Midterm Evaluation Partnership for Biodiversity Conservation: Mainstreaming in Local Government Processes

Report Cover Image
Evaluation Plan:
2012-2018, Philippines
Evaluation Type:
Mid Term Project
Planned End Date:
01/2015
Completion Date:
05/2015
Status:
Completed
Management Response:
Yes
Evaluation Budget(US $):
20,000

Share

Document Type Language Size Status Downloads
Download document TOR_BPP_Mid- Eval.doc tor English 625.00 KB Posted 284
Download document BPP MTR Report _Final Report.pdf report English 677.09 KB Posted 648
Download document BPP MTR Report Attachments July 19.pdf related-document English 634.91 KB Posted 334
Title Midterm Evaluation Partnership for Biodiversity Conservation: Mainstreaming in Local Government Processes
Atlas Project Number: 00074945
Evaluation Plan: 2012-2018, Philippines
Evaluation Type: Mid Term Project
Status: Completed
Completion Date: 05/2015
Planned End Date: 01/2015
Management Response: Yes
Focus Area:
  • 1. Others
Corporate Outcome and Output (UNDP Strategic Plan 2014-2017)
  • 1. Output 2.5. Legal and regulatory frameworks, policies and institutions enabled to ensure the conservation, sustainable use, and access and benefit sharing of natural resources, biodiversity and ecosystems, in line with international conventions and national
Evaluation Budget(US $): 20,000
Source of Funding: Project funds
Joint Programme: No
Joint Evaluation: No
Evaluation Team members:
Name Title Email Nationality
Eduardo Queblatin Mr.
Mark Anthony Gamboa Mr.
GEF Evaluation: Yes
Evaluation Type:
Focal Area: Biodiversity
Project Type: FSP
GEF Phase: GEF-4
PIMS Number: 2904
Key Stakeholders: DENR-PAWB, DA, DTI, LGUs
Countries: PHILIPPINES
Lessons
1.

The land-use planning process presents a highly valuable and continuing entry point to introduce biodiversity values to LGUs. This cyclical process is legally mandated and is sometimes done perfunctorily especially in the treatment of public/forest lands, which from a conservation perspective, often coincides with KBAs. By proactively assisting LGUs in the planning process, the DENR has a window of opportunity to integrate biodiversity in the land-use planning process and affect all the other plans that depend on it.


Findings
1.
  • MTE & TE are good but regular monitoring should also be done to elicit more evidence and information in the project areas especially in difficult projects
  • Project Board members should also have a bigger role in M&E
  • Identify solutions beforehand to complications that can arise with working with the government as local responsible party
  • Further documentation is needed on the role of women in conservation and how the project empowers women

Recommendations
1 Midterm Review recommendation 1. Provide a major focus on BD-friendly agriculture and BD-friendly business for the remaining project period (Actor: Project Board and PMU, DA and DTI). It is recommended that the project focus its resources and attention now to two sets of policy and implementation innovations (referred to as themes by the project stakeholders) under the project. These are the policies that enable LGUs and communities to directly derive concrete material benefits from biodiversity during the project period. This is now made possible because of the milestones and gains made in other themes (e.g. CLUP) where project resources can be safely realigned in favor of these two sets of policy and implementation innovations: ? BD-friendly agriculture. This is because agricultural land use is pervasive to be one of the highest threats to ecosystems services including biodiversity. There is also already a wide range of technologies available to make this happen and a wide network of potential service providers. ? Relevant BD-friendly business. This enables LGUs to fully tap both forest and agricultural biodiversity resources, and maximize income and local employment through value addition. LGUs are also most excited about BD-friendly business, and are generally inclined to invest in them using their own resources especial if their access to land and resources is assured. Specific suggestions for each theme are discussed in the next section. ? The project needs to realign staff and/or recruit new staff to be able to deploy a full time senior professional in each of the two themes to facilitate increased support to partner agencies and catalyze productive communication between partner agency and DENR-BMB, and between national agencies and local stakeholders.
2 Midterm Review recommendation 2. (Cross-cutting) Further prepare DENR to sustain the facilitation process for mainstreaming BD in other sectors (Actors: PMU, BMB and other concerned Units of DENR). The phase out strategy needs to be prepared immediately in 2015. DENR needs to anticipate the continuing need to facilitate BD mainstreaming in other sectors such as agriculture, trade and local area planning, beyond the project life. In the absence of a Project Management Unit after the project, there is no other entity that can do this except the regular units and plantilla personnel within DENR. The DENR may also tap the opportunity provided by existing venues for dialogue. One such body is the inter-agency technical subcommittee for biodiversity of the Philippine Council for Sustainable Development (PCSD) of which the BMB Director is a senior member. This is the same body that will be performing a major role in overseeing the updated Philippine Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan (PBSAP) which now includes a major theme on agrobiodiversity conservation and sustainable use. The interagency committees created during the Project may also be supplemental ad hoc venues. Within the DENR, an inter-Bureau committee may be established to monitor and prepare proposals for the inter-agency committee cited above. A specific division within DENR-BMB may act as secretariat. As main catalyst within the DENR, the MTR team also endorses the suggestions of BMB senior staff to help in mainstreaming as follows: ? Establish focal divisions within the BMB to deal with matching themes for mainstreaming which was initiated the BPP i.e. agriculture, business and local level development planning. ? support the development of a BMB unit dedicated to the further development of standards for biodiversity mainstreaming ? Establish (best of the moment) indicators for effective mainstreaming of biodiversity in sectoral programs. This may serve as input to the further development of standards Three other bureaus need to be involved in addition to the BMB. These are Forest Management Bureau (FMB) which has a rich experience on community based forest management (CBFM), the Ecosystems Development Bureau (ERDB) which has an R&D program on agroforestry, and the Environmental Management Bureau (EMB) which has responsibility for environmental screening of business ventures that may be proposed within or adjacent to PAs and KBAs. FMB and EMB are already involved but ERDB is not yet involved.
3 Midterm Review recommendation 3. (Cross-cutting) Strengthen the verification process for Objective level indicators (Actor: PMU, NGO partners involved in the studies; M&E consultant) Realistically, only one or two sets of indicators of success may be evident at the end of the project life i.e. ?number of hectares in production landscape under sustainable management,? and ?extent of remaining habitat within PAs?. The other two indicators (population count and extent of fragmentation) can be likely seen if there is sustained work, (say for five more years) after the end of the project. ? The MTR team recommends the adoption of the PMU and partners? proposal to use population estimates instead of population counts. ? The study area for the above indicators must be clearly demarcated to take into account the actual area that will be covered by LGU interventions (it is costly to study large swaths of areas when LGUs will only cover a small portion for its interventions). ? Identify opportunities for (non-project financed) survey to be repeated years after the mandatory end of project survey. This will ensure that those realistic correlations can be established between at least five years of LGU intervention (starting in 2015) and its effects on population estimates and forest fragmentation rates five years after. ? In planning for the conduct of the end of project survey, consider the possibility of using the process to attract the interest in the survey process and train selected locally based SUCs on the tools to do it. If the opportunity arises in the future, they can also repeat the process using local resources later. There is no guarantee that this can be done but it is worth trying because there are existing regional and local SUCs with relevant academic and research programs who might be interested to pursue the study for their scientific value. The Commission on Higher Education (CHED) in fact, has a research budget to support biodiversity which SUCs can tap. ? The M&E system must also help fine-tune indicators dealing with habitats and production landscapes under the objective level indicator on sustainable production systems. These are where impacts may more likely be seen towards the end or a few years after the project. ? Subject to the approval of GEF, consider adjusting selected physical targets associated with some indicator outcomes. Given the late project start, this will allow the project team and partners to focus more on developing processes, distill, document, and reflect on lessons and use the same to guide the fine-tuning of policies and ? how to guides ? for LGU action . The proposed specific adjustments are cited below in conjunction with proposals to improve implementation processes.
4 Midterm Review recommendation 4. (OUTCOME 1) Strategic Environmental Assessment - Accelerate the promulgation of the National SEA policy so other actions can immediately follow. ? Due to the almost total absence of existing relevant policies, there is a need to accelerate the promulgation of the Draft National JAO and the BD-focused SEA framework in 2015 so that piloting actions can be justified and be immediately implemented within the project period especially by the DENR and DA and initially in areas covered by the BPP.
5 Midterm Review recommendation 5. (OUTCOME 1) Agriculture: Enhance the impact of the current draft JMC by elaborating discussion of available incentives and institutional roles. a) Clarifying Institutional roles: ? Elaborate the role of DA Regional Field Units to provide appropriate agricultural support services to LGUs in project sites in accordance to local constraints and opportunities. ? Enjoin LGUs to launch their upland programs and capacitate their agriculture staff and MAFCs for this purpose. Enjoin regional research consortia to provide support to DA-RFU and pilot LGUs in local level planning and implementation. b) Embed the relevant incentive systems currently being provided by the DA that are applicable to agriculture conditions prevailing in PA areas. Examples are: ? Special assistance and subsidy to qualified farmer organizations qualified for organic certification under the Organic Agriculture guidelines; ? Crop insurance to farmers planting indigenous crops and heirloom varieties belonging to the registry of poor stakeholders; ? Small grants for harvesting and marketing facilities and market linkage to poor but deserving producer groups; ? Small grants for relevant projects by women?s groups and out of school farm youth who pilot innovations in and value-adding micro business from sustainable agriculture; ? Provide for local recognition of good practices (e.g. Gawad Saka). ? As co Author of the JAO, the DENR may also articulate available incentives that can be provided to upland farmers in forest lands. c) For agribusiness applications, provide overall policy statement that reiterates relevant existing regulations governing compliance of agriculture projects to environmental laws and rules on bio safety, among others.
6 Midterm Review recommendation 6. (OUTCOME 1) Agriculture: Certification of BD-friendly agriculture. Consider a more inclusive approach to include recognition of BD best practices in addition to certification a) As the concept of BD-friendly agriculture is still relatively new and need to be ?marketed? to more stakeholders, the project may wish to consider the promotion of a more inclusive approach to BD certification that provides a range of modalities that match the varying capacities of different stakeholders at this time (e.g. subsistence IP farmers that want to enter the market; more established farmer cooperatives, private plantations etc.). b) Modalities may include recognition for ?best as of the moment? good practices, as well as recently adopted certification systems such as the DA Good Agricultural Practices (GAP), 3rd party certifications and 2nd party certifications. For this purpose, engage technical assistance to assist DA, DENR and LGUs concerned to identify and adopt various forms of recognition and certification and formulate/ implement collaborative work programs for promoting this. The modalities will of course have to correspond to the minimum set of guidelines set by the proposed JAO or to previously set national standards such as those set by the Organic Agriculture Policy.
7 Midterm Review recommendation 7. (OUTCOME 1) Proceed with the issuance of memorandum circular that will guide LGUs in the preparation of local wildlife ordinance and codification of environment ordinances integrating the concept of BD.
8 Midterm Review recommendation 8. (OUTCOME 1) Business. Enhance the impact of the draft JAO to elaborate provisions for incentives, and clearer guidance for local action. a) Consider attention to: ? Clearer guidance on planning and implementation of BD-friendly businesses at the site level or even at the local government level; and specifying more clearly the roles of local DTI offices ? Incentive structures and financing mechanisms ( including existing ones ) to encourage BD-friendly businesses/enterprises including BD-friendly business label; b) These improvements may be incorporated in the final version of the JAO or as suggested by the PMU, be included in subsequent, policy instruments and technical bulletins to be made during the project period.
9 Midterm Review recommendation 9. (OUTCOME 1) Knowledge management information systems. Clarify and firm up strategic objectives and where necessary, amend LGU-related operational targets under the planned Knowledge Management System. a) Engage the assistance of a KM oriented office or program/project within the DENR, or engage a short term KM/learning consultant to facilitate a round table multi stakeholder to assess and fine tune operational plans for the PKMIS (Partners Knowledge Management Information System). The process needs to build on the observed actual capacities of partner LGUS and experience and lessons learned so far from somewhat similar recent initiatives such as the Clearing House Mechanisms (CHM). b) The discussion may include the following: The actual scope of participation of LGUs in the National Information System based on better understanding of what can be realistically expected from partner LGUs and what the BMB can actually maintain especially after the project; The scope and processes and structure of inter ? LGU knowledge sharing (including after the project) (see also discussion in Outcome 2 and 3).
10 Midterm Review recommendation 10. (OUTCOME 2&3) Strategic Environmental Assessment- Tooling and training of LGUs. a) Accelerate the development of DILG memorandum circular and manual of procedures for LGUs for immediate orientation and pilot testing initially in BPP areas The guidance to LGUs may build on the initial spatial analytical work done during the CLUP and CDP preparation process and be embedded in the LGU processes for assessing progress of development plans being developed of in preparing implementation plans. This would be ideally supported by DA, DENR, and NEDA. b) As suggested by the Project Document, DENR and DA may wish to pilot-test the SEA in such policies that are currently affecting partner LGUs such as the High Value Crops Development Act of 1995, and pertinent policies that allow genetically modified organisms (GMOs). Pilot-test the BD-focused SEA Framework in the most suitable LGU following a set of selection criteria. These selection criteria could include the presence of BD-enhanced CLUP and presence of MENRO or other relevant local office/unit. c) Provide the appropriate orientation and training support to key agencies that will be involved in the piloting i.e. DENR, DA DILG and LGU based offices.
11 Midterm Review recommendation 11. (OUTCOME 2&3) Strategic Environmental Assessment ? LGU implementation Work with LGUs that have finalized or are finalizing their CLUPs and CDPs and to the extent possible, embed the substantive SEA processes in the CLUP and CDP processes because these are the processes that LGUs can more easily relate with (see also discussion below under local area planning). In assisting the 20 percent of LGUs to be trained on SEA (Outcome 2) provide focal attention to at least 2 LGUs. This proposal will allow the project team to provide more quality time for fine-tuning delivery systems; documenting lessons learned; and facilitating sharing and reflection among early practitioners of SEA.
12 Midterm Review recommendation 12. (OUTCOME 2&3) Agriculture- local program development. Pending promulgation of the JAO, the DENR and DA in collaboration with local SUC based R&D networks, provide immediate planning and technical support to at least one pioneering LGU per site (8) (or 20% of LGUs) to fully launch their local BD-friendly agriculture program by mid-2015, based on directions set by their CLUP/CDP as well as the technical recommendations of the draft JMC already agreed upon. a) As needed, tap regional research networks and local SUCs to assist DA regional offices identify immediately doable BD-agricultural practices that can be prioritized by the LGUs above. Initially, focus support to 1-2 critical farming systems in the area (e.g. IP food systems, upland migrant farming systems, small scale agribusiness etc.). Formulate locally relevant extension programs and incentives; b) Accelerate the preparation of training modules programmed under DA to support the pioneering work of the LGUs. This may be done even before the formal promulgation of DA policy as a good number of the BD friendly technologies cited by the draft policy are not expected to be debatable. c) Consider the feasibility of decentralizing the detailed preparation and execution of training modules to regional level, to the extent possible, with guidance from the Agricultural Training Institute HQ. Where appropriate, utilize existing modules available (either within DA or within the R&D network). d) Complete the training of pioneering LGUs as well as pilot farmer groups prior to the planting season of 2015; e) To support the planned training program for LGUs, develop LGU user-friendly orientation guides on various key technological options, good practices and potential costs and benefits of key BD friendly practices that are most feasible in their areas.
13 Midterm Review recommendation 13. (OUTCOME 2&3) Agriculture ? adoption of BD friendly practices a) Towards achieving the BPP target, and as part of the LGU agricultural programs to be developed, help partner LGUs, assist establish target adopters based on a combination of the following : ? Benchmark information of farmers and agribusiness firms with existing good practices. ? Lessons learned on agricultural extension practices that work locally ? Assumptions used in the BPP target of 5,000 farmer adopters. b) Consider assistance to LGUs that provide focal attention to at least one demonstration village per bio geographic region (say, in LGUs that have developed their CLUPs and CDPs). Such selected villages should ideally have the potential to demonstrate substantive levels of adoption of recommended practices (usually between 20 -30% of the total number of farmers in an area after 2 to 3 years). This may represent, the numbers needed to promote natural diffusion and help overcome possible backsliding among adopters. Document and communicate the processes involved in the adoption process in these pilot villages as part of the learnings in promoting BD-friendly agriculture. c) Assist LGUs collaborate with other locally based stakeholder organizations to embed BD friendly agriculture in their agenda and where appropriate, help set physical adoption targets. Examples of such priority stakeholder organizations to work with are: local NGOs working on sustainable agriculture, regional agricultural science and technology (S&T) networks of agricultural colleges.
14 Midterm Review recommendation 14. (OUTCOME 2&3) Agriculture ? Certification a) Given the relatively high physical targets for certification under Outcome 3 and the limited time left, the project may also immediately begin the certification process described for recommendations under Outcome 1, pending final promulgation of the Certification Standards, by providing interim recognition of good practices that eventually lead to BD friendly agriculture. b) Collaborate with other stakeholder organizations in identifying good practices in both agriculture and associated business not necessarily supported by BPP that can receive recognition and certification and further support. c) Given the time left, ensure establishment and documentation of pilot cases of enforcement of the certification system developed under BPP in at least three sites. To provide more quality attention to the participatory process development, consider reducing the targeted number of farmers and producers to be certified. This can take into account the actual experience of certification processes under the National Organic Agriculture Program.
15 Midterm Review recommendation 15. (OUTCOME 2&3) Agriculture-. Plant Genetic Resources (PGR) Provide special attention to the protection of agrobiodiversity in KBAs and LGUs assessed to have high agrobiodiversity. a) Where possible assist at least one PAMB covered by the project to include agro-biodiversity information in their plans so that resources can be provided for their protection and sustainable use can be provided. b) Assist at least three LGUs in different bio-geographic regions set up pilot programs for in situ agrobiodiversity conservation as an organic part of the biodiversity friendly agriculture.
16 Midterm Review recommendation 16. (OUTCOME 2&3) Wildlife trade. Fortify the process for capacity building measures for wildlife trade monitoring and management. a) Focus capacity-building of personnel in LGUs who have been extended assistance in the preparation of the local environment code and wildlife ordinance. b) Institute feedback mechanisms in the implementation of the training modules prepared for necessary improvements. c) Enhance communication and coordination mechanisms not just among national government agencies but also between national government agencies and local government units in terms of implementing and monitoring the implementation of the harmonized wildlife trade regulations.
17 Midterm Review recommendation 17. (OUTCOME 2&3) Business. Explore the possibility of including a specific category of BD-friendly business with a listing of the activities within the LGU that could be categorized as BD-friendly business/enterprise in the initial listing of the LGU preferred areas for investments. Fortify the piloting process for supporting the promotion of BD-friendly business. a) Continue to actively involve other relevant units of DTI (e.g. BMSMED and local offices) and other government agencies such as the Agribusiness Unit of DA, the DOST, and financing entities (e.g. DOF) to translate the already set-up policies into actual investments by the private sector. b) Identify a demonstration site that could serve as model in the convergence of the various thematic areas of the BPP (i.e. BD-friendly agriculture, BD-friendly businesses/enterprises, and BD-enhanced CLUP). c) Accelerate efforts to link up with other government institutions on financing mechanisms that could be made available to LGUs and private entities interested and committed in investing on BD-friendly businesses/enterprises. d) Proactively assist LGUs that are preparing their local conservation plans for important landscapes identified as a result of the CLUP process. Where the opportunity exits, work towards the establishment of suitable sites as Critical Habitats as defined under the Wildlife Act, as also suggested by BMB e) As suggested by the BMB, check existing correspondence between BPP sites and 83 sites identified by the DOT for sustainable tourism, and eligible for support from the DOT. This can help tap resources from the Tourism sector for the sustainability of BPP actions.
18 Midterm Review recommendation 18. (OUTCOME 2&3) Local Area Planning. Consolidate interventions on local planning processes especially the CLUP, and help at least three provincial governments prepare for follow on support. CLUP preparation has made a lot of outstanding progress and has in fact exceeded physical targets. There is no compelling need to cover more sites. a) Conduct a participatory assessment of progress made so far at the site level to assess gains and loose ends, identify recurrent planning gaps encountered by LGUs in developing and implementing their CLUPs, and develop guides (such as FAQs) to address such gaps). This activity may also be done in conjunction with the target for BD SEA at the local level (see discussion under BD SEA). b) Provide orientation to at least three provincial government teams as well as municipal sharers on the use of the guides to help prevent confusion on the multiple planning instruments that have been recommended to LGUs by different projects. Prepare and communicate a brief guide to LGUs that will help them to determine what planning process to use for different situations (CLUP, FLUP, watershed planning, etc.).
19 Midterm Review recommendation 19. (OUTCOME 2&3) LGU Knowledge management. With technical assistance support, develop or adopt appropriate system for documentation and analysis of experience to ensure they are useful for inter-LGU sharing and policy formulation. a) Identify the LGUs that are demonstrating varying levels of good practices in the theme of agriculture business, wildlife trade and local development planning. b) Develop a typology of good practices cited above that are being generated, and support proactive documentation of practices coming from different production /enterprise systems. c) Pilot the appropriate documentation process as early as possible in early 2015 in at least one site to gain experience and adjust the protocols to suit project needs. Immediately mobilize at least one LPSC by mid-2015 that can demonstrate the knowledge sharing process as envisioned by the project. d) Tap the BMB website for long term communication support by assisting the BMB develop a web page dedicated for LGUs. Such a web page may include an annotated list of policies directly relevant to LGUs, a portfolio of emerging good practices (initially coming from BPP sites) and downloadable guides and tools (also initially coming from BPP). Biodiversity data from LGUs may be uploaded in the current page for PA or species data. Regional DENR offices may encourage their counterpart LGUS to regularly visit the web page. Upload this link to the websites servicing LGU concerns such as the websites of the Leagues of LGUs as well as CSO networks working with LGUs. The BPP website can serve as the de facto webpage during the project period. e) Identify other supplemental or locally existing alternative platforms for knowledge sharing that can carry and sustain the sharing process and provide technical support to local facilitators as needed (example: local R&D consortia). f) Collaborate with the Leagues of Cities and Municipalities to share information on good practices in selected regular sessions of the leagues. This may be done once the Project is able to assemble an initial set of good practices documentation. In engaging the Leagues, the Project may also wish to team up with other similar foreign assisted projects working with LGUs so that they can communicate a ?bigger message? with more cases (from BPP and from others) to substantiate it. The project may also wish to take advantage of annual league events both at the national or regional levels. g) Consider also working with the professional leagues associated with the Leagues of LGUs, An example would be the League of Planning Officers and the League of Environment and Natural Resources Officers (ENROs). These leagues also hold their own annual conferences and such venues provide opportunity to share the good practices emanating from LGUs assisted by BPP.
20 Midterm Review recommendation 20. LGU Knowledge management ? new proposal formulation. ? With respect to the target for development of new policy proposals (under Outcome 2) convene a round table discussion series as part of the knowledge sharing process /event series on the final year. This would be among proactive LGU partners; key line agency and CSO partners as well as local governance research networks. The knowledge sharing process would reflect on good practices and lessons learned as well as identify the potential 2nd generation policy proposals. This should ideally initially concentrate on how to address identified gaps in the initial policies promoted under the BPP. Indicative scopes of such proposals may also be identified. ? Additionally, the policy identification process may also help develop improved templates for key LGU policies or ordinances (based on LGU experience). This can then be shared with other LGUs. Where resources allow, the support of local governance specialists may be solicited from partner SUCs to help facilitate the dialogue.
1. Recommendation: Midterm Review recommendation 1. Provide a major focus on BD-friendly agriculture and BD-friendly business for the remaining project period (Actor: Project Board and PMU, DA and DTI). It is recommended that the project focus its resources and attention now to two sets of policy and implementation innovations (referred to as themes by the project stakeholders) under the project. These are the policies that enable LGUs and communities to directly derive concrete material benefits from biodiversity during the project period. This is now made possible because of the milestones and gains made in other themes (e.g. CLUP) where project resources can be safely realigned in favor of these two sets of policy and implementation innovations: ? BD-friendly agriculture. This is because agricultural land use is pervasive to be one of the highest threats to ecosystems services including biodiversity. There is also already a wide range of technologies available to make this happen and a wide network of potential service providers. ? Relevant BD-friendly business. This enables LGUs to fully tap both forest and agricultural biodiversity resources, and maximize income and local employment through value addition. LGUs are also most excited about BD-friendly business, and are generally inclined to invest in them using their own resources especial if their access to land and resources is assured. Specific suggestions for each theme are discussed in the next section. ? The project needs to realign staff and/or recruit new staff to be able to deploy a full time senior professional in each of the two themes to facilitate increased support to partner agencies and catalyze productive communication between partner agency and DENR-BMB, and between national agencies and local stakeholders.
Management Response: [Added: 2015/12/10]

The management agree on this recommendation to focus its effort to biodiversity-friendly agriculture and business for the remaining period. The 2015 Annual Work and Financial Plan allocate relatively higher funds to move the outputs under the said Themes. The Project Management Unit and site partners will assign additional responsibilities of existing staff to facilitate data gathering and coordination of field level activities for Thematic 2 and 4. The engagement of a Senior Professional was explored by DA-BPP Team and PMU but both later decided that instead of a Senior Professional, the DA will engage technical staff since the DA-TWG members also have the required expertise. Likewise, the hiring of Senior Professional is constrained by fund availability and period necessary for the hiring process.

Key Actions:

2. Recommendation: Midterm Review recommendation 2. (Cross-cutting) Further prepare DENR to sustain the facilitation process for mainstreaming BD in other sectors (Actors: PMU, BMB and other concerned Units of DENR). The phase out strategy needs to be prepared immediately in 2015. DENR needs to anticipate the continuing need to facilitate BD mainstreaming in other sectors such as agriculture, trade and local area planning, beyond the project life. In the absence of a Project Management Unit after the project, there is no other entity that can do this except the regular units and plantilla personnel within DENR. The DENR may also tap the opportunity provided by existing venues for dialogue. One such body is the inter-agency technical subcommittee for biodiversity of the Philippine Council for Sustainable Development (PCSD) of which the BMB Director is a senior member. This is the same body that will be performing a major role in overseeing the updated Philippine Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan (PBSAP) which now includes a major theme on agrobiodiversity conservation and sustainable use. The interagency committees created during the Project may also be supplemental ad hoc venues. Within the DENR, an inter-Bureau committee may be established to monitor and prepare proposals for the inter-agency committee cited above. A specific division within DENR-BMB may act as secretariat. As main catalyst within the DENR, the MTR team also endorses the suggestions of BMB senior staff to help in mainstreaming as follows: ? Establish focal divisions within the BMB to deal with matching themes for mainstreaming which was initiated the BPP i.e. agriculture, business and local level development planning. ? support the development of a BMB unit dedicated to the further development of standards for biodiversity mainstreaming ? Establish (best of the moment) indicators for effective mainstreaming of biodiversity in sectoral programs. This may serve as input to the further development of standards Three other bureaus need to be involved in addition to the BMB. These are Forest Management Bureau (FMB) which has a rich experience on community based forest management (CBFM), the Ecosystems Development Bureau (ERDB) which has an R&D program on agroforestry, and the Environmental Management Bureau (EMB) which has responsibility for environmental screening of business ventures that may be proposed within or adjacent to PAs and KBAs. FMB and EMB are already involved but ERDB is not yet involved.
Management Response: [Added: 2015/12/10]

The points by the Evaluators are well-taken. To sustain the gains from the project intervention and assist the BMB to mainstream biodiversity in the other sectors the PMU is coordinating with the BMB-Project Facilitation Group which composed of the Chiefs of the BMB-Divisions. Focal divisions with the BMB will be specified for each of the Thematic Areas to allow for the phasing in of the PMU work in the regular functions of these divisions. Likewise, a sustainability plan is being prepared to specify the process and actions needed by each partner organizations at the central and field levels to sustain the gains of the project beyond its closure in 2016. While FMB already is a member of the BPP Inter-agency Technical Working Group, there will be the need to strengthen its engagement the planning and management of key biodiversity areas within classified forest lands to ensure the integrity of biodiversity in these areas. ERDB will be engaged to facilitate the preparation of a biodiversity research agenda and the conduct of researches relevant to the Thematic Areas of the project.

Key Actions:

3. Recommendation: Midterm Review recommendation 3. (Cross-cutting) Strengthen the verification process for Objective level indicators (Actor: PMU, NGO partners involved in the studies; M&E consultant) Realistically, only one or two sets of indicators of success may be evident at the end of the project life i.e. ?number of hectares in production landscape under sustainable management,? and ?extent of remaining habitat within PAs?. The other two indicators (population count and extent of fragmentation) can be likely seen if there is sustained work, (say for five more years) after the end of the project. ? The MTR team recommends the adoption of the PMU and partners? proposal to use population estimates instead of population counts. ? The study area for the above indicators must be clearly demarcated to take into account the actual area that will be covered by LGU interventions (it is costly to study large swaths of areas when LGUs will only cover a small portion for its interventions). ? Identify opportunities for (non-project financed) survey to be repeated years after the mandatory end of project survey. This will ensure that those realistic correlations can be established between at least five years of LGU intervention (starting in 2015) and its effects on population estimates and forest fragmentation rates five years after. ? In planning for the conduct of the end of project survey, consider the possibility of using the process to attract the interest in the survey process and train selected locally based SUCs on the tools to do it. If the opportunity arises in the future, they can also repeat the process using local resources later. There is no guarantee that this can be done but it is worth trying because there are existing regional and local SUCs with relevant academic and research programs who might be interested to pursue the study for their scientific value. The Commission on Higher Education (CHED) in fact, has a research budget to support biodiversity which SUCs can tap. ? The M&E system must also help fine-tune indicators dealing with habitats and production landscapes under the objective level indicator on sustainable production systems. These are where impacts may more likely be seen towards the end or a few years after the project. ? Subject to the approval of GEF, consider adjusting selected physical targets associated with some indicator outcomes. Given the late project start, this will allow the project team and partners to focus more on developing processes, distill, document, and reflect on lessons and use the same to guide the fine-tuning of policies and ? how to guides ? for LGU action . The proposed specific adjustments are cited below in conjunction with proposals to improve implementation processes.
Management Response: [Added: 2015/12/10]

The project has taken and continue to carry out steps to strengthen the verification process for Objective level indicators consistent with the MTE recommendations. The project has now been able to provide baselines for the three of the success indicators , i.e., ?extent of remaining natural habitat within PAs in five biogeographic regions?, ?number of hectares in production landscapes/ waterscapes under sustainable management ? and extent of fragmentation. With the recent completion of the biodiversity surveys in the project sites, the project may be able to provide baselines for estimates of ?populations of at least three critically endangered species in three demonstration sites?. Using the most recent satellite image maps that can be obtained from the web, the project will do another fragmentation analysis of the demonstration sites and compare the results with the baselines that used the 2010 land cover data. The intention is to determine if there has been changes in the fragmentation levels since project inception in 2010 until 2016. The project has done trainings for BMB staff on the fragmentation metrics so that subsequent measurements can be done beyond the project life. On the population estimates, the project together with partners and other biodiversity experts will fine-tune the biodiversity survey and assessment methods and tools and link with academic and research institutions for the possibility of undertaking subsequent surveys possibly 3-5 years after project closure.

Key Actions:

4. Recommendation: Midterm Review recommendation 4. (OUTCOME 1) Strategic Environmental Assessment - Accelerate the promulgation of the National SEA policy so other actions can immediately follow. ? Due to the almost total absence of existing relevant policies, there is a need to accelerate the promulgation of the Draft National JAO and the BD-focused SEA framework in 2015 so that piloting actions can be justified and be immediately implemented within the project period especially by the DENR and DA and initially in areas covered by the BPP.
Management Response: [Added: 2015/12/10]

The project will endeavor to accelerate the promulgation of the National SEA through the biodiversity-focused SEA (BDSEA) policy initially within the DENR and later with other national partner agencies such as the DA, DTI, DOT, and DILG and local government units. At the same time, trainings and capacity building activities on the use of BD-SEA will be carried out while awaiting for the approval of the national policy to prime the national agencies and LGUs for the eventual adoption and implementation of BD-SEA at their levels. These notwithstanding, it must be appreciated that the process of review and approval of the BD-SEA policy is a tedious process and most of the approval stages such as. The series of consultation meetings with the Technical Review Committee (TRC) of BMB and DENR Policy Technical Working Group (PTWG), vetting of the DENR Executive Committee are beyond the control of the project and will require additional time to allow for the expected series of revisions of the policy document to incorporate the inputs of the reviewers prior to finalization. Moreover, the approval of the said policy cannot be guaranteed as the final decision and approval of the heads of the national government agencies of the said policy again is beyond the control of the project.

Key Actions:

5. Recommendation: Midterm Review recommendation 5. (OUTCOME 1) Agriculture: Enhance the impact of the current draft JMC by elaborating discussion of available incentives and institutional roles. a) Clarifying Institutional roles: ? Elaborate the role of DA Regional Field Units to provide appropriate agricultural support services to LGUs in project sites in accordance to local constraints and opportunities. ? Enjoin LGUs to launch their upland programs and capacitate their agriculture staff and MAFCs for this purpose. Enjoin regional research consortia to provide support to DA-RFU and pilot LGUs in local level planning and implementation. b) Embed the relevant incentive systems currently being provided by the DA that are applicable to agriculture conditions prevailing in PA areas. Examples are: ? Special assistance and subsidy to qualified farmer organizations qualified for organic certification under the Organic Agriculture guidelines; ? Crop insurance to farmers planting indigenous crops and heirloom varieties belonging to the registry of poor stakeholders; ? Small grants for harvesting and marketing facilities and market linkage to poor but deserving producer groups; ? Small grants for relevant projects by women?s groups and out of school farm youth who pilot innovations in and value-adding micro business from sustainable agriculture; ? Provide for local recognition of good practices (e.g. Gawad Saka). ? As co Author of the JAO, the DENR may also articulate available incentives that can be provided to upland farmers in forest lands. c) For agribusiness applications, provide overall policy statement that reiterates relevant existing regulations governing compliance of agriculture projects to environmental laws and rules on bio safety, among others.
Management Response: [Added: 2015/12/10]

The project upon recommendation of the Technical Review Committee (TRC) of the BMB to transform the draft Joint Memorandum Circular into a Joint Administrative Order (JAO). The management recognizes the need to enhance the current JMC draft by elaborating discussion of available incentives and from the DENR including the institutional roles. However and because the current draft of the JMC (now the JAO) already is in the advance stages of finalization and that any additional provisions or modifications will further delay the issuance of the JAO. We propose that the recommendations of the MTR be part of the subsequent policy issuances to implement the JAO.

Key Actions:

6. Recommendation: Midterm Review recommendation 6. (OUTCOME 1) Agriculture: Certification of BD-friendly agriculture. Consider a more inclusive approach to include recognition of BD best practices in addition to certification a) As the concept of BD-friendly agriculture is still relatively new and need to be ?marketed? to more stakeholders, the project may wish to consider the promotion of a more inclusive approach to BD certification that provides a range of modalities that match the varying capacities of different stakeholders at this time (e.g. subsistence IP farmers that want to enter the market; more established farmer cooperatives, private plantations etc.). b) Modalities may include recognition for ?best as of the moment? good practices, as well as recently adopted certification systems such as the DA Good Agricultural Practices (GAP), 3rd party certifications and 2nd party certifications. For this purpose, engage technical assistance to assist DA, DENR and LGUs concerned to identify and adopt various forms of recognition and certification and formulate/ implement collaborative work programs for promoting this. The modalities will of course have to correspond to the minimum set of guidelines set by the proposed JAO or to previously set national standards such as those set by the Organic Agriculture Policy.
Management Response: [Added: 2015/12/10]

Given the limited time and funds left for the implementation and the difficulty of designing and implementing a certification system for BD-friendly agricultural practices, the recommendation of the MTE to consider a more inclusive approach to include recognition of biodiversity best practices is a viable option and an innovative way to acknowledge stakeholders applying biodiversity-friendly agricultural activities. As such, standards can be developed for the purpose of this recognition system rather than the more tedious certification system. The ?best of the moment? good practices as one of the modalities for recognition can be considered for this purpose. However, there will be the need to assess whether DA Good Agricultural Practices (GAP), 3rd and 2nd party certifications are aligned with and supportive of the principles and criteria for BD-friendly agricultural practices prior to its application in the project. Likewise, engagement of technical assistance to assist DA, DENR and LGUs concerned to identify and adopt various forms of recognition and certification and formulate/ implement collaborative work programs can be considered but subject to the availability of funds and approval by the Project Board.

Key Actions:

7. Recommendation: Midterm Review recommendation 7. (OUTCOME 1) Proceed with the issuance of memorandum circular that will guide LGUs in the preparation of local wildlife ordinance and codification of environment ordinances integrating the concept of BD.
Management Response: [Added: 2015/12/10]

The management agree on this recommendation to proceed with the issuance of memorandum circular to guide the LGUs in the preparation of local wildlife ordinance and codification of environment ordinances integrating the concept of biodiversity.

Key Actions:

8. Recommendation: Midterm Review recommendation 8. (OUTCOME 1) Business. Enhance the impact of the draft JAO to elaborate provisions for incentives, and clearer guidance for local action. a) Consider attention to: ? Clearer guidance on planning and implementation of BD-friendly businesses at the site level or even at the local government level; and specifying more clearly the roles of local DTI offices ? Incentive structures and financing mechanisms ( including existing ones ) to encourage BD-friendly businesses/enterprises including BD-friendly business label; b) These improvements may be incorporated in the final version of the JAO or as suggested by the PMU, be included in subsequent, policy instruments and technical bulletins to be made during the project period.
Management Response: [Added: 2015/12/10]

The management would like to facilitate the approval of the Joint Administrative Order with Department of Trade and Industry and Department of Tourism to adopt the framework of biodiversity-friendly business/enterprise. The revised JAO includes the tasks to be undertaken by partner agencies at the national and local level. However, like the other policy proposals of the project, the final approval is subject to the discretion of the heads of the partner agencies beyond the control of the project. The enhancement of impact of the JAO will be a subsequent work where the provisions for incentives will be elaborated. The clear guidance for local action will be part of the guidebook on developing a biodiversity-friendly business/enterprise which is a target for this year 2015.

Key Actions:

9. Recommendation: Midterm Review recommendation 9. (OUTCOME 1) Knowledge management information systems. Clarify and firm up strategic objectives and where necessary, amend LGU-related operational targets under the planned Knowledge Management System. a) Engage the assistance of a KM oriented office or program/project within the DENR, or engage a short term KM/learning consultant to facilitate a round table multi stakeholder to assess and fine tune operational plans for the PKMIS (Partners Knowledge Management Information System). The process needs to build on the observed actual capacities of partner LGUS and experience and lessons learned so far from somewhat similar recent initiatives such as the Clearing House Mechanisms (CHM). b) The discussion may include the following: The actual scope of participation of LGUs in the National Information System based on better understanding of what can be realistically expected from partner LGUs and what the BMB can actually maintain especially after the project; The scope and processes and structure of inter ? LGU knowledge sharing (including after the project) (see also discussion in Outcome 2 and 3).
Management Response: [Added: 2015/12/10]

The management agree on the recommendations stated above. The management is closely working with the Biodiversity Policy and Knowledge Management Division (BPKMD) of BMB who will soon take over the administration of the knowledge management system developed by the project.

Key Actions:

10. Recommendation: Midterm Review recommendation 10. (OUTCOME 2&3) Strategic Environmental Assessment- Tooling and training of LGUs. a) Accelerate the development of DILG memorandum circular and manual of procedures for LGUs for immediate orientation and pilot testing initially in BPP areas The guidance to LGUs may build on the initial spatial analytical work done during the CLUP and CDP preparation process and be embedded in the LGU processes for assessing progress of development plans being developed of in preparing implementation plans. This would be ideally supported by DA, DENR, and NEDA. b) As suggested by the Project Document, DENR and DA may wish to pilot-test the SEA in such policies that are currently affecting partner LGUs such as the High Value Crops Development Act of 1995, and pertinent policies that allow genetically modified organisms (GMOs). Pilot-test the BD-focused SEA Framework in the most suitable LGU following a set of selection criteria. These selection criteria could include the presence of BD-enhanced CLUP and presence of MENRO or other relevant local office/unit. c) Provide the appropriate orientation and training support to key agencies that will be involved in the piloting i.e. DENR, DA DILG and LGU based offices.
Management Response: [Added: 2015/12/10]

The management agrees with the recommendations provided by the MTE on tooling and training of LGUs on BD-SEA. The development of DILG MC and Manual of Procedures for LGUs have been completed and will be for approval of the DILG. The recommendation to pilot-test the BDSEA for the High Value Crops Development Act of 1995 will be explored which can be part of the training and mentoring in the use of BD-SEA for DENR and DA. The project has done pilot tests of the simplified SEA in the 6 LGUs of QPL that have prepared their BD-enhanced CLUPs.

Key Actions:

11. Recommendation: Midterm Review recommendation 11. (OUTCOME 2&3) Strategic Environmental Assessment ? LGU implementation Work with LGUs that have finalized or are finalizing their CLUPs and CDPs and to the extent possible, embed the substantive SEA processes in the CLUP and CDP processes because these are the processes that LGUs can more easily relate with (see also discussion below under local area planning). In assisting the 20 percent of LGUs to be trained on SEA (Outcome 2) provide focal attention to at least 2 LGUs. This proposal will allow the project team to provide more quality time for fine-tuning delivery systems; documenting lessons learned; and facilitating sharing and reflection among early practitioners of SEA.
Management Response: [Added: 2015/12/10]

The management agree on the recommendations of the Evaluators for the Bd-focused SEA implementation at LGU level.

Key Actions:

12. Recommendation: Midterm Review recommendation 12. (OUTCOME 2&3) Agriculture- local program development. Pending promulgation of the JAO, the DENR and DA in collaboration with local SUC based R&D networks, provide immediate planning and technical support to at least one pioneering LGU per site (8) (or 20% of LGUs) to fully launch their local BD-friendly agriculture program by mid-2015, based on directions set by their CLUP/CDP as well as the technical recommendations of the draft JMC already agreed upon. a) As needed, tap regional research networks and local SUCs to assist DA regional offices identify immediately doable BD-agricultural practices that can be prioritized by the LGUs above. Initially, focus support to 1-2 critical farming systems in the area (e.g. IP food systems, upland migrant farming systems, small scale agribusiness etc.). Formulate locally relevant extension programs and incentives; b) Accelerate the preparation of training modules programmed under DA to support the pioneering work of the LGUs. This may be done even before the formal promulgation of DA policy as a good number of the BD friendly technologies cited by the draft policy are not expected to be debatable. c) Consider the feasibility of decentralizing the detailed preparation and execution of training modules to regional level, to the extent possible, with guidance from the Agricultural Training Institute HQ. Where appropriate, utilize existing modules available (either within DA or within the R&D network). d) Complete the training of pioneering LGUs as well as pilot farmer groups prior to the planting season of 2015; e) To support the planned training program for LGUs, develop LGU user-friendly orientation guides on various key technological options, good practices and potential costs and benefits of key BD friendly practices that are most feasible in their areas.
Management Response: [Added: 2015/12/10]

The management agree on the recommendations, actions are taken on the recommendation to accelerate preparation of the training modules.

Key Actions:

13. Recommendation: Midterm Review recommendation 13. (OUTCOME 2&3) Agriculture ? adoption of BD friendly practices a) Towards achieving the BPP target, and as part of the LGU agricultural programs to be developed, help partner LGUs, assist establish target adopters based on a combination of the following : ? Benchmark information of farmers and agribusiness firms with existing good practices. ? Lessons learned on agricultural extension practices that work locally ? Assumptions used in the BPP target of 5,000 farmer adopters. b) Consider assistance to LGUs that provide focal attention to at least one demonstration village per bio geographic region (say, in LGUs that have developed their CLUPs and CDPs). Such selected villages should ideally have the potential to demonstrate substantive levels of adoption of recommended practices (usually between 20 -30% of the total number of farmers in an area after 2 to 3 years). This may represent, the numbers needed to promote natural diffusion and help overcome possible backsliding among adopters. Document and communicate the processes involved in the adoption process in these pilot villages as part of the learnings in promoting BD-friendly agriculture. c) Assist LGUs collaborate with other locally based stakeholder organizations to embed BD friendly agriculture in their agenda and where appropriate, help set physical adoption targets. Examples of such priority stakeholder organizations to work with are: local NGOs working on sustainable agriculture, regional agricultural science and technology (S&T) networks of agricultural colleges.
Management Response: [Added: 2015/12/10]

The management agree on the recommendations provided by the Evaluators.

Key Actions:

14. Recommendation: Midterm Review recommendation 14. (OUTCOME 2&3) Agriculture ? Certification a) Given the relatively high physical targets for certification under Outcome 3 and the limited time left, the project may also immediately begin the certification process described for recommendations under Outcome 1, pending final promulgation of the Certification Standards, by providing interim recognition of good practices that eventually lead to BD friendly agriculture. b) Collaborate with other stakeholder organizations in identifying good practices in both agriculture and associated business not necessarily supported by BPP that can receive recognition and certification and further support. c) Given the time left, ensure establishment and documentation of pilot cases of enforcement of the certification system developed under BPP in at least three sites. To provide more quality attention to the participatory process development, consider reducing the targeted number of farmers and producers to be certified. This can take into account the actual experience of certification processes under the National Organic Agriculture Program.
Management Response: [Added: 2015/12/10]

The management agree on the recommendations stated above most especially the recommendation on the interim recognition of good practices in lieu of the certification standards.

Key Actions:

15. Recommendation: Midterm Review recommendation 15. (OUTCOME 2&3) Agriculture-. Plant Genetic Resources (PGR) Provide special attention to the protection of agrobiodiversity in KBAs and LGUs assessed to have high agrobiodiversity. a) Where possible assist at least one PAMB covered by the project to include agro-biodiversity information in their plans so that resources can be provided for their protection and sustainable use can be provided. b) Assist at least three LGUs in different bio-geographic regions set up pilot programs for in situ agrobiodiversity conservation as an organic part of the biodiversity friendly agriculture.
Management Response: [Added: 2015/12/10]

The said recommendations is mainly part of the tasks of the Integrating the conservation of plant genetic resources for food and agriculture into decentralized landscape management for food security and biodiversity conservation in critical eco-regions of the Philippines under the Benefit Sharing Fund of International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture (ITPGRFA) Project being also handled under BPP, the management will explore the possibility of assisting one PAMB to include agro-biodiversity information in their plans so that resources can be provided for their protection and sustainable use. However, assistance to at least 3 LGUs in different bio-geographic regions set up pilot programs for in situ agrobiodiversity conservation as an organic part of the biodiversity friendly agriculture will require time and resources, but as mentioned earlier in-situ on-farm conservation of PGR was covered under ITPGRFA Project.

Key Actions:

16. Recommendation: Midterm Review recommendation 16. (OUTCOME 2&3) Wildlife trade. Fortify the process for capacity building measures for wildlife trade monitoring and management. a) Focus capacity-building of personnel in LGUs who have been extended assistance in the preparation of the local environment code and wildlife ordinance. b) Institute feedback mechanisms in the implementation of the training modules prepared for necessary improvements. c) Enhance communication and coordination mechanisms not just among national government agencies but also between national government agencies and local government units in terms of implementing and monitoring the implementation of the harmonized wildlife trade regulations.
Management Response: [Added: 2015/12/10]

The management agree on these recommendations. The tasks for these are part of the 2015-2016 key implementation activities under these Outcomes.

Key Actions:

17. Recommendation: Midterm Review recommendation 17. (OUTCOME 2&3) Business. Explore the possibility of including a specific category of BD-friendly business with a listing of the activities within the LGU that could be categorized as BD-friendly business/enterprise in the initial listing of the LGU preferred areas for investments. Fortify the piloting process for supporting the promotion of BD-friendly business. a) Continue to actively involve other relevant units of DTI (e.g. BMSMED and local offices) and other government agencies such as the Agribusiness Unit of DA, the DOST, and financing entities (e.g. DOF) to translate the already set-up policies into actual investments by the private sector. b) Identify a demonstration site that could serve as model in the convergence of the various thematic areas of the BPP (i.e. BD-friendly agriculture, BD-friendly businesses/enterprises, and BD-enhanced CLUP). c) Accelerate efforts to link up with other government institutions on financing mechanisms that could be made available to LGUs and private entities interested and committed in investing on BD-friendly businesses/enterprises. d) Proactively assist LGUs that are preparing their local conservation plans for important landscapes identified as a result of the CLUP process. Where the opportunity exits, work towards the establishment of suitable sites as Critical Habitats as defined under the Wildlife Act, as also suggested by BMB e) As suggested by the BMB, check existing correspondence between BPP sites and 83 sites identified by the DOT for sustainable tourism, and eligible for support from the DOT. This can help tap resources from the Tourism sector for the sustainability of BPP actions.
Management Response: [Added: 2015/12/10]

The management agree on the recommendations stated above, the focus of the remaining years will be under this Outcome. The categories of the biodiversity-friendly enterprise were revised and adopted the industry categories being used by DTI. These list will be cascaded to the LGUs covered by the project.

Key Actions:

18. Recommendation: Midterm Review recommendation 18. (OUTCOME 2&3) Local Area Planning. Consolidate interventions on local planning processes especially the CLUP, and help at least three provincial governments prepare for follow on support. CLUP preparation has made a lot of outstanding progress and has in fact exceeded physical targets. There is no compelling need to cover more sites. a) Conduct a participatory assessment of progress made so far at the site level to assess gains and loose ends, identify recurrent planning gaps encountered by LGUs in developing and implementing their CLUPs, and develop guides (such as FAQs) to address such gaps). This activity may also be done in conjunction with the target for BD SEA at the local level (see discussion under BD SEA). b) Provide orientation to at least three provincial government teams as well as municipal sharers on the use of the guides to help prevent confusion on the multiple planning instruments that have been recommended to LGUs by different projects. Prepare and communicate a brief guide to LGUs that will help them to determine what planning process to use for different situations (CLUP, FLUP, watershed planning, etc.).
Management Response: [Added: 2015/12/10]

The management agree on the recommendations in relation to mainstreaming of biodiversity into the local planning process. The conduct of participatory assessment of progress and gaps identification will serve as venue to further enhance the Manual of Procedures (MoPs) being finalized. A Training-of-Trainers for HLURB and the DENR will be done to sustain the gains made under this Outcome. The Transboundary Plan prepared for NECKBA and LMKBA will be upscaled and incorporated in the Provincial Land Use Plan of Cagayan, Agusan del Norte and Surigao del Norte.

Key Actions:

19. Recommendation: Midterm Review recommendation 19. (OUTCOME 2&3) LGU Knowledge management. With technical assistance support, develop or adopt appropriate system for documentation and analysis of experience to ensure they are useful for inter-LGU sharing and policy formulation. a) Identify the LGUs that are demonstrating varying levels of good practices in the theme of agriculture business, wildlife trade and local development planning. b) Develop a typology of good practices cited above that are being generated, and support proactive documentation of practices coming from different production /enterprise systems. c) Pilot the appropriate documentation process as early as possible in early 2015 in at least one site to gain experience and adjust the protocols to suit project needs. Immediately mobilize at least one LPSC by mid-2015 that can demonstrate the knowledge sharing process as envisioned by the project. d) Tap the BMB website for long term communication support by assisting the BMB develop a web page dedicated for LGUs. Such a web page may include an annotated list of policies directly relevant to LGUs, a portfolio of emerging good practices (initially coming from BPP sites) and downloadable guides and tools (also initially coming from BPP). Biodiversity data from LGUs may be uploaded in the current page for PA or species data. Regional DENR offices may encourage their counterpart LGUS to regularly visit the web page. Upload this link to the websites servicing LGU concerns such as the websites of the Leagues of LGUs as well as CSO networks working with LGUs. The BPP website can serve as the de facto webpage during the project period. e) Identify other supplemental or locally existing alternative platforms for knowledge sharing that can carry and sustain the sharing process and provide technical support to local facilitators as needed (example: local R&D consortia). f) Collaborate with the Leagues of Cities and Municipalities to share information on good practices in selected regular sessions of the leagues. This may be done once the Project is able to assemble an initial set of good practices documentation. In engaging the Leagues, the Project may also wish to team up with other similar foreign assisted projects working with LGUs so that they can communicate a ?bigger message? with more cases (from BPP and from others) to substantiate it. The project may also wish to take advantage of annual league events both at the national or regional levels. g) Consider also working with the professional leagues associated with the Leagues of LGUs, An example would be the League of Planning Officers and the League of Environment and Natural Resources Officers (ENROs). These leagues also hold their own annual conferences and such venues provide opportunity to share the good practices emanating from LGUs assisted by BPP.
Management Response: [Added: 2015/12/10]

The management agree on the recommendations provided by the Evaluators. The corresponding key actions for the recommendations will be done in 2016.

Key Actions:

20. Recommendation: Midterm Review recommendation 20. LGU Knowledge management ? new proposal formulation. ? With respect to the target for development of new policy proposals (under Outcome 2) convene a round table discussion series as part of the knowledge sharing process /event series on the final year. This would be among proactive LGU partners; key line agency and CSO partners as well as local governance research networks. The knowledge sharing process would reflect on good practices and lessons learned as well as identify the potential 2nd generation policy proposals. This should ideally initially concentrate on how to address identified gaps in the initial policies promoted under the BPP. Indicative scopes of such proposals may also be identified. ? Additionally, the policy identification process may also help develop improved templates for key LGU policies or ordinances (based on LGU experience). This can then be shared with other LGUs. Where resources allow, the support of local governance specialists may be solicited from partner SUCs to help facilitate the dialogue.
Management Response: [Added: 2015/12/10]

With respect to the LGU Knowledge management-new proposal formulation, the recommendation to convene a round table discussion series as part of the knowledge sharing process/event series is good suggestion that the Management will consider. The Management prepared concept note for the Biodiversity Network that will also include local network that will provide platform for LGU level sharing of experience and access to the expertise of member Experts, Academe and other LGUs.

Key Actions:

Latest Evaluations

Contact us

220 East 42nd Street
20th Floor
New York, NY 10017
Tel. +1 646 781 4200
Fax. +1 646 781 4213
erc.support@undp.org