- Evaluation Plan:
- 2012-2018, Philippines
- Evaluation Type:
- Final Project
- Planned End Date:
- 07/2017
- Completion Date:
- 07/2017
- Status:
- Completed
- Management Response:
- Yes
- Evaluation Budget(US $):
- 15,000
Terminal Evaluation Partnership for Biodiversity Conservation: Mainstreaming in Local Agricultural Landscapes
| Document | Type | Language | Size | Status | Downloads |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
 00074945 BPP Terminal Evaluation - Final Report.pdf |
report | English | 1735.59 KB | Posted | 261 |
| 00074945 TOR TE_Biodiversity Mainstreaming Terminal Evaluation.pdf |
tor | English | 876.59 KB | Posted | 80 |
| Title | Terminal Evaluation Partnership for Biodiversity Conservation: Mainstreaming in Local Agricultural Landscapes | ||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Atlas Project Number: | 00059793 | ||||||||||||||
| Evaluation Plan: | 2012-2018, Philippines | ||||||||||||||
| Evaluation Type: | Final Project | ||||||||||||||
| Status: | Completed | ||||||||||||||
| Completion Date: | 07/2017 | ||||||||||||||
| Planned End Date: | 07/2017 | ||||||||||||||
| Management Response: | Yes | ||||||||||||||
| Focus Area: |
|
||||||||||||||
| Corporate Outcome and Output (UNDP Strategic Plan 2014-2017) |
|
||||||||||||||
| Evaluation Budget(US $): | 15,000 | ||||||||||||||
| Source of Funding: | Project funds | ||||||||||||||
| Evaluation Expenditure(US $): | 15,000 | ||||||||||||||
| Joint Programme: | No | ||||||||||||||
| Mandatory Evaluation: | No | ||||||||||||||
| Joint Evaluation: | No | ||||||||||||||
| Evaluation Team members: |
|
||||||||||||||
| GEF Evaluation: | Yes
|
||||||||||||||
| Key Stakeholders: | DENR-PAWB, DA, DTI, LGUs | ||||||||||||||
| Countries: | PHILIPPINES |
| Lessons | |
|---|---|
| 1. | Best and worst practices in addressing issues relating to relevance, performance and success Best Practices
Worst Practices
|
| Findings | |
| Recommendations | |
|---|---|
| 1 | Formulation of projects should be more realistic and less overly ambitious especially when the target outcome is in the nature of policy change at the national level. Alternative course of action should also be incorporated so as not to be tied down by the same forces that have caused the policy inaction in the first place. |
| 2 | There should be a healthy balance between innovation and scale on the one hand, and learning from experience and consolidating gains, on the other. Innovation requires time and resources to manifest gains while consolidation builds on social capital developed by previous projects. |
| 3 | Means of cross-learning should be included as key component in projects consisting of sites at varying stages of development so as to allow regular sharing of experiences and ideas. |
| 4 | Identify solutions beforehand to complications that can arise with working with the government as local responsible party (e.g., budgetary considerations, protocol, staffing, etc.). For instance, include UNDP-work in the IPCR of project staff who are eventually absorbed by the agency, and institute fund management seminars to the finance staff of the local field offices to familiarize them with the different accounting processes [Government Agencies & UNDP] |
| 5 | Document the role of women in conservation and how the project empowers women. |
| 6 | Augment the MTE & TE with regular monitoring to elicit more evidence and information in the project areas especially in difficult projects [UNDP] |
| 7 | Project Board members should also have a bigger role in M&E [Project Board] |
| 8 | Explore commonalities with organic agriculture to move BDFAP forward [DA, DENR, NGOs] |
| 9 | Study how the present EIA system can be tweaked to be more biodiversity-focused, instead of pursuing BDSEA [DENR] |
| 10 | Work with DILG on how biodiversity integration can be included in the LGU recognition system of the DILG (i.e., Performance Challenge Fund) in order to improve further the quality of these land-use plans [DENR, DILG] |
| 11 | Mandate DENR technical assistance to LGUs on CLUPs, not just FLUPs [DENR, DILG, HLURB, LGUs] |
| 12 | In KBAs that overlap with ancestral domains, document the process of integrating ADSDPPs with CLUPs [DENR, NCIP] |
| 13 | Instead of bigger transboundary plans, go back to basics by initiating biodiversity-integration in the land-use plans of KBAs that did not fully benefit from the project (i.e., Antique and Cagayan PLGUs) [DENR] |
| 14 | Link BDFE with BDFAP by studying the possibility of giving fiscal and non-fiscal incentives to agricultural activities that do not use pesticides, GMOs, among others. Pilot-test in QPL. [Quirino PLGU, DA] |
| 15 | Continue the process of mainstreaming through constant application and strengthening of the foundations of the project thematic areas, including increasing budgetary commitments by LGUs [Government Agencies, LGUs, NGOs, NDP] |
| 16 | Instead of the usual enumeration of endangered species, identify the relevance of biodiversity to the other agencies and include these in the KMs to be produced [DENR] |
| 17 | Translate in more easily understandable terms the process of BD-integration in CLUPs for future KMs so other LGUs can adopt the same [DENR, HLURB] |
| 18 | Community involvement by way of consultations in CLUP formulation should be strengthened [LGUs, NGOs] |
| 19 | Sensitivity training needed for some agencies working with local communities and IPs [Government Agencies, NGOs] |
| 20 | Instead of BDFEs, explore the possibility of formulating fiscal incentives that can generate funds directed towards forest protection, tree planting, etc. and can serve as much-needed capital for biodiversity-friendly livelihoods which can benefit IPs and POs alike and tied directly with conservation (e.g. financing of ICCAs by IPs) [DTI, DENR, NEDA] |
1. Recommendation:
Formulation of projects should be more realistic and less overly ambitious especially when the target outcome is in the nature of policy change at the national level. Alternative course of action should also be incorporated so as not to be tied down by the same forces that have caused the policy inaction in the first place.
Management Response: [Added: 2017/11/26]
This is noted. The UNDP and the BMB will invest in conducting thorough consultations with stakeholders during project conceptualization especially when the intended outputs are policies at the national level. It will also strengthen its adaptive management approach in project implementation to ensure that alternative courses of action will be identified in cases where the original targets are unlikely to be met.
Key Actions:
| Key Action | Responsible | DueDate | Status | Comments | Documents |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Conduct of intensive and extensive consultations during project conceptualization
[Added: 2017/11/26] [Last Updated: 2018/09/16] |
BMB and UNDP | 2018/05 | Completed |
2. Recommendation:
There should be a healthy balance between innovation and scale on the one hand, and learning from experience and consolidating gains, on the other. Innovation requires time and resources to manifest gains while consolidation builds on social capital developed by previous projects.
Management Response: [Added: 2017/11/26]
This is noted and will be considered in future project formulation endeavors.
Key Actions:
3. Recommendation:
Means of cross-learning should be included as key component in projects consisting of sites at varying stages of development so as to allow regular sharing of experiences and ideas.
Management Response: [Added: 2017/11/26]
This is noted and will consider in future project formulation endeavors.
Key Actions:
4. Recommendation:
Identify solutions beforehand to complications that can arise with working with the government as local responsible party (e.g., budgetary considerations, protocol, staffing, etc.). For instance, include UNDP-work in the IPCR of project staff who are eventually absorbed by the agency, and institute fund management seminars to the finance staff of the local field offices to familiarize them with the different accounting processes [Government Agencies & UNDP]
Management Response: [Added: 2017/11/26]
This recommendation is noted. Identifying solutions beforehand to possible concerns/complications could facilitate the project implementation. Moreover, the incorporation of UNDP work in the IPCR of contractual project staff absorbed by the DENR is worth considering and should be explored.
Key Actions:
5. Recommendation:
Document the role of women in conservation and how the project empowers women.
Management Response: [Added: 2017/11/26]
The management agree on this recommendation. The documentation of the role of women in conservation and how the project empowers them could encourage involvement of more women into conservation endeavors.
Key Actions:
6. Recommendation:
Augment the MTE & TE with regular monitoring to elicit more evidence and information in the project areas especially in difficult projects [UNDP]
Management Response: [Added: 2017/11/26]
This is noted. UNDP will strictly implement its M&E plan and BMB will strengthen its existing M&E mechanism for its on-going and future projects.
Key Actions:
7. Recommendation:
Project Board members should also have a bigger role in M&E [Project Board]
Management Response: [Added: 2017/11/26]
This recommendation is noted. The role and responsibilities of the Project Board and its members are specified in the Project Document and under DENR Special Order 2012-920.
Key Actions:
8. Recommendation:
Explore commonalities with organic agriculture to move BDFAP forward [DA, DENR, NGOs]
Management Response: [Added: 2017/11/26]
The management already explored the commonalities of BDFAP with organic agriculture, but in order to move the BDFAP after the project, a discussion with DA on this matter is a must, hence, we agree on this recommendation. The BDFAP at the moment is only recommended for application within the multiple use zones of protected areas and sustainable use zones of key biodiversity areas. DA has still to promote this in the wider agricultural landscape so as not to compromise the agency’s main mandate of food security for the country.
Key Actions:
9. Recommendation:
Study how the present EIA system can be tweaked to be more biodiversity-focused, instead of pursuing BDSEA [DENR]
Management Response: [Added: 2017/11/26]
The management would still like to pursue the BDSEA. The BDSEA seeks to complement and reinforce the national Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) initiatives by providing guidance for a proactive approach and undertake feed-backing to integrate biodiversity considerations into the higher levels of planning and decision-making. This considers the overall view of promoting sustainable development during the planning, implementation and monitoring stages. With the current national EIA framework and policy focusing on the environmental impacts of projects, the proposed BDSEA-DMC will strengthen the environmental assessment initiatives by focusing on DENR’s plans, programs and policies.
The need to integrate biodiversity in environmental impact assessment has already been addressed by BMB through a signed DENR circular for the integration of biodiversity in the tenurial instruments issued by the DENR. This proved beneficial in mining audit of Hamiguitan which used a dedicated biodiversity checklist. The BMB staff and their counterparts at the DENR field offices are now part of EIA review team to ensure that biodiversity concerns are addressed in the review of EIAs. Amended EIA checklists were already submitted to EMB for their consideration and adoption.
Key Actions:
10. Recommendation:
Work with DILG on how biodiversity integration can be included in the LGU recognition system of the DILG (i.e., Performance Challenge Fund) in order to improve further the quality of these land-use plans [DENR, DILG]
Management Response: [Added: 2017/11/26]
The management agree on this recommendation. The Procedural Guidelines (PG) developed by the project provides simplified detailed instructions for incorporating biodiversity concerns in the land use planning process, thus, the quality of the CLUPs could be enhanced to make it biodiversity-responsive. While DILG has supervision over LGUs, it is HLURB that has the mandate to ensure the qualities of the CLUPs of LGUs. However, integrating biodiversity in the LGU recognition system of the DILG could encourage more LGUs to make their land-use plans biodiversity-responsive because of the recognition. The DILG, HLURB and BMB can explore ways to develop for a recognition system for LGUs that can further biodiversity integration.
Key Actions:
11. Recommendation:
Mandate DENR technical assistance to LGUs on CLUPs, not just FLUPs [DENR, DILG, HLURB, LGUs]
Management Response: [Added: 2017/11/26]
The management agree on this recommendation. The approval of the JAO on the adoption and use of the Procedural Guidelines on Biodiversity Conservation Mainstreaming in the CLUPs of LGUs will give mandate and facilitate the provision of technical assistance by the DENR to LGU in mainstreaming BD in the CLUP. In the interim, the HLURB already can adopt, approve, and disseminate to the LGUs the Procedural Guidelines to jump start the mainstreaming work. In parallel, the BMB can issue a Technical Bulletin for the use by the DENR field level units as reference in working with LGUs in the preparation of the CLUPs. It must be noted that the DENR is part of the Provincial Land Use Committees that are mandated to provide assistance to LGUs and at the same time review compliance to land use planning guidelines. The PG therefore will be very useful for DENR field units for carrying out their tasks.
Of particular significance would be the role of DENR Field Offices in providing technical assistance, data, maps and other information relevant to the mainstreaming of biodiversity in 7 the planning and plan implementation processes of LGUs. As exemplified by the BPP experience, the DENR (CENRO at the local level) has been an active participant in the BD Mainstreaming of CLUPs particularly in the updating of the ecological profile, provision and integration of forest land use plans, cadastral maps and harmonization of policies with zoning ordinances. The DENR representative (PENRO or CENRO) also sit as a PLUC member that examines the CLUP.
Key Actions:
12. Recommendation:
In KBAs that overlap with ancestral domains, document the process of integrating ADSDPPs with CLUPs [DENR, NCIP]
Management Response: [Added: 2017/11/26]
The management agree on this recommendation. The manual of procedures (MoP) of Integrating BD into ADSDPP Processes and the BD Enhanced ADSDPP into the Mandated Plans of Host Local Governments developed by the project could be used as reference to document the process of integration of the ADSDPP with KBAs and PAs with management plans and then for these combined plans to be integrated into the land use and development plans of LGUs (CLUP and CDP). Moreover, the BPP’s current BD mainstreaming initiatives for CLUP together with HLURB consider the inclusion of PAs/KBAs and Ancestral Domains harmonized spatial and development concerns in the CLUP stages of: Step 4. Situation Analysis; Step 5. Setting the Goals and Objectives; Step 6: Establishment of development thrusts and definition of spatial strategies; Step 7. Preparation of the land use plan and Step. 8 Drafting of the Zoning ordinance.
Key Actions:
13. Recommendation:
Instead of bigger transboundary plans, go back to basics by initiating biodiversity-integration in the land-use plans of KBAs that did not fully benefit from the project (i.e., Antique and Cagayan PLGUs) [DENR]
Management Response: [Added: 2017/11/26]
The management would still like to pursue transboundary planning. The biodiversity resources and values cut across administrative jurisdictions and boundaries of local government units. At the same time, KBAs already contain human communities and subject to varying types of land uses, the potential for conflict between development and the protection of natural resources thus becomes imminent. It is also evident that communities within the KBA are the good stewards of their own resources. That is why there is a need to demonstrate how a common management framework within a cluster of LGUs can help address, in a more holistic way, the threats to biodiversity. The proper assessment of environmental impacts of development plans, programs and projects of the cluster LGUs, as can be specified in the Transboundary Plans, will help in understanding interactions, and guide the actions and decisions of local executives of LGUs that together encompass key biodiversity areas. The Transboundary Plans can thus serve as guide for unified coordinated actions of these LGUs for the management of KBAs.
Key Actions:
14. Recommendation:
Link BDFE with BDFAP by studying the possibility of giving fiscal and non-fiscal incentives to agricultural activities that do not use pesticides, GMOs, among others. Pilot-test in QPL. [Quirino PLGU, DA]
Management Response: [Added: 2017/11/26]
The management agree on this recommendation. In fact, the promotion of BD-friendly agricultural practices and BD-friendly enterprise has been included in the recently revised provincial and municipal local environment codes of Quirino Province. Moreover, the recommendation to provide fiscal and non-fiscal incentives is actively pursued in the BPP pilot BDFAP sites like Bgy. Eden, Cabarroguis in Quirino.
Key Actions:
15. Recommendation:
Continue the process of mainstreaming through constant application and strengthening of the foundations of the project thematic areas, including increasing budgetary commitments by LGUs [Government Agencies, LGUs, NGOs, NDP]
Management Response: [Added: 2017/11/26]
The management agree on this recommendation. The adoption, approval, and dissemination by HLURB of the Procedural Guidelines for mainstreaming biodiversity in the in CLUPs will ensure the application of the tools and procedures developed under the BPP. Budgetary support for mainstreaming activities have been incorporated by the LGUs in their respective development plans and local investment programs. The BMB in its follow up engagement with LGUs will push for the provision of counterpart funds from the LGUs to support biodiversity conservation initiatives particularly in the preparation of spatial and development plans and the implementation of projects on BD-friendly agricultural practices and BD-friendly enterprises. The issuance of biodiversity inclusive local environment codes/ordinances of the LGUs provides the impetus for sustaining BD related projects which have been started and are already in place.
Key Actions:
16. Recommendation:
Instead of the usual enumeration of endangered species, identify the relevance of biodiversity to the other agencies and include these in the KMs to be produced [DENR]
Management Response: [Added: 2017/11/26]
The recommendation is well noted. In fact, at present, the knowledge materials that were generated by the project across the thematic areas were already in the process of packaging (layout) into knowledge products and for subsequent dissemination to relevant agencies with mandates over these thematic areas.
The BD mainstreaming process contained in a simplified procedural guidelines on mainstreaming BD in the CLUP has been finalized and packaged for adoption, approval, and dissemination of HLURB to LGUs, Leagues and DENR Field Offices. The procedural guidelines will serve as manual for LGU planners to integrate BD concerns in their CLUP following the HLURB 12-step process.
Key Actions:
17. Recommendation:
Translate in more easily understandable terms the process of BD-integration in CLUPs for future KMs so other LGUs can adopt the same [DENR, HLURB]
Management Response: [Added: 2017/11/26]
This recommendation is noted. The Procedural Guidelines for Mainstreaming Biodiversity in the CLUP Process developed by the project is a good reference because it follows the HLURB- mandated CLUP process that makes it friendly and easy for LGU planners to use.
Key Actions:
18. Recommendation:
Community involvement by way of consultations in CLUP formulation should be strengthened [LGUs, NGOs]
Management Response: [Added: 2017/11/26]
The management agree on this recommendation. The CLUP process specified by the HLURB provides for the engagement of various stakeholders in the entire CLUP preparation process. This stakeholder involvement have been adopted and expanded in the Procedural Guidelines for BD Mainstreaming in CLUP to ensure that communities, NGOs, the academe, national government agencies, and the private sector that have direct and indirect concerns on biodiversity conservation are fully engaged in the entire CLUP preparation and approval process.
Key Actions:
19. Recommendation:
Sensitivity training needed for some agencies working with local communities and IPs [Government Agencies, NGOs]
Management Response: [Added: 2017/11/26]
The management agree on this recommendation. The conduct of sensitivity training prior the implementation of any project is relevant, this may foster understanding to the culture, belief and way of life of the local communities and IPs. Understanding the local communities and indigenous peoples will make it easier to work with and learn with them.
Key Actions:
20. Recommendation:
Instead of BDFEs, explore the possibility of formulating fiscal incentives that can generate funds directed towards forest protection, tree planting, etc. and can serve as much-needed capital for biodiversity-friendly livelihoods which can benefit IPs and POs alike and tied directly with conservation (e.g. financing of ICCAs by IPs) [DTI, DENR, NEDA]
Management Response: [Added: 2017/11/26]
The management would like to pursue the BDFE. The management views this recommendation as an immediate solution for the provision of alternative income sources for upland communities but does not address and does not provide the long term and sustainable solution to the twin issues of biodiversity loss and poverty. The BDFE intends to offer not just an immediate solution but a long-term option for the communities to lift themselves out from poverty while making them an ally to biodiversity conservation.
Key Actions: