructured and a global logical framework elaborated. The
development objective was adjusted to refer to “reducing” instead of “reversing” current
degradation trends, and the immediate objectives were reformulated as follows:
1. Integrated approaches for sustainable development are adopted by the population
through the integration of the environmental concerns in the design of regional, inter-
communal and communal development plans.
2. Marine and coastal ecosystems potentialities are managed in a sustainable manner.
3. Policies, instruments, and information for an integrated environmental management are
elaborated and implemented.
2.4 Major stakeholders
EP II was designed to take a programmatic approach to technical implementation and financial
allocations. The program was implemented through partnerships between national and
international institutions, including Government Departments, NGO‟s and the donor community.
International technical and financial partners: World Bank, French Cooperation, USAID,
WWF, CI, CARE International, GTZ, EU, KFW, SILK, WCS, FIDA
UNDP implementation agencies : FAO, UNOPS, ONE/SAGE, UNESCO
Institutional partners:
The Ministry of Environment (now the Ministry of Environment, and Water and
Forest) is the supervision authority
National Environment Office (ONE) is the executing agency of the program
Technical Directions in charge of natural resources management (particularly DGEF and
DGEP) at the national and regional levels.
Decentralized territorial entities: Autonomous provinces, Fivondrona, Communes
All PNAE executing agencies and EP operators (WWF, CI, WCS…).
Participatory planning structures at the regional (GTDR, Regional Development
Committee or other), communal (Communal Development Committee, Communal
5
participatory planning/development structures) and local levels (base communities,
V.O.I.)
Private sector: private operators in the sector of biodiversity resources development
(medicinal plants, spiny lobster, aromatic plants, ecotourism operators).
Other projects / programs:
UNDP: Poverty reduction program and promotion of sustainable livelihood (DAP 2) and
Governance Program and public policy for sustainable human development (DAP 1)
Rural Development Support Program (PADR) and (PSDR)
2.5 Beneficiaries
Primary beneficiaries are the base rural communities as they are users and dependent on
renewable natural resources for their livelihood.
Indirect beneficiaries
Other groups have benefited from the program activities : Decentralized territorial entities (ex.
Regional environmental information system) ; participatory planning structures ( ex. capacity
building) ; the private sector through the organization of market-oriented sustainable
biodiversity exploitation ; other projects/programs due to a increased synergy between actions
allowing substantial savings and stronger impact, and job creation for consulting services and
national and international NGOs through the mandates given for the realization of activities in
the context of EP II.
2.6 Expected and Observed Results
Table 1. Logical framework used for the realization of the GEF/UNDP components of EP II
The following table summarizes the expected and observed results against the specific objectives
defined before and after the restructuring of EP II in March 2001.
Specific Specific Objectives Expected results Observed Results
Objectives since March 2001
before March
2001
SO1. Objective 1. - Research and studies on - Marine and coastal resources inventory is
Management and Marine and coastal the marine and coastal available for 8 regions
sustainable ecosystems zone are conducted
development of potentialities are - Management plans of - Models of coastal zone development and
the coastal and managed in a the pilot sites are management plans elaborated and
marine zones in sustainable way elaborated implemented in the 3 pilot zones of the
the pilot zones of program (Toliara, Nosy Be and
Toliara, Nosy Be Toamasina)
and Toamasina. - Prevention plan and feasibility study for
marine pollution observatories in the
Toliara zone elaborated
- 4 marine and coastal - An action plan for the creation of 4
protected areas are marine and coastal protected areas is
established elaborated
- Feasibility study for the creation of 5
MCPA achieved of which 3 are validated
- Development mini- - 11 mini-projects (dune fixation,
projects are carried out mangrove reforestation in most mangrove
in the pilot zones sites in Nosy-Be and in one site in
Toliara, hills and islet reforestation in
Nosy-Be and Toliara)
6
Specific Specific Objectives Expected results Observed Results
Objectives since March 2001
before March
2001
- Human capacities for - 75 structures reinforced and mobilized (1
renewable natural national working group, 2 regional
resources sustainable working groups, 5 inter-communal
management are structures, 10 communal structures, 80
reinforced and official local structures, 10 informal local
mobilized in the 3 pilot structures)
zones
SO2. Regional Objective 2. - Tools, methodologies - 26 sous-programmes are elaborated over
planning and Integrated sustainable and mechanisms for an the eco-regions of the country
natural resources development approaches eco-regional planning of - Contribution to the elaboration of PCD
local management are adopted by the the sustainable use of and green PCD guide
population through the natural resources are
integration of tested and implemented
environmental concerns with operational
in the design of participatory planning
development plans and structures
regional, inter- - Regional sous- - 18 priority sous-programmes are
communal and programmes including implemented by the participatory
communal management « green » development planning structures and their local
schemes. plans are elaborated and intermediates (associations, local NGOs
implemented supporting local communities)
- Regional information - 8 information systems accessible to
systems are established participatory planning structures are in
and operational as place and operational
decision making tools
and for the monitoring
of activities
- Capacity building and - Capacity building and mobilization of 42
mobilization for participatory planning structures
sustainable management - Capacity building for 265 local base
of renewable natural communities
resources
- Contracts for renewable - 108 finalized GELOSE contracts of
natural resources which 22 are for marine and coastal
management rights resources
transfers to local
communities and to
communities are signed
and implemented
SO3. Applied - Knowledge base on - Inventories for 4 priority biodiversity
environmental biodiversity is conservation sites (Ranomafana -
research, reinforced Andringitra forest corridor, Zafimaniry,
inventories and Mikea forest, Bevoya Morondava) are
biodiversity achieved and available for the Program
valorisation and other users
- Database on biodiversity is operational
and updated; network established at
national level with NOE system
- The national monograph on biodiversity
is published
- Sustainable - Inventories for 3 target resources
management for (medicinal plants, aromatic plants, fauna
biodiversity market – reptiles and amphibians) carried out and
chains are tested and popularized with communities and in
implemented relation with private operators
7
Specific Specific Objectives Expected results Observed Results
Objectives since March 2001
before March
2001
SO4. Drawing up Objective 3. - The National Strategy - The National Strategy for a Sustainable
and Policies/ instruments/ for a Sustainable Management of Biodiversity is
communication of informations for an Management of elaborated, validated by the
environmental integrated Biodiversity and Environmental National Committee, and
policies, strategies environmental relating texts are submitted to the Government
and instruments management are elaborated - The popular version of the National
elaborated and Strategy for a Sustainable Management of
implemented Biodiversity is official and distributed
- Bills on intellectual property and the
access rights to biological resources and
equitable sharing are elaborated, validated
by the Environmental National
Committee and submitted to the
Government
- A strategy for small island management is
elaborated
- The National Policy for - A guidance document (Green paper) for a
the coastal zone sustainable development of the marine
sustainable development and coastal zones is elaborated through a
is elaborated broad participatory process and submitted
to the Government
- The national policy (White paper) for the
sustainable development of coastal zones
is elaborated and submitted to the
Government
3 FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS
3.1 Project Formulation
3.1.1 Country ownership/Driveness
(rating: satisfactory)
Consistency with national environmental and development agenda, and with national/sectoral
development plans
As the implementation tool of the Environmental Action Plan and hence of the Environmental
Charter, EP II responds well to the country environmental agenda. As it is aiming at sustainable
management of natural resources, and working in the rural area where the poorest segments of the
population live, it also suits the national strategy on poverty presented in the « Document sur la
Stratégie de Réduction de la Pauvreté (DSRP) ». Indeed, natural resources are the productive
capital of the poorest segment and majority of the Malagasy population. The regional
participatory planning activities are especially relevant to the decentralization strategy put
forward in the Economic Policy Framework Document (Document Cadre des Politiques
Économiques) in 1996.
In order to achieve the transfer of management rights to local communities, the Government has
adopted the law n° 96/025 (GELOSE). The transfer of management rights to local communities
responds to national principles established in the Environmental Charter, the Environmental
Action Plan, and the National Strategy for Sustainable Management of Biodiversity, relative to
the participation and mobilization of local base communities in the protection and management of
their own territory.
8
Outcomes incorporation into national and sector development plans
The National Forest Management Plan and the Regional Forest Programs, formalized as
provincial orders, promote the management rights transfers, the development of market-oriented
sustainable utilisation systems for components of biodiversity, and have been elaborated with the
contribution of all stakeholders, including participatory planning structures.
Involvement of country representatives in project identification/planning/implementation
As opposed to the first phase of the environmental program that was developed with an important
external input due to the lack of institutional capacity for dealing with environmental issues and
programming, the EP II was prepared by national institutions and based on a country-driven
participatory process. A project document was written with the support of 70 national and
international experts representing all stakeholders (bilateral and multilateral donors, international
and national NGOs, Government and actual executing agencies) and later submitted to national
and provincial consultations. Interactions with donors took place through the Orientation and
monitoring committee (Comité d’Orientation et de Suivi, COS) and at the time of multi-donors
missions.
Seven national executing agencies have been initially involved in the EP II implementation, of
which four are the main agencies: ANAE, ONE, ANGAP and the Water and Forests Direction,
and three support agencies: FTM, CFSIGE, and the Domains Direction. Therefore, these AGEX
include two technical directions, a national office, two NGOs, a non governmental institution
(CFSIGE) and a parapublic service (FTM). The components supported by UNDP/GEF have been
implemented by ONE before the program revision in 2002, and by SAGE, a newly created
executing agency borne of ONE, from the 2002 revision.
All of the concerned decentralized technical services, administrative and traditional authorities,
village associations, operators, NGOs and civil society are represented within the decentralized
planning structures. Communes are involved in the decentralized planning structures and as co-
signatories of management rights transfer contracts.
Government commitment to the program
The new Government that took office in July 2002 is committed to seriously addressing
governance issues in the country and has moved forward in carrying out an action plan to
improve governance and initiate institutional reforms. This plan includes the following actions:
publication of permits to increase transparency; transfer of 70% of the permit fees to the regions
to provide better incentives for law enforcement to local stakeholders; cancellation of permits
with fee payments arrears; measures to enforce fauna management rules adopted under CITES
and publication of CITES monitoring reports; introduction of GPS to better delineate permit
boundaries. Implementation of the Action Plan has been monitored by the independent Forest
Observatory, and progress reports show that conditions for better governance in the sector are
gradually being put in place. This should help overcome a major obstacle to sustainable natural
resource management and environmental protection. Also, this new Government moved rapidly
to approve the Code for Protected Areas in 2002 and to include its funding in the annual budget.
In the context of the Decentralization Policy, the Government has established communes as base
administrative entities, and requested them to elaborate development plans based on a
participatory approach. The communes must integrate environmental concerns into the design of
their own development action plans. As these communes do not have the capacities or the
resources to independently achieve this, the process has been supported by the donor community,
which has provided funding and technical assistance to develop the capacities of local
9
communities to elaborate their plans. This process took place following a demand-driven
approach.
Government financial commitment to the project: Globally, the Government has maintained its
financial commitment towards the program. However, delays in the payment of the counterpart
contribution have been encountered (of up to six months to a year).
Government approval of policies in line with the project objectives: EP II contributed to the
design and elaboration of the following strategies that have been approved by the Government:
the Strategy for sustainable management of biodiversity, the Strategy for integrated management
of coastal and marine resources, the Framework and strategy for coastal zone development and
management; the Small island management strategy, and the Strategy for the creation of marine
and coastal protected areas. However, due to a lack of synergy between the ministries in charge of
the environment and of fisheries, and the troubled political situation in 2002, the National Policy
for a sustainable development of the coastal zone has not yet been adopted by the Government,
even though the texts have been validated during a national stakeholder workshop in 2001.
3.1.2 Implementation approach
(rating: marginally satisfactory)
Logical framework
No initial logical framework was designed for the implementation of EP II in the SAR document.
A planning, monitoring and evaluation procedure manual was elaborated by the Committee for
Planning, Monitoring and Evaluation for the implementation of the program, in which 113
indicators were identified as well as the methods to evaluate impacts and results. The Committee
includes the persons in charge of Monitoring and Evaluation within each execution agency. These
indicators had been identified to account for the results of each component, without however
accounting for global program objectives. However, in the DAP3 document, separate monitoring
tools have been elaborated for each component: a logical framework with progression indicators
(i.e. looking at the realization of activities) for AGERAS, 5-year work plans for the Biodiversity
component, and annual work plans with result and progression indicators. In 1999, the EMC
component elaborated a logical framework for 2000 to 2002 integrating result and progression
indicators.
Nevertheless, based on the results of the external mid-term review, this weakness was recognized
and a major revision and restructuring of the program was elaborated by a panel of experts in
March 2001. A global logical framework for EP II was then designed to clarify, simplify, and
consolidate the implementation and monitoring systems for the various components in order to
foster the attainment of the development and immediate objectives. This logical framework
integrated outcome and output indicators and targets, including biodiversity and tavy practice
indicators for a total of 27 indicators. The planning, monitoring and evaluation procedures
manual remained the same. The CFE recommended the implementation of the new logical
framework in June 2001.
It appears that efforts were aimed at reaching these targets and progression indicators without
evaluating real outcomes or results with the primary beneficiaries. This had consequences such as
the achievement of a high number of realizations, often beyond planned targets (forest surface
covered by the transfers of management rights, number of participatory planning structures,
number of households involved in mini-projects, etc.), that were not always sufficiently carefully
planned to ensure their sustainability and desired impact.
10
Project adaptation to changing conditions
Throughout the execution of EP II, there has been a lot of changes in the external context.
Notably, at the institutional level, national institutions and donors directors have followed one
another (2 Presidents of the Republic, 2 UNDP Representatives, 2 WB Representatives, 2 USAID
Directors, 3 Ministers in charge of Environment, 3 Ministers of Waters and Forests, a succession
of province Chiefs and of Mayors at the communal level in the decentralization context). In
addition, a political and socioeconomic crisis suspended activities from January to July 2002,
stopping completely field activities, therefore causing a significant rupture in the processes in
progress with local communities. Despite the slowing down of activities due to the crisis, the
program continued its implementation owing to the stability of the implementing agencies (ONE,
ANGAP, ANAE).
Partnerships in implementation arrangement
A multi-donor secretariat involving all donors has been set up in order to represent donors that do
not have a permanent representation in the country and ensure donor coordination .This structure
is chaired on a rotating basis. The coordination of activities is ensured through monthly meetings
of the donors but also during the CFE meetings that take place every 6 months. The CFE is a
multi-donor coordination framework with the potential to improve the coordination and
integration of interventions between donor programs. However, this multi-donor approach also
resulted in a multiplicity of objectives and concepts applying specifically to each fund, which did
not necessarily served the integration and harmonization of objectives and activities. Its role is to
allocate budgets and approve work plans for the coming year. The annual work plan of each
executing agency is approved every year, as well as a consolidated work plan where each donor‟s
contribution is indicated. Also, the secretariat works jointly with ONE to prepare the CFE and a
joint report for the CFE meeting
Changes in project design
Initially, at the outset of EP II, seven executing agencies were involved in the implementation of
EP II. The ongoing evaluation process, which sought to improve performance and impact,
recommended that the regulatory functions of ONE (institutional activities related to policies
elaboration, instruments, information, and preparation of environmental impact assessments) be
separated from its service delivery and operational role (support to community management
transfers, capacity building, support to decentralized participatory planning). ONE was then
restructured into SAGE, a service delivery agency for environmental management independent
from ONE, and PIIGE which remained under the supervision of ONE. The restructuring of the
program also reduced the number of executing agencies to 4: ONE, ANGAP, ANAE and the
Ministry of Environment. The creation of SAGE allowed for a better integration of cross-cutting
components of the program (Participatory planning and local resources management) with EMC
and Biodiversity. This increased the coherence and complementarities of activities and resulted in
a greater visibility of these components results and impacts. It also served to avoid a possible
conflict of interest between capacity building and policy making.
The mid-term evaluation also recommended the elaboration of a global logical framework for EP
II, designed to clarify, simplify, and consolidate the implementation of the various components
and the monitoring of the project advancement, in order to foster the attainment of the
development and immediate objectives. The development objective was adjusted from “reverse”
to “reduce” environmental degradation trends, making this objective more realistic. Also, the
number of indicators was reduced from 113 to 27, including synthetic development indicators,
which allowed for a more efficient monitoring and evaluation of the program.
11
The COS is the committee in charge of leading the monitoring and evaluation of the program. In
2000, the COS meeting observed that forest degradation was continuing outside protected zones
and it was decided to shift the emphasis of the program intervention towards developing good
governance. In order to monitor the evolution of forests and follow the development of good
governance in this sector, an observatory of the forestry sector (OSF) was created following the
COS recommendation.
Overall project management
Various committees have been set up to achieve the overall management of this rather complex
program.
Overall program implementation was coordinated by ONE, the National Environment Office, and
by a steering committee (Comité d’Orientation et de Suivi, COS) which meeting annually, and is
composed of representatives of Government agencies, EP II executing agencies and donors.
A committee involving the Chief executives of the executing agencies was in charge of the
overall supervision of the program. This committee served as the Ministry interlocutor for
strategic decision-making regarding the program. Even though all executing agencies were
represented in this committee, this mechanism was not successful at ensuring the full
complementarity and integration of the actions of the various executing agencies. This resulted in
the duplication of some outputs of the program, for example, the design of two processes,
GELOSE and GCF, for the transfer of natural resources management rights to local populations –
or various participatory planning processes for the identification of communities‟ priorities
(AGERAS, EMC, ANAE).
A planning, monitoring and evaluation committee was in charge of harmonizing the monitoring
of each component.
A committee of the Administrative and Financial Directors was in charge of standardizing
financial management of the different executing agencies, including software, accounting, and
mobilization of funds.
From 1997 to 2001, GEF/UNDP provided support to three operational EP II components
executed by ONE: Support to regional management and spatial approaches (AGERAS);
Environmental applied research / Market-oriented biodiversity sustainable exploitation
(REF/Biodiversité); Marine and coastal environment (EMC). UNDP (TRAC funds) provided
support to the institutional and legal framework reinforcement for the marine and coastal
environment in support of the operational EMC component. After the reorganization of EP II in
2002, GEF/UNDP support was programmed into institutional and operational components,
including the operational activities of the three previous components and of another one, called
GELOSE. The institutional component refers to “Environmental Policy, Instruments, and
Information” and remained under the execution of ONE.
The mandate of the AGERAS component was to provide support to the development of a
decentralized, multi-level participatory planning process (regional or inter-communal, communal,
and local base communities) integrating environmental concerns and using geographic/spatial
planning tools. The mandate of the Biodiversity component included environmental research and
biodiversity inventories, the development of policy and legal instruments for biodiversity and the
commercial/market development of biodiversity products. The EMC component was created to
develop methods for the management of coastal zone resources, for supporting participatory
planning for marine and coastal pilot areas and for reinforcing national policies and strategies for
coastal zone management. The GELOSE component related to the implementation of a new law
enabling transfers of natural renewable resources management rights to local communities.
12
In February 2002, following the restructuring of EP II, the NGO SAGE was established out of the
operational components of ONE to provide environmental management support services to local
communities. SAGE capitalizes the experiences and objectives of the three previous components
supported by UNDP, as well as the component GELOSE. The activities related to policies,
strategies and legislation are being implemented by the component Policy, Instruments, and
Information for Environmental Management, or PIIGE/ONE.
Therefore, since February 2002, UNDP has funded a combination of SAGE and PIIGE/ONE
activities. Terms and conditions for the execution of EP II remain unchanged, and ONE remains
the implementation agency for DAP3, even though it has delegated the implementation of
operational activities to the association SAGE – FAMPANDROSOANA since February 2002.
Adequacy of the intervention strategy
The EPII intervention strategy can be summarized in a few points:
A program approach in order to stimulate coherence and development of a common vision
regarding choices and implementation means
A spatial approach for the reduction of pressures on natural and human resources
Consideration of the socio-cultural factors for sustainable management
Empowerment of the local authorities by integrating them in the program establishing
process, completion of actions as well as contributing in their needs and priorities
identification
Stimulation of the basic structures in view of the implications to local populations, private
sector and associations for projects conception, planning and management – in view of a co-
management of natural resources between operators and the communities in the peripheral
zones of protected areas
Decentralization of the means of the executing agencies by the settlement of antennas nearer
to beneficiaries. However budget and empowerment to engage funds remain poorly
decentralized.
The approach adopted by SAGE, the implementing agency was to contract out key service
delivery functions for operational activities to other parties, where possible. This approach
was adopted to maximize the extent of the accomplishments at the national scale, and
optimise efficiency. However, this approach may be risky in terms of hiring consultants
which are sometimes limited to respond to the mandates of the Terms of Reference without
effectively contributing to the integration of the environmental concerns at a local level.
3.1.3 Stakeholder participation / Public involvement
(rating : Highly satisfactory)
Information dissemination
At the start of the process of designing EP II, provincial awareness raising campaigns have
presented the activities to be implemented during EP II to all stakeholders (i.e. administrative and
traditional authorities, technical services and the population) in order to consult with participants
on the relevance of the designed activities to their own concerns. Efficient information campaigns
about the GELOSE law have been undertaken throughout the whole country using national media
(radio, television, newspapers, national and provincial workshops). Bush fire prohibition, as a
Government priority and purpose of a legislation, as well as the protection of the environment
have been widely publicized using posters, and radio and television broadcasting texts related to
these subjects.
13
Consultation and stakeholder participation in the design, implementation and evaluation of
program activities
For the implementation of activities, the program made use of the experience and knowledge of
the public sector, local base communities, NGOs, and national consulting cabinets, and, in the
first period, of research institutions. The public sector through the technical services (water and
forests, environment, cattle ranching and fisheries) is involved in the design of activities, in the
preparation of simplified planning and management plans, and development plans through its
participation in decentralized structures at the communal, inter-communal or regional levels. Its
role is particularly important for the execution of activities related to the entire process for the
management rights transfer of renewable natural resources.
The evaluation by the beneficiaries, coordinated by ONE, is held on an annual basis with the
participation of consulting cabinets.
Stakeholder participation
The transfer of management rights and responsibilities to local base communities and
organizations implicate the portion of the society most directly concerned by the conservation and
sustainable use of natural renewable resources.
Participatory planning structures established from the local level to the regional level, with
AGERAS/SAGE and EMC components support, make up a well distributed network over the
whole national territory. These structures are integrating the organisational and decisional bodies
of the communities, therefore integrating local knowledge and public will.
Partnership development between various program stakeholders
The tripartite signature of the management rights transfer contracts establishes a partnership
between the local base community, the commune, and the concerned technical services for the
sustainable management of the natural resources targeted by the transfer. The communal and
inter-communal participatory planning structures create a non formal partnership between the
various participants for the joint and agreed identification of the priority development and
environmental issues and problems and for the identification of the solutions to implement.
Compliance with commitments towards local stakeholders and involvement of stakeholders
The program has responded to local base communities applications for transfers of management
rights, according to their request.
The apparently high implication of the local base communities is stimulated by natural leaders,
who are often locally elected, are often more intellectually alert, and have a higher understanding
of the development, social and environmental issues related to the transfers. The local base
communities (V.O.I.) underline the constant application requests from potentially new members
and requests from neighbouring villages for similar transfers. This illustrates the high replication
potential based on pilot experiences. However, they systematically regret that insufficient micro-
projects are implemented. These micro-projects had been identified by the local communities as
measures to reduce pressures on resources in the context of management rights transfers. Most
local base communities that were met had benefited from training sessions for the development of
revenue-generating activities, but did not appear to have the capacity or the resources to move by
themselves toward their goal.
It should be said however, that the absence of micro-projects is not necessarily a constraint to
resource conservation by the communities. It has been observed that local communities are
motivated to request management rights transfers for various reasons that do not necessarily
14
involve collecting or exploiting the resources to generate revenues. The most important
motivation is to be able to exclude migrants or neighbouring communities from their territory and
protect their own resource access. Some communities were found to be motivated to protect the
forests on their territory to preserve the regulatory potential of the forest ecosystem in a
watershed, in order to maintain the irrigation capacity in the downstream cultivation areas.
Frequently, local populations are also motivated to preserve their natural resources, understanding
the potential for developing ecotourism projects. However, where the potential to generate
benefits with market-oriented sustainable use of biodiversity was demonstrated, it was found that
community‟s motivation to preserve the resources was very strong.
The assumption underpinning integrated conservation and development projects has been
questioned for similar projects around the world. The findings have shown that where the
community motivation is driven solely by the expectation that major development rewards will be
forthcoming, conservation gains tend not to be sustainable. Where communities are motivated by
other factors such as access to resources, ability to exclude outsiders, and benefits from resource
use are tangible, the gains tend to be more durable. This points out to the importance of clearly
understanding community motivations through a sociological approach and carefully structuring
management rights transfers.
Consulting and seeking for experience, NGOs, community groups, public and private sectors
knowledge and skills, and the academic institutions for conception, implementation and
assessment of the project activities
During the implementation process, the program had to work with the public sector, communities,
NGOs, national consulting cabinets, and the research institutions to tap a diverse pool of
experience and knowledge. By providing the technical services (water and forests, environment,
breeding and fishing), the public sector is involved in the conception of activities, settlement,
simplified management (PAGS) and development plans by its participation in decentralization
planning structures at the communal, inter-communal and regional levels. The public sector plays
a particularly important role in the implementation of the activities linked to the renewable
natural resources management transfer.
With the help of consulting cabinets and under the coordination of the ONE, the assessment made
by beneficiaries is performed on an annual base.
3.1.4 Potential for replication
(rating:satisfactory)
Knowledge transfer
The experience of transferring management rights to local populations has a high potential for
replication as guidelines and accompanying documents, integrating lessons learned, and written
in Malagasy, have been designed to guide the implementation of the entire process. However, the
use of these documents and the understanding of some of the concepts may be limited and not
fully accessible to local populations, since a large proportion is illiterate.
Expansion of demonstration project
In some areas, requests from local communities to benefit from management rights transfers
increase as they see, in the neighbouring participating villages, the advantages they may get from
it. The expansion of the management rights transfers has to be carefully examined and planned at
a bioregional scale. Communities have reported that while they are protecting their resources,
neighbouring areas suffer from an increased pressure. This is the case for the tapia forest, where
15
the pressure for coal production has increased in the adjacent forest areas that have not been the
object of management rights transfers. These issues should therefore be considered in the context
of a regional or inter-communal development plan.
The program developed models and carried out pilot experiences from which lessons could be
drawn and that have the potential to be replicated and/or scaled up:
Pilot experiences of market-oriented biodiversity sustainable exploitation outside protected
areas (production of native silk based on the conservation of an endemic forest species, tapia
(Uapacea bojeri) and the re-introduction of an endemic silkworm (Bombyx
madagascariensis); Management of raffia (Raphia ruffa) palm stands based on sustainable
harvest techniques and respect for market quality standards; Sustainable use and marketing of
traditional herbal medicines.
Three pilot models of coastal zone development and management plans have been developed
in Toliara and Nosy-Be, and a more recent one in Morondava, including local actions that
involved stakeholders consensus and participation and that resulted in a mobilization of actors
in the field.
Pilot models of voluntary marine reserves for reef fisheries were tested in Toliara and Nosy-
Be.
Models for the management of pastures, fishery resources, and forest resources.
The mini-projects carried out by the EMC component were successful as a demonstration of what
could be achieved through participatory planning and working together, therefore raising
awareness and acting as incentives to foster the active participation of base communities in
participatory planning and to promote management rights transfers.
Capacity building
86 environmental mediators have been trained and have acquired practical experience as they
were involved in various steps of the GELOSE management rights transfers with 278 villages.
Capacity building has been achieved for every level of the participatory planning structures, from
the local base communities to the regional or inter-communal groups, which provides a
framework for replication. The higher level structures have benefited from training sessions
enabling them to support the development of lower level structures and the elaboration of
communal development plans, therefore creating a potential to extend the project realizations.
Throughout EP I and II, ANGAP‟s capacities have expanded. The management of the protected
areas involving 332 staff in 1997 mobilized approximately 700 trained staff in 2001. The
potential for expansion of the good results they have achieved in protected area management
(core functions), could be lowered by their restricted ability to support protected areas peripheral
support zones. An implementation strategy based on the complementarities of SAGE‟s and
ANGAP‟s fields of expertise would increase the potential for replication and expansion of this
component.
The purpose of creating SAGE was to establish a service provider who could work on behalf of
the communities and under contract to the management authorities (for certain SNRM related
services). SAGE, as a semi autonomous entity, is more flexible in providing these services than a
government institution, and is not encumbered by the same regulatory mission constraints. The
creation of SAGE then in itself, is an example of how institutional capacity has been expanded.
16
3.1.5 Cost effectiveness
Compliance with the incremental cost criteria
The rationale for GEF financial support relies on the exceptional biodiversity of global
importance in Madagascar and the insufficient national capacity to address the threats to this
biodiversity. The incremental cost criteria imply that GEF funds should cover only the agreed
incremental costs of measures to achieve global environmental benefits in the focal area, i.e.
biodiversity of global importance. For GEF/UNDP support to EP II, the co-financing used to
implement baseline activities amounts to 6 409 219 USD while GEF contribution amounts to
8,000,000 USD.
Through the combined effects of transferring natural resources management rights with market-
oriented biodiversity sustainable exploitation, and the establishment of a multi-level participatory
planning process integrating environmental concerns, the program has significantly contributed in
addressing the following root causes of biodiversity loss in Madagascar:
lack of economic incentives for sustainable natural resource use;
inequitable and insecure land tenure;
poverty combined with mobility and de-facto open access to common resources;
poor governance, especially in the forestry sector.
The creation of a new institution intended to provide environmental management support
services, SAGE, contributed to the alleviation of institutional constraints. The finalization or
elaboration of national strategies (Strategy for a sustainable management of biodiversity; Strategy
for the creation of marine and coastal protected areas; Small island management strategy) and of
a policy for sustainable development of the coastal zone and legal implementation texts, the
elaboration of a legal framework to enable the transfers of natural resources management rights to
local populations contributed to improve the environmental policy framework.
Financial vs Technical Delivery Rates
The adoption of the new set of indicators allowed the calculation of the financial and technical
realization rates, which were evaluated in the financial audited statements for the years 2001 and
2002. In 2001, for the program MAG/96/G31, the financial realization rate was 101.6% while the
technical rate reached 98%, while the program MAG/97/003 showed a financial realization rate
of 104% and a technical realization rate of 98%. For the year 2002, the report on MAG/96/G31
indicates a financial realization rate of 86.2% and a technical realization rate of 36% for PIIGE
activities and of 51.6% for SAGE activities. The report on MAG/97/003 for the same year shows
a financial realization rate of 78.8%, corresponding to the same level of technical realization for
SAGE and PIIGE activities. This low cost efficiency observed in 2002 shows a slowing down of
the implementation performance of the program attributable to the political crisis. This crisis
affected the program in different ways: lowered financial and technical commitment of the
Government; increase of governance problems, notably in the forestry sector, and delays in
procurement decisions and calendar.
3.1.6 Linkages between project and other interventions within the sector
Partnership strategy
Implementation of partnership strategy between EP II components:
A lack of effective coordination between some EP II components resulted in a dispersion of the
interventions undertaken under different components and funded by different donors, resulting in
less program synergy than might otherwise have been the case. For example between ANAE
17
micro-projects and the implementation of the micro-projects agreed with local communities in the
context of the management rights transfers, or the implementation of activities planned in the
regional or communal schemes with the participatory planning structures. Through the successive
redefinitions of the program, the implementation of alternative development activities has not
always coincided with the requirements for pressure reductions at specific sites. For example,
ANAE and ANGAP‟s intervention zones were often dissociated, therefore diminishing the
complementarity between the microprojects implemented with ANAE‟s support and protected
area management. In March 2001, the Government gave the order to ANAE to concentrate on the
Eastern Corridor but this request had limited effect as it took place towards the end of the
available funding.
Also, ANAE had developed its own participatory approach to identify projects to support in the
context of FORAGE funds, as the implementation of the participatory planning process followed
by AGERAS to identify development plans was considered too slow. Therefore, FORAGE has
contributed very little to the implementation of mini-projects identified through the participatory
planning process.
Implementation of partnership strategy Between EP II and other UNDP-Madagascar
programs:
No effective partnership has been established between DAP 3 and DAP 1 (governance) or DAP 2
(poverty). The lack of partnership between DAP 3 and DAP 1 on the governance issue could be
related to a different governance concept. In DAP 3, governance is promoted through the
participation to the planning of the resource use, while in DAP 1, governance is addressed
through fighting corruption and improving economic planning and monitoring. A partnership
between DAP 2 and DAP 3 would have been advantageous as the integrated development plans
and mini-projects identified through AGERAS participatory planning process could be
implemented with the funds available to reduce poverty in Fianarantsoa and Toliara.
Implementation of partnership strategy between UNDP/GEF supported components and
other initiatives carried out in the country in the same field:
The actions of several financing organizations, such as FID and PADR/PSDR are based on the
activities included in the communal, inter communal and regional plans developed by
AGERAS/SAGE in order to determine their funds allocation. This approach helps to sustain fund
raising following the real priorities defined by the commune or region. It contributes on the
consideration of the environmental concerns for development actions, as far as they are
effectively integrated in the development plans.
The Rural Development Support Program (PSDR) and SAGE, the executing agency for
UNDP/GEF components for EP II, have established partnerships for the implementation of small
operations with the communities involved in the transfer of management rights (ex : PSDR : has
constructed houses for silkworm egg laying and SAGE was responsible for providing the egg
masses for rearing silkworms).
The collaboration of the PRE-COI program implemented by the EU and the EMC component
implemented with UNDP and GEF funds was very positive as it has enabled the testing by EMC
of a concept put forward by the PRE-COI program about the preservation of coral reefs. The
GIZC concept was submitted by the PRE-COI and tested by EMC in the two regional plans in
Nosy-Be and Toliara which contributed to the elaboration of the National Policy for a sustainable
development of the coastal zone.
However some funding organizations adopt a different approach, without basing their
interventions on the frameworks adopted by communes or regions, and without empowering
stakeholders for their own development. It has been observed that some projects are establishing
18
orientations instead of supporting the existing concerted plans. These projects are remunerating
participation to activities, then adopting an approach which is against the self-empowerment
efforts as well as the process of community based participative planning. It does not ensure the
integration of the environmental matters within the development initiatives.
3.2 Implementation
3.2.1 Financial Planning
Actual cost by activity
In the Program Support Document signed in 1997, the planned budget for the components to be
managed by ONE (and later by SAGE) was 9.626 M USD (UNDP and GEF). The allotment of
the budget among activities and the actual costs are presented in the Table 2.
Table 2. Actual cost by activity for UNDP supported components of PE2 (in USD) from
January 1998 to July 2003
Activity Compo- GEF TRAC Total
nent
Post 2002 Pre 2002 Planned Actual Planned Actual Planned Actual
Support to GELOSE 2 000 000 1 951 254 0 212 226 2 000 000 2 163 480
management rights REF/Bio-
transfers and to diversité
natural resources
sustainable
exploitation (SAGE)
Development and AGERAS 3 000 000 3 123 511 0 151 376 3 000 000 3 274 887
promotion of
sustainable
development
planning (SAGE)
Development and AGIR 1 000 000 1 885 323 0 172 304 1 000 000 2 057 627
consolidation of
instruments and
policy framework
(PIIGE)
Marine and coastal EMC 2 000 000 885 781 1 626 448 1 023 729 3 626 448 1 909 510
environment
(SAGE)
Total 8 000 000 7 845 869 1 626 448 1 559 635 9 626 448 9 405 504
The actual total cost of the activities is 9 405 504 USD (July 2003) distributed as follows: GEF:
7 845 869 USD, and TRAC: 1 559 635 USD amounting respectively to 98% and 95,8% of the
budgeted costs.
The 21 indicates a low disbursement rate for the EMC component (52,6%) while this rate is
above 95% for the activities relative to natural resources management transfers and participatory
planning development, illustrating the high importance of these components in EP II.
A low disbursement rate was observed in 2002 due to the political crisis that slowed down or
even halted activities from January to September.
Financing is also analyzed for each financial category in the Table 3. This table shows that the
undertaken expenditures for the personnel represent more than 40% of the total budget, for GEF
and TRAC funds. Under the same category, the expenses for national and international
consultants amount to 2.8 M US$, representing 70% of the total personnel cost. The approach
19
adopted by SAGE to contract out key service delivery functions for operational activities to other
parties, might partly explain this high proportion.
Table 3. GEF and TRAC funds by expense category for the period 1997 to
2003 (July) for the UNDP supported components
Actual cost (USD)
Expense categories GEF TRAC
International consultants 805 625 433 168
National consultants 1 486 924 62 770
Administrative assistant 384 133 137 909
Monitoring & Evaluation 551 152 70 637
Missions (UNDP/GEF experts) 40 335 0
Total – Personnel 3 268 189 704 484
Contracts (subcontracting) 1 998 630 423 383
Training 1 052 613 95 604
Equipment 981 101 162 836
Various 545 936 173 328
Total 7 845 869 1 559 635
Financial management
UNDP support to the implementation of EP II is financed through the programs MAG/97/003
funded by UNDP – TRAC funds (1.5 M US$) and MAG/96/G31 funded by the GEF (8 M US$).
Initially, UNDP/GEF provided support to three operational EP II components: Support to
regional management and spatial approaches (AGERAS), Environmental applied research /
Market-oriented biodiversity sustainable exploitation (REF/Biodiversité), and Marine and coastal
environment (EMC). UNDP (TRAC funds) provided support to the institutional and legal
framework reinforcement for the marine and coastal environment, therefore in support to the
operational EMC component. After February 2002, GEF/UNDP supported essentially SAGE and
PIIGE activities, which were also financed through ITF, FIDA, USAID, the Government
contribution, EIE generated funds, and leveraged resources.
ONE is responsible for the financial management of UNDP supported components of EP II.
Common rules for the management of human and financial resources have been adopted by ONE
and all other execution agencies of EP II. After the restructuring of ONE in February 2002,
SAGE was given the responsibility for the management of 4 operational components: AGERAS,
GELOSE, Biodiversity, and EMC. However, the financial management of these components is
still under ONE administrative responsibility. ONE and SAGE accountings are separate but the
consolidation of financial statements is done at ONE by the accountant recruited in the context of
UNDP financing. The UNDP financial management system is a progressive system where the
budget allocated for the current year is constituted by the added financial realizations for the past
years since the beginning of implementation. This allows the budgetary system to be adjusted in
proportion to the financial realizations. Since the beginning of EP II, the budget has been revised
15 times (the most recent revision was labelled “P”).
In general, the audit reports concluded that the program management was globally satisfactory,
and executed in accordance with UNDP procedures. However, some recurring problems have
been pointed out:
- delays in releasing funds and pay funds into the Regional Technical Units of the executing
agencies, therefore slowing down the execution of field activities;
20
- delays in the payment of TVA for JIRAMA and TELMA by the Government, although
meetings have taken place with ONE and the Ministry of Plan to solve to this problem;
- some expenses exceeding planned budget;
- delays in regulating requests for expense commitment.
Improvements were recommended for internal controls, such as a better control of certain
expenses (fuel, telephone communications, supplies). Some of the recommendations have not
been followed by corrective actions (as is the case for unused made out cheques that do not bear
the marking “cancelled”).
Quality of financial controls, including reporting, and planning
Audits have been taking place on a yearly basis for the years 1998 to 2002. The examination is
conducted both with UNDP and ONE. Reports were prepared separately for MAG/96/G31 and
MAG/97/003. According to terms of reference, audits had to verify the financial and
administrative management, technical realizations, and program management. The rate of
technical and financial realization was only indicated for the years 2001 and 2002. The audit
report for the year 1999 highlights the importance to implement analytical accounting with
appropriate software, in order to achieve an effective control of the budget within each
component. This recommendation was followed by the implementation of an analytical
accounting system and appropriate training during the year 2000.
GEF grant and co-financing
Other donors have contributed to financing UNDP supported components:
Malagasy Government which contribution concerns only the payment of TVA;
USAID, World Bank, and WWF, which contributions amounts to 4 448 339 USD;
Exclusive resources and funds generated by environmental impact studies (EIS) have been
mobilized to complement UNDP funds for a total amount of 401 185 USD, which was mostly
used to cover ONE operation expenses.
Co-financing for the support to ONE and SAGE activities was planned in the initial budget, but
actual amounts cannot be accurately determined as donors manage themselves their contribution
to EP II co-financing and finance activities directly, in such a way that ONE does not have access
to information on expenses really committed by these donors for the activities of the components.
Table 4. Co-financing for the components executed by ONE and SAGE
from 1999 to 2003 (source: ONE, 2003)
External funds USD Internal funds USD
FIDA 747 246 Exclusive resources 26 085
ITF 3 451 358 EIS 375 100
PACT/USAID 231 788
WWF 18 007
Total 4 448 399 Total 401 185
Total co-financing (4 849 584 USD) – from documented sources – represents approximately a
third of total financing for the UNDP supported components (14 476 032 USD).
Also, the program has adopted an approach promoting the development of self-financing through
participatory planning, sustainable management and market-oriented biodiversity exploitation.
Many actions were negotiated directly with donors or partners, but some funds were also obtained
through the involvement of these partners in the participatory processes leading to the elaboration
21
of regional and local development plans. The GEF/UNDP supported components executed by
SAGE have leveraged significant financing which is contributing to the attainment of the
program objectives. A few regional management programs (called sous-programmes) elaborated
with the participatory planning structures with the support of SAGE (AGERAS) have enabled the
mobilization of funds for the implementation of some or all activities planned in the programs.
For example, the sous-programme for Haute-Ramena was elaborated with SAGE support, and
submitted to a panel of donors. This resulted in the allocation of approximately 30 M FMG from
the project „Support to the implementation of the Forest Policy – POLFOR/GTZ‟ for the
elaboration of the forest planning and management outline. In the Fianarantsoa province, one
program in Andranomiditra obtained 366 M FMG from the Foundation Tany Meva and
420 M FMG from PAIR, while another program in Ambatofotsy Maromiandra obtained a
financing of 1 117 M FMG from MGHC and is currently being implemented. In the Mahajanga
province, another program called Andranomiditra obtained 500 M FMG from the Foundation
Tany Meva, 250 M FMG from PSDR, and 300 M FMG from SAGE. SAGE has supported some
activities in this context, such as the elaboration of Communal development plans, capacity
building and management rights transfers.
In the case of the management rights transfers for the tapia forest in Arivonimamo, the Commune
and the local base communities have obtained financing from the PSDR for the construction of
buildings for the silkworm reproduction.
For the marine and coastal zone component, the structuring of local communities into traditional
fishermen associations has enabled them to obtain additional financing from other programs, such
as the PSDR, for the acquisition of fishing equipment and the implementation of alternatives to
restricted or forbidden activities. The leverage effect calculated for the EMC component up to
June 2001 amounted to at least 1 238 050 USD. This funding allowed mostly the realization of
studies and research projects on the marine and coastal zone, activities related to the
establishment of protected areas, GIZC training, and also mini-projects.
The exact total amount of financing leveraged by the presence of the project is not available in
the context of this mission given the disparity of the financing sources. It is also premature to
assess the effectiveness and efficiency of these financings as they are taking place only towards
the end of EP II.
3.2.2 Monitoring and evaluation
(rating: marginally satisfactory)
Quality of initial M&E plan
The internal evaluation of the executing agencies is conducted by the Planning, Monitoring and
Evaluation Committee (CPSE), consisting of 2 representatives for each executing agency. A
monitoring system has been conceived to monitor the progression of activities. At the time of the
elaboration of work plans by the executing agencies, the activities that were not realized were
transferred to the new work plan.
A planning, monitoring and evaluation procedural manual was elaborated by the CPSE for the
implementation of the program, in which 113 indicators were identified as well as the methods to
evaluate impacts and results. They were evaluated by the person in charge of the
monitoring/evaluation within each executing agency, and then compiled at the level of ONE. The
procedure manual is clearly conceived and can apply to any set of indicators and for any agency.
It defines the role of the various actors in the monitoring – evaluation system of EP II, the formats
and calendar for the elaboration of strategic plans, annual work plans, and periodical progression
22
reports (semi-annual and annual) for each component. After the creation of SAGE, the results of
the monitoring/evaluation were still compiled at the level of ONE.
The initial indicators had been identified to account for the realization of activities carried out by
each component, without giving an account of the level of attainment of global program
objectives. The external mid-term review points out this weakness and a major revision and
restructuring of the program was recommended. A global logical framework for EP II was then
designed to clarify, simplify, and consolidate the implementation of the various components and
the monitoring of the project advancement, in order to foster the attainment of the development
and immediate objectives. This logical framework integrated outcome and output indicators and
targets, including biodiversity and tavy practice indicators for a total of 27 indicators. The
planning, monitoring and evaluation procedures manual remained the same.
The beneficiaries evaluation is the external evaluation conducted by donors and coordinated by
ONE. It was planned to be carried out on an annual basis with the participation of national
consulting cabinets, on the basis of the selected indicators. The results were to be taken into
account at the time of the meetings of the Environmental Fund Committee (Comité du Fonds
pour l’Environnement, CFE). However, this evaluation has taken place only once, at mid-term.
The outputs have been integrated into the program management in 2001, resulting in a
streamlining and simplification of the project design.
Effectiveness of implementation
ONE was responsible for consolidating the results obtained from each executing agency and to
prepare an analysis report with recommendations relative to the implementation of the program.
However, due to the low relevance of the indicators, this system did not permit to follow the
progression of the program towards the attainment of results or to readjust its course as needed.
Quality and use of relevant impact indicators
The selection of inappropriate indicators constitutes a major weakness of the monitoring and
evaluation since selected indicators were informing on the level of realization of the activities and
not on the level of result achievement.
The first set of indicators was far too numerous (113) and the AGEX could not effectively
monitor them. Also, the indicators did not reflect the synergic effect that should have resulted
from the combined actions of the different components of the program.
Lessons learned for the design and implementation of other similar M&E systems
The implementation of the program must be guided by a logical framework comprising a limited
number of integrative indicators, and identifying the beneficiaries with whom the results (or
effects) must be evaluated.
The monitoring of the level of attainment of RESULTS in the opinion of beneficiaries should be
intensified in order to adapt the realization of the activities, in particular the activities relative to
capacity building.
23
3.3 Results
3.3.1 Attainment of objectives
Development objectives
iii) Reverse current environmental degradation trends and promote sustainable use
of natural resources, including soil, water, forest cover, and biodiversity (rating:
satisfactory)
The EP II has succeeded in slowing down ecological degradation trends and biodiversity loss in
target areas of intervention therefore contributing significantly to this development objective.
This is clearly illustrated by four studies2 comparing the rates of change of forest cover inside and
outside EP II intervention zones, or inside and outside protected areas, using Landsat images
between 1993 (or 1994) and 2000. The results of these studies are coherent and indicate that the
annual rate of forest loss outside protected areas or outside EP II intervention areas is twice, or
more, the rate of forest loss within EP II intervention areas. This is strong evidence that EP II has
globally contributed to the reduction of threats to biodiversity, although a more focused approach
would have increased the visibility of the results and made them more tangible.
One of the most powerful effects of the EPII lies with the contractual transfer of renewable
natural resources management rights to local communities throughout the country. These
transfers of management rights are initiated on demand from local populations. Where carefully
structured and accompanied by capacity building support, they may result in the removal of the
heaviest pressures on ecosystems (deforestation, tavy fires, bush fires, destructive fishing
practices, etc) and in the rehabilitation of degraded sites (reforestation), as agreed with local
communities in their contract. Such positive effects have been observed in every visited site,
therefore slowing down environmental degradation trends. They result from the local
communities‟ good will to take the responsibility to preserve the natural resources within their
territory, based on their understanding of their dependence towards these resources or of the
services they provide. This behaviour and attitude change is also a prime result of EPII as well as
the inversion of the environmental management approach from command and control to
enticement. In various sites, transfers of management rights have been accompanied by market-
oriented biodiversity exploitation experiences, which reinforced the population motivation for
resource conservation.
iv) Create conditions for environmental considerations to become an integral part
of macroeconomics and sectoral management in Madagascar (rating:
satisfactory)
EP II has contributed to creating favourable conditions for the integration of environmental issues
with economic and social development, as participatory planning tools and structures, guidelines
for the elaboration of “green” communal development plans, and legal tools (application decrees
for the GELOSE law (No 96/025) for the management rights transfer to local communities have
been developed. Laws on intellectual property rights and on access to natural resources and
equitable benefit sharing have been drafted. The positive effect of reducing threats to biodiversity
2
Hawkins and Horning, 2001. Forest cover change in USAID and control areas – A preliminary evaluation and report
to USAID and partners. PAGE/USGS. 21 p.; FTM. 2001. Rapport sur l‟évolution de la couverture végétale et
l‟incidence du tavy. Programme Environnemental Phase 2. 74 p. ; ONE. 2001. Incidence du tavy dans les zones cibles.
Rapport de synthèse. Évaluation du PE2 de la cellule de coordination ONE. 17 p. ; ANGAP. 2001. Incidence du tavy
sur les aires protégées.
24
has been enabled by the development of an institutional and legal framework, which is a great
achievement towards sustainable environmental management.
Immediate objectives
Objective 1. Approaches for sustainable development integrating environmental concerns
in the design of regional, inter-communal and communal development plans are adopted
by the population. (rating: satisfactory)
The development of participatory planning structures from local to regional levels is fostering
good governance in environmental management in Madagascar. It had the strong result of
creating a new dynamics enabling the integration of individual environmental initiatives and
motivated people into global environmental action plans. These structures allow the emergence of
synergies amongst various stakeholders to increase the impact of their actions, and to find
consensual solutions to resource use conflicts. Their impact is particularly important, as they are
serving as structures to hold government civil servants accountable for their actions, since poor
governance is one of the greatest threats to biodiversity conservation. The program contributed to
the capacity building of 338 local base communities (EMC and AGERAS combined) and enabled
the creation of 117 participatory planning structures, which were involved in the design of 18
priority regional or inter-communal development plans designed to bring solutions to major
environmental problems.
Still, the representative quality of some of these structures is somewhat lowered by an insufficient
participation of women into every level planning structures, and non-systematic and inadequate
representation of the local populations directly concerned by the sustainable use of the resources,
in a few higher level structures.
Objective 2. Marine and coastal ecosystems potentialities are managed in a sustainable
manner. (rating: satisfactory)
The attribution of the rating reflects the successful achievements of this component and the
pertinence of the approach that was adopted for the elaboration of the policy and strategies, rather
than the effective achievement of the objective. As stated, the objective implies that a legal tool
such as the “National Policy for the sustainable development of the coastal zone” should not only
be validated by stakeholders, but that it should be ratified by governmental authorities and
implemented through the Coastal Zone Management Plan. The attainment of this objective does
not rely solely on the program performance but requires lobbying efforts and political will to
ensure the document is properly supported for its adoption, which requires the integrated efforts
of different sectors including the ministries in charge of fisheries, environment, tourism, and
transportation.
This component has successfully elaborated strategies, a national policy, and instruments, using a
broad, field-based participatory approach, and through national and regional workshops.
However, the implementation of these tools in the field could not be fully realized due to a lack of
synergy between the ministries in charge of the environment and of fisheries, in the context of the
EP II. In particular, the National policy for the sustainable development of the coastal zone could
not be put into action as the policy has not yet been adopted as a consensus still needs to be
adopted on the text before being submitted to the Government and adopted by the Parliament.
This likely caused the delay rather than a low performance of the EMC component. This has a
negative impact on the beneficiaries as this situation prevents the implementation of the activities
that were identified with the participation of communities.
25
The mini-projects were successful as a demonstration of what could be achieved through
participatory planning and working together, therefore raising awareness and acting as incentives
to foster the implication of base communities in participatory planning and to promote
management rights transfers.
Marine coastal resources have been the object of management rights transfers to local
communities. This has the potential to reduce overexploitation and use of destructive fishing
practices.
The attainment of this objective has been slowed down by some factors, other than the ones
referred to previously, that the EMC team had to overcome. Since the marine and coastal zone
component was not part of the EP1, the team had to develop and establish its bases with the
communities. Also, the marine and coastal inventories were not completed due to the poor
performance and break of the contract of the international consultant that had been selected for
this activity. Therefore, the database that should have served as a basis for the design of the other
activities and the identification of priority sites was never produced. However, this problem was
by-passed as the team used data collected in the context of a previous project and organized
national workshops with all the stakeholders to determine the marine and coastal eco-regions and
their biodiversity, pressures, potentialities, and trend. The identification of sensitive sites was
based on empirical knowledge of the pressures on the marine and coastal ecosystems, but
remained non-documented.
Objective 3. Policies, instruments, and information for an integrated environmental
management are elaborated and implemented. (rating: satisfactory)
National strategies and policy, instruments, and information for an integrated environmental
management have been developed as was stated, for the marine and coastal environment
component, participatory planning, and management rights transfers to local communities. Legal
tools such as management rights transfer contracts, are accessible (in terms of readability) and
clear in terms of communities‟ rights and responsibilities which favour their adoption by local
populations.
3.3.2 Sustainability
(rating : satisfactory)
Establishment of financial and economic instruments and mechanisms to maintain benefits
beyond GEF assistance
There are few economic instruments or mechanisms planned in the UNDP supported components
to ensure the sustainability of the activities beyond GEF assistance. Transfers of management
rights are more likely to be sustainable if they are linked to a process allowing the generation of
revenues for the local communities, as is the case for the tapia forest and the production of silk, or
ecotourism. However, this should not be taken as a prerequisite as was mentioned in section
3.1.3.
Development of policy and regulatory frameworks that further the project objectives
Policy and regulatory framework have been adopted during the course of EP II that further some
of the project objectives. The GELOSE law and the application texts create the conditions for the
transfers of management rights to local populations. The National policy for a sustainable
development of the coastal zone although not implemented yet, could support the development of
management plans for the marine and coastal zones in Madagascar. The Forest Policy and related
26
regulations pursue the same objectives as the program in terms of decentralized development
approach, participatory approach and transfer of management rights to local communities.
The adoption of dina in the context of management rights transfers reinforces the project
objectives. According to local populations themselves, this traditional law is far more effective
than a fine to discourage offenders. However, the effectiveness of the dina or any regulations is
sometimes lessened by the limited capacity, mostly in terms of effective and rapid transportation,
at the local level for the enforcement of the regulations and dina, especially when it is relative to
restricted or forbidden collection over large or distant territories (ex. large forests or mangroves).
Incorporation of environmental and ecological factors affecting future flow of benefits
This a weakness in the planning of the management rights transfers to local communities where a
strong reduction of the pressures on the ecosystem results from the transfers. There is insufficient
monitoring of the evolution of the dynamics of the resources for which an economical
dependence of the populations could result from the project activities.
Sustainability is also threatened by insufficient integration of basic information on biological
parameters that determine sustainable productive capacity of a resource and, in turn, the
sustainable level of revenue based on the exploitation or use of that resource;
Sustainability is also threatened by limited capacity for the determination of sustainable
exploitation levels or carrying capacity, including knowledge base on the biology and state of
resources.
Development of appropriate institutional capacities
Institutions
The creation of the institutions was not guided by a strategy for assuring their sustainability nor
by a clear vision of the roles that these actors would play on the national scene, or on the
permanent or temporary status of these roles. Their mandate was not conceived beyond the
context of the environmental program. Being aware its precarious situation, SAGE has started to
think about defining a development and institutional strategic plan with the help of a national
consultant. However useful, that exercise has not generated the expected result of designing an
action plan for the development of SAGE that integrates a business plan. The development of
such an action plan should be achieved through a strategic planning exercise for SAGE before the
beginning of EP III. The results of such an exercise would be useful to define SAGE‟s specific
niche as a service provider to other EP executing agencies, ANGAP in particular, and the
Ministry in charge of Environment, for the mobilization of communities in environment
management in the peripheral zones of the protected areas.
Participatory planning structures – Implementation and reinforcement of participatory planning
structure skills for all the stakeholders in the development of communes or regions
- The organizational structures at the inter-communal level have been created with a
sustainability strategy which success varies between structures. Through the EP II, they have
benefited from training that allowed them to offer services within the EP II, in order to
support management transfers, elaborate CDPs, and other activities which generate sufficient
revenues for the financing of the structure‟s operating costs, as is the case for the CRADES in
Diego. However, other structures have not attained such a satisfactory self-sufficiency level
to be able to assure the continuation of their interventions with local base communities
beyond the environmental program support.
- The organizational structures at a communal level have also been created with a sustainability
strategy since they are attached to the country‟s administrative structures. However, tax
payment in the communes is not functional, the communes have practically no revenues, and
27
can therefore hardly support the operational costs of the communal participatory planning
structures.
- The organizational structures at the local community level were founded on the mobilization
of volunteers who expected to benefit from the transfer of the renewable natural resources
management. Following their demand, these structures get a support to constitute formal
associations. These structures have received training to improve or develop new subsistence
or revenue generating activities in order to reduce their dependency upon unsustainable
activities and to compensate for the abandonment of prohibited activities.
3.3.3 Raising awareness amongst stakeholders for biodiversity and environment
sustainable management
EP II has raised much awareness amongst local communities on the opportunities and benefits
provided by the sustainable use of natural resources, especially through the process of transferring
management rights. According to interviewed local populations, the relative long-term presence
of the environmental mediators involved in the GELOSE process (transfers of natural resources
management rights) and trained by SAGE, has been a critical factor in raising awareness and
building their trust in the process.
The establishment of decentralized multi-level participatory planning structures reinforced the
awareness of these groups. Although already aware of environmental issues, the training provided
by AGERAS/SAGE and the experience they gained through their participation in the program
helped them to develop a more global vision integrating environmental concerns into their
development schemes, from local to communal, inter-communal and regional levels.
Achieving social sustainability by mainstreaming project activities into the economy or
community production activities
Social sustainability is promoted through the participatory planning of communal development
plans, and of regional integrated management plans integrating environmental and resource use
issues into development plans. The local management of renewable natural resources linked or
not to market-oriented biodiversity exploitation, fosters social sustainability as it empowers the
communities to protect their own territory and resources from outsiders.
Achieving stakeholders consensus regarding courses of actions on project activities
This is the very purpose of the cross-cutting component relative to the participatory elaboration of
development plans at the local, communal or regional scales. The program has been successful at
implementing this approach through the capacity building of 18 regional participatory planning
structures. 77 communal development plans have also been elaborated with this same approach.
3.3.4 Contribution to upgrading skills of the national staff
Development of the national institutional capacity in the field of participatory environmental
management
Initially, the Office National pour l’Environnement (ONE) was the executing agency of EP II.
The creation in January 2002 of the NGO SAGE (Service d’Appui à la Gestion de
l’Environnement) resulted from the fusion of the operational elements of four (4) components that
were previously under the management of ONE. The fusion of the components into SAGE
stimulated the process of transfer of management rights and increased its visibility through its
integration with marine and coastal management and sustainable biodiversity market
development, based on participatory planning. This institution functions as a decentralised
28
structure with one central unit and six regional technical units, allowing a better interaction with
field operations.
The team is competent, dynamic and highly motivated to move forward. In a very short time,
SAGE has reached a high level of maturity which is demonstrated by their recent initiative to
undertake an internal process to envision the future of the organization within and beyond the
time frame of the environmental program.
The development of national institutional capacities such as SAGE‟s promotes the appropriation
by the country of its own development, the development of Malagasy institutional memory and
increases the benefits from projects experiences. However, SAGE was initially created without a
clear vision of its role on the national scene in the environment field and without a clear
indication of the timeframe to reach its financial and operational autonomy. Until now, SAGE
was fully supported by EPII funds; there is a need to diversify the funding base, and assure the
continuation of current operations relying on SAGE expertise. Before the end of EP II support,
SAGE must complete a detailed business plan clearly clarifying its long term intervention niche
based on its specific strengths and expertise, in order to assure its long term institutional
sustainability.
Recommendations
3.4 Corrective actions for the design, implementation, monitoring and
evaluation of the project
The implementation of the program must be guided through a logical framework comprising
a reduced number of integrated result indicators and identifying, for each outcome, direct and
indirect beneficiaries (with whom result assessment should be conducted), and hypothesis /
risks.
Further integration of the biodiversity component (presence of endemic, rare, or threatened
species and of critical or unique ecosystems) into the elaboration of documents relative to
natural resources management, i.e. sous-programmes, “green” communal development plans,
contracts for the transfer of management rights, and local communities cahiers de charges.
Carry out socio-economic studies in the villages requesting management transfers in order to
know precisely the communities‟ motivations to preserve and manage their natural
endowment; based on the results of these studies and according to the objectives pursued in
the transfer of management rights to communities, identify the most appropriate management
approaches, i.e. spatial planning or resource management or a combination of both; support
the development of capacities needed to elaborate and implement resource management
measures, in particular where resources are subjected to intensive use or commercial
exploitation.
The creation of a new institution should include a strategic vision of its development, through
its integration into national structures at the end of the program support, or through the
elaboration of a strategy to develop its autonomy. A specific component of the program
should concern capacity development of SAGE, to ensure that the organization is able to
fulfill its role or mandate, and is autonomous in pursuing its operations at the end of the
program. Therefore, SAGE should get a specific support to complete a strategic planning
exercise before the end of EPII, and elaborate a strategy to reach its operational and financial
autonomy in the course of EPIII.
Consolidation and reinforcement of the knowledge base on biodiversity, including data
underlying the elaboration of measures for the sustainable management of renewable natural
29
resources, i.e. knowledge of the biological characteristics of used or exploited species; habitat
requirements; status, size, and distribution of the population in the management area in
relation to the national species distribution, calculation of maximum sustainable yield or
exploitation levels. In this view, initiatives aiming to repatriate databases on Madagascar
biodiversity should be supported.
Management rights transfers of some resources, fisheries for instance, are conditioned by the
obligation to collect simple data on production and effort, which will eventually provide the
necessary information base to elaborate sustainable management models for these fisheries.
Local populations that benefit natural resources management rights transfers should be
involved in the collection of simple statistics and data on the used or exploited resources, in
order to gather the required information to develop exploitation recommendations to ensure a
constant, sustainable provision of resources to the local populations.
Association of national research institutions and universities as service providers for the
provision of scientific support with:
a. Monitoring the dynamics of the ecosystems concerned by the transfer of management
rights to communities and for which the reduction of pressures could involve
significant modifications to the ecological equilibrium (Arivonimamo tapia forest
example: vegetation regeneration, double flowering cycle, increase of vulnerability to
parasites and disease following cessation of fires, predator (bird) population increase
following the reintroduction of silkworms, …)
b. Acquiring the biological data required for the elaboration of sustainable management
measures based on the determination of sustainable exploitation levels for the natural
resources underlying the development of market-oriented biodiversity exploitations
linked to management right transfers to populations. These sustainable exploitation
thresholds must serve as a basis for economic feasibility studies of such
exploitations.
c. Searching for solutions in response to emerging problems that could put at risk the
sustainability of the resources supporting the market-oriented exploitation (ex. A
disease is affecting silkworms, inhibiting the growth before the reach of the chrysalis
stage, thus preventing the mechanical separation of the silk cocoon).
Improve and increase monitoring efforts in order to:
a. To achieve an effective adaptive project management and adapt the execution of the
different activities in the course of the program – notably those related to capacity
building processes – measure effectively the level of advancement of the project
towards the attainment of RESULTS (outcomes and impacts), not only on the
realization of activities based on target levels; where appropriate, the assessment of
the level of achievement of the results should be conducted with beneficiaries
b. follow the evolution of the socio-economic situation for the communities involved in
the management rights transfers;
c. monitor the implementation of the management measures planned in the management
rights transfer contracts;
d. measure the level of integration of the various trainings with beneficiaries and the
level of awareness developed by target audience (local communities, participatory
communal and regional structures, and government authorities);
e. follow the dynamics of the ecosystems where intense pressures have been removed,
especially where a dependence link has been promoted through management rights
transfers to local communities coupled to market-oriented biodiversity exploitation;
f. monitor natural resources status, especially for the resources that are the object of
management rights transfers and vulnerable biodiversity;
30
g. assess the effectiveness of natural resources management as implemented by local
communities, in the context of the management rights transfers, in order to adapt it as
the situation is evolving.
Starting, as early as possible, the National Capacity Self-Assessment for global environmental
management, in order to take into account these results coupled to SAGE‟s strategic planning
exercise results, to optimise capacity building/development efforts and use of existing ones
for EPIII.
Performance analysis – 2 to 3 years after the end of EPII - of the participatory planning
structures created under EPII, including the ones participating to EPIII.
Ensuring that the impacts on biodiversity of sustainable natural resource management are
measured through prior baseline studies and subsequent monitoring.
Effecting an adaptive approach to SNRM that is responsive to ecological impacts and market
approaches.
4 LESSONS LEARNED
The creation of new institutions must be done with a clear strategic vision of their
development, as integrated entities into the national structures at the end of the program support,
or through the conception of a strategy to develop their autonomy. A specific component of the
program interventions must deal with the development of the capacities of these new institutions
to ensure that they will be able to fulfill their role and pursue their operations in a self-governing
manner at the end of the program support.
Result-based project management must be implement throughout the program interventions,
which will result in a more targeted and effective implementation.
A clear focus must be defined from the outset, in terms of objectives and spatial approach
with clear result indicators.
Knowledge management must be reinforced and accessible databases must established so all
users concerned with environmental issues (for example, users involved in natural resources
management, or in environmental impact studies) can benefit from it.
Annexes
A. TOR
B. Itinerary
C. List of persons interviewed
D. List of documents reviewed
E. Questionnaire used and summary of results
F. Financial Planning : GEF grant and co-financing
2
Annex A. Terms of Reference
3
-
-
-
4
1.
2.
3.
5
6
Annex B. Itinerary
Annexe B. Itinéraire
20.07 Arrivée à Antananarivo
21.07 – 27.07 Antananarivo : Rencontres officielles, avec les partenaires, les agences
d‟exécution du PE2, consultation de documents de conception du programme
et produits dans le cadre du PE2
28.07 Antananarivo – Itasy – Antananarivo
29.07 – 01.08 Antananarivo – Diego Antsiranana – Ambanja – Nosy Sakatia – Nosy-Be –
Antananarivo
02.08 Antananarivo – Arivonimamo – Antananarivo
03.08 – 04.08 Antananarivo
05.08 – 08.08 Antananarivo – Ambositra – Ambihimitombo – Fianarantsoa – Andranomiditra
– Fianarantsoa – Antananarivo
09.08 Antananarivo
10.08 Antananarivo – Arivonimamo – Antananarivo
11.08 – 19.08 Antananarivo
20.08 – 23.08 Antananarivo – Toliara – Antananarivo
24.08 – 05.09 Antananarivo : Rencontres avec les partenaires, les agences d‟exécution du
PE2, consultation de documents de conception du programme et produits dans
le cadre du PE2; Rédaction du rapport
7
Annexe C.
Liste des personnes ou groupe rencontrés
Annexe C.
- M Sylvain RABOTOARISON Ministre de l'Environnement, des Eaux et
Forêts
- M Bouri Jean Victor SANHOUIDI Coordonateur Résident Nations Unies Madagascar
- M Mansourou CHITOU Représentant Résident Adjoint PNUD Madagascar
- Mme Noëline RAONDRY PNUD Madagascar
- Mme Jumana FARAH Banque Mondiale
- Mme Claudine RAMIARISON SAGE
- Mme Tiana Eva RAZAFINDRAKOTO SAGE
- Mme Aro RATOVONOMENJANAHARI SAGE
- Mme Fleurette ANDRIANTSILAVO CGP / MINENVEF
- Mme Félicité REJO DIREEF Toliara
- Mme Nivo ANDRIAMBOLANORO ONE
- Mme Hajanirina RAZAFINDRAINIBE SAGE
- Mme Jocelyne RASOANIRINA SAGE / UTR Toliara
- M Heritiana RANDRIAMIARANA SAGE
- M Hubert RAKOTOARISON SAGE
- M Erick RAKOTOMAVO SAGE
- M Haribenja ANDRIANTSOAVINA SAGE
- M Haingo RASOLONIRINARIMANANA SAGE / UTR Diégo
- M Laurent AMPILAHY SAGE / UTR Diégo
- M Jean Charles PISO SAGE / Nosy-Be
- M Jacques TOUSSAINT Opérateur Nosy-Be
- M Lalao DIREEF Diégo
- M Bienvenu RAJAONSON Banque Mondiale
- M Jean Christophe CARRET Banque Mondiale
- M Jean Chrysostome RAKOTOARY DG ONE
- M Paul ANDRIANAIVO ONE
- M Roger RAKOTOARIJAONA ONE
- M Charles RAKOTONARIVO ONE
- M Tovondriaka RAKOTOBE ONE
- M Lala RANAIVOMANANA ONE
- M Solofo ANDRIANTSARAFARA ONE
- M Phillibert RARIVOMANANA DIREEF Fianarantsoa
- M Pascal RAZAFIMAHATRATRA SAGE/ UTR Fianarantsoa
- M Célestin HENRI SAGE / UTR Toliara
- M Jacob Emilson TOMBOTINA SAGE / UTR Toliara
- M Altofère Association FIMIMANO
- M Roy HAGEN PNUD consultant
- M Nick SEKHRAN GEF/PNUD
8
- M RATOVONOMENJANAHARY Direction Générale de l‟Élevage et de la Pêche
- M Mamy ANDRIANTSOA Direction de la Pêche
- M Bernard KOTO DGE
- M Armand RABEARIVELO Maire Commune Rurale Arivonimamo II
- M Ny Andry RANARIVELO ANGAP / Toliara
- M Tovo ANDRIAMIARISOA WWF/ Toliara
- M Jocelyn Rakotomalala ANGAP
- M Honoré RAZAFIMBELO FAO
- M Andrew COOKE ex FAO CT EMC
- M Hery PNUD Madagascar
- M Chrysante RANDRIAMBOLOLONA PNUD Madagascar
- M Christophe Veloson Tsirafy Direction de la Pêche / Toliara
- M Étienne TSARAJORO Maire de la Commune de Nosy- Be
- CRADES : Comité Régional d'Appui au Développement Economique et Social de la région DIANA
- PFED : Plateforme pour l'Environnement et de Développement de Nosy- Be
- FIMIMANO Comité intercommunal de développement Anakao
- Comité de Développement Communal d'Ambohimitombo
- Comité de Développement Communal d'Andranomiditra
- Communauté Locale de Base Anakao:/ Toliara
- Communauté Locale de Base d'Antsampana / Ambanja
- Communauté Locale de Base de Nosy Sakatia RASIS / Nosy-Be
- Communauté Locale de Base Andranomiditra/Ambositra
- Communauté Locale d' Ambohimitombo/ Fianarantsoa
- Communauté Locale de Base d'Antsampanimahazo/ Arivonimamo II
- Communauté Locale de Base d'Ambohimanjaka/ Arivonimamo II
9
Annexe E. Questionnaires utilisés et sommaire des résultats
Guide d’entretien pour les rencontres avec les parties concernées et les
communautés impliquées dans les transferts de gestion des ressources naturelles
renouvelables et la mise en place d’un processus de planification participative
Groupes cibles à rencontrer :
Communautés locales de base ou V.O.I.
Structures de concertation communales
Structures de concertation intercommunales ou régionales
Présentation de la mission d’évaluation et de ses objectifs
1. Remerciements adressés aux participants
2. Présentation de l‟équipe d‟évaluation
3. Explication des objectifs de l‟évaluation :
- Évaluer dans quelle mesure la stratégie de mise en œuvre du programme a été appropriée,
efficace et efficiente.
- Évaluer la pertinence et la durabilité des actions réalisées et leur adoption par les parties
concernées.
- Présenter des recommandations pour la poursuite d‟activités dans le but de pérenniser et
consolider les acquis.
La mission d‟évaluation n‟a pas pour objectif principal de « noter » le taux de succès du
programme et des intervenants qui ont contribué à le mettre en œuvre, ou d‟identifier les
responsables des échecs. L‟évaluation finale est prévue dans le cycle du projet pour permettre un
apprentissage autant sur la base des expériences qui n‟ont pas été concluantes que de celles qui
ont atteint leurs objectifs – en identifiant les facteurs de succès et de réussite comme les facteurs
qui ont retardé ou empêché l‟atteinte des objectifs. Ainsi, les activités de suivi et d‟évaluation
permettent d‟intégrer les leçons apprises et les meilleures pratiques tout en essayant d‟éviter de
répéter les erreurs dans la conception et dans la mise en oeuvre des projets futurs.
4. Principaux bénéficiaires de l‟évaluation du projet : L‟évaluation doit permettre au
Gouvernement de Madagascar, aux différents ministères chargées de l‟élaboration et de la mise
en œuvre des mesures de protection et de conservation de la biodiversité, au PNUD (bureaux de
New York et d‟Antananarivo), au FEM, aux agences d‟exécution et aux différents partenaires
dont les régions, les communes et les communautés villageoises, et à l‟ensemble des autres
parties intéressées, de dégager des leçons à retenir de l‟expérience de la phase 2 du programme et
des orientations pour l‟élaboration d‟activités ou de projets futurs.
10
Questions pour guider les entretiens
Avec les communautés
Présences – hommes et femmes
Perceptions des membres des communautés sur la nature du rôle et sur les droits qui leur sont
dévolus dans la gestion des RNR et dans la planification participative.
Connaissance des procédures et des textes légaux régissant le transfert de gestion des RNR
par les communautés? Quelle est la différence avec ce qui était prescrit par l‟État relativement
aux ressources?
Connaissance du contenu du cahier de charges qui accompagne le contrat de transfert de
gestion? Quel est le rôle de la commune? Quel est le rôle de l‟État?
Comment ont-ils entendu parler du transfert de gestion des RNR et pourquoi en ont-ils fait la
demande?
Sont-ils représentés au sein de la structure de concertation communale? Ont-ils participé à
l‟identification des représentants? Se considèrent-ils bien représentés par elle? Sentent-ils que
la SCC tient compte de leurs besoins?
Est-ce que d‟autres types de structures associatives ou autre représentent actuellement leur
communauté? Si oui, lesquelles? Que concernent-elles?
Ont-ils bénéficié de formations? Si oui, lesquelles? Quelle était la proportion de femmes et de
jeunes qui ont bénéficié de chacune des formations?
Évaluation de la prise en compte des besoins et des priorités des parties intéressées (dont les
femmes et les jeunes) dans l‟élaboration des activités de renforcement des capacités, au
démarrage du programme et en fonction de l‟évolution des activités. Suggestions de
formations pour une phase ultérieure.
Satisfaction relative aux activités de formation dont ils ont bénéficié et intégration des
contenus.
Évaluation des impacts du projet en termes d‟accroissement de la sensibilisation à la
conservation de la biodiversité et à l‟environnement en général et indices concrets de cet
impact
Principaux succès, contraintes et échecs des activités entourant les transferts de gestion des
RNR
Lorsque des transferts de gestion des RNR avec ou sans projets de valorisation de la
biodiversité sont effectués et mis en opération, quels impacts les populations perçoivent-elles?
Quel intérêt y trouvent-elles?
Qu‟est-ce qui a changé pour eux depuis le début de l‟intervention du programme?
Attentes et préoccupations relatives à l‟achèvement prochain du programme
11
Questions pour guider les entretiens
Avec les structures de concertation communales ou régionales
Perceptions des parties concernées sur la nature du rôle et sur les droits qui leur sont dévolus
dans le transfert de gestion des RNR
Ce rôle et ces droits dépassent-ils le domaine de l‟environnement et des RNR?
Quelle est la composition de la structure de concertation?
Cette composition est-elle demeurée la même depuis le début?
Est-ce que les femmes et les jeunes y sont présents?
Comment les membres sont-ils désignés?
Comment le fonctionnement normal de la structure est-il assuré? Dépenses et moyens
logistiques? Si le fonctionnement est assuré par le PE2, comment ce fonctionnement sera-t-il
assuré après le PE2?
La SCC a-t-elle besoin d‟un appui technique ou autre pour remplir ses fonctions?
Les membres des structures de concertation connaissent-ils les procédures et textes juridiques
régissant le transfert de gestion des ressources naturelles renouvelables aux communautés?
Comment tient-on compte des schémas de développement régionaux lors de l‟élaboration des
Plans Communaux de Développement (PCD)?
Lors de l‟élaboration des PCD et des schémas régionaux de développement, considèrent-ils
que les besoins, idées et priorités qu‟ils ont exprimés ont été intégrés?
Quelles ont été les formations dont ils ont bénéficié? Quelle est la proportion de femmes et de
jeunes qui ont bénéficié des formations? Évaluation de la prise en compte des besoins et des
priorités des parties intéressées (dont les femmes et les jeunes) dans l‟élaboration des activités
de renforcement des capacités, au démarrage du programme et en fonction de l‟évolution des
activités. Suggestions pour une phase ultérieure.
Satisfaction relative aux activités de formation dont ils ont bénéficié et intégration des
contenus
Évaluation des impacts du projet en termes d‟accroissement de la sensibilisation à la
conservation de la biodiversité et à l‟environnement en général et indices concrets de cet
impact
Principaux succès, contraintes et échecs des activités entourant les transferts de gestion des
RNR
Attentes et préoccupations relatives à l‟achèvement prochain de la deuxième phase du
programme
Sommaire des résultats – Communautés locales de base – V.O.I.
Antsahampano Nosy Sakatia Ambohimitombo Andranomiditra Arivonimamo 2 Anakao
Participation à la 14 hommes 19 hommes 7 hommes 4 hommes 7 hommes 80 hommes
7 femmes 16 femmes 1 femme 4 Femmes 3 femmes
rencontre
Appropriation Excellente connaissance du Bonne connaissance des Pas de perception très nette Contenu du cahier de Bonne connaissance des Bonne connaissance du
contenu du cahier de droits et des responsabilités des rôles et responsabilités charge non connu car le droits et rôles des VOI dans contenu des cahiers de
par les charges et des de la VOI dans la gestion du VOI dans le contexte du processus de transfert de la gestion des ressources charge et des rôles des VOI
communautés responsabilités de la VOI, des ressources naturelles transfert de gestion. gestion est encore en cours naturelles dans le contexte dans la gestion des
des services techniques, de renouvelables Contrôle de l‟application du Bonne connaissance des de transfert de gestion ressources naturelles
la commune et de l‟État Bonne connaissance du dina par un comité de responsabilités des VOI Préservation de la forêt et Contrôle de l'application des
Les actions de reboisement contenu du cahier de vigilance. Attitude et dans la gestion des contrôle de l'application des dina et surveillance des
dépassent les prescriptions charges mais mauvaise implication soutenues, ressources naturelles Dina ressources
du cahier de charges connaissance du rôle des respect intégral du dina pour Connaissance des rôles des
services techniques, de la la conservation de la forêt. Services Techniques, de
commune et de l‟État en Contenu du cahier de l'Etat, de la commune
raison du taux élevé charges pas encore connu
d‟analphabétisme par la communauté qui
dépend de la lecture par le
Président du VOI en raison
du fort taux d‟analphabètes.
Gouvernance Demande d‟appui à SAGE : Demande d‟appui à la suite Demande de transfert de Demande de transfert de Demande de transfert de Demande de transfert de
Processus issu des de la sensibilisation par gestion motivée par gestion motivée par les gestion à la suite de la gestion motivée par la
demandes de la l‟ONE sur la loi GELOSE l‟éloignement du service diverses possibilités offertes sensibilisation par l'ONE et nécessité de se protéger :
communauté face au constat par conviction qu‟une forestier qui ne peut assurer par la forêt exemple l'eau le Service Forestier sur la loi sécurisation de leurs
de l‟échec de la gestion meilleure gestion peut être le contrôle et qui continue à GELOSE et par conviction ressources par rapport à
centralisée des ressources opérée par les communautés autoriser le défrichement, et qu'une meilleure gestion l'Etat
naturelles renouvelables et à travers les dina par l‟abondance de peut être opérée par les
face aux possibilités offertes populations animales dans communautés à travers les
aux communautés dans le ces forêts. dina
contexte de la loi GELOSE
Bonne représentativité de la Bonne représentativité de la Bonne représentativité de la Bonne connaissance de la Bonne représentativité de la
Structure de concertation Structure de concertation structure de concertation structure de concertation structure de concertation
communale communale, possiblement communale. La forte communale communale
Intégration des besoins compromise par le retard de participation des membres Intégration des besoins des
exprimés par les femmes la mise en œuvre des micro- favorise le sentiment de femmes dans le PCD qui a
dans le PCD projets identifiés par les confiance. été élaboré en 2000
communautés Les femmes constituent
moins de 10% des membres
du VOI, en raison de leur
fort taux d‟analphabétisme.
2
Antsahampano Nosy Sakatia Ambohimitombo Andranomiditra Arivonimamo 2 Anakao
Autre structure Structure de développement Association des amis de Association des femmes Association des femmes, Association Tanimenakely ONG anglaise : Frontier
de quartier (protection Sakatia (réduction des feux pour la vannerie, association association des forgerons, Association Iavotra Marine Conservation pour le
présente dans la sociale, infrastructures de brousse et reboisement des menuisiers-artisans, association CA Fitaratra Les mêmes VOI travaillent suivi de l'état de santé des
communauté routières, développement avec l‟appui de l‟opérateur associations d‟agriculteurs avec les intervenants tels récifs coralliens Anakao,
social) touristique de Nosy Sakatia) avec ANAE, association que Groupe de Travail pour Beheloka, suivi de la
ANJOMARA pour la le Développement Rural population des tortues
distribution de médicaments Projet SAHA avec la radiées, des populations de
Coopération Suisse Phaétons à queue rouge
Fondation Tany Meva unique au monde, études des
Coopération Japonaise mangroves,pêche à requin,
tortues terrestres en
collaboration avec IHSM
Renforcement des Formation sur le processus Formations déterminées par Identification en cours des Formations conçues par
de transfert de gestion pour SAGE sur la culture besoins et bénéficiaires des SAGE sur le tissage de soie,
capacités membres CLB et maraîchère, culture formations la sériciculture
transmission en cascade d‟algues, culture Niveau de satisfaction Niveau de satisfaction
Besoins formulés pour d‟orchidées et apiculture dépendant du niveau de positif pour le tissage, non
formations Intégration et application scolarisation et de la satisfait sur la sériciculture
- gestion administrative et des formations reçues distribution de matériel Demande des formations
financière, surtout pour les cultures didactique pratiques sur place au lieu
- gestion des ressources maraîchères Besoins formulés pour des formations théoriques
forestières et suivi de Limitations par manque formations : Besoin d'appui sur la
l‟exploitation d‟outils agricoles et Confection d‟outils sériciculture et pour
Besoins formulés en semences, manque de agricoles pour améliorer la l'éradication des oiseaux
ressources matérielles : moyens de transport pour production agricole et martins et des insectes
Embarcation motorisée pour évacuer les produits et réduire la nécessité de faire nuisibles
assurer la surveillance de la manque de moyens de le tavy Demande d'appui financier
zone de mangrove (11 km contrôle des insectes Demande d‟indemnités de pour l'achat des matières
de largeur) nuisibles. déplacement et de premières : cocons et fils
Besoins formulés pour participation pour les
formation sur la culture de formations de plusieurs
la vanille jours
Demande que les formations
soient offertes sur place
3
Antsahampano Nosy Sakatia Ambohimitombo Andranomiditra Arivonimamo 2 Anakao
Effets et impacts Sensibilisation déjà présente Sensibilisation par la Sensibilisation sur la Sensibilisation sur la Sensibilisation pour la Sensibilisation sur la
sur la vulnérabilité des cessation du tarissement préservation des forêts préservation des forêts et sur préservation de la forêt de protection des ressources
du PE2 – ressources et la dégradation saisonnier des sources d‟eau Sensibilisation présente sur les possibilités offertes par Tapia et sur la possibilité Renforcement de la
sensibilisation des mangroves lié au reboisement et à la la vulnérabilité des la forêt offerte par la forêt ( fruit, conscience pour préserver
Sensibilisation par le PE2 cessation des feux de tavy et ressources et la disparition ver à soie, ...) les ressources
des communautés sur leur par l‟augmentation des des arbres de grosse
emprise sur la conservation ressources animales de la diamètre et des animaux
et la gestion durable des mangrove ainsi que sur la difficulté de
ressources de leur terroir Renforcement de la trouver des bois pour leur
compréhension de besoin
l‟importance de préserver
les ressources naturelles,
forêts et mangroves
Effets et impacts Accroissement de Revenus insuffisants Conscience de la Conscience de la Conscience de la Concepts sur la préservation
l‟adhésion à la CLB dépendance envers les bois préservation des forêts du préservation de la forêt des ressources naturelles
du PE2 – général Émergence d‟un zafimaniry pour avoir des corridor par le fait que la Diminution des feux de mal compris (remettre les
comportement d‟auto- revenus forêt renferme beaucoup de forêts depuis 1998 coraux à la même place)
surveillance et diminution richesse et pourrait procurer Augmentation de demande Intervention de EMC
des délits des revenus non de transfert de gestion des incompréhensible par les
Conscience de la négligeables forêts par les VOI communautés
dépendance envers la avoisinantes ( 08 processus
préservation de la mangrove de transfert de gestion en
pour la satisfaction des cours)
besoins de la communauté
Succès Succès des opérations de Bon succès de l‟ensemble Succès des opérations en Conscience de la Succès des opérations en Succès des opérations en
reboisement illustré par la des opérations particulier sur la responsabilité envers le particulier sur la formation particulier sur la
régénération des mangroves particulièrement l‟adduction Structuration des paysans en contrôle et la surveillance en tissage : forte demande structuration des paysans
et l‟augmentation des par les barrages d‟irrigation association VOI des ressources des tissus en soie sur le en association, la présence
populations de crabes et de Conscience de marché d'une centre de formation,
crevettes responsabilité pour Succès des opérations : l'appui en matériel de pêche
Augmentation de la préserver la forêt diminution des feux et ( moteur hors bord), en
satisfaction des besoins régénération des tapia puis matériel pour le nettoyage
alimentaires double saison de fruit de de la plage, la sensibilisation
Conscience de la tapia sur la propreté et la santé
responsabilité envers le
contrôle et la surveillance
des ressources
4
Antsahampano Nosy Sakatia Ambohimitombo Andranomiditra Arivonimamo 2 Anakao
Limites et points Ce succès ne se traduit par Mauvais choix du thème de Ce succés ne se traduit pas Ce succés ne se traduit pas Succés limité par la Succés limité par
en une augmentation des formation relative à la par une augmentation de par une augmentation de présence des martins et des l'incompréhension de la
faibles revenus aux communautés. culture d'algues revenus aux communautés revenus aux communautés insectes nuisibles qui population de l'objet des
La principale limite du détruits les vers à soie interventions de EMC
transfert de gestion réside Diminution de la confiance introduits dans la forêt Diminution de a production
dans l‟insuffisance des de la population vis à vis de à cause de la présence des
moyens de surveillance de la plateforme de pêcheurs migrants ou
la superficie dont la gestion concertation qui n'ont pas provenant des villages
a été transférée : 7423 ha. trouver de financement pour voisins
les besoins exprimés
Préoccupations et -- Inquiétude relative à l‟arrêt Inquiétude relative à l'arrêt Demande d'appui pour le Demande d'appui pour lutter A l'arrêt du projet,
du financement et de l‟appui du projet : risque de retour à développement d'alternative contre les martins et les continuation de la protection
attentes relatives de SAGE en raison de la la pratique ancéstrale " pour générer des revenus en fourmis des ressources par
à l’achèvement du confiance développée. tavy" si la population a un compensation pour Demande de financement l'application des dina
PE2 Demande de formation problème de revenu l'interdiction de pour l'achat des matières
comme guides défrichement de la forêt premières : cocon Demande d'appui en pirogue
écotouristiques, pour la Demande de développer des plastique
culture du riz et en couture alternatives pour générer des Demande d'activités de
pour générer des revenus en revenus avant la cession du compensation : éevage de
compensation pour projet chèvre, mouton et volaille
l‟interdiction d‟exploiter les
ressources forestières Demande de renforcement
Demande d‟adduction d‟eau des animations et
pour les villages qui n‟en sensibilisation
ont pas encore bénéficié
5
CRADES PFED Zafimaniry Fimimano
Participation à la 6 hommes 19 hommes 7 hommes 6 hommes
2 femmes 1 femme
rencontre
Connaissance des Rôle d'appui et de Rôle d‟appui et de - Rôle d‟appui et de - Rôle d'appui et de
sensibilisation des VOI sur sensibilisation des VOI sur sensibilisation des VOI sur la sensibilisation des populations
rôles et des droits
la préservation de la préservation de préservation de l‟environnement sur la conservation des
l‟environnement ressources
l'environnement
Rôle de renforcement des
Rôle de renforcement des actions locales et
actions locales et individuelles
individuelles
les domaines d'activités du Les domaines d‟activités du -les domaines d'activités: - les domaines d'activités:
CRADES : PFED suivent 4 axes : - Recherche d'appui et de - Présentation des demandes de
- Elaboration des PCD verts - sensibilisation/ éducation financement transfert de gestion
/information - gestion rationnelle des - Sensibilisation de la population
- Sensibilisation/ éducation
environnementales ressources
environnementale - prévention et réduction des - appui à l'élaboration de PCD
- Appui à la structuration pollutions
des communautés de base - gestion rationnelle des
- Participation à l'élaboration ressources naturelles
des PAGS et suivi des renouvelables
cahiers de charge par les - activités génératrices de
techniciens membres revenus pour réduire la
culture sur brûlis
Composition de la Membres : Nombre 74 Membres : Désignation par suffrage sur désignation par suffrage
composés de 12 associations - Fédération de 7 proposition volontaire ou par un exprimée sur une base annuelle
structure de associations autre membre Membres : nombre 24 élus à
concertation dont 4 associations
- 37 Personnes individuelles partir des 6 villages dans 02
féminines
- Autorités locales Membres : nombre 33 dont 3 communes ( 3 membres + chef
- 8 ONG oeuvrant dans femmes quartier par village )
* Adhésion volontaire des l‟environnement
techniciens ou par - 4 Sociétés privées
désignation par les membres - 3 Institutions publiques
- 12 Services publics
* Dynamisme de la structure
motivée par le maire
6
CRADES PFED Zafimaniry Fimimano
Fonctionnement Appui financier et technique Assuré par cotisations des *Pas encore de moyens ni de Assuré par les droits d'entrée
assuré par SAGE, WWF, PACT membres et des associations ressources et fonctionnement pour Nosy-Ve et les cotisations
MIRAY, GREEN MAD ET Pourcentage (10%) des assuré par l‟appui de SAGE des membres
POLFOR/GTZ à partir des revenus générés par des *Prévisions :
demandes exprimées prestations de services faites - Tourisme
Pourcentage (05%) des revenus au nom de la PFED - Droits d‟accès aux ressources
générés par les prestations de *Insuffisant pour assurer le (déterminé dans les cahiers de
services faites au nom de fonctionnement - charge)
CRADES *Implication basée sur le - Droits de visite touristique (non
* Accès aux matériels bénévolat déterminés)
informatiques de l'ANGAP mais *Appui de SAGE / ONE - jumelage de la forêt avec une
utilisation limitée pour les frais de formation et forêt se trouvant à l'extérieur de
*Appui très limité en matière de de déplacement Madagascar ( à rechercher)
déplacement et de Besoins non assurés à la fin
communication du PE2 : local et matériel
* Besoins exprimés dans les informatique
PTA mais pas de financement
Connaissance des Bonne connaissance au sein du Bonne connaissance au sein *CDC créé en juin 2003 donc le
CRADES du PFED mais besoin de PCD pas encore élaboré
textes diffusion plus large des
textes et de renforcer
l‟éducation
environnementale au niveau
scolaire
Les activités alternatives ne
sont pas mises en œuvre -
ex : on décourage
l‟utilisation du charbon mais
il n‟y a pas d‟alternative
énergétique
Les activités définies dans les Il n„y a qu‟une seule
sous- programmes sont commune sur l‟île qui a un
intégrées dans les PCD schéma d‟aménagement.
Trois niveaux de planification La planification communale
- au niveau village, les ne tient pas compte de la
structures villageoises de planification régionale.
développement (SVD) qui
s'organisent
- Les structures communales de
concertation ( SCC) au sein des
communes
- Le CRADES regroupant les
communes et les autres entités
7
CRADES PFED Zafimaniry Fimimano
Appui aux CLB à l'élaboration Appui aux CLB à élaborer Appui aux CLB à élaborer leur Appui des communautés pour la
de leur PCD leur PCD, à l‟élaboration et PCD, à l‟élaboration et la demande de transfert de gestion
Cadrage des PCD verts la diffusion des dina diffusion des dina
Formations GELOSE, Elaboration PCD, GELOSE, GIZC, Elaboration de PCD, élaboration
Formation formateur de communication villageoise, des plans d'aménagement des
l'environnement, Utilisation du gestion budgétaire et forêts
logiciel Netweaver, ASEG, administrative, approche * participation relativement faible
Communication genre, élaboration de des femmes
* besoins exprimés: dossiers de projets * en phase d'identification des
- Analyse socio-économique *participation relativement besoins
- Analyse des problèmes équitable des femmes
- Gestion/management et *on a tenu compte des
organisation pour mieux besoins exprimés pour
s'organiser dans le futur et pour élaborer le programme de
aider les associations sur la formation
structure d'organisation *besoins exprimés :
- informatique - gestion des ressources
- gestion administratif et naturelles et détermination
financière dans le cadre du des seuils d‟exploitation
Transfert de gestion durables
- gestion des forêts de mangrove - éducation
- formation en langue anglaise environnementale
pour faciliter les échanges et - vulgarisation sur processus
pour avoir des partenaires GELOSE
surtout financiers
Effet du PE2 / Sensibilisation antérieure au - Sensibilisation antérieure - Sensibilisation antérieure au - Sensibilisation par SAGE et
PE2: Les sakalava sont des au PE2, mais dynamisée par PE2, mais renforcer par SAGE EMC
sensibilisation défenseurs de la nature selon les le regroupement en une
us et les coutumes plate-forme
- Besoin d'étendre la - Besoin d‟étendre la
sensibilisation auprès des sensibilisation auprès des
autorités ( PDS , Ministère, ...) enfants
- Besoin de sensibiliser la
population urbaine pour
accentuer les impacts
8
CRADES PFED Zafimaniry Fimimano
Succès Compréhension et implication Changements de mentalité et Changements de mentalité et Changement de mentalité et
des gens à résoudre la d‟attitude : d'attitude : d'attitude :
problématique - réduction de la coupe de - diminution des défrichements et - Conservation stricte des
environnementale mangrove retour à la riziculture irriguée ressources
Conscience de la population de - amélioration de la salubrité - compréhension des liens entre - Conscient de l'épuisement des
la vulnérabilité des ressources et des plages la gestion des prélèvements et la ressources
de l'environnement est l'affaire - diminution des feux de gestion de la forêt
de tous brousse - Conscient de l'épuisement des
- diminution de la destruction de - diminution de la pêche bois zafimaniry
mangrove destructrice Appui à l'identification des
- regroupement des gens de -reconnaissance et respect filières porteuses : des richesses
tendance différente dans la des CLB par la population culturelles zafimaniry, des sites
structure de concertation - compréhension par la écotouristiques et à la
et existence d'une interrelation population de la valorisation des plantes
des différentes structures lors de vulnérabilité des ressources médicinales, ethno-botaniques
la célébration de la journée
mondiale de l'environnement
- naissance de force de lobbying
auprès des politiciens
(contrepoids politique)
Échecs Appui très limité au niveau de la L‟application de la MECIE L'utilisation de pirogue à rame
communication et du ne tient pas suffisamment non compatible pour la
déplacement vers les zones compte des réalités locales – surveillance de la côte
enclavées ex : autorisation de
- Les sous programmes sont construction accordée sur
élaborés, mais non concrétisés une île de ponte de tortues
par manque de moyen financier marines
(cas Haute Ramena) L‟environnement urbain
n‟est pas considéré dans les
plans de gestion mais peut
avoir des impacts importants
sur les actions menées avec
les populations
Préoccupations Besoin d'appui pour la Besoin d‟appui pour les Besoin d'appui pour les
concrétisation des travaux en infrastructures infrastructures touristiques :
relatives à la fin du cours comme les transferts de Pas de relation directe avec route, pont, piste en forêt
PE2 gestion le Ministère de Besoin d'appui pour trouver de
Besoin d'appui pour trouver des l‟Environnement financement
financements La corruption entre la population
et les agents forestiers pour
l'autorisation de défrichement
La fidélité et la motivation des
membres du CDC
9
Related docs
